/vr/ - Retro Games

Good spritework should always be appreciated unfiltered.

>>7851175
fpbp

>>7851153
Scale 2x is the only one my PC can handle. This is better than ugly CRT shaders at least.

>>7851467
wow really? how could that be possible?

>>7851494
You be the judge.

>>7851523
No shit, anything is better than that. Try a half decent filter.

>>7851527
What about this one

>>7851523
>>7851530
Both of these shaders suck, even compared to other crt shaders. Crt easymode or royale look far better.
This >>7851467 looks worse than raw pixels

>>7851539
It makes it a little better.

If you are using an LCD you are losing many details and virtual resolution by not using filters.
Composite video shaders also necessary in many cases.

>>7851574
I got nothing against CRT but CRT shaders look ugly as fuck in a LCD compared to the real thing. I saw other examples. I'm glad I do have a CRT as well

>>7851586
There are many types of LCD. A unit with local dimming, fast response time, high resolution, and high brightness should compare well with a CRT using shaders. OLED should work too.
I own CRT televisions, CRT monitors, LCD monitors, and LCD television. Tweaked CRT-Royale on my high resolution LCD monitors captures the necessary aspects of a CRT to convey the game graphics in a flattering way.

>>7851467
Disgusting.

>>7851523
Even worse.
>>7851530
Worse yet.

>>7851523
>>7851530
Where did you get these? wtf

>>7851153
They look fine at native res, but not so great when you increase the scaling.
The distance from your display is also a factor.

>>7851639
I never bothered getting this. These already came on MAME. The first one was at "75% scanlines" and the other one at "RGB triad of 16 pixels".
>>7851615
I don't have money to afford OLEDs this is why I keep playing retro. I got a 1080 AOC 43 inch though

>>7851153
Based. I play 2D games with raw pixels only and literally the only instance where I thought "damn this doesn't look right" was in the Genesis version of Earthworm Jim which uses shitloads of dithering.

>>7851670
>I never bothered getting this. These already came on MAME. The first one was at "75% scanlines" and the other one at "RGB triad of 16 pixels".
No wonder they look like shit then.

>>7851682
Haven't found anything much better than this on google images. At least not on my LCD.

>>7851674
>the only instance where I thought "damn this doesn't look right" was in the Genesis version of Earthworm Jim
Congratulations; you're retarded

>>7851642
It's not very pixaleted as older games though

>>7851698
What do you mean?

>>7851709
Still looks better than older Street Fighter games

Does this looks any good

>>7851728
Yes, from farther away it'd look goot.

>>7851716
What about it?

>>7851732
The characters were in bigger resolutions in the other game

Check this out.

>>7851752
and?

>>7851759
Bigger characters mean more pixels. This adds better details making it look better when unfiltered

>>7851769
They all look fine when running at native res. It becomes an issue when you scale then while unfiltered.
The sprite size does not matter.

>>7851778

>>7851778
>The sprite size does not matter.
It does matter, because when you are not able to move far from the screen when the character is too small you see closer how bad it looks unfiltered

>>7851778
3rd Strike still benefits from CRT shaders.

>>7851802
I never it didn't

>>7851806
said*

>>7851153
Me too, but I use bilinear filtering, since I play on a large screen with a good sharpness.

>>7851757
Nice as a piece of art, but I'd rather not play it that way.

I believe the shader missed out a feel details

>>7851794
>not able to move far from the screen
How are you not able to move away from the screen?

>when the character is too small you see closer how bad it looks unfiltered
I don't understand.

>>7851813
Some games do look better that way. Specially with pretendered images

>>7851828
>Some games do look better that way
Like which ones?

>>7851828
*prerendered.

>>7851794
>>7851823
>I don't understand.
nvm
You meant the details in the sprites when the game is scaled right?
What I'm saying is that they look fine IF you are playing at native res, but that is unlikely if you are playing on a LCD. The scaling will make the sprites look worse when compared to the native res and that is where the shaders come in.
see:
>>7851793

>>7851757
You need to use integer scaling.

>>7851757
>>>/n/o/.

>>7851835
>integer scaling.
Is that supposed to mean something?

>>7851823
>How are you not able to move away from the screen?
If the characters are too small you can't watch them from long distances unless you zoom in but that will make it worse.

>>7851830
Killer Instinct.

>>7851839
That's why you would increase the scaling of the game and use a shader. It's not a "zoom" btw.

>>7851846
*piett look*
Acceptable. Go on.

>>7851849
It's a filtered zoom then. What I meant is that unscaled resolutions are only good for small screens up close. It does look good when they are upscaled and unfiltered as long you are able to see the character being controlled far from your screen

>>7851858
It has to be prerendered 3D graphics. MK don't look so good. Donkey Kong must look great

>>7851867
Uh uh that looks like Vaseline Vision.

>>7851863
>It's a filtered zoom then.
It's not a zoom. The emulator scales the game rendering resolution.

>What I meant is that unscaled resolutions are only good for small screens up close.
No. They will look fine on an actual CRT even without having to increase the rendering resolution.

>It does look good when they are upscaled and unfiltered as long you are able to see the character being controlled far from your screen
It's going to be worse than without any shaders on a LCD regardless of distance.

>>7851867
The filter effects that come with advancemame are very outdated.

>>7851874
A zoom means upscaling as well. Not just for emulators but for every image you try to make it bigger. I wasn't talking about CRTs but smart phones with small screens. A big LCD screen will make it look ugly when upscaled and unfiltered once you approach enough to see the pixels. Even CRTs look ugly very near, but in this case will be worse on a LCD.

>>7851573
no, it really doesn't

>>7851895
Playing at native resolution on a small screen will still be missing the virtual resolution effect of a CRT raster. It will also be missing the extra colors and blending of composite video if it is relevant to the game.

>>7851867

>>7851897
Notice the mouth the hair the belt. Are you sure you want them looking like a fucking lego?

>>7851895
>A zoom means upscaling as well.
lmao
I'm done. Do whatever you want idc anymore.

>256x223
yeah no

>>7851929
Too much glow.
Pls fix aspect ratio.

>>7851902
Doesn't have to be native as long the screen is small or far enough to hide all the squares that make it ugly. But I do understand that nothing replaces CRT

>>7851934
If it is too small or far you just won't be able to see the screen properly.
Use a shader.

>>7851932
do it yourself

>>7851929
but still much better than unfiltered.

>>7851912
>the mouth
Looks worse on the left, it's not even complete.
>the hair
So you prefer his hair looks like smeared shit no matter where you sit as opposed to the raw pixels looking fine when your face is 2 feet away from the screen?
>the belt
It now makes less sense for the belt to have round humps like that if the art is going for a smoother look. It doesn't look realistic at all. The raw pixels at least have the excuse of being pixel art, that filter is just smearing it for no reason. Acquire taste, anon. The entire left side looks like a shitty painting being viewed through wet glass.

>>7851941
Is your name Don Quijote by any chance?

>>7851923
You must think that zoom is some how different from upscaling simply because of the term that is used by emulators. You are the retard here.

>>7851939

>>7851937
This is why I mentioned that some games had bigger characters with that in mind.

>>7851947
They don't use zoom in emulators worth a shit for a reason retard bro. You just tried to make shit up as you go and fell flat.

>>7851912
Look at this fucking shit, anon

>>7851949
now do a flip

>>7851943
>It doesn't look realistic at all.
It was never meant to be a MK game
>The raw pixels at least have the excuse of being pixel art
You are making this excuse. They all can be art.
>The entire left side looks like a shitty painting being viewed through wet glass.
They are both shitty. But the left at least look like a painting instead of little squares trying to form an image

>>7851153
>256x223
fuck off retard

>>7851954
They don't use the term zoom. But zoom and upscaling had always meant the same thing for everything. For a retard like you not even a dictionary would be enough to explain that.

>>7851969
>But the left at least look like a painting instead of little squares trying to form an image
A shitty painting with inconsistent pixel sizes and ruined shading.

>>7851984
Yes. But still is a painting

>>7851969
>You are making this excuse
No, the raw pixels have actual limitations due to hardware that the devs had to work around and be creative with. Your shitty filter just smears it all together into a mess to make it look "smooth".
>It was never meant to be a MK game
It was never meant to look like a shitty painting

>>7851990
Why should it look like a painting? How is this a positive?

>>7851980
>But zoom and upscaling had always meant the same thing for everything
>simply because of the term that is used by emulators.
Now it stopped being about emulators right? Remember what I said?
They don't use it because it doesn't work like zooming specially when the emulator has integer scaling and is able to change the aspect ratio. Even bigger difference when you start to get into games that have 3D models.
Goodbye and go fuck yourself you fucking nigger.

>>7851992
>No, the raw pixels have actual limitations due to hardware
The raw pixel are not meant to be seeing. That requires a CRT not LCD otherwise they will look shitty as well.
>Your shitty filter just smears it all together into a mess to make it look "smooth".
It smears some of it not all of it. This is not a XBr filter, it's just 2x scaling. So it wasn't meant to be that smooth.
>It was never meant to look like a shitty painting
The game was meant to look like a cartoon actually. A shitty painting can be better than shitty pixel art at least

>>7852006
>They don't use it because it doesn't work like zooming specially when the emulator has integer scaling and is able to change the aspect ratio.
Good so you call it scaling just because the game is zoomed into bigger resolutions with better filtering.
>difference when you start to get into games that have 3D models.
I agree that 3D images are totally different from 2D images. Because there are polygons instead of pixels

>>7852010
>The raw pixel are not meant to be seeing. That requires a CRT not LCD otherwise they will look shitty as well.
Not meant to be viewed with shit scaling that makes it look like a painting either. At least the raw pixels are impressive in their own right, and are the pure visuals made by the team who worked on the game.
It smears some of it not all of it. This is not a XBr filter, it's just 2x scaling. So it wasn't meant to be that smooth.
It looks about as bad as an XBr filter
>The game was meant to look like a cartoon actually. A shitty painting can be better than shitty pixel art at least
Again, the pixel art is impressive in its own right and still looks better than a shitty painting. Your screenshots aren't how the game was intended to look either, and scaling it like that literally ruins the pixels and creates a shitload of inconsistencies in the visuals.

>>7852010
>The raw pixel are not meant to be seeing. That requires a CRT not LCD otherwise they will look shitty as well.
Not meant to be viewed with shit scaling that makes it look like a painting either. At least the raw pixels are impressive in their own right, and are the pure visuals made by the team who worked on the game.
>It smears some of it not all of it. This is not a XBr filter, it's just 2x scaling. So it wasn't meant to be that smooth.
It looks about as bad as an XBr filter
>The game was meant to look like a cartoon actually. A shitty painting can be better than shitty pixel art at least
Again, the pixel art is impressive in its own right and still looks better than a shitty painting. Your screenshots aren't how the game was intended to look either, and scaling it like that literally ruins the pixels and creates a shitload of inconsistencies in the visuals.

>>7852037
>At least the raw pixels are impressive in their own right, and are the pure visuals made by the team who worked on the game.
That excuse again. Pixels are not impressive. They are just squares trying to form an image. The team would never put that shit on a comic book.
>It looks about as bad as an XBr filter
This one is though >>7851757
>Again, the pixel art is impressive in its own right and still looks better than a shitty painting
Why you keep calling pixel art? This is only considered "art" by nostalgia retro nerds. The shitty painting look like bad art but still looks as an attempt made by hand not a hardware limitation.
>Your screenshots aren't how the game was intended to look
That screenshot would look bad scaled in any way through a LCD

>>7851838
It means if you don't know what it is you should lurk more and read about the subject.

>>7852067
>Why you keep calling pixel art? This is only considered "art" by nostalgia retro nerds. The shitty painting look like bad art but still looks as an attempt made by hand not a hardware limitation.
Why are you even here?

>>7852085
No, it means you've forgotten what this board is about.

>raw pixel emulator/RGB look
Over shitty fake looking filters? Absolutely.
>composite video into a CRT
This is the way the games were made to look and how you should play them, until a filter actually comes close naturally mimic this you are better of just going raw pixels or blargg's NTSC.

The thing with raw pixels is that they don't represent what the graphical artist was trying to achieve and they only look the way they do raw because of how they would be processed by the analog video signal (composite in the case of consoles) and the scanlines and phosphor artifacts of a CRT.

So to study them raw is pointless unless you are planing to apply composite/CRT to get the intended end result. Too much recent and constantly regurgitated misunderstood RGB autism has made a lot of people confused about this when all you need to do is plug a console with it's pack-in cable into a CRT and clearly behold what always has been evident.

>>7852126
>until a filter actually comes close naturally mimic this
256-pixel and 320-pixel Composite CRT-Royale is good at this. It doesn't look like a real CRT but it allows for the void spaces, rounding off of edges, and blending that are needed for the game to look the way it is supposed to look.

>>7851523
THE LINES ARENT EVEN THE SAME WIDTH

>>7851467
>This is better than ugly CRT shaders at least.
You're not using the right CRT shader

>>7851816
This shader sucks

>>7852139
All attempts I've seen post have been grotesque caricatures that look fake, shit and distracting.
So here's a challenge: can you guys try to recreate the image of Blaze on the right in >>7852126.

Let's see how close it really gets.

>>7852126
That's the default CRT Royale + Composite preset.

>>7852114
You mean underage ignorant shitposting? Sad thing is, for you zoom zooms that is what this board is about. You can't even forget what it's actually about because you never knew.
>This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games, including consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other forms of video games
>You will immediately cease and not continue to access the site if you are under the age of 18.

>>7851153
it's the only acceptable way to play along bilineal, everything else is dumb poser shit

>>7852446

>>7851153
>>7851467
I still don't get where they are stepping on this stage. It feels like planks floating in the air.

>>7852290
Crt-easymode + Blargg's NTSC (Composite)
It's not as bright, but it does the trick

>>7852430
Listen, jackass, this is a retro video game board, not a math board, now fuck off with your integers and non answers.

>>7853208
Well, I have to agree. If you're paying any anon here to calibrate your shaders and screen, then you can complain all you want about things not going like your taste. Otherwise, just leave each other setup alone. There are people in this board who don't accept anything different than theirs.

>>7851153
That's fine anon. Play games however YOU find them appealing.

For me, it's the NTSC shader on BSNES.

>>7852180
>You're not using the right CRT shader
I did use something like that here >>7851530. The difference is that you got a higher resolution.
>>7852332
This is the same shader I suppose. But is a shame that you have to see all those ugly CRT color lines that wouldn't be visible in a real CRT from a medium distance

>>7851523
>PanPizza: People who put scanlines on emulators

It was not until shaders came along when emulation scanlines became good.

Which do you prefer?

>>7853752
Second from left.

>>7853752
The second one got better colors.

>>7853752
The first one is the worst. Because got less saturation compared to the second.

We can go further.

>>7853758
>>7853759
The second one is CRT-Royale with diffusion turned off + type 2 mask and size 4 triads + Blargg NTSC filter.
>>7853761
The first is 320px-Composite-CRT Royale with Type 2 mask and size 4 triads.

>>7853782
CRT color lines seem to be less visible at the left.

>>7853786
>The second one is CRT-Royale with diffusion turned off + type 2 mask and size 4 triads + Blargg NTSC filter.
I admit it looks very good.
Now get ready for this:
I use RF exclusively for CRT play, outside of arcade units, and it's just as good as composite. RF looking like shit all the time is a meme.

>>7853792
What size is your CRT?

RGB

>>7853792
>I use RF exclusively for CRT play, outside of arcade units, and it's just as good as composite.
If the game is old enough and got small resolutions composite shouldn't have much improvement over RF.

>>7853816
The one I typically use? 13", but it can also look good on a 32"
No, I don't care about dot crawl or red bleed, which isn't that bad depending on the brightness.