i own a small collection with some nice TVs to play on and i sometimes play on emulators
i play however i feel like playing at the time because video games are about enjoying the experience without any fricking homosexual morons yelling at me about im a moron for how i play my games
SNES is fricking moronic in this regard. >some devs compensate for 4:3 by making their 8:7 assets thinner >some don't so 4:3 looks slightly stretched (Link's hearts in LttP for example) >not even first party Nintendo titles are consistent with it
Anamorphic physics require more calculation.
I think people forget that on 8/16bit systems you can't just do what ever the hell you want so you gotta keep it simple stupid
8:7 is objectively correct.
4:3 is for autists who think CRTs, original hardware, and S-cables are the "superior" experience
16:9 is for morons who want to have their screen filled up even if the quality is garbage, similar to boomers who eschewed widescreen DVD releases because "there are black bars on the TV"
CRTs display colors more accurately. They also had better refresh rates (the latest ones did). We just turned to LCD because it was cheaper to produce and morons b***hed about the weight on CRT. LCD is actually worse for ecology than 100 CRTs are, and they can be punched and break instantly.
There's always the issue of authenticity vs. quality. "Authenticity" means every Game Boy/Color/Advance game before 2003 isn't backlit and you have to hold up the screen to a light source.
16:9 is only feasible in 3D if the hud won't get stretched and it renders the environment at a wider angle. 2D games in widescreen doesn't really work it usually just stretches everything unless there's a hack or patch for it. Apart from that its preference, some games are pretty good in 16:9 some feel weird.
The MiSTer handles Playstation games in 16:9 pretty well too, it does show more of the 3D space correctly but sadly HUD elements do get slightly stretched. It also has a 480p toggle so you don't have to play Tekken with a ton of combing artifacts but it doesn't work for everything
Neither of those are correct for the SNES. 4:3 on emulators doesn't take into account overscan. Actual CRT AR is 64:49 DAR (which is 8/7 PAR).
Further reading if you actually give a shit about this kind of stuff and aren't just a dumb zoom zoom:
https://archive.nes.science/nesdev-forums/f5/t15879.xhtml
https://www.nesdev.org/wiki/Overscan
tl;dr >But people remember the display with the overscan chopped off. Emulators tend to approximate the visible image as 256x224 or 320x224 pixels, which is 64:49 DAR, and 64:49 is close to the nominal 4:3, just as "2.35:1" is close to the actual ratio of scope, which is 2.39:1 on film or 2.40:1 on Blu-ray. And when upscaling for HDTV, you usually want to display it as if the overscan were also upscaled, as HDTV programming on broadcast and cable is generally formatted with overscan to accommodate early-adopter CRT HDTVs. This means upscale the entire 280x240 or 350x240 pixels to 960x720 or 1440x1080.
If you stretch the image to fit within your TV's bezels, then yes. But this discussion is pointless if you actually own a CRT display because the correct answer will always be "whatever fits within your CRT" since bezels and the actual DISPLAY aspect ratio of TVs had a lot of variance. 8:7 DAR (1:1 PAR for SNES) is just the console's framebuffer output. This discussion is mostly just important for people who emulate games onto their flat panel displays because everyone is used to the whole "4:3" nomenclature that they don't realize that the actual CRT aspect ratio was a little bit more narrow than that. But obviously, 64:49 is less catchy and memorable than 4:3, which is just an approximation.
Emulators like bsnes already default to 64:49 NTSC. I think Snes9x defaults to it as well, or 8:7 DAR.
I use emulators in the default screen size
16:9 is more pixels, we figured that out in like 2005 when the Xbox 360 came out
i own a small collection with some nice TVs to play on and i sometimes play on emulators
i play however i feel like playing at the time because video games are about enjoying the experience without any fricking homosexual morons yelling at me about im a moron for how i play my games
Wider.
SNES is fricking moronic in this regard.
>some devs compensate for 4:3 by making their 8:7 assets thinner
>some don't so 4:3 looks slightly stretched (Link's hearts in LttP for example)
>not even first party Nintendo titles are consistent with it
Anamorphic physics require more calculation.
I think people forget that on 8/16bit systems you can't just do what ever the hell you want so you gotta keep it simple stupid
it's going to look stretched regardless because crt
so why care? just that it'll look even more moronic if you stretch it to 16:9
Proper real 4:3 when play om real hardware (but only because of underscanning and i usd a wii)
>interlacing
>dithering
came in my pants
8:7 is objectively correct.
4:3 is for autists who think CRTs, original hardware, and S-cables are the "superior" experience
16:9 is for morons who want to have their screen filled up even if the quality is garbage, similar to boomers who eschewed widescreen DVD releases because "there are black bars on the TV"
spotted the dumb zoomer nobody should listen to
I bet you also think lcd's are better than CRTs.
I don't think a zoomer could enjoy gaming with EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE coming from a CRT monitor
CRTs display colors more accurately. They also had better refresh rates (the latest ones did). We just turned to LCD because it was cheaper to produce and morons b***hed about the weight on CRT. LCD is actually worse for ecology than 100 CRTs are, and they can be punched and break instantly.
>turns on CRT
>starts making noise
>gets warm
>no picture
This shit broke fr
>Console has svideo
>"But your not supposed to use it"
There's always the issue of authenticity vs. quality. "Authenticity" means every Game Boy/Color/Advance game before 2003 isn't backlit and you have to hold up the screen to a light source.
16:9 is only feasible in 3D if the hud won't get stretched and it renders the environment at a wider angle. 2D games in widescreen doesn't really work it usually just stretches everything unless there's a hack or patch for it. Apart from that its preference, some games are pretty good in 16:9 some feel weird.
The MiSTer handles Playstation games in 16:9 pretty well too, it does show more of the 3D space correctly but sadly HUD elements do get slightly stretched. It also has a 480p toggle so you don't have to play Tekken with a ton of combing artifacts but it doesn't work for everything
Tell that to Shovel Knight.
if emulating you should play at 4:3 and use integer scale for the the sharpest picture available
SNES integer scale would be 8:7
yes ur right, i was just thinking of ps1 since thats what i mostly play.
5:4
What's the game on the bottom?
Chrono Trigger
Thanks
It pisses me off to see morons stick to 4:3 on the Steam Deck and not use the full screen. As if it looks significantly better.
Whatever my CRT is
how is this even a question when the shape of the moon should say it all?
>the smartest front poster
Based, you gays had to get at least one thing right
go back to sucking dicks on reddit
reddit froge
based frog chad makes the discord troonys seethe
t. troon
Neither of those are correct for the SNES. 4:3 on emulators doesn't take into account overscan. Actual CRT AR is 64:49 DAR (which is 8/7 PAR).
Further reading if you actually give a shit about this kind of stuff and aren't just a dumb zoom zoom:
https://archive.nes.science/nesdev-forums/f5/t15879.xhtml
https://www.nesdev.org/wiki/Overscan
tl;dr
>But people remember the display with the overscan chopped off. Emulators tend to approximate the visible image as 256x224 or 320x224 pixels, which is 64:49 DAR, and 64:49 is close to the nominal 4:3, just as "2.35:1" is close to the actual ratio of scope, which is 2.39:1 on film or 2.40:1 on Blu-ray. And when upscaling for HDTV, you usually want to display it as if the overscan were also upscaled, as HDTV programming on broadcast and cable is generally formatted with overscan to accommodate early-adopter CRT HDTVs. This means upscale the entire 280x240 or 350x240 pixels to 960x720 or 1440x1080.
So if I play SNES games at 8:7 on a CRT, I'll get the correct aspect ratio?
If you stretch the image to fit within your TV's bezels, then yes. But this discussion is pointless if you actually own a CRT display because the correct answer will always be "whatever fits within your CRT" since bezels and the actual DISPLAY aspect ratio of TVs had a lot of variance. 8:7 DAR (1:1 PAR for SNES) is just the console's framebuffer output. This discussion is mostly just important for people who emulate games onto their flat panel displays because everyone is used to the whole "4:3" nomenclature that they don't realize that the actual CRT aspect ratio was a little bit more narrow than that. But obviously, 64:49 is less catchy and memorable than 4:3, which is just an approximation.
Emulators like bsnes already default to 64:49 NTSC. I think Snes9x defaults to it as well, or 8:7 DAR.
4:3 stretched to 16:9
16:9 + Super Eagle
Haha! Look at that fat dragon!
What's the original resolution? I always use that multiplied by 3 or 4.