SNES diserves a better Emulator!

[LaughingMAN.S9]

fuck original hardware, i'll take smooth as butter edges and bright colors that pop with all the filters you can imagine, 4x anti aliasing, hq2x, the wholeeeeeeee 9


lol you people just hang on because you spent all this money on physical cartridges, admitting emulation is superior is admitting that your collection is meaningless

[jperryss]

fuck original hardware, i'll take smooth as butter edges and bright colors that pop with all the filters you can imagine, 4x anti aliasing, hq2x, the wholeeeeeeee 9

lol you people just hang on because you spent all this money on physical cartridges, admitting emulation is superior is admitting that your collection is meaningless

Classic systems never look good on a modern displays. Ever.

Also, emulation actually made me want to start buying original gear and actually got me INTO collecting. Imagine that.

Emulating is convenient, I'll give it that.

[Kitsune Sniper]

fuck original hardware, i'll take smooth as butter edges and bright colors that pop with all the filters you can imagine, 4x anti aliasing, hq2x, the wholeeeeeeee 9

hq2x makes things look WORSE THAN FUCKING RF.

[RedBeans]

So as a noob who recently resurrected my old SNES, what's the best possible setup? Kinda dissappointed with the way it looks on my 32'' HDTV....sprites just look too "big" if that makes any sense. Thanks!

[kedawa]

Yep, that was originally used on the N64 (where it was sold separately). It seems the N64 was the first Nintendo console to only include a composite AV cable in the box.

It was also used for the SNES2, which didn't have a built in RF modulator. I don't know off hand if the SNES2 predates the N64 or not.

[buzz_n64]

It was also used for the SNES2, which didn't have a built in RF modulator. I don't know off hand if the SNES2 predates the N64 or not.

The SNES model 2 came out October 20, 1997, so the N64 was first.

[theclaw]

Right and there was no PAL model 2.

[JSoup]

Classic systems never look good on a modern displays. Ever.

Kinda a moot point, depending on how you game. If I'm emulating an old game, it's an old game I'm probably never going to get my hands on, either do to price, scarcity or both. As long as the game is playable and I can tell what's going on, it's good enough. I don't tend to graphic whore about old systems.

[Jorpho]

Kinda dissappointed with the way it looks on my 32'' HDTV....sprites just look too "big" if that makes any sense.

It doesn't.

[JSoup]

It doesn't.

To you. I get what he's saying and let's less of an issue than he thinks. Some games show their imperfections more on larger/newer TVs, but the game doesn't actually play any worse. It's just one of the things you either get used to or just never noticed to begin with.

[buzz_n64]

I used to play my Atari 5200 on a tiny portable black and white screen sometimes, and I just had to deal with it. So, bitching that a TV is too nice to view 8 bit graphics on is laughable. Sure you might notice some pixelation if your staring at some big ass HDTV, but it's better than blurriness.

[SparTonberry]

Top-loader NES on an HDTV...
I can only remember trying to play Simon's Quest for like a minute before deciding to keep playing on my old CRT.
I remember it being among the fuzziest image I've seen, really magnifying the "lines" issue. Only thing that looked worse was playing a SNES as a kid in the '90s with an RF connection under severe interference (rolling/wavy picture, wrong colors, etc.)
However, the difference is that THAT is NOT how it was intended to be seen.

[Rob2600]

Super Castlevania IV looks like ass, if it isn't slightly blurred.

100% wrong.

[Miss Boris Yeltsin]

For me, the main problem with SNES emulation is that of the "Big Three" emulators, two of them (SNES9X and ZSNES) are laughably inaccurate (especially when it comes to sound), to the point where you basically have to make a mental list of games to run in SNES9X and games to run in ZSNES - not to mention that ZSNES's "custom" UI is, to put it charitably, a love-it-or-hate-it sorta thing.

The programmer of the third one, BSNES, had a real adverse reaction (in common vernacular, I believe the term would be "a meltdown") to retarded idiots on message boards - understandable, but still tragic - and ripped out a bunch of features that he personally didn't want or use. The ones that come to mind are native handling of .ZIP files and native handling of certain semi-archaic but still widely-used legacy formats (primarily .SMC files), but there were a few others. As far as I know, there's only one or two versions that handle .ZIP and .SMC while also providing a way to map GUI functions (savestates and such) to the controller without resorting to the fetid pit of rage-inducing garbage that is AutoHotKey and the like. I think v.070 is the last one that has both.

BSNES is still the best by a longshot (and makes the other two look like NESticle by comparision), but the picky file support makes playing games a tedious and space-wasting experience. Thankfully, I don't think v.070 has any serious bugs, so I suppose I can live with it.

[JSoup]

100% wrong.

I'm far from a Super Castlevania IV expert, but I've seen a number of reviews that seem to agree with the 'blurry = better' opinion.

[Jorpho]

For me, the main problem with SNES emulation is that of the "Big Three" emulators, two of them (SNES9X and ZSNES) are laughably inaccurate (especially when it comes to sound), to the point where you basically have to make a mental list of games to run in SNES9X and games to run in ZSNES

I won't deny that BSNES is superior and the way of the future, but nonetheless SNES9x and ZSNES were entirely adequate for a very long time. The way some people talk about them now, you'd think using them was like trying to play a SNES with forks stabbed into your eyeballs, or something.

native handling of certain semi-archaic but still widely-used legacy formats (primarily .SMC files)

I thought the format was still supported, but the files have to be named properly.

[TonyTheTiger]

I won't deny that BSNES is superior and the way of the future, but nonetheless SNES9x and ZSNES were entirely adequate for a very long time. The way some people talk about them now, you'd think using them was like trying to play a SNES with forks stabbed into your eyeballs, or something.

That's how I feel about it, too. I love the philosophy behind bsnes. I think it's not only the way of the future but also a fantastic endeavor to preserve the hardware (at least a super close approximation of it). But back in 1998 we weren't gonna be running no bsnes. I mean, really. It just wasn't happening. And to look back on that era and scoff is silly. It was what it was and time/technology pushes forward. Those emulators served their purpose when they mattered. That's really what's important. I think the real complaint isn't so much against ZSNES and SNES9X as it is against the community being against change, even when that change is for the better (standardizing formats, eliminating copier headers, etc.).

[Miss Boris Yeltsin]

I won't deny that BSNES is superior and the way of the future, but nonetheless SNES9x and ZSNES were entirely adequate for a very long time. The way some people talk about them now, you'd think using them was like trying to play a SNES with forks stabbed into your eyeballs, or something.

Well, NESticle is the same way - it was perfectly adequate in the 90s, heck, I'd even go so far as to say it was "awesome". But no way would I even touch it today, not with FCEUX and NEStopia around. Even back in the day, I could recognize that there was a definite reason to keep the old console plugged in and ready to be fired up, there were actual tradeoffs involved. NESticle offered convenience, the NES offered authentic graphics and sound and real controllers.

Now, though, with current emulators and USB pads, the "to emulate or to play on the console" question is more like owning a classic car: sometimes the finicky nature is appealing in and of itself - the blowing, the wiggling, the way the sound goes through cruddy interference-laced RF or RCA - but ask me which car I'd use to go down to the store, run errands, or do any sort of real driving with, and it's no contest at all.

Once you've tasted paradise, the old world just doesn't quite cut it anymore.

I thought the format was still supported, but the files have to be named properly.

Yeah, according to http://byuu.org/bsnes/legacy-formats this is the case - but it's still a pain in the ass, since virtually every ROM distribution outlet uses the .SMC extension. I think what adds to the frustration is the knowledge that BSNES isn't the #1 emulator, not by a longshot, so it's not like the emulation scene is going to jump up and rename their files properly just to support an emulator with maybe 20% of the "marketshare", no matter how good it is.

You can't really bully without a bully pulpit.

That's how I feel about it, too. I love the philosophy behind bsnes. I think it's not only the way of the future but also a fantastic endeavor to preserve the hardware (at least a super close approximation of it). But back in 1998 we weren't gonna be running no bsnes. I mean, really. It just wasn't happening. And to look back on that era and scoff is silly.

Personally, I think it's silly to bolt on a pair of rose-colored glasses and make excuses for the past. Only a complete idiot doesn't understand the processing reality of the situation, so constant reminders about history just get tiresome after a while. It's similar to the old "back when I was your age, we had to walk five miles in ten feet of snow uphill both ways, so how dare you complain about a one mile walk in pouring rain" canard. Yep, there are children starving in Sudan, but it honestly doesn't change the fact that undercooked chicken and raw cauliflower on burnt toast tastes like shit to me!

Anyone who uses NESticle in this day and age is flat-out crazy - it's not like retro consoles, where you have a completely different architecture, set of games, control methods and whatnot - the cycle-accurate emulators of today are objectively better than the frame-accurate emulators of yesterday, which are themselves objectively better than the old "smoke and mirrors"-accurate hacky emulators of yore, so it's only natural to scoff, today, about the notion of using emulators from that era, back then, which, interestingly enough, is not, in fact, today, to play games on, on this day. Wax cylinders were a marvel of their time too, but to claim their fidelity is anything remotely sufficient for modern-day archiving or serves any purpose besides quaint indie-pop gimmicks in this day and age is just thick-headed.

It was what it was and time/technology pushes forward. Those emulators served their purpose when they mattered. That's really what's important. I think the real complaint isn't so much against ZSNES and SNES9X as it is against the community being against change, even when that change is for the better (standardizing formats, eliminating copier headers, etc.).

Exactly, +1, this, etc

And lest anyone get me wrong - byuu (the BSNES coder) is ridiculously talented and creating incredible work. I agree that his endgoals are noble in their intent, and can even understand why he doesn't include native .ZIP support. He deserves a ton of credit for taking the time to explain his decisions. It's just frustrating that you have to jump through hoops and waste a ton of hard drive space* to fully experience the latest versions. It's a bit of a catch-22, as well - he sorta scoffs at people who collect entire ROMsets, but when you have to manually extract and rename every single ROM to get it to work in BSNES, I think you'd be crazy not to download the whole ROMset and do it all in a single batch. Otherwise it's a 2 minute clicky-clicky-tidy-namey ordeal every time you get the urge to play a new game.

*hard drives may be relatively cheap, but try collecting lossless audio concerts and doing video work from time to time while stomaching 2+ gigs of wasted space - the true limiter isn't the amount of space on a single drive, but rather the amount of slots and ports and power outlets to plug the new hard drives into!

[SirPsycho]

100% wrong.

100% Sarcasm.

[TonyTheTiger]

Personally, I think it's silly to bolt on a pair of rose-colored glasses and make excuses for the past.

It's not rose colored glasses. It's just the way things were. I look back on the VHS era and chuckle at how much money we all spent on blank tapes. But it's silly to look back on that and talk about it as if we were all foolish for putting up with it, as if it were possible to hook up a DVR or fire up a µTorrent in 1992. You either taped your shit or you were SOL. Obviously it's archaic now. But back then it was top of the line and did its job. It's not foolish or an excuse to point that out.