arstechnica.com — I picked Mario for this experiment, because I feel that everyone knows what Mario is supposed to look like. Also, this is probably going to be the first game that many people play once they get their classic systems back or buy a clone. Are you ready for the pictures? Let's do this thing.
Feb 14, 2007 View in Crawl 4
vancanucksfanFeb 14, 2007
i got this clone called the peNES. no joke
shiftlessFeb 15, 2007
Thanks for the billionth article about how component cables are better than older cables... Hooray *headesk*
verifexFeb 15, 2007
You what is even more fun? Get all 4 BAED images and play it on an XBox - <a class="user" href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=P0Z&q=big+ass+emulator+disc&btnG=Search">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=P0Z&q=big+ass+emulator+disc&btnG=Search</a>
localhFeb 15, 2007
@dclowd9901:Nope, sorry, wrong. The reason you have those artifacts is because the NES' PPU output straight composite right out of the chip, whereas the VC doesn't. Same reason that (until recently) NES emulators did not really look like an actual NES. It has nothing to do with whether or not you're outputting in progressive scan.Unfortunately, for true accuracy, those artifacts *have* to be emulated, as some games used them to generate extra colors (similarly to how the Genesis blends single-pixel dithering together).
localhFeb 15, 2007
I would imagine that, even over composite, VC would look a bit cleaner, as you're not dealing with the NES' NTSC artifact pattern, you're just dealing with standard crosstalk on a signal encoded from pure clean RGB.