D
Deleted member 284
Unconfirmed Member
Brandon F said:Now back to Dr. Wily kicking my ass in Megaman 1...
Lemme guess....the gauntlet of doom featuring bombman, fireman, iceman and gutsman one after another......gawd.
Brandon F said:Now back to Dr. Wily kicking my ass in Megaman 1...
Defensor said:This is only bad if you people are Gamecube only owners. Really, who doesn't or wouldn't have a ps2 as their second console?
Brandon F said:I can handle the gauntlet just fine(the only one that causes trouble for me is Fireman), it's really just Wily that keeps kicking my ass.
Particularly his 2nd form...the very few times I can actually reach it. Gah, he sucks!
Jumpman said:I think you might have misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that the actual game resolution was bumped up, just the screen resolution. This was also done in the GC versions of the N64 Zelda's. For me, this greatly improves the look of the games.
I have no problem buying the PS2 version if I believe it is the better of the 2. The problem I usually have with the PS2 is it rarely runs at a full 640X480. The only game on PS2 that does that I can remember off hand is Tekken 4. Also, I often have to perform annoying, dark rituals to get my PS2 to get past its disc read errors, and I prefer to not go through that if I don't have to.
So it comes down to a couple of questions. Does either version run at a 640X480 screen resolution, like with Sonic Mega Collection. Are the remixed tracks in the PS2 version indeed awesome and not some poor knock off of the originals. Do the control issues with the GC version really matter if I don't intend to use the new turbo features and such.
dark10x said:A 3D game like Zelda OoT can in fact be displayed in 640x480 (only the UI remains unchanged). 320x240 artwork at 640x480 stretched (it has to be stretched to reach full screen) still looks like 320x240. Sonic Mega Collection still looked about the same as the Genesis games...whereas Zelda OoT was twice as clear on GC (just like using an emulator on the PC).
Jumpman said:I agree that the visual improvment was more dramatic in Zelda OoT than it was in the Sonic 2D games, but to me, the Sonic games saw a sizable jump. I remember firing it up and immediately thinking, what the..... and then it hit me, the game was much cleaner than I remembered the Genesis version as being. At the time, I tested my old copy on the Genesis, just to make sure I wasn't crazy. Sure enough, big difference in clarity.
Can anyone confirm if either version runs at a full 640X 480 screen resolution. This is very important to me. If the PS2 version runs at the usual slightly lower than full resolution, while GC version runs at the GC's normal resolution (possibly even progressive scan) then I might just have to buy both, just so I can have the remixed tracks, as well as the cleanest picture.
Jumpman said:Thanks for clearing that up for me dark10x. I guess it's the PS2 version for me.
I'm intrigued by your technical knowledge in regards to the difference in the outputs for these systems. If you would, could you explain in as much detail as you feel comfortable, the differences between say the Genesis output as compared to the Gamecube outputs. I would love to more about the subject.
dark10x said:I actually think MM4 is pretty damn good.
Jumpman said:I appreciate the explanation, but could't the original Genesis be hooked up with normal A/V cables if you chose to?
Jumpman said:I appreciate the explanation, but could't the original Genesis be hooked up with normal A/V cables if you chose to?
dark10x said:Yes you could, and it did look a bit better. However, the video output was simply never intended to look good. Composite cables aren't THAT much of a step up from RF...
Jumpman said:Thank you so much for the help. I'll definately be picking up the PS2 version later today.
One more question, just for clarity. If both a Genesis and a Gamecube were hooked up with normal composite cables, wouldn't the Gamecube still have a much clearer picture due to output technologies?
dark10x said:Well, in simple terms, consider what the systems were intended to be attached to. The Genesis was created to be used with an RFU adaptor and attached the TV in that manner. On the flipside, you are mentioning progressive scan while suggests that you are using Gamecube component cables (a far superior connection). Now, combine the higher quality inputs (on both the TV and game system) with the fact that GC was INTENDED to be displayed on higher end devices and I think it is obvious.
The older Genesis system simply was never intended to be displayed on modern HD sets (or even on analog sets with composite or S-video). When it was released, image quality was not that important and it was quite common to find people playing these games with screens full of static and bleeding. Times have changed.
It is even more obvious that the Genesis has poor output when you use a PC emulator with a TV. The emulator uses the SAME game data as the Genesis did...yet it looks vastly superior (even without filters!).
One more question, just for clarity. If both a Genesis and a Gamecube were hooked up with normal composite cables, wouldn't the Gamecube still have a much clearer picture due to output technologies?
Sure, because the Genesis's composite output sucks eggs. That's just one more reason why RGB is so important. Compare Genesis Sonic 2 in RGB on a proper monitor to Gamecube SMC Sonic 2 via component and the Genesis version will clearly come out on top. Of course, I realize that the practicality of getting an RGB setup put together in the US makes it a difficult proposition, but it doesn't make it any less stunning once you see it.
dark10x said:Wait a sec, RGB is superior to component? I am quite unfamiliar with European TV standards, so I would appreciate some additional info. I had assumed them to be virtually the same in terms of quality (that is, RGB Scart == component).
The Genesis, in America, always had poor output...but it sounds as if the Megadrive + RGB can produce some beautiful image quality.
The point is that what you see coming from the Genesis in RGB is how the game was intended to look from the beginning, and retro-compilations almost invariably do some kind of fucking with the video signal before it reaches a display, be it filtering, interlacing, and/or scaling
dark10x said:Yes.
jiji said:RGB is a video signal that's exactly equivalent to what comes from the Genesis's NTSC encoder. It's present on all models of Genesis and Mega Drive (as well as most consoles from the Genesis onward), and it's what's used in arcade games to get video from the PCB to the monitor. It's used most commonly in home systems in the UK and less so in Japan, but it's nearly nonexistent in the US. Its clarity would have made it very easy to make nice copies of VHS tapes, so it was blocked thanks to whatever back-room dealings took place 20 years ago.
Component and RGB have very similar image quality. The main difference is that modern video hardware generally uses component, while RGB has been in use for 20+ years. Going back to my example, though, the difference between Sonic 2 on Genesis with RGB and SMC Sonic 2 through component consists of more than just the video signal used.
Genesis:
Video output -> cable -> display with scanlines
GCN:
For composite:
Emulated (?) video output -> 2X scaling -> softening filter -> interlacing (for most TVs) -> composite conversion -> cable -> display without scanlines
For component:
Emulated (?) video output -> 2X scaling -> softening filter -> digital video out -> conversion to component via DSP in cable -> display without scanlines
The GCN can display in RGB too, if you've got a PAL system or a hacked component cable - just replace steps in whichever process for the solution you've got. The point is that what you see coming from an original system in RGB is how a given game was intended to look from the beginning, and retro-compilations almost invariably do some kind of fucking with the video signal before it reaches a display, be it filtering, interlacing, and/or scaling.
evilromero said:Goddamnit one more time. Cube version= faster loading time, Hori Controller or Wavebird. For me that is better than the remixed music in-game. Plus like I said in another thread, I don't play my damn PS2 enough to warrant buying this little game. It is not worth the trouble to turn the fucker on.
And I like Wario 64's face much better than Buddies'. Did you ever stop to think the pixelation was a good thing?
I can see a person liking that 2X SAI stuff. Console-based retro packs don't offer that, though. What they tend to do is line-double and interlace, which gives the image a swimmy, indistinct look, removes the scanlines and gives you that nice high-res flicker effect (that's the interlacing in action). I'm not sure how anyone could prefer that, unless maybe they had an HDTV thats line-doubler eliminated the interlace flicker. Even then, though -- chunky pixel city. You need the scanlines.dark10x said:Ah, but you see, I do not like they way games originally look. The low-res pixelated look, no matter how sharp, doesn't appeal to me AT ALL. I would much prefer view Sonic 2 via the 2XSAI filter on my PC than to use RGB on a Genesis. Of course, opinions on this vary quite heavily!
*scans the rest of the thread*Kumiko Nikaido said:I want to put a boot up Atomic Planet's butt
edit: www.jandaman.comBobbyRobby said:Yeah, the controls in the GCN version kind of suck. Anyone know where I can get the Hori SNES style controller cheap?
sonic4ever said:I have a question, are the Graphics in Megaman 1-6 improved any? I ask this becuase I was looking at thenewest EGM, they had a preview of the game. The screenshot of Megaman 2 looked more colorful then the NES, it almsot looked like the Genesis version of Megaman: willy wars game that was released in europe and Japan. Maybe I am wrong, and I just don't remeber what the old NES Megamas look like...
Why did they use the PS version of Mega Man 8 instead of the Saturn version? The Saturn version kicked ass!