Nintendo Classic Mini announced

[Osgeld]

Obviously the game designer was going for round.

 

 

I think people give game designers a bit much credit, they design sprites on a grid, sometimes even graph paper, and the bonus blur of the crappy screens at the time were sometimes a hindrance and a blessing.

 

sure pac man is suposta be round but its plotted on a low resolution grid, on the flip side mario's hat is red so it didnt blur into a blob, same with the jumpsuit, and the only reason he has a mustache is to define a face or else it wouldnt have displayed on the much better arcade screens of DK

Edited November 4, 2016 by Osgeld

[Atariboy]

The innards apparently are more powerful than a Wii or a 3DS.

 

SoC: Allwinner R16 (4x Cortex A7, Mali400MP2 GPU)
RAM: Hynix (256MB DDR3)
Flash: Spansion 512MB NAND
PMU: AXP223

 

And here's the first review that I've seen.

 

Honestly it's no worse than the Dog Bones that came with the AV Famicom or the stock Turbografx controller. I have a Super Famicom SNES controller with a cable that's a bit less than half the length of my SNES (purple buttons) controller.

 

At just 2.5', I doubt such historical comparisons would do much to appease someone that ends up annoyed here in 2016.

 

But there are 3rd party extension cables that will be available (Not to mention some 3rd party wireless controllers are appearing for this), so it's at least an issue that can easily be resolved if it proves problematic.

 

Such people will still end up annoyed though, since there's no button combo like pressing start/select simultaneously or a dedicated home button to get out of a game and return to the dashboard.

 

Edit: Here's another extension cable.

 

If the NES Mini has a stretch to full option like the 5:3 pixel aspect setting on the AVS, squished picture would be a non-issue with HDMI-Composite converters.

 

EDIT: Triple post. Whoops!

 

Unless it's hidden, it doesn't. There's just 4:3, 4:3 CRT, and a 1:1 pixel perfect setting that provides a square aspect ratio like some people think these were meant to be seen despite the televisions of the era.

[Great Hierophant]

Interesting that both those expansion cables are not scheduled to be released until the NES Classic Edition is to be released.

 

My interest died once I actually listened to the production units and heard the garbage that was being output from the noise channel : http://forums.nesdev.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15073&view=unread#unread

[TPA5]

 

So you prefer your graphics to look less like they're intended to look like, rather than more? For example, in the CRT image, it actually looks like there are shadows on his torso, in the pattern of human musculature, which is obviously what the graphics designer was going for. Have you even seen shadows fall on a human torso in the shape of perfect squares arranged on a grid?

 

What about Pac-Man? On an original arcade machine, the Pac-Man sprite and other things look ~round. Send the same ROM to a high-resolution monitor, and it looks like this:

 

Obviously the game designer was going for round.

 

By the way, the CRT looks a lot better in person than in an open-air photograph of the screen (which is the only way to capture it), taken with a cheap camera, no less, whereas the LCD examples look exactly how they look in person, because they are raw pixel dumps and you are viewing them on a high-resolution monitor, the same as playing the game on a high-resolution monitor in real life. You can't capture the brightness and vibrancy of a CRT by taking a picture of it (and taking a picture results in inherent losses in other areas as well), no more than you can capture the real-life brightness and vibrancy of a light bulb by taking a picture of it. Even with all of the losses with the CRT picture, it still looks better than MS Paint graphics.

 

Honestly, I prefer the sharpness of LCD to CRT any day. Grew up with CRT's, and now having used LCD's for years and years I find them much easier on the eyes.

 

 

Why are alot of YouTubers with like a Mil Subs getting the NES Classic Mini early

 

Because YouTubers are a special breed, far removed from us mere mortals.

 

 

Interesting that both those expansion cables are not scheduled to be released until the NES Classic Edition is to be released.

 

My interest died once I actually listened to the production units and heard the garbage that was being output from the noise channel : http://forums.nesdev.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15073&view=unread#unread

 

It's at moments like these that I'm very happy in my ignorance. Because to my ears I cannot tell enough of a difference in the audio to care.

[Great Hierophant]

To enjoy a NES Classic Edition, you will probably be spending close to $90, not $60. By fully I mean you need an extra controller, but since the cables are so short, you will need a pair of extension cables running $10 each. 3' cables are the norm in Japan, but not elsewhere.

 

I find it ironic that the poster/manual included showcases games that are not included.

 

Like NES Top Loader jailbars, once you hear the differences between real NES audio and Classic Edition audio, they can't be unheard.

[MaximRecoil]

 

 

I think people give game designers a bit much credit

 

"Going for round" is "giving the game designers a bit much credit"? What are you talking about?

 

 

 

they design sprites on a grid, sometimes even graph paper

 

Of course they did, but they also knew that, when viewed on a real TV/monitor, each pixel isn't going to look like it was cut out of vinyl with a razor blade guided by a carpenter's square.

 

 

 

and the bonus blur of the crappy screens at the time were sometimes a hindrance and a blessing.

 

Blurry screens are never a blessing. Fortunately, CRTs aren't blurry. If you have one that is, it is in need of repair or adjustment, or it was never built to a high standard of quality in the first place. And Pac-Man machines came with Electrohome G07 15 kHz RGB monitors, which were a far cry from "crappy", and not even remotely blurry.

 

 

 

sure pac man is suposta be round but its plotted on a low resolution grid

 

That's because they had no choice; that was the limitations of their graphics hardware. But it was obviously plotted to be as round as possible, and the CRT monitor took care of the rest.

 

 

 

on the flip side mario's hat is red so it didnt blur into a blob, same with the jumpsuit, and the only reason he has a mustache is to define a face or else it wouldnt have displayed on the much better arcade screens of DK

 

And on a CRT, Mario actually looks like a cartoon character, rather than something made out of large squares aligned to a grid.

[Flojomojo]

You sound like a religious zealot for CRTs. How about taking a breath and thinking about how everyone sees the world a little bit differently?

 

A modern screen is a "real TV/monitor" too.

 

Mario IS made out of large squares aligned to a grid. Always has been.

[Keatah]

It's at moments like these that I'm very happy in my ignorance. Because to my ears I cannot tell enough of a difference in the audio to care.

 

I find it pleasurable and oftentimes necessary to extend my ignorance to ALL areas of videogames just to have fun like the old days!

 

All this talk of "politics" surrounding how and why things are done they way they are done, mixed in with the bickering of how this method vs that method is better or worse, is draining.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Interesting that both those expansion cables are not scheduled to be released until the NES Classic Edition is to be released.

 

My interest died once I actually listened to the production units and heard the garbage that was being output from the noise channel : http://forums.nesdev.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15073&view=unread#unread

You guys making mountains out of mole-hills again.

 

I think it is safe to say that, issues aside, the quality of this plug-n-play device will go above and beyond anything that AtGames or any of the multi-in-one pirates and shit clones over the years.

 

Compare these minor issues to NOAC with swapped duty cycles or AtGames Genesis emulation. There's no comparison.

 

This device is strictly for casual fans. Someone who hasn't played an NES in 25 years won't notice the minute inaccuracies. Hardcore gamers who desire the best of the best can pick up an AVS or NT 2 if they want flawless emulation.

[exo]

Man I don't even care about CRT/RGB/whatever elitism. Choose whatever you want, just know that there are many different options out there when it comes to connecting consoles, and each option has pros and cons. This bickering is utter nonsense.

[Keatah]

Can't wait to see multi-color extension cables released. Nintendo fanbois will buy one of each!

[Great Hierophant]

You guys making mountains out of mole-hills again.

 

I think it is safe to say that, issues aside, the quality of this plug-n-play device will go above and beyond anything that AtGames or any of the multi-in-one pirates and shit clones over the years.

 

Compare these minor issues to NOAC with swapped duty cycles or AtGames Genesis emulation. There's no comparison.

 

This device is strictly for casual fans. Someone who hasn't played an NES in 25 years won't notice the minute inaccuracies. Hardcore gamers who desire the best of the best can pick up an AVS or NT 2 if they want flawless emulation.

 

I expected better from Nintendo than a two-bit outfit like atgames. Nintendo has something like a Raspberry Pi 2 inside that thing, it could have gotten the sound right at least from a non-upgradeable device. This is definitely an issue that could have been fixed, the AVS had a similar issue which was fixed prior to its release. The AVS could be fixed, this thing can't even though the hardware certainly seems capable of it.

 

10 year old NES emulators sound better than Nintendo's miniaturized box, maybe the Rasp Pi emulators do as well. Were this an issue that only popped up on occasion, that would be one thing. These inaccuracies can be heard in almost every game and quite frequently. It may not be quite as nasty as atgames' garbage, but this is a difference in degree, not kind. $60 is not exactly pocket change.

[MaximRecoil]

You sound like a religious zealot for CRTs. How about taking a breath and thinking about how everyone sees the world a little bit differently?

 

Your non sequitur is dismissed.

 

 

 

A modern screen is a "real TV/monitor" too.

 

Not in my book; I see them as glorified calculator screens. Also, HD digital TVs didn't exist when Pac-Man or SMB was created, so back then, they literally weren't real.

 

 

 

Mario IS made out of large squares aligned to a grid. Always has been.

 

Once again you've demonstrated your mastery of the obvious. Of course, large squares aligned to a grid isn't a generally desirable look for graphics, which is why the squares (pixels) got smaller and smaller relative to screen size as graphics hardware progressed. An HD display pulls back the curtain to reveal the ugliness, while an SD CRT naturally rounds out the sharp corners of the pixels (among other things), making it look more like traditional artwork, or even live-action video in some cases, such as Mortal Kombat (arcade) and other games with digitized graphics. Mortal Kombat graphics on an HD display looks like photographs converted to 64-color, non-dithered GIFs as viewed on a PC monitor, such as cluttered the web during the dial-up era.

Edited November 4, 2016 by MaximRecoil

[Osgeld]

Mortal Kombat graphics on an HD display looks like photographs converted to 64-color, non-dithered GIFs as viewed on a PC monitor, such as cluttered the web during the dial-up era.

 

That's cause it is, and you can even clearly see that on the CRT arcade monitor with no issue, didn't ruin the game then, doesn't ruin the game now, some people have different opinions than your rose tinted beer googles

 

now quit derailling the subject cause you got offended by my half a paragraph of 2 cents

Edited November 5, 2016 by Osgeld

[Flojomojo]

A look inside the NES classic mini

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/11/nes-mini-teardowns-have-begun-chips-identified/

[MaximRecoil]

 

That's cause it is

 

No. That's because an HD monitor reveals what it is, while a CRT monitor makes it look better than what it is. A CRT is like a professional make-up and lighting crew for an aging actress.

 

 

 

and you can even clearly see that on the CRT arcade monitor with no issue

 

No, you clearly see it on an HD monitor. On the original arcade monitor it looks more like actual live-action video.

 

 

 

didn't ruin the game then, doesn't ruin the game now, some people have different opinions than your rose tinted beer googles

 

now quit derailling the subject cause you got offended by my half a paragraph of 2 cents

 

^^^ Another progenitor of non sequiturs, as well as comical irony.

[Keatah]

Why are alot of YouTubers with like a Mil Subs getting the NES Classic Mini early

 

Because they are like gods compared against the uneducated masses (us consumers).

[Keatah]

I think people give game designers a bit much credit, they design sprites on a grid, sometimes even graph paper, and the bonus blur of the crappy screens at the time were sometimes a hindrance and a blessing.

 

Sprite and image designers of the day took advantage of and factored in the characteristics of CRTs. Sometimes they used the display itself as a natural anti-aliasing and smoothing mechanism. They relied on bleed & bloom to hide pixelation.

 

They even did the same thing with the NTSC signal itself, by using certain color combos and this-color-adjacent-to-that color to make an entirely new color. An interference of frequencies, if you will.

 

This can even be extended to sound, and we're all familiar with mixing and resonance. No need to expound there.

[NinjaWarrior]

I'm getting mine on friday, Also I have a HDMI to Composite Adapter coming from ebay

 

Where the NES Games are ment to be seen on a CRT Set

[Great Hierophant]

 

Because they are like gods compared against the uneducated masses (us consumers).

 

A.K.A. cheap advertising for Nintendo, views for channels

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

 

Once again you've demonstrated your mastery of the obvious. Of course, large squares aligned to a grid isn't a generally desirable look for graphics, which is why the squares (pixels) got smaller and smaller relative to screen size as graphics hardware progressed. An HD display pulls back the curtain to reveal the ugliness, while an SD CRT naturally rounds out the sharp corners of the pixels (among other things), making it look more like traditional artwork, or even live-action video in some cases, such as Mortal Kombat (arcade) and other games with digitized graphics. Mortal Kombat graphics on an HD display looks like photographs converted to 64-color, non-dithered GIFs as viewed on a PC monitor, such as cluttered the web during the dial-up era.

Graph paper was all those early graphics designers had to work with, and quite frankly those guys were masters at pulling off believable characters with so pew pixels. The blur, moire, bloom, artifact colors, scanlines, and other intrinsic qualities of CRT displays were a product of the time. So put away your nostalgia goggles and realise that pixels are the purist form these games have on a hardware level. If said pixels weren't massively oversampled on a modern HD display and instead displayed at their native 1:1 resolution, the game display would literally be the size of a postage stamp.

 

I'm all for gaming on old tubes as much as you are, but I don't really understand the extreme disdain you have for modern LCD tech. If razor sharp pixels are not your thing, then I might recommend a cheap pair of reading glasses and adjusting the diopter strength until the screen goes out of focus.

[MaximRecoil]

Graph paper was all those early graphics designers had to work with, and quite frankly those guys were masters at pulling off believable characters with so pew pixels. The blur, moire, bloom, artifact colors, scanlines, and other intrinsic qualities of CRT displays were a product of the time.

 

As I said before: CRTs aren't blurry. If you have one that is, it is in need of repair or adjustment, or it was never built to a high standard of quality in the first place. The CRT that connected to my PC right now is capable of displaying 1920 x 1440. Of course, it's no good for classic video games, because like any high-resolution display, it makes low-resolution graphics look like large, perfect squares arranged on a grid. But the point is, if CRTs were inherently blurry, they certainly couldn't be used as a modern PC monitor. I wouldn't be able to read that small text in the quotation box above because it would be nothing but a blur.

 

Also, scan lines aren't an intrinsic quality of a CRT either; they are what happens when you display ~240p on a ~15 kHz CRT; they are the result of skipping every other line (the skipped lines are left blank, thus appear as "scanlines"). There are no scanlines with 480i on a 15 kHz CRT, or 480p on a 31 kHz CRT, and so on.

 

Moire happens due to certain patterns; it is not exclusive to CRTs. It can even be seen in real life. The term is hundreds of years old.

 

 

 

So put away your nostalgia goggles and realise that pixels are the purist form these games have on a hardware level.

 

The "purest form" looks worse in the case of simplistic graphics, and it has nothing to do with nostalgia. If going for nostalgia, I'd use a 19" or 25" CRT and the RF connection for everything, because that's what we, and most other people, had in the '80s. Instead, I use a 32" CRT manufactured in 2006 with the highest quality connection that the video output device offers, up to component (YPbPr). I'm stuck with a crappy picture from some devices, such as the Atari 2600, because it only has RF, and not very good RF at that, but from devices with at least a good composite output such as the NES or SNES, the picture is beautiful. If low-resolution graphics looked better on high-resolution displays, then I'd use a high-resolution display. It is not as if they are hard to come by.

 

The graphics were never intended to be seen in graph-paper form. They all knew that they would be viewed on 15 kHz CRTs; and since that drastically alters the appearance of simplistic graphics (for the better), you can think of that as being analogous to a final rendering stage. In a modern game, would you want the "purest form" of the graphics to show up on your screen, i.e., the basic 3D models without all the rendering effects that get added to them?

 

 

 

If said pixels weren't massively oversampled on a modern HD display and instead displayed at their native 1:1 resolution, the game display would literally be the size of a postage stamp.

 

I know, but that's what you should want, because that's the "purest form" of the graphics:

 

 

Awesome, right?

 

 

 

I'm all for gaming on old tubes as much as you are, but I don't really understand the extreme disdain you have for modern LCD tech. If razor sharp pixels are not your thing, then I might recommend a cheap pair of reading glasses and adjusting the diopter strength until the screen goes out of focus.

 

I like high-resolution displays for high-resolution content, such as my 22" Mitsubishi Diamondtron CRT PC monitor that I'm using right now. I don't like LCD screens for anything other than e.g., calculators. I hate their image characteristics. And no, blurry (which means out-of-focus) is never an improvement. Making a high-resolution display blurry does not make it look like a CRT in the least ...

 

 

... because, as I said, CRTs are not blurry.

Edited November 5, 2016 by MaximRecoil

[Andromeda Stardust]

I never said CRTs were blurry. However there are effects which are similar to blur, especially in the horizontal domain, such as RF bleed when colored swatches extend slightly to the right of a pixel area due to the modulator's lack of a pre-emphais filter. I rather like the stock RF picture on my stock 4-switch Atari. The bleed persists about half a pixel width. Also scanline intensity on 240p sources can vary from one CRT display to the next based on the focus of the beam. My mom's bedroom CRT has almost not scanlines (and is ever so slightly fuzzy at the edges of the screen) but the Zenith I have stockpiled in the garage has gorgeous scanlines. It is too big to fit in my current game room however.

 

And yes, if that Mario screenshot you posted were actually the way the NES Mini displayed games, people would cry foul, and have reason too.

 

The main issue here is that you can't accept that some people may like seeing razor sharp pixels on HD displays. If display technology existed in the 80s such that people could have seen razor sharp pixels in arcades and home devices, I am sure they would have been employed. Look at the "Black Box" artwork for early NES games. The sprite art is right there on the box, no gimmicks or fantasy artwork. And the art displays razor sharp pixels! Somehow I think the developers would have wanted you to see the actual pixels if display tech allowed themto do so. Otherwise the character art on the box would have filters applied to obfuscate the pixels...

[Austin]

Why are alot of YouTubers with like a Mil Subs getting the NES Classic Mini early

 

They are getting them because it's cheap, valuable advertising for the company. You can't beat hundreds of thousands of impressions (potentially millions) for the price it costs to send a few freebie units to some of these channels. This is a common practice with sizable channels on YouTube.

[Austin]

You guys making mountains out of mole-hills again.

 

I agree. I just checked out the video referenced and there are definitely issues with the noise channel. That said, everything else sounds normal and I would hardly compare it to AtGames garbage--nothing on those units sounds accurate. The sound from the NES Classic Mini is still pure gold in comparison.