I'm aware; I mentioned this to cover the possibility that the NES documentation may make mention of it, and was saying that even if it *did* appear there it is unlikely it received much documentation at all, for the same reasons they did not feel the need to make a big deal of it in SNES documentation. It was a response to "In the case of the official NES documentation, I have no idea (to date I have only seen a single page of said documentation)".
tepples wrote:Keep important things 1 tile away from the left and right and 5 tiles (240 line mode) or 4 tiles (224 line mode) from the top and bottom. Umihara Kawase was way ahead of its time in this respect.
I'm assuming you meant to say top and bottom in both cases, not left and right.
Either way, I think by making games "widescreen friendly" all this does is chop off perfectly usable area on what is an already strikingly low-resolution system. If anything, it encourages people to use that atrocious "fit" feature that cuts off so much information to fill the screen. I guess I don't think it's good to encourage such a thing; the people who would care / notice have more than likely either configured their television set to appropriately show a 4:3 image, or are playing their system on a television the system is designed for (like a 4:3 CRT television or monitor).
If we make games just for 16:9 cropped setups, we're left with a bunch of games with awkwardly wasted space or weird HUD placements. Yeah, I'm looking at you, Umihara Kawase. I don't think of it as ahead of its time but more annoying and stupid for everyone who isn't playing their SNES on a setup that is flat-out wrong
and extra-blocky with every other game.
If it's "fixed" with an option to move the HUD to appropriate spots, then is such an interference really the best solution? If we're going to go to such an effort, wouldn't it be better to just have the game tell the player "Hey nutsquad! Put your television on 4:3 mode and buy yourself an S-video cable if you don't have one for your SNES!". Everybody wins, and composite dies just a little more!
byuu wrote:So with all I understand, I take a kind of controversial view that few people like with how I personally choose to render video. First, the NTSC vs PAL cropping of overscan is due to analog properties that aren't an issue with a PC. So I show all 240 scanlines. Some games use them, some games don't. People tend to not like not being able to fill the screen 100% from top to bottom with colored lines, but oh well. Video shaders can do that anyway if it's that important. Next, because of being -able to-, even if nothing does, toggle the hires bits mid-scanline, it's better to just output at a consistent 512 pixel width. This of course would break a naive HQ2x software filter, but a smarter vector-based shader that treats the screen as having 256 "dots" in normalized space would work fine, so that's fine too. Also tends to produce a sharper image with bilinear filtering, for obvious reasons.
Controversial or not, this is my favorite approach and you have my applause. I especially like the by-default 2x prescale you've applied that makes even the cheapest bilinear filtering preserve sharpness much more.
This of course would break a naive HQ2x software filter