what about plasma witch nobody gives a crap about. 60 Hz on the plasma is 60 flashes per second.I am not kidding the image appears and then instantly goes away. each refresh there is zero screen smearing like OLEDs and LCDs. and plasmas are still actually really good and are definitely better than CRTs.
Fuck yeah! Love me some nvidia originality that is only available with dlss 3.0 and not 3.5 because 3.5 was only made so 30-series cards would have something new after spending 2k during covid.
The reason why old games look better on CRT's is not because of the CRT's themselves, it's because the developers back then employed graphics tricks that take advantage of CRT TV's and their blur, which is why most old games look so off on modern displays. One example is the checkerboard water, which looks super weird on modern monitors, yet actually look like transparent water on CRT's.
Yeah, but that still means the CRT is why it looks good. The same sprite looks worse on a modern TV, therefore the CRT is what makes it look good even if that was intentional.
checkerboard water was also memory saving tool. Checkerboard water looks bad on CRT monitor even by today's standards. CRT monitor and CRT TVs works differently. So games that were developed for consoles hence CRT TVs can have these design tricks. But games that were developed for PC do not. So for example World of Warcraft and Half Life were never meant for CRT TVs.
there's one time I use an LCD tv on Resident Evil 4. Its graphics look so horrendous that i thought maybe my memory of when playing it on CRT TV was wrong.
Modern games look amazing on crts, too. Just not crt tvs. If you go 1920x1440 on a high quality crt monitor for modern games, there is hardly anything that can beat that, in my opinion.
I posted on your reply because you don’t have a lot of comments, but I just wanted to say hey Baldy some of have only played one game in life played one game in our life and it was awesome RDR two great graphics great game great story I don’t know about another game stack for graphics so if you can give me an example go for it
@ yeah dude i had a few months of having an Xbox and could only afford 1 game. Rdr2 was it. Great game… idk what this dude is talking about graphics i looked it up and there not great in past games. What was his point?
You could on tube tvs too. What you experienced was most likely a settings problem or you were playing something optimized for a higher resolution than your tv was capable of. If you have a 720p tube tv and you play a 980p game on it the text will be blurry and some details will be gone or blurred to a point of being unnoticeable. If you play a 720p game on a 720p tv you won’t have any issues unless your tv is smaller than the aspect ratio the game was designed for which can blur things as well.
You absolutely can read words fine on crts. The exception is some sets struggle with xbox 360 and newer due to the tiny size text tends to have nowadays
I remember the first time we plugged in our new 360 into our granparent's old tube TV from 1999, had to get REALLY close to the TV and squint to make out the words.
I absolutely love CRTs and have like 50 of them, but the info in this video is debatable at best, rose tinted confusion at worst. No way is a CRT superior to a modern OLED in any way except playing older games designed with them in mind.
Glad someone's in the same boat! I have a CRT I use to play games, and it looks good! But to say it's superior to modern displays... it's a stretch. Mine's an RCA Colortrak 2000, maybe ~1983. TV age could play a role, or the RF modulator I use. Maybe I need a monitor from the later years?
Yeah I agree. Not sure what this guy is going on about. Modern games on modern monitors look hundreds of times better and more crisp. Sounds like he may be biased and getting paid to push this new tech.
@@georgegeysen2727youre both wrong the way a crt produces an image is far better than any lcd and even oled panel but you can get pretty good quality with lcd and its far less expensive. The way resolution and refresh rate function on crts is honestly mind blowing, of course I’m not saying every crt clears your 1200$ oled but there’s nothing like some of the goat crts to this day. When was the last time you played a modern game developed around 4:3 on a crt… oh wait never
I think you are missing the point of crt filters a little bit. They are mostly suited to pixel art games and maybe old school low res games. CRTs blur the pixels and make them look smoother. Originally pixel graphics were designed in CRT monitors like these and the CRT filter gives them the look the artists intended. That is why RetroArch is incorporating hem. Basically they were not developed because people thought that Red Dead Revolver looked better than RDR2. They were developed because Red Dead Revolver looked better in a CRT TV than it does in a LED monitor.
This filter wont help retro games look any better beyond reducing motion blur, but it could be used to stack on top of other filters to get a more complete CRT experience. I don't even think that improving retro games is the main intention here. Movies, sports games and video games all suffer from motion blur on LCD's, less so on OLEDS but they are still not as good as CRT's, CRT's handle it incredibly well. Most TV's have some sort of "Clear view" setting, that tries to reduce motion blur often by inserting frames, causes a reduction in image quality and jitter, basically just crap. An algorithm like this could possibly solve those issues.
This video is about a different aspect of crt monitors completely seperate from the pixels. If you have a high refreshrate monitor you can find the shadertoy link and see for yourself how much clearer the motion is
The main reason why modern gamss look blurry is that game devs no longer make their own antialising instead using TAA and similar stuff without any adjustments... despite adjustments being absoliteky necessary as all kodern systems are just a baseline meant to be optimised on a per gamw basis.
@autismspirit game devs have made their own anti alising for years mate. There was no comprehensive tool you simply put onto your engine and said "done" until TAA came about. Sure, we name certain styles of AA after the method employed, but those are all built by the devs using techniques of the style rather than using a pre build engine unspecific tool like TAA. That is the difference: One NEEDS to be implemented into your engine on a per game basis, and the other CAN be adjusted to your needs.
@@AlphaHorst huh? TAA isn't a drop-in technology, it needs to be created from scratch for each engine just like any other AA method (apart from MSAA, which is ironically the only one that works the way you're talking about). Maybe you're mistaking it for DLSS which has nothing to do with it? TAA actually requires way more modifications than other AA solutions, like implementing motion vectors, jittering, and doing several passes to get the final "smoothed" image, whereas most other post-process AA back in the day were usually done in one pass. It works well with deferred rendering though, which is the standard nowadays.
@@autismspirit The problem is that a lot of devs aren't doing those modifications. Tools like UE5 come with tons of stuff built in, but they're not optimised -at all- for the game that's being developed. Due to laziness, lack of know-how or time crunch, these modifications aren't made, and the game performs *and* looks worse as a result.
Modern games look wildly better than anything I grew up playing on a CRT. Old school games on classic systems, they might be better on CRT because they were designed for it. But for new games, I’ll take my 4K HDR OLED over a CRT every time
You're talking graphical fidelity versus artistic design. Hyper-realization executed through advanced graphics are never going to look as good as a good artstyle executed well. Final Fantasy 13 looked worse than games for the ps2 made years before it, for example.
@ art style isn’t relevant to what I’m walking about. You can have good or bad art styles regardless of it being modern or classic. My point is focused only on CRT vs modern tv technology like OLED. All modern games will look better on an OLED than CRT. Maybe some older games might look better on CRT since they were built to take advantage of scan lines and not pixels
@@beatles42ohgg94 how is that relevant to the original point? The argument isn’t that modern games are better games, it’s purely about the visuals on CRT vs modern TVs
I wouldn't say that modern games look bad, the same yes but bad no. the major difference is that older games had more of a stylized look, primarily I'd say due to the hardware restrictions.
I agree with this. However, 'Realistic' can be good, but it can't be the be all. Which is why I really loathe the graphicsexuals creaming at ray tracing or "life-like" graphics. And I think that sends the wrong signals to the studios, who are now too focused on promoting graphics over gameplay.
@ yeah, I'd very much perfer more stylized games over hyper realistic ones, and there isn't much to be improved with realistic graphics they've been pretty perfect since 2018
you can have realistic graphics but style is a MAJOR factor of feeling distinct pikmin 4 is a great example because visually its astonishing in both atmospheric design and flair which a lot of games just feel muddy with graphics taking the dominant hold
I wonder how this feels on a regular 144hz VA, TN or IPS panel. Can't imagine there being any benefits over the integrated strobing options on some higher end panels. OLED's low latency probably has to do with it working well there
144hz IPS BFI here. i actually think this effect looks clearer then having BFI active because of the brightness loss, but this does still seem to improve clarity even if BFI is on.
Taa is a plague of modern video games but that’s mostly due to developer trends and shortcuts. Modern screens have loads of fundamental flaws that simply do not exist on crts but they are far less expensive to mass produce
@@512TheWolf512 it isn't lol turn TAA off and compare. Apex lets you turn it off for example the problem is persistence blur, which is inherent for LCD and OLED displays
I own an old CRT that I use for my retro game consoles and I can confirm, they are 100% better in every way except their size and weight. A 14" CRT can easily weigh 20 to 25 pounds. To put that into perspective, most modern 40" LCDs are in or below that weight range.
its not just nostalgia, it’s because stuff was genuinely better. Like xbox, newer consoles, shit, newer games? also shit. I only play on my 360 because the games were actually fun.
@@Crispierbug sure if u are comparing it to like Gollem ye its great but if u are comparing it to red dead 2 or wokong etc its not that good. I grew up on the 360 and the games where not as good as today with few exceptions. They were good for the time i wont lie but games are better now with more developers doing the job. More indies, better visuals. Outside of some publishers like Ubisoft and EA games are looking good.
i always find stuff like this funny "old games were better that's why i always play on my ps1 instead of my ps4 old will always be better than old" like okay bro
*new - retro gamers have used these since the proliferation of flat panels. I love having one on my MAME multicade! I do suggest them! Better than any of the shader options.
The real problem with modern games is that they're not OPTIMIZED AT ALL. Oh you have hardware, let's just not optimize anything... Modern Game devs: The GPU can handle it! Old Game devs: How good can we make this god awful shite look? The old methods lead to WAY better looks. Because they put some effing effort into making things as goods as they could... meanwhile modern game devs: look picture move... I Smrt!
yea, it's the dev new tech stupid rat race. Plus bending to the people expectations either publishers or audience. If you don't have budget, don't shoot for top graphics, just master what you can handle.
They are optimized for what they are, which in the case of unreal engine, unity,godot etc all being multipurpose engines that try and cater to everyone and everything at once.. which results in bloat. The other is techniques to handle things like volumetric light and fog, which is extremely intensive and can take roughly 45-50% of a frames budget alone. Rendering millions upon millions of polygons is fairly trivial nowadays, the problem is when your performing shader calculations on each and every pixel of said millions and millions of polys ... this is where performance comes to die.. and depending on what type of game your trying to make might be necessary evil, especially in the case where your trying to push 2k to 4k textures. (this is also where upsampling via fsr/DLSS comes into play).
Pixel games looked bad because you're seeing the sharp pixels. Those games took into account screen quality and thoroughly tested the looks of details. Dracula's 1 red dot of an eye would bleed and blur out into a fabulous glowing and menacing appearance.
Thanks for sharing such valuable information! Just a quick off-topic question: I have a SafePal wallet with USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). What's the best way to send them to Binance?
My childhood CRT ruined my eyes. I still have decent vision, but it stopped getting worse after HD TVs came out. I remember having headaches after playing even for just half an hour or so.
Well back in the day, those who made games had passion for their creations while modern games prefer to make horrific abominations that look uncanny. I'm talking about you Taash
bro do you know how much ghosting a regular crt had back in the day? a flashbang in cs lasts way longer in my monitor, and moving the cursor fast literally leaves a skidmark
I will! I love it so much (i grew up playing sonic games on online emulators, a lotta retro gaming, plus newer games). It was apparently my dad's Genesis from college, had NHLPA '93 with it. Recently I bought Vectorman 2 for it! I also have a wii I repaired (was broken parts i got for free), some dude in high school gave me his old gamecube, and I got a Game Boy Color I got in 2015. I love repairing old consoles and maintaining them.
I think the reason why older games look great 'back then' is because game developers were testing and working with hardware, IE TVs that most people will have for sure. Developers nowadays develop games for a large server for memory back up, the newest of new TVs, and hardware, which is something NO ONE has in their house or they are filthy rich IE Old money.
My only concern is that OLED monitors could suffer from pixel burn-in with this technology. Pixel burn-in happens faster when an image is flickering at a fast rate, which is exactly what this program is doing to the whole screen.
The only thing I want for my older games to look better is something that sharpens the pixels so my Wii and GameCube games don’t look like blurry messes
Very cool fact is that you can play Nintendo Switch games on the N64 because one of the memory card slots is the exact same slot on the Switch, so yes, you can play MK8 Deluxe on the N64 but the graphics are bad but playable
Motion blur? I was thinking more about how model and animation quality of a lot of big budget games has gone in the toilet when I consider how older games are better but okay..
It's not even just CRTs vs LCDs / LEDs, games on PS3 look way better at 720p than games nowadays at 1080p. 1080p games nowadays look hella blurry for no reason, but 720p games back then look smooth and crisp.
I dunno, maybe it's because I haven't turned on my CRT since our move 2 years ago, but, I definitely remember it looking worse in almost all aspects, literally unless the game is designed to take advantage of the flaws because of the way pixels were displayed. Which is why I kept my CRT, but, motion wasn't a part of it for me. I really like how clean everything looks now I personally also turn off motion blur because I think it looks horrendous
Nah back in the days devs were just more concerned about making crysis look realistic. Nowadays those moneywasters are more concerned about making sure we know by which pronounce concord characters go by.
Would say it just comes down to if the developers put the time and effort in, some games look way better now then before. Then a lot do not, and most of those are companies that are just after the money... not the passion.
A big part of it was devs having really strong art directions in their games, especially the triple AAA games. Nowadays it’s all about hyper realism and graphical fidelity, while the games are impressive graphically now they’re very boring to dull to look at
its not just tubes. its how the games were actually made. Games arent actuslly 3d anymore. They found an easier way to make games and stuck with it because it takes way less time. went from polygonal 3d shapes to flat squares and triangles.
i have a beast of workstation and i use a Dell CRT monitor from 2002 simply because it's HD and the colours look way better than an LCD. might still get an OLED in the future, but for now i'm enjoying what i have.
Games used to just look better because they had a more iconic look. Games these days just try to be as realistic as possible and it's booring. I'm not even talking about games like ratchet and clank, like look at dead rising 1 and dead rising 4. Dead rising 1 doesn't look as realistic, but way more interesting.
Nvidia: WRITE THAT DOWN. WRITE THAT DOWN
Introducing ✨blurAI✨ for improved visuals
(it's just a crappy filter unrelated from the one in the video(their stock price doubles overnight anyways because it has ai in the name))
ULMB 2 exist
@@cathacker13no no no, it’s that but ai*✨✨✨
what about plasma witch nobody gives a crap about. 60 Hz on the plasma is 60 flashes per second.I am not kidding the image appears and then instantly goes away. each refresh there is zero screen smearing like OLEDs and LCDs. and plasmas are still actually really good and are definitely better than CRTs.
Fuck yeah! Love me some nvidia originality that is only available with dlss 3.0 and not 3.5 because 3.5 was only made so 30-series cards would have something new after spending 2k during covid.
The reason why old games look better on CRT's is not because of the CRT's themselves, it's because the developers back then employed graphics tricks that take advantage of CRT TV's and their blur, which is why most old games look so off on modern displays.
One example is the checkerboard water, which looks super weird on modern monitors, yet actually look like transparent water on CRT's.
Yeah, but that still means the CRT is why it looks good. The same sprite looks worse on a modern TV, therefore the CRT is what makes it look good even if that was intentional.
checkerboard water was also memory saving tool. Checkerboard water looks bad on CRT monitor even by today's standards. CRT monitor and CRT TVs works differently.
So games that were developed for consoles hence CRT TVs can have these design tricks. But games that were developed for PC do not. So for example World of Warcraft and Half Life were never meant for CRT TVs.
there's one time I use an LCD tv on Resident Evil 4. Its graphics look so horrendous that i thought maybe my memory of when playing it on CRT TV was wrong.
I remember hearing on the original sonic the hedgehog in green hill the waterfalls in the background have some sort of colour or something kn only crt
Modern games look amazing on crts, too. Just not crt tvs. If you go 1920x1440 on a high quality crt monitor for modern games, there is hardly anything that can beat that, in my opinion.
We‘ve come full circle soon 😅
I play counterstrike on a plasma this is a much better experience than a CRT
@@beatyoubeachyt8303 that is not how personal preference works, son.
@@ThemightyTelevisionbeing on high refresh rate is way better than a crt and new panels look better crts only have better motion blur
@cheetxh6831 you genuinely do not understand personal preference.
@@ThemightyTelevision zero gosting thats a fact look it up plasmas can not gost
One of the other reasons was that games were often written to take advantage of crt scan lines.
Like palette swap at a specific line for where the water begins.
Ohhh
I posted on your reply because you don’t have a lot of comments, but I just wanted to say hey Baldy some of have only played one game in life played one game in our life and it was awesome RDR two great graphics great game great story I don’t know about another game stack for graphics so if you can give me an example go for it
@@Alwaysexcited383You've only played _one_ video game in your life? 🧐
@ yeah dude i had a few months of having an Xbox and could only afford 1 game. Rdr2 was it. Great game… idk what this dude is talking about graphics i looked it up and there not great in past games. What was his point?
the best thing about modern games is you can read the words in the games
You could on tube tvs too. What you experienced was most likely a settings problem or you were playing something optimized for a higher resolution than your tv was capable of. If you have a 720p tube tv and you play a 980p game on it the text will be blurry and some details will be gone or blurred to a point of being unnoticeable. If you play a 720p game on a 720p tv you won’t have any issues unless your tv is smaller than the aspect ratio the game was designed for which can blur things as well.
You absolutely can read words fine on crts. The exception is some sets struggle with xbox 360 and newer due to the tiny size text tends to have nowadays
I remember the first time we plugged in our new 360 into our granparent's old tube TV from 1999, had to get REALLY close to the TV and squint to make out the words.
wasn't the game that did that
yeaaaah... about that, I don't know about you, but I defenetly can't read shit, the fonts are always crazy tiny, need a hawke eye to read anything
I absolutely love CRTs and have like 50 of them, but the info in this video is debatable at best, rose tinted confusion at worst. No way is a CRT superior to a modern OLED in any way except playing older games designed with them in mind.
Glad someone's in the same boat! I have a CRT I use to play games, and it looks good! But to say it's superior to modern displays... it's a stretch. Mine's an RCA Colortrak 2000, maybe ~1983. TV age could play a role, or the RF modulator I use. Maybe I need a monitor from the later years?
Early LCD monitors were asscheeks but current day OLED and QD-OLED tech is infinitely better
Yeah I agree. Not sure what this guy is going on about. Modern games on modern monitors look hundreds of times better and more crisp. Sounds like he may be biased and getting paid to push this new tech.
@@georgegeysen2727youre both wrong the way a crt produces an image is far better than any lcd and even oled panel but you can get pretty good quality with lcd and its far less expensive. The way resolution and refresh rate function on crts is honestly mind blowing, of course I’m not saying every crt clears your 1200$ oled but there’s nothing like some of the goat crts to this day. When was the last time you played a modern game developed around 4:3 on a crt… oh wait never
So you’re the guy that’s buying all those CRTs on eBay for $125-$300 each lmao
Still have a CRT specifically for older consoles and man does it still feel great.
Zero input lag
Can't beothered to move that behemoth, and my old games look better on it.
I think you are missing the point of crt filters a little bit. They are mostly suited to pixel art games and maybe old school low res games. CRTs blur the pixels and make them look smoother. Originally pixel graphics were designed in CRT monitors like these and the CRT filter gives them the look the artists intended. That is why RetroArch is incorporating hem.
Basically they were not developed because people thought that Red Dead Revolver looked better than RDR2. They were developed because Red Dead Revolver looked better in a CRT TV than it does in a LED monitor.
This filter wont help retro games look any better beyond reducing motion blur, but it could be used to stack on top of other filters to get a more complete CRT experience. I don't even think that improving retro games is the main intention here. Movies, sports games and video games all suffer from motion blur on LCD's, less so on OLEDS but they are still not as good as CRT's, CRT's handle it incredibly well. Most TV's have some sort of "Clear view" setting, that tries to reduce motion blur often by inserting frames, causes a reduction in image quality and jitter, basically just crap. An algorithm like this could possibly solve those issues.
That is true of most shaders trying to mimic crts but that isn’t the point of this one.
This video is about a different aspect of crt monitors completely seperate from the pixels. If you have a high refreshrate monitor you can find the shadertoy link and see for yourself how much clearer the motion is
The main reason why modern gamss look blurry is that game devs no longer make their own antialising instead using TAA and similar stuff without any adjustments... despite adjustments being absoliteky necessary as all kodern systems are just a baseline meant to be optimised on a per gamw basis.
TAA should not be used almost without exception, its crap... DLAA semi fixes the issue... but its still makes games blurry.
when the hell did devs "make their own antialiasing"? are you just incorrectly parroting someone else's words?
@autismspirit game devs have made their own anti alising for years mate.
There was no comprehensive tool you simply put onto your engine and said "done" until TAA came about.
Sure, we name certain styles of AA after the method employed, but those are all built by the devs using techniques of the style rather than using a pre build engine unspecific tool like TAA.
That is the difference: One NEEDS to be implemented into your engine on a per game basis, and the other CAN be adjusted to your needs.
@@AlphaHorst huh?
TAA isn't a drop-in technology, it needs to be created from scratch for each engine just like any other AA method (apart from MSAA, which is ironically the only one that works the way you're talking about). Maybe you're mistaking it for DLSS which has nothing to do with it?
TAA actually requires way more modifications than other AA solutions, like implementing motion vectors, jittering, and doing several passes to get the final "smoothed" image, whereas most other post-process AA back in the day were usually done in one pass. It works well with deferred rendering though, which is the standard nowadays.
@@autismspirit The problem is that a lot of devs aren't doing those modifications. Tools like UE5 come with tons of stuff built in, but they're not optimised -at all- for the game that's being developed. Due to laziness, lack of know-how or time crunch, these modifications aren't made, and the game performs *and* looks worse as a result.
Modern games look wildly better than anything I grew up playing on a CRT. Old school games on classic systems, they might be better on CRT because they were designed for it. But for new games, I’ll take my 4K HDR OLED over a CRT every time
You're talking graphical fidelity versus artistic design. Hyper-realization executed through advanced graphics are never going to look as good as a good artstyle executed well. Final Fantasy 13 looked worse than games for the ps2 made years before it, for example.
@ art style isn’t relevant to what I’m walking about. You can have good or bad art styles regardless of it being modern or classic. My point is focused only on CRT vs modern tv technology like OLED. All modern games will look better on an OLED than CRT. Maybe some older games might look better on CRT since they were built to take advantage of scan lines and not pixels
Modern Games Look better on CRT monitors and TVs also though.
Its the motion and sharpness we are talking about, not the actual game graphics.
yeah, but what games are actually worth playing on that?
does it do....anything....that my shitbox doesnt?
@@beatles42ohgg94 how is that relevant to the original point? The argument isn’t that modern games are better games, it’s purely about the visuals on CRT vs modern TVs
Majima really is everywhere huh
I wouldn't say that modern games look bad, the same yes but bad no. the major difference is that older games had more of a stylized look, primarily I'd say due to the hardware restrictions.
I agree with this. However, 'Realistic' can be good, but it can't be the be all.
Which is why I really loathe the graphicsexuals creaming at ray tracing or "life-like" graphics.
And I think that sends the wrong signals to the studios, who are now too focused on promoting graphics over gameplay.
@ yeah, I'd very much perfer more stylized games over hyper realistic ones, and there isn't much to be improved with realistic graphics they've been pretty perfect since 2018
you can have realistic graphics but style is a MAJOR factor of feeling distinct
pikmin 4 is a great example because visually its astonishing in both atmospheric design and flair which a lot of games just feel muddy with graphics taking the dominant hold
I wonder how this feels on a regular 144hz VA, TN or IPS panel. Can't imagine there being any benefits over the integrated strobing options on some higher end panels.
OLED's low latency probably has to do with it working well there
I agree, as time goes on the benefits lessen even more as we push refresh rates on sample and hold displays
144hz IPS BFI here.
i actually think this effect looks clearer then having BFI active because of the brightness loss, but this does still seem to improve clarity even if BFI is on.
The fact we are going back to old tech is crazy
Old tech is often better than new tech.
its a cycle for sure, make tech, make better tech, with better take make original tech better, and so on
We’re not, this is bad take. CRT may look better for old school games that were designed to work on CRT, but modern games would look awful on CRT
tested, reliable, developed.
But usually it's pushed aside for a reason.
Also with movies. Directors using old lenses, to get an effect.
@@JonathanRose24 no. Not if you actually make a modern CRT designed for modern gaming.
The screen isn't the issue its Temporal anti aliasing
No, the screens natural motion blur is definitely noticeable, even with taa off.
@cowclucklater8448 not big enough to annoy me and i have ips on a oled its even less noticable
Taa is a plague of modern video games but that’s mostly due to developer trends and shortcuts. Modern screens have loads of fundamental flaws that simply do not exist on crts but they are far less expensive to mass produce
This is not about TAA
This is about persistence blur
DLAA REALLY helps, its literally TAA but with MUCH less ghosting and blur.
If only modern games could actual run at Native res with DLAA...
No
DLAA does nothing for motion clarity.
This video is about strobing/BFI and for example Nvidia pulsar
TAA is a war crime
@Violet-ui TAA is the worst culprit in motion clarity being bad
What?
@@512TheWolf512 it isn't lol
turn TAA off and compare. Apex lets you turn it off for example
the problem is persistence blur, which is inherent for LCD and OLED displays
I own an old CRT that I use for my retro game consoles and I can confirm, they are 100% better in every way except their size and weight.
A 14" CRT can easily weigh 20 to 25 pounds. To put that into perspective, most modern 40" LCDs are in or below that weight range.
My 21 inch crt monitor is like 65😂
I for one don’t miss the awful high-pitched sound CRTs make
Modern games are all made using training wheels programs. Allegorithmic, Qixel and Pixologic are the CG version of No Child left Behind.
My ears are happy that CRTs are gone, just like my brain
Damn the nostalgia makes people believe it’s better😂
its not just nostalgia, it’s because stuff was genuinely better. Like xbox, newer consoles, shit, newer games? also shit. I only play on my 360 because the games were actually fun.
@ new games are fun though bro you are not telling old ass games like Bioshock, fallout 3 etc are better then some of the stuff made today
@flyinglobster9552 Bioshock is absolutely better then a good chunk of modern games,
@@Crispierbug sure if u are comparing it to like Gollem ye its great but if u are comparing it to red dead 2 or wokong etc its not that good. I grew up on the 360 and the games where not as good as today with few exceptions. They were good for the time i wont lie but games are better now with more developers doing the job. More indies, better visuals. Outside of some publishers like Ubisoft and EA games are looking good.
i always find stuff like this funny "old games were better that's why i always play on my ps1 instead of my ps4 old will always be better than old" like okay bro
I do not believe this would make things looks better
Because it won’t. Art style matters.
I was blown away by the fact that component cables were an option for a PS2. The difference is day and night.
We’re bringing back eye strain with this one
What? We're going to have to look at your mom?
Trying to fit all of her in my field of view at the same time did give me some eye strain..
the comment above me is so funny
@jimarapidis it's very bottom tier ngl. He tried too hard
it was average
I thought for a second there was a new CRT coming out ... and got excited. 😂
What monitor do you have?
CRT OLED
was the constant flashing good for us? You would pass by a house with a tube TV and it looked like a rave
Okay, but how do you USE that thing?
*new - retro gamers have used these since the proliferation of flat panels. I love having one on my MAME multicade! I do suggest them! Better than any of the shader options.
Kay, The Control reference can't be coincidence
The real problem with modern games is that they're not OPTIMIZED AT ALL. Oh you have hardware, let's just not optimize anything...
Modern Game devs: The GPU can handle it!
Old Game devs: How good can we make this god awful shite look?
The old methods lead to WAY better looks. Because they put some effing effort into making things as goods as they could... meanwhile modern game devs: look picture move... I Smrt!
yea, it's the dev new tech stupid rat race.
Plus bending to the people expectations either publishers or audience.
If you don't have budget, don't shoot for top graphics, just master what you can handle.
They are optimized for what they are, which in the case of unreal engine, unity,godot etc all being multipurpose engines that try and cater to everyone and everything at once.. which results in bloat.
The other is techniques to handle things like volumetric light and fog, which is extremely intensive and can take roughly 45-50% of a frames budget alone.
Rendering millions upon millions of polygons is fairly trivial nowadays, the problem is when your performing shader calculations on each and every pixel of said millions and millions of polys ...
this is where performance comes to die.. and depending on what type of game your trying to make might be necessary evil, especially in the case where your trying to push 2k to 4k textures. (this is also where upsampling via fsr/DLSS comes into play).
Pixel games looked bad because you're seeing the sharp pixels. Those games took into account screen quality and thoroughly tested the looks of details. Dracula's 1 red dot of an eye would bleed and blur out into a fabulous glowing and menacing appearance.
Thanks for sharing such valuable information! Just a quick off-topic question: I have a SafePal wallet with USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). What's the best way to send them to Binance?
My childhood CRT ruined my eyes. I still have decent vision, but it stopped getting worse after HD TVs came out. I remember having headaches after playing even for just half an hour or so.
Well back in the day, those who made games had passion for their creations while modern games prefer to make horrific abominations that look uncanny.
I'm talking about you Taash
I don't think I ever thought my older games looked better than my more current games.
bro do you know how much ghosting a regular crt had back in the day? a flashbang in cs lasts way longer in my monitor, and moving the cursor fast literally leaves a skidmark
This is why I still have a crt TV in one room,only a 28" Panasonic yet I love the screen for retro gaming
I actually own a small CRT I got connected to a Sega Genesis I found in my basement years ago.
As a game collector and avid player, please take care of that Genesis!
I will! I love it so much (i grew up playing sonic games on online emulators, a lotta retro gaming, plus newer games). It was apparently my dad's Genesis from college, had NHLPA '93 with it. Recently I bought Vectorman 2 for it!
I also have a wii I repaired (was broken parts i got for free), some dude in high school gave me his old gamecube, and I got a Game Boy Color I got in 2015.
I love repairing old consoles and maintaining them.
I think the reason why older games look great 'back then' is because game developers were testing and working with hardware, IE TVs that most people will have for sure.
Developers nowadays develop games for a large server for memory back up, the newest of new TVs, and hardware, which is something NO ONE has in their house or they are filthy rich IE Old money.
My only concern is that OLED monitors could suffer from pixel burn-in with this technology. Pixel burn-in happens faster when an image is flickering at a fast rate, which is exactly what this program is doing to the whole screen.
This is so smart, I tried it out and I love it. Thanks for this video.
This is exactly what they did for 8/16 Bit games. They designed sprites with those screens in mind
You can just turn motion blur off.
What are the downsides? Is there like, a visible scan line?
You should totally dress up as Dr evil from Austin Powers and do a video
CONTROL mention
awesome game, can’t wait for the sequel
Does this filter allow the Nintendo Zapper to now be able to communicate with newer tvs now?
So people are now substituting frames in their framerate to create a smoother gameplay experience. So more frames not more better now?
Not related to tv talks but been replaying my later gen 360 games and am realizing how much I miss that aesthetic
CRT had no latency, and i always got headaches while watching on a crt for too long as a child back in the day. I don’t have that with lcd/led
The only thing I want for my older games to look better is something that sharpens the pixels so my Wii and GameCube games don’t look like blurry messes
Can’t wait to play Portal and Half-Life 2 with this 😂
im using a crt rn, i wish crts would do a comeback with decent resolutions and refresh rates
Unbelievable what modern LCDs need to match the performance of plasma screens
I'm honestly most excited about this for the old speedruns
Possibly no need to get a CRT screen anymore? Sign me up
To summarize: "I like old thing better because it reminds me of my youth."
I feel like modeling the electron beam phosphor interaction and decay, would be the way to go
Humanity started its decline after dropping the n64 shiny metal effects
I mean, don’t fighting games tournament use CRT monitor so that they have super low latency and all?
As a scrub on this topic, which means I know nothing technical wasn't the image crisp because CRT's had no latency?
Art style is king.
When they will get rid of the TAA and blurred visual for actual games?
Very cool fact is that you can play Nintendo Switch games on the N64 because one of the memory card slots is the exact same slot on the Switch, so yes, you can play MK8 Deluxe on the N64 but the graphics are bad but playable
Motion blur? I was thinking more about how model and animation quality of a lot of big budget games has gone in the toilet when I consider how older games are better but okay..
Does this also help with oled burn in?🤔
Not really. Games UI will still burn your OLED.
Only LCD that practically immunes to burn in.
Now my real question is, would this work on steam decks too?
Fun thing too, crts actually last longer than the new stuff.
I grew up playing on one of those tube tv's, even with my Wii, and I can confidently say no the absolute fuck they did not look better.
Holy shit this is amazing and I love it
Huh, guess those melee players still playing on CRT were onto something this entire time
It's not even just CRTs vs LCDs / LEDs, games on PS3 look way better at 720p than games nowadays at 1080p. 1080p games nowadays look hella blurry for no reason, but 720p games back then look smooth and crisp.
This sounds like adding crap to the image without adding in the original good features that made it good.
Do you think the 50 series will make 1080p "dead" like 720p?
Games just cared about art style and not only being realistic 120 fps and rtx bull
Wait you didnt mention oleds???
Trust me, our eyes do not miss CRTs
I dunno, maybe it's because I haven't turned on my CRT since our move 2 years ago, but, I definitely remember it looking worse in almost all aspects, literally unless the game is designed to take advantage of the flaws because of the way pixels were displayed. Which is why I kept my CRT, but, motion wasn't a part of it for me. I really like how clean everything looks now
I personally also turn off motion blur because I think it looks horrendous
“Massive tub TVs” You know what else is massive?
LOOOOOOOOOEWW TAAAAA-
GET OU- 🗣️🗣️🔥🔥
That's funny. The second I open a game with a crt texture overlay, I try to turn it off.
Nah back in the days devs were just more concerned about making crysis look realistic.
Nowadays those moneywasters are more concerned about making sure we know by which pronounce concord characters go by.
Would say it just comes down to if the developers put the time and effort in, some games look way better now then before. Then a lot do not, and most of those are companies that are just after the money... not the passion.
This video is being heavily subsidized by nostalgia.
hear a child tell me that sonic looked better that RDR2. cool.
I KNEW BURNOUT 3 LOOKED BETTER WHEN I WAS A KID THAN NOW
Man, Im Playing Half Life 2 For The First Time, And Holy Crap. It Looks Better Than Ang Other Game Ive Ever Played.
It was made by talented and passionate devs who love video games. Instead of just people doing their job.
Its funny how we keep advancing technology only to reverse it and go back to the old ways.
A big part of it was devs having really strong art directions in their games, especially the triple AAA games. Nowadays it’s all about hyper realism and graphical fidelity, while the games are impressive graphically now they’re very boring to dull to look at
hey, how are you? you're okay?
Basically BFI for monitors that don't have it or what?
I mean, CRT is like the jack plug of headphones
its not just tubes. its how the games were actually made. Games arent actuslly 3d anymore. They found an easier way to make games and stuck with it because it takes way less time. went from polygonal 3d shapes to flat squares and triangles.
i have a beast of workstation and i use a Dell CRT monitor from 2002 simply because it's HD and the colours look way better than an LCD. might still get an OLED in the future, but for now i'm enjoying what i have.
The new power rangers game has a scanline filter, they're devs after my own heart.
Games used to just look better because they had a more iconic look. Games these days just try to be as realistic as possible and it's booring. I'm not even talking about games like ratchet and clank, like look at dead rising 1 and dead rising 4. Dead rising 1 doesn't look as realistic, but way more interesting.
a reshade / nvidia freestyle port will be cool to have
So... We've come full circle?
Its also TAA thats used everywhere. Play a game from a few years ago and it looks much much sharper.
Fallout 4 would look amazing
Pretty much all games around that time and older
Metro is pure immerssion
My favorite graphics are the old burnout or driver games. Those look amazing.