> OK, I think I found what I was remembering, MooglyGuy logged an issue for vector core
> improvements, and the thread seems to explain a good deal of what I was thinking
> about why MAME can't yet reproduce some of these things that are part of the look of
> vector monitors. https://github.com/mamedev/mame/issues/399
>
> That said, even with this I'm still not fully clear on what obstacles remain, or what
> work still needs to be done. If he or anyone else has any more info, though, please
> feel free to share it here. Thanks!
It is indeed a very good description of what is needed and i thank him for this "answer" to a long thread on bannister.org here: http://forums.bannister.org//ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=104711&page=1
Basically said, MAME needs a good emulation for vector monitors, because it is not enough to emulate only the pcb-hardware the games used, to achieve the fascinating effects and brightness of the vector drawing phosphors and their trails they leave while moving.
Even if you leave behind the fact, that every driver would need to be rewritten, one argument why nobody has touched this, are the different technologies used in LCD´s and CRT´s. If it comes to brightness and high contrast, a LCD monitor cannot compete with a CRT and at the time Moogly wrote that thread, i would say not even close.
Times have changed and the first LCD monitors with HDR technology are out. HDR could be one answer for most of the problems developers had before, regarding the mimics of phosphor/beam of a CRT.
If you want to know what HDR means: http://www.pcgamer.com/what-hdr-means-for-pc-gaming/
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: What work would need to be done to get more accurate vector shaders?
Reply
