I first used MAME about 10 years ago, and although I found a few games that worked really well, I was pretty disappointed with the graphics emulation on a lot of them.
I tried a few other emulators around that time (one that comes to mind is "Callus") and found the graphics on games such as, for example, Ghosts'n'Goblins, were far more as I remembered them to be on the original arcade versions.
Having just gotten back into retro gaming, and trying out MAME again, I've had basically the same results: some games are emulated really well (one example: Star Wars), whereas the graphics on a lot of other games look blocky and kind of, well, crappy. Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me, but when I played the original arcade games in the 80s, the graphics were smooth and fair superior to any home computer at that time.
However, the graphics on most of the MAME emulated games look something similar to Commodore 64 games. For example, I've just been playing Outrun on MAME, a game I loved back in the day, but I can't believe the graphics were so blocky like that.
Compare the Kawaks emulator version of a game like Ghouls'n'Ghosts (which seems identical to the original) to the MAME emulation (which has the typical blocky graphics mentioned above) to see exactly what I mean.
I'd just like to know if anyone can explain to me why the graphics on most MAME games are not very good?
Thanks.
|
Index 
Flat 
Why are the graphics on most MAME emulated games so... poor?
Reply
