MAMEWorld Forums - EmuChat - Re: Recording a video after playing it

> > I think we all know the games where restricted by the technology at the time
>
> Why the fuck do you and other people like you keep pushing this bullshit,
> thoroughly-disproven line of reasoning? Ask anyone who actually worked on games
> during that time period, and they'll tell you that they authored the art specifically
> for the output device that they were shown on. Would any of the artists tell you that
> at the time, they felt particularly restricted? No, because they learned to work
> within the constraints. In fact, there's a MAME dev who can tell you first-hand, and
> has done so, but you've dismissed him because you're exactly the sort of fucking
> philistine that is ruining the emulation community. His name's R. Belmont.
>
> These people didn't have some grand artistic vision of some shithead 15 years on
> stretching them to be 33 percent wider than they were intended to be. Yeah, you'd
> like to think that you're only stretching it a little bit, wouldn't you? Except it
> seems like quite a bit much more when you actually put it numerically.
>
> Which of these looks "correct" to you?
>
>
>
> It might astound you to know that the model behind the Mona Lisa was not, in fact,
> American, and it is the first image that's the correct one.
>
> Now, if you were Leonardo Da Vinci, and you saw people stretching your canvas 33%
> wider than the original when displaying your work, how exactly would you feel? Would
> you be filled with bonhommie towards these people, or would you be appalled that
> people are essentially destroying your works because they think they know better than
> you, even though they couldn't actually produce art if their lives depended on it?
>
> And to follow on from this, how do you think the countless artists who put their
> heart and soul into the art for the title they were working on feel, when they
> encounter people who legitimately don't give a fuck about how the game is supposed to
> look, and think that they're somehow hot shit, some sort of special fucking snowflake
> because they jerk it to fat Chun-Li? And if you feel that these people somehow less
> of a claim to the portrayal of their art than any other artist, I would love to hear
> why.

Perhaps more to the point is - why are people like you so intolerant of differing opinions and preferences? Just because you think being slavish to the original is the be-all and end-all, doesn't mean everyone must think this way forever and a day. Get over it. You ruin it how it suits you, let others do the same.

Take this quote: "Why the fuck do you and other people like you keep pushing this bullshit, thoroughly-disproven line of reasoning? Ask anyone who actually worked on games during that time period, and they'll tell you that they authored the art specifically for the output device that they were shown on".

Okay, so let's pick a random example. Let's pick, Berzerk, When the guy sat down to design it, was he presented with a 4:3 tube set, a 16:9 LCD, and a 16:10 LED and asked which suited his artistic vision better? No. He was stuck with a 4:3, because that was the dominant ratio at the time. It ran on a tube set, because you know - LCD screens weren't about then.

You are insinuating that if given the choice, he'd of chosen 4:3 anyway. I don't suppose we'll ever know. The fact is, his choice was limited to what was available at the time - hence he worked "within the limitations of the technology at his disposal". Simple. That's not "dis-proven", in fact it's a rather obvious conclusion. At the end of the day it's a red herring - I never said he was unhappy with 4:3, or that the game wasn't designed to be played 4:3. Only that the limitation of a 4:3 tube screen at the time confined him to a ratio choice. I'm sure he was more than happy (he made a great game, any way).

Now, would the artist claim they were restricted? No, probably not. It does not follow though that they weren't. It simple illustrates that they accepted the norms of the day, and worked within them. He wouldn't have thought of making it 16:9, actually. Would the designer of Berzerk have loved to have written it for a 64" LED screen at 4k resolution? Yeah, I'm guessing he'd of found that pretty cool. But at the time he was limited, and did a great job with what was available.

As for my being "exactly the sort of fucking philistine that is ruining the emulation community" - you're having a laugh.

How does my playing Berzerk stretched on a 16:9 screen do anything to the emulation community? It does nothing to the emulation community, where the "fix" to my abhorrent behaviour is checking an option in the UI.

In fact - ironically - it's people like you that will hurt the community with your dictatorial ranting over minor things such as how I choose to enjoy a game. You seem to want to treat the community like an enlistment to the military. Well, good luck with that, but I'm afraid I'm going to go ahead and bring the community to its knees by running some games in something other than it's OAR if I choose. Because that's how I like it. Trust me, the world won't end. In fact, the only people that care are, yes, philistines like yourself who have their joystick pushed, firmly, up your ass (seriously, when you bend forward to type does the cursor jump to the top of the screen?) If your attitude is truly indicative of the community, then the community is a bit of a cesspit. Fortunately, it's not.

I didn't ignore R. Belmont. I just don't happen to think it matters even half as much as you do. Is that really so bad? I'm sure he did some great work, I'm very pleased for him. However, does he really think it's the end of the world that monitors are now 16:9? If so, then I'm not sure what I can say. I can only repeat myself - it's 2016, things move on, and I don't get any particular pleasure at ignoring advances that have been made. I use controllers that aren't from the original machine, running on an OS that wasn't around when the game was released, sitting in a chair that you wouldn't haver found in any arcade, with the sound pumped through a stereo system, that can shake the walls. So stretching a few pixels.... yeah, it's not such a big deal, imo. I don't feel obliged to rent a space in a strip mall, put down dirty carpeting, and to jostle my way through a group of strangers to get at my favorite game so i can enjoy the authenticity, the experience. Mr. Belmont may lose sleep over it (although honestly, he doesn't, does he?) but I hope he at least has the maturity to know that times change, people have different preferences, and at the end of the day, it's playing the game that's important, you know, having fun.

I'm not sure why you wrote "It might astound you to know that the model behind the Mona Lisa was not, in fact, American" - what does the nationality have to do with it? Hell, I'm not even American.

As for what Leonardo would think..... I think he'd probably move on. The original picture is not changed. It's still there to be seen. His vision was of a portrait - a painting. What's on the screen is not a painting. No-one has taken the canvas and stretched it. Of course, he may be appalled that someone like yourself enjoys it on a screen, depicted in pixels rather than brush strokes. But at the same time, others around him would likely say "Yeah Leonardo, what can you do? You only painted one, and it's in France. It's what the kids do today." Then Leonardo would get back to designing helicopters.

Mind you, he might have jumped from a tower if he found out people wear pictures printed on the front of T-Shirts. But hey, what can you do?

"when they encounter people who legitimately don't give a fuck about how the game is supposed to look, and think that they're somehow hot shit, some sort of special fucking snowflake because they jerk it to fat Chun-Li? "

I do "give a fuck" how a game is supposed to look. But it doesn't follow that I'll necessarily choose to play it that way. They're different things. If you're talking about a discussion of the artwork, then sure, OAR is quite important. If you're casually shooting some robots on large 16:9 screen to pass some time, it's not so important. Choice. It's an amazing thing. Perhaps they have a thing against freedom of choice where you are? It's going to shock you, but after half an hour of playing Berzerk, I find getting the high-score takes over from my continually stopping and admiring the red robots - WOW, NOW THEY'RE BLUE! - WHOA, THE MAZE IS DIFFERENT! I get distracted see.

Actually, I don't think I've come across a single thread on this board where people discuss how beautiful character art is. Perhaps I missed it. I don't conclude from that that people don't care though - you probably do.

Tell me, when listening to music do you use an equalizer? Have you ever customized a car? Have you ever bought a Christmas card with a still from a movie on it with a funny caption? Probably not, because you know, the vision thing....

Well, I don't know, what would the developers think?. You seem to be the all-knowing spokesman for all developers, after all. Perhaps they'd think: "Who is this foul-mouthed cretin who is so intolerant of someone who doesn't agree with them?" Or maybe they'd say: "You know, it feels really good to know that almost 50 years after I worked on that, people are still enjoying it - how cool is that?!" Coz, while they might prefer it in 4:3, it's not a deal breaker, the be-all and end-all. Maybe it's the complete package - design, gameplay, difficulty, peoples love for their creation, etc. that counts for a lot. You seem to be suggesting that all takes a back seat to aspect ratios. Or maybe they'd feel I'd committed an affront to their creation. If the latter, then I'd have to say they'd be better served to get some perspective, and at least try to understand why a preference exists. Like normal people.

I have not denied the developers and artists an opinion. It's you that wants to lock down opinions. It's not a black and white issue - it's a preference. How many of these games had "MUST ONLY EVER BE PLAYED IN 4:3" in its design documents? All of them? I had no idea.

By the wau, what does "special snowflake" mean? Who is "fat Chun-Li"? What does it have to do with this topic?

In summary - if you feel I'm ignoring someone, or not taking their thoughts on board, it'll likely be because they've been rude, unwilling to accept the opinion of others, and are trying prescribe blame on "ruining the community" that is not, in any way, ruined as far as I can tell. I can only converse with sane, rational people. If you come out belligerent and swinging then I'm forced to reply in kind. What'll ruin the community (which I don't think will ever happen) is people like yourself, going off as you have. Why is it not sufficient to have a simple discussion, without losing your marbles? Can you name a single instance where the community was hurt by someone playing a game on a 16:9 screen out of OAR?

Calm down. Have a soda. The guy in this thread likes the games. He has a small Youtube channel which he clearly enjoys doing. Encourage him, let him have his fun. Don't start telling him what to do by pain of death, using foul-language, and acting like a mental patient. You see, he IS part of the community, whether you like it or not. He's having fun, and that - for me - is the heart of emulation, not some insane adherence to a set of rules dictated by others. Be friendly, share opinions, say something nice every now and again. It costs you nothing, and you can put some good bck into the world. You may disagree on one topic, but if they're here then here's likely a lot of common ground. Ain't that sweet?

THIS MESSAGE WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED BY ITS AUTHOR TO BE READ IN A 5:5 RATIO USING THE ARIEL FONT IN GREEN. PLEASE ADJUST YOUR SETTINGS ACCORDINGLY.