Unless you present arguments you're just being biased. How this: Is better than this: The unique thing I don't like about cheap LCDs is the terrible ghosting that looks like an RF artifact in motion, but that's only noticeable, again, on cheap LCDs.
2D graphics were made with CRTs in mind for the longest time. If Sonic Mania is true to their word about being mid 90's Saturn-era 32-bit graphics, then an optimal CRT display should make it look nice and clean with scanlines, as you would have expected from a high end monitor in the 1990's.
I was just gonna play it on my laptop and switch screens. Clearly I'm too much of a peasant to understand what the problem is with just using any old screen.
Regarding all the pixel stuff, one YouTube channel uploaded a video of Sonic Mania gameplay manipulated in such a way that pixels don't show as blurry, and its size is 1:1. The end result is more crisp than all official gameplay videos: Link here. I am, nevertheless, also curious to see this running with a CRT monitor.
...how is that picture in any way supporting your argument? An off screen photo of the subpixel scatter doesnt prove anything Regardless, there is absolutely no reason a crt cant be as sharp as an lcd, and lcds have enormous trade offs like poor black levels, subject to light bleed, etc. Lcds will never, ever look as good as a crt, objectively.
And if you played the same game on an LCD using composite video, you'd have the same legibility issues. A CRT with RGB input can produce just as good an image as an equivalent LCD. (or better, in some cases - see 240p)
A CRT display is not going to give you the super clear picture you might expect from a modern high definition monitor. If anything, they were designed for the opposite - to smooth out the picture to reduce noise from analogue transmissions. Whether the difference is noticeable with crappy composite signals is a different story. And mileage will vary depending on the model and age. What a CRT does do, however, is provide much lower latency between controller inputs and on-screen action. They're apparently required for a game like Battletoads on the NES, but from my experience, it's not such an issue with Sonic. Trying to land, duck and do a spindash quickly is more likely to fail because the engine can't keep up, not the monitor. But as it's been said many times before, Sonic graphics were designed with composite signals in mind and so do all sorts of tricks to simulate extra colours and transparency and the like. Moving pillars in Marble Zone, Aquatic Ruin waterfalls, etc.
Totally going to take that as a joke as I had nothing but CRTs until 2011. I'm not looking to hinder my experience is all. My point was that they've always made their best attempt at pushing the boundaries. I'm just not up for hindering quality at the sake of nostalgia. That's what the in-game CRT option is for. EDIT: Nevermind! That RGB is beautiful!!! But still liking my HD LCD/LED better. I'm most likely going to play in my home office through HDMI from laptop to computer, but will also hook it up to my living room LED for better surround sound. I'm just happy I can use my laptop for this, consoles be damned. This is what I saw: http://modretro.com/xen/index.php?threads/add-rgb-to-that-old-crt.12889/
with my PVM I can count the pixels of my Famicom games on screen, even via composite. On the other hand I have the feeling that RGB is way too crisp on my regular CRT TV. Sonic Next Level for example shows just a bunch of stripes this way, while with composite it produces the orgy of transperency effects that's intended. I still refer to CRTs as "proper screens" *g
That arrangement is also not really well aligned so it's really uneasy on the eyes for crispness. It does help with 'blending colors' but you can blend colors on 1080p with filters too :P I really hate non-square pixel grids, I even returned a Phone after I saw the PenTile screen. Really ugly-looking :P
