Finally a proper Sonic collection!

They are still missing Sonic R or at least it's not mentioned.

Yakumo

 

:happyhap:

 

HUZZAH!!!!!!!!!!

 

In version 1 xbox at least, they draw a box around the screen and run the game inside that box, doesn't look too bad.

 

Was the xbox or PS2 version of Sonic Mega Collection better? I have the xbox one, but I don't like the box they put the screen in. But I havn't tried to PS2 ver. Does it have the games running in the proper resolution with on-par with the xbox ver emulation?

 

I have tried the ps2 version and it also runs in boxed form, plus sonic 1 seems to have slight slowdown not in the original plus the game does seem to look washed out on ps2. The cube version however was perfect, and everthing was running smooth and clean as a whistel, though the game cube used its own genesis emu sicne i remember when they did dump the game people were able to extract the emu from it, but imo the cube version looks the best since its the sharpest as well as having not box around it at all, from what i remember.

 

Not necessarily. Any standard NTSC video camera will record at 60Hz interlaced. It's only when viewed on a PC and frame de-interlaced (i.e. converted to 29.97 progressive) and put on XviD or whatever that it's 29.97fps.

The majority of 2D games run at 50 or 60fps, unless it's on a crap computer like a Spectrum or C64 - they weren't renowned for their graphics rendering. It's just stuff like the fake transparencies on MD games really show how de-interlacing makes things look crappy.

 

well the thing is now we do have dv cameras here in the us, we can set the cameras to yes record at 60fps, however most capture cards and encoderdsencdoe at 29.9 frames, but im curious how they get 59.9 accomplished on some dvds.

 

You taking the piss? I don't know anyone here with a camera that isn't DV anymore! And please remember this is the country that manufactures half of Intel's processor cores, among many other things - not just potatoes.

DV cameras don't record at 60 frames per second - it's 60 *fields* per second interlaced. In reality it looks just as good as 60 progressive fps (on CRT TVs anyway), but it's just a pain to work with on PCs. It's often referred to as 29.97fps interlaced (or 25fps interlaced for PAL) but it's the same thing.

Encoding interlaced video to MPEG2/4/whatever is easy to do as long as you don't (i) de-interlace, (ii) re-size, (iii) use temporal or spatial filters improperly (interlaced video has to be treated differently with filters, as to not fudge up the fields), or (iv) do anything else silly. Every MPEG-2 encoder I've seen has options for interlaced video.

If you want 60 *frames* per second you need an HDV camera... and an HDTV...

 

They still have to do software rendering to make it look genuine. Same with the PC port, as not everyone (actually almost nobody) has a monitor hooked up to their PC that can accept a low-res signal. Hence most emulators have a scanlines option to emulate low-res. Most games don't come with this, and look crappy.

 

It's pretty easy to get MD games to look good on a PC - just run it at 320x240 (or even 640x480) - the MD outputs 320x224 so all you get is slight borders at the top and bottom. And custom resolutions are your friend when it comes to emulators. For NES games and other 256x224 stuff, I just made a custom 512x448 @ 120Hz mode, simply by using the normal Nvidia drivers!

I don't like the scanline modes on emulators - I don't think they simulate standard res monitors very well. The low dot pitch of them makes things so much more different. I prefer no scanlines, no filters, no anything when playing emulators on my PC monitor, but that's just me ^_^

What's so bad exactly about the GC conversions? I didn't think they looked too bad, but I was viewing them on a crappy 14"er with blur-o-matic composite video.

 

im getting a little sick of all these compilation sonic games...it doesnt seem like you get any new content.

it seems like everything is some sort of combination: dr. robotnik's mean bean machine, sonic the hedgehog, sonic the hedgehog 2, or sonic the hedgehog 3.

theres a crap load of sonic games they could include...gamegear games, arcade games, pc games, pico games(?)...sonic eraser, segasonic the hedgehog, sonic labyrinth, sonic drift, sonic and tails, sonic drift 2, bla bla, bla..

they should just release all the games on one compliation for each system untill the end of time.

i wonder if the fighters game will be a port of the arcade or based off of whatever work they did for the saturn...if its the saturn and they dont include sonic R ill be pissed.

 

If up-scaled graphics don't bother you, there will be no problem. I'm getting really picky about such things though.

 

I don't like badly upscaled graphics - especially on PCs where the bilinear filtering usually used hurts my eyes. It's also the reason why I have LCD screens and their one native resolution, though good newer ones seem to do a better job at scaling. But I'm still sticking to my CRTs and double or triple-scaled resolutions at 120Hz for now ^_^

Was the graphics on the GC collection using bilinear resizing or something blurry? If it was, then yeah, I probably would have hated it. But comparing how I used to play Sonic games - on an even worse TV, through RF, at 50Hz with huge borders - it's not all that bad.

 

It seems to me that the general public aren't concerned in the slightest about the game running in a box, or looking a bit crappy. They just want to be able to play the old Sonic MD games they had as kids on their flashy new PStwos.

For people such as ourselves (who are damn picky), I suggest getting the originals. I mean, you can get Sonic R and the original MD/Genny Sonics for <£5 each. It'll work out about the same price as a new £40 game anyhow. The only reason to purchase this is for Sonic Fighters, as it's the only Sonic game in these compilations never to grace a home console.

Granted it'll take up more room, but a MegaCD + Saturn and all the Sonics is much > a shitty PStwo conversion every time

 

you forget one important feature of the handyness of the sonic compilations on the 'next-gen' consoles.... on most plasma's and beamers it looks pretty crappy if you connect an megadrive with an a/v lead. thanks to the compilations you can output the video with component and the audio with optical! (and yes it looks good!)

 

I have no problem with compilations, it's great to play these games again legally as some really are timeless. I do however, have a problem with companies cashing in and taking the pi$$. I'd be happy for Sega/Nintendo etc to release a compilation of old games for each new generation of console, but not at £40 for 5 or 6 games, especially when these games can be anything upto 20yrs old. There's no reason why Sega can't do a proper Sonic collection. Every MD/MS/GG/etc. Sonic game all on one disk with options to change the output from, say, MD style or have super hi-res. Same with Nintendo: I'd like one disk with every Mario and every Zelda; but due to GBA rerelease cash-ins, that's not gonna happen. And probably won't happen with the Revolution, as OoT/MM will be available on DS. Capcom aren't any better with the so-called Megaman collection. These companies should be happy that people are willing to pay for these old games. At the end of the day, NeoGeneis/xSnes9x etc on Xbox do a lot more than a small compilation disk, and it's all free as long as you know where to go.

[/rant]

 

Err, the X-Box version (if not all consoles) of the first compilation does have the Game Gear Sonic, Sonic Drift, Sonic Chaos, Sonic Blast, and Sonic Labyrinth (and the Game Gear version of Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine, too). Oddly Sonic and Tails for Game Gear is missing, though. You just need to scroll down past the "???" unlockable listings. Bonus and unlockable content as well, some new things here and there.

 

You're missing the point. Yes, upscaled graphics look better on an high-res display than non-scaled low-res graphics on a high-res display. But scaled is scaled, whether it's the software or the hardware. Does it look good? No, but it's good enough for casual gamers. Last I checked, no casual gamers hung out here.

Why Zilog would want to burn his eyes running games at 3x their resolution with no scanlines is beyond me, but that's his choice.