Principally the thing it did right, having lived through the era, is bring a real video game home with Super Mario Bros. At the time I had a C64 and an Atari 2600, but would spend every quarter I could dig up at the arcade at the bowling alley next door playing pretty much anything, but especially Super Mario Bros. The Nintendo was the first console to bring the arcade home and it was absolutely revolutionary.
What made the NES so interesting?
31–40 of 127 posts
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#32> The NES is in some sense a composite-only system. While there is an RGB mod, it's quite invasive[...] This is something that a lot of even very plugged into retrogaming people don't really get about the NES and RGB mods. I think it's very counterintuitive for people now that there is no part of the system that operates in actual 'color' information. The NES' video output is composite from start to finish[1], with p…
Wouldn't the palette chosen by Nintendo for use in first-party emulators going for a "nostalgic" feel (e.g. the NES Classic's https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Kachikachi ) be in some sense the "canonical" palette? At least in the same way that an author's statements about their own previously-published works are "canonical" to those works. My thinking is that there was certainly an RGB palette that the de…
* As evidenced by the fact that the (RGB-based) Nintendo VS. System has a different palette than later emulation releases, even at the time Nintendo wasn't sure of the "correct" RGB palette (or has since come around and changed their mind about what that should be).
* There wasn't really any sort of standard devkit. Different developers, different games, different artists used different hardware and software tools to draw their graphics. Nintendo was notoriously crappy to third-party developers during the Famicom years, and Western developers in particular had little institutional support from them. Even if you had the correct palette that Nintendo was using between 1988 and 1991, that's not necessarily what Rare was using in 1990, or what Square was using in 1987, or...
* The Famicom was released in 1983, and development on it began in 1982. There was no Amiga, no Atari ST, no X68000, no VGA, no mainstream computers really capable of general purpose graphics editing. Developers often had to come up with bespoke systems for editing graphics at the time, including bespoke hardware - and it's entirely possible these bespoke systems used a similar non-RGB design as the Famicom, or even the same PPU, or were even just editing programs on a Famicom with some kind of serial-out hacked in.
* Philosophically speaking, the artists were aware that they were producing graphics for the Famicom/NES. That is, they weren't looking at whatever RGB output they had as the definitive version, but just as a rough guideline for how the image would appear on TVs. Given that, whatever RGB the devkit might've been spitting out isn't "definitive" in the sense of how the artist intended anyone to see it.
* I don't really trust Nintendo to make any extra effort to provide an "authentic" experience in their re-releases: witness, for instance, the low quality of the N64 emulation in the Switch Online Expansion Pack they just put out. The actual people who did the art may be gone or uninvolved in the re-releases; just because they own the copyright I don't think whatever Nintendo slaps together really represents the intent of the artists themselves, in the same way that I don't think, say, the release of Go Set a Watchman says anything about the intent of Harper Lee.
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wrote an NES game for my senior project in university. Later, when I researched writing a game for the Atari 2600, I was surprised to learn that you basically had to write your own display subroutine, whereas the NES did that work for you.
The system used in the Atari 400 and Atari 800 is definitely based on the thinking of the Atari 2600 in that you are really thinking about drawing one line at a time but you are getting help to do it This chip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANTIC is controlled by a "display list" that sets the strategy used to draw lines on a line-by-line basis. If you have 20 blank lines you can just skip past them and not waste any…
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't the palette chosen by Nintendo for use in first-party emulators going for a "nostalgic" feel (e.g. the NES Classic's https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Kachikachi ) be in some sense the "canonical" palette? At least in the same way that an author's statements about their own previously-published works are "canonical" to those works. My thinking is that there was certainly an RGB palette that the de…
To throw a few wrenches into that: * As evidenced by the fact that the (RGB-based) Nintendo VS. System has a different palette than later emulation releases, even at the time Nintendo wasn't sure of the "correct" RGB palette (or has since come around and changed their mind about what that should be). * There wasn't really any sort of standard devkit. Different developers, different games, different artists used diffe…
We have seen photos featuring people using nice, pro or broadcast grade CRT displays. Given the lack of an RGB authority, and the limited number of colors, it is likely each group just used whatever references that made sense to them.
And regions. PAL, SECAM, other variants all added noise.
I'll bet a standard consumer grade TV with RF was a small part of many dev processes too. Just a check on effects and or particularly troublesome color combinations. The pro or broadcast grade displays would often render those better than one might expect, but your average TV would likely display a hopefully interesting blur...
RGB images suggest this check on a basic RF TV because some of the pixel art choices may have been different, given better display signals were an option.
For me personally, viewing an NES on a better quality composite display works best for me. Personal preference, and that is due to having composite capable displays early on. I used composite more than anything else. But all that said, the NES RF modulator was respectable. Worked better than many did.
Often, the design choice was a long cable to the TV.
I had a few systems that parked the modulator right next to the signal input on the TV. TI Home computer had a huge one, but it really was great. I used it for many different systems. There was a modulator for PS1 that you could use with a very short connection. And the NES.
RF done that way worked well enough.
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#35If you like this kind of article, Retro Game Mechanics Explained is a channel with a lot of really similar retro game console hardware and software breakdowns. It's a really good channel that goes into a lot of detail and has fantastic visuals: https://www.youtube.com/c/RetroGameMechanicsExplained
I'm an expert on the Atari 2600 (wrote a homebrew game.) This channel's video on it isn't quite accurate. He overstates the case of how primitive the machine is, claiming that it takes only 39 bits to display the 2600's screen. That's not really true. The playfield (20), sprite (8x2), missiles (2x1), and ball (1) do total to 39 bits of pixel data... but a lot more than that is involved, many registers modify those pixel bits. There are two X-position latches for all five objects, four color registers, two sprite width/repeat registers, two sprite reflection registers, one register to repeat/mirror/priority the playfield, plus a few more bits in the "vertical-delay" (really each another latch) and timing (horizontal and vertical blank and sync) registers.
Here's the list, with a total of 45 byte-sized registers, although not all bits are used and some are for nongraphical purposes (audio, collision detection). https://github.com/munsie/dasm/blob/master/machines/atari260... (starts at line 88)
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#36Principally the thing it did right, having lived through the era, is bring a real video game home with Super Mario Bros. At the time I had a C64 and an Atari 2600, but would spend every quarter I could dig up at the arcade at the bowling alley next door playing pretty much anything, but especially Super Mario Bros. The Nintendo was the first console to bring the arcade home and it was absolutely revolutionary.
There’s a lot in SMB that we take for granted, but I didn’t understand as a kid. The physics system made the action feel real. The the subtle animation of the coins rotating in the air (actually part of the background, interestingly) gave the levels fullness. It was a really impressive achievement compared to the competition at the time (which of course had been destroyed by the video game crash of 1983)
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#37What made the NES great was what others have already mentioned: by 1985 chip technology was at a point where you could do hardware tiling and RAM was cheap enough that you could do nice color lookup tables. Also the NES came out during a video game crash, so competitors were holding back on making new consoles (their latest consoles were a few years earlier). Also the ability to do simple stored audio wave patterns a…
Platformers on a single or two button joystick, for example, just do not work as well.
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#38> The NES is in some sense a composite-only system. While there is an RGB mod, it's quite invasive[...] This is something that a lot of even very plugged into retrogaming people don't really get about the NES and RGB mods. I think it's very counterintuitive for people now that there is no part of the system that operates in actual 'color' information. The NES' video output is composite from start to finish[1], with p…
This is why we joked NTSC meant Never The Same Color.
The last thing you wanted to see in NTSC was bright red because you'd continue to see it smear for at least 1/4 of the screen to the right. NTSC "Safe" red wasn't really red. Run a broadcast safe filter on 255,0,0 and see how far off it goes. Should be somewhere around 180,0,0 IIRC. The days of looking at vectorscope to see the red point shoot off while everything else was much closer. When it became easier to get digital images to tape, we'd have to adjust the chroma down on the TBC to bring it back into legal limits which would mean the rest of the other colors would get squashed when the client didn't work in NTSC safe color palletes.
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#39> The NES is in some sense a composite-only system. While there is an RGB mod, it's quite invasive[...] This is something that a lot of even very plugged into retrogaming people don't really get about the NES and RGB mods. I think it's very counterintuitive for people now that there is no part of the system that operates in actual 'color' information. The NES' video output is composite from start to finish[1], with p…
In France we had a different color system (SÉCAM), while the other european countries were in PAL, but French TV were required to have a Péritel/SCART entry by law, offering RGB input. So the french NES was basically the european PAL version with an extra PAL to RGB converter.
* The power of that sticker was amazing! ;P
Re: What made the NES so interesting?
#40I cannot complain enough, this is a simple web page. there is absolutely no reason i cannot capture a static image of it.
beyond that, i sort of enjoyed a deeper dive, but the subject matter was relatively uninteresting to me. Technology used to have to be bent to the will of the group programming for it, and i'm sure with enough time and the lack of a release schedule from the three big CPU manufacturers, we'd have amazing results with x86 and Arm now, too. But it was a different time, and i do appreciate history.
Sure do wish i could save the site as a .png, though.