This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

First "accurate" ports of console games

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. First "accurate" ports of console games

User Info: Amakusa

5 months ago#21
X3 having redbook audio and anime cutscenes did not make it better. Arguably some of the SNES music was better (but this is like saying polishing a turd, X3 is not known for its great music) and it didn't have blatant load screens on it.
I will rule the world, and find that truly good cup of coffee.

User Info: JKatarn

5 months ago#22
The cranky hermit posted...
VGA was fairly common and widely supported in 1990, and was better than pretty much any console's video mode, and rivaled most arcade boards. It really comes down to the faster CPUs, mainly the 486 which started being common around 1992.

Did you actually play games on PC in 1990? They were overwhelmingly still CGA/EGA with VGA compatibility - VGA cards, or at least games supporting true 256 color VGA graphics didn't really become widespread until a few years later. Also saying it "rivaled most arcade boards" is shockingly misinformed - most consoles/arcade boards had specialized hardware for handling sprites/scrolling/collision that PC did not - all that had to be done on the CPU, hence the very slow or completely absent scrolling in PC games. You're also forgetting that arcade boards like System 16/32 existed at the time that offered many more colors on screen than a basic VGA card could handle - again due to custom hardware.

*Edit* - that is to say there WERE *VGA* games in 1990, but they were overwhelmingly still 16 colors, just using a VGA palette etc. for more scene variety, but they didn't take advantage of the VGA chipset/have 256 colors on screen - this was of course because VGA cards by and large were still fairly expensive and far more people had CGA/EGA cards. That of course would change by 92/93 or so.
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii-U | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES

User Info: JKatarn

5 months ago#23
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Zsnes is the highest quality SNES emulation, sadly.

On a technical level? No, not by a longshot, that would go to BSNES. I mean, in practical terms, most people aren't going to be able to tell the difference between most of the SNES library running on a fairly recent build of ZSNES vs. BSNES but in terms of emulation accuracy, ZSNES is far from "high quality", and like most emulators is very hacky with a lot of not terribly accurate hacks/workarounds to get the most popular games working reasonably.
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii-U | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES

User Info: DarkZV2Beta

5 months ago#24
The cranky hermit posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Zsnes is the highest quality SNES emulation, sadly.

It's not even close, and it's pretty common knowledge. Snes9x surpassed it a very long time ago, and Higan is the gold standard today.

Coulda sworn X2 had a low print run PC port, but I could be wrong.

Yes. Yes you are.

X3 on PC is not better than the SNES version, much like X3 on PS1 is not better than the SNES version.

They're both better than the SNES version.

Talking about running native, not through DOSbox or anything like that.

You didn't say "native." DOSBox is the de facto method of playing DOS games - DOS games always means DOSBox unless otherwise specified. And even if you had said "native," you'd still be half wrong. It's IMPOSSIBLE to play X1 "native." You would have just as much luck trying to play the SNES version "natively" as you would the DOS version.

If I said it's "difficult" to run SNES games on a PC, that would show I don't know what I'm talking about. Going "oh, I actually meant playing them native" would not be a saving throw. Same deal with saying that about DOS games.

Snes9x is nearly unplayable. Zsnes still has far better reliability for input timing and frame pacing than anything else out there, by far. Snes9x is so awful that I couldn't even stand to play Megaman X3 on it for more than a minute. It dropped an input at least once a minute, there was noticeable delay in everything, and frame pacing was downright awful.
If you're talking about technically being accurate to SNES hardware in terms of it's emulation of software to the extent of display and sound, probably? But I don't care, it's trash, and Zsnes is still king where it counts; playability.

SNES version has no load times and a more suitable soundtrack, and is therefore better, much like the vast majority of SNES to PS1 ports. Another play > looks thing. Similarly, Tales of Symphonia was better on GameCube than PS2.

And the rest is just pointless whining "look mom I can be right on the internet" bulls***, so I'ma skip that.
a quad core i7 was just a rebranded celeron -Pengu1n
Anything that has 3p fps or better is fine with me -mucloud

User Info: Bendetto

5 months ago#25
I going to go ahead and date myself here but does anyone remember these? Played them on my dad's Tandy:


Thats all I can remember...

User Info: chase1234life

5 months ago#26
The cranky hermit posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
That said, Megaman X1/2/3 also received solid ports, though they're difficult to run on anything more modern, due to compatibility issues, and were rapidly outdated by high quality, high speed emulation from ZSNES.

Just about everything you said here is partly wrong or completely wrong.

Mega Man X2 never got a PC port.
Mega Man X and X3 PC are easy to run on modern PCs, thanks to DOSBox. In fact, that's the only way you can play them. There is no difficult way to play them.
Mega Man X3 on PC is better than the SNES version.
ZSNES isn't exactly "high quality" emulation.

1. Whatever
2. See 4
3. Subjective
4. First, he said "High Speed". Second, if you're going to complain about accuracy of emulation than I personally would really wish you didn't mention DOSBox. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but you don't get to complain about emulation and then praise it in the same breath.

You're just trying to get brownie points and prove that you have a bigger e-peen. Stop that, or at least inform rather than refute like you did with your first "point".

And when it comes to SNES9x; it seems to be a personal issues. I've never had problems wish it; and it tends to be the one most people use without issue. BSNES is as already mentioned basically the gold standard when it comes to accuracy, but so is MAME; doesn't make it exactly user friendly though. SNES9x is a nice compromise between accuracy and usability.

Back on topic:
As mentioned there was some stuff in the early 90s that got very close to being indistinguishable, but that was for a very select few games. PS1/Dreamcast is when you started seeing what I would describe as "consistently competent" ports that were so close, but still usually had some issue that made it easy to tell it was a port. (Someone mentioned Crazy Taxi earlier, but there are common frame-rate issues with that game [I own both the Dreamcast and PC version and have that issue myself]). But you'd also get things like the Resident Evil ports which could be even better than their console counterparts.

Late PS2 era is when you started seeing ports between console and PC become common, with a big push coming on during the early (2005-2007) 360/PS3 era of ports back and forth. This was likely due to the changing of how consoles operated, becoming more PC like, that made porting much easier. However, because this was still a relatively new concept for many developers, there were many terrible ports done during that period.

2008 is when we really got ports that ran as reliably as their console versions.
J.O.B. Squad 4 life

User Info: speedforce131

5 months ago#27
Thing about Zsnes is that back then, that's all we had.

User Info: kobalobasileus

5 months ago#28
Prior to the 7th Gen, crossover of any kind between PC and consoles was the exception rather than the rule.

User Info: Lum_Yatsura

5 months ago#29
speedforce131 posted...
Thing about Zsnes is that back then, that's all we had.

Don't feed the troll. Insulting SNES9x when there's no indication it's being run on a computer that meets the system requirements gives it away.

User Info: LOLIAmAnAlt

5 months ago#30
Hard Drivin
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. First "accurate" ports of console games

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

Update Topic Flair

You are not allowed to update this topic's flair.

  • Topic Archived