pouët.net

Scali wins.

Emulators might be a good way to provide a faster development path when coding for these devices especially with the advanced memory and debugging features, but ultimately they can also do things like, run at untethered speeds, and have their own bugs, as well not outputting to a real TV, like what you need kneel in front of as a kid.

Even with say modern mobile dev like iOS or Andoird, the simularors and emulators are always bested by the real deal.

So they are a good thing they may have awesome features and some advantages of the real thing, but they're not THE thing. They don't have the sound circuit or the same visual output device.

IMO Anyone using emulators seriously in anger for a platform will end up getting the deal. So they are valuable and have a place but they are their own thing.

This.

Yet.

Emulators are ultra essential for development these days, honestly you'd probably see half the amount of 8-bit demos around without them. Because when you want to do something on a whim, you can. Quickly, wherever you are. Yes it's nice to have hardware/do final test and whatever but being able to one-click from a text editor and have an idea running immediately is brilliant. No having to debug on a cart for those little memory crashes, running up against your assembler's ram limits, waiting for data to squirt down to hardware on a cable, building disk images on hardware, running ultra slow compressors on hardware overnight(!) Being able to inject data straight into memory, send/video a wip build for the rest of the team immediately. There will always be the final test/debugging session on hardware sure, but I can't imagine going back to the old ways.

Cross dev FTW!!

Old hardware can be repaired when necessary..
I think I would never make 8-bits demos if I could not see them running on real hardware!

see that none of these shows an actual C64 setup, but all shitty emulator palettes? LOL

So why no real hardware shots? Emulators must be most popular in that case, and convenient too. ;)

for development, sure. for actually running stuff - fuck off.

There are plenty of captures from real C64s on Youtube. NTSC does indeed look more blue than PAL, but the ones I looked at were not as blue as in Feobane72's screenshot, so the difference between PAL and NTSC is more subtle.

Some of us don't have the space or money for the real stuff, Groepaz ;)

So you contend with watching jerky crap versions?

I once had real Atari XLs and real Amigas on my desktop back in the 80s and 90s, and for those systems I feel that time has gone, so I'm happy to stick with emulation for them.

However, I've been hankering after joining the C64 club for a long time now, and I think I could squeeze a real breadbox onto my current cramped desktop, though I'd have to use my current LCD TV with it. I'd also have to get one of those SD card reader gizmos to provide the disk games as necessary, as I definitely don't have room for real tapes or disks.

What I'm saying is, I think that if you've at least owned the genuine article for some time, then you can proudly say you've experienced what it can actually do and not some rough software approximation, and you can say you've been a REAL owner of said hardware.

Concerning emulation, you're right about it being imperfect: I've known certain demos on my A500 that looked perfect, but I was disappointed that the emulator mangled it - a prime example was "Total Triple Trouble" by Rebels, a real copper showcase, mangled on WinUAE, no matter what version.

To me the biggest problem with emulators isn't even accuracy. It's that they're usually used with computer systems and flatscreen displays that can't show or sync to 50 Hz modes, let alone C64's 50.124 something. So, you won't see any smooth motion. Which is, to me, almost the whole point in demos. Emulators are awesome for development, but not for watching the final product.

I guess it could be possible to get very authentic looking results by hooking up, say, a Raspberry Pi, to a CRT monitor, or Framemeister. The emulation could perhaps even be slowed down to produce an exact 50 Hz video output to make modern TVs happy.

What happens if a real C64 (or Amiga or anything "288p" at slightly-not-50 Hz) is connected to a modern TV? Will it sync just fine, or stutter or something?

I don't know.

Here's some info on the subject. It's not just C64, and it's not just PAL.
http://www.videogameperfection.com/2012/06/22/what-causes-games-to-stutter/

Well, just face it, there'll HAVE to be a permanent solution featuring LCDs at some point: even if the physical hardware of retro computers will last a long while, CRTs certainly won't, and they are NOT manufactured anymore.

The reason for deviation from 50 (or 59.94 - NTSC is not 60) Hz isn't only inaccurate clocks. The two interlaced fields that make up a full frame have slightly different timing, so when old consoles and home computers trick the TV into half resolution progressive scan by sending a technically illegal signal that only consists of upper or lower fields, the resulting framerate is slightly higher or lower.

The blog answers what the result is though (stuttering, tearing, and streaks), thanks.

Well, just had a quick look on ebay, and CRT TVs are a dime a dozen (£10 average) so it seems that's not really a problem, if I can get a C64 for £30 at least.

Obtaining CRTs is not a problem really, at least not for now. And who says LCD panels are the final and only display technology ever. And there's this
http://solarisjapan.com/products/xrgb-mini-framemeister-compact-up-scaler-unit

Thanks for the link, Yzi, but a CRT TV is more authentic, more nostalgic and cheaper.

And more eye-straining!

Part of the experience, Saga ;)