Reply 60 of 83, by Sombrero
retardware wrote on 2021-11-23, 12:08:
PAL is not trash. […]Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2021-11-23, 07:15:
PAL is trash.
Screw whoever thought that giving us Europeans 17% slower games with squished graphics was a good idea.
PAL is not trash.
You obviously haven't experienced Never The Same Color.
This was why PAL and SECAM had been developed in the 1960s as alternatives which didn't, for example, show the news speaker with a violet face that had to be adjusted with a "hue" knob to look more natural, and constantly to be readjusted depending on the reception quality or when changing programme.
If you experienced the "SECAM fire" back then, you'll agree that PAL is the analog TV system that gave best colors even with bad reception.
And the reduced game speed is because of PAL's higher resolution, 625 instead of 525 lines.
The alternative would have been to introduce black bars, but obviously that would have not been accepted well by the gamer audience.
They reduced game speed to fit PALs 50Hz, resolution had nothing to do with it. The games that were PAL optimized ran at correct speed and had PAL resolution, all that took was effort from the developer which too often was too much apparently or the publisher wanted to cheap out. And I would have taken black bars over wrong aspect ratio any day of the week, and I don't see why black bars would have been a problem. Even some NTSC games had them and people didn't grab their pitchforks and torches and start rioting because of those.
Eh Joseph_Joestar was quicker but I'll post anyway.
DOS/Win98SE (1990-1999): Pentium III 650MHz / Voodoo 3 3000 / Sound Blaster Audigy 2 / Orpheus
WinXP (2000-2006): Pentium 4 HT 651 3.4GHz (65W) / 9800 GTX+ / Sound Blaster X-Fi
Win7/10 (2007-2016): Xeon E3-1230 v3 / GTX 1660 Ti / Sound Blaster Z