Virtual Console - No has NeoGeo

ReRuss · Post by **ReRuss** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:54 am

Anyone notice this recently?

Joe Camacho · Post by **Joe Camacho** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:17 pm

No? I think you ate a letter man.

casualsax3 · Post by **casualsax3** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:56 pm

They don't work though.

ReRuss · Post by **ReRuss** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:53 pm

apparently you have to switch to the original AV cables and run in 480i in order for them to work

I think I'm gonna get one I want , and test this , except I'll also try on a 4:3 aspect via PC , I just wonder if I got 900 points to spare heh

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:28 am

ReRuss wrote:apparently you have to switch to the original AV cables and run in 480i in order for them to work

Fuck the WHAT?

snkcube · Post by **snkcube** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:36 am

I hope this gets fixed up pretty soon. After spending some dough on stuff, you should expect it to work.

blackmyst · Post by **blackmyst** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:27 am

I've got an RGB cable, I don't think I'm supposed to have any of those problems.

Or is that somehow different from component, quality-wise?

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:38 am

http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/V ... ectors.asp

blackmyst · Post by **blackmyst** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:07 am

Alright, so RGB and component are pretty comparable in quality then.

I don't get the whole point of having separate black and white and colour info, since screens are made up of red, green and blue dots of course so anything that has to be displayed needs to be merged back anyway. What's more accurate than directly setting the RGB values of each pixel? What's the point of component? Having more cables is cool?

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:21 am

blackmyst wrote:Alright, so RGB and component are pretty comparable in quality then.

I don't get the whole point of having separate black and white and colour info, since screens are made up of red, green and blue dots of course so anything that has to be displayed needs to be merged back anyway. What's more accurate than directly setting the RGB values of each pixel? What's the point of component? Having more cables is cool?

Component doesn't have more lines than RGB.
RGB usually has separate sync lines, making RGB have more.

Component exists because the MPAA wanted a way for macrovision to work on DVD players as the electronics industry FINALLY gave in and started giving the US something more than composite(except for highest-end sets, which'd had s-vido for some time).

It's also easier to convert component to s-video, composite, or RF, since they're all based on the actual TV transmission standards, which are chroma+luma. But that's not why component exists in the consumer market.

And you're right, RGB is superior.
But in this case, I don't think it matters. I suspect the Wiis with RGB output choke similarly to the ones with component output.

blackmyst · Post by **blackmyst** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:57 pm

Hmm, I'm going to have to test that then. Even though I don't really imagine why that would be, I've got RGB on everything from my old PS1 to my Wii and they all work perfectly. But I'll reserve judgment till I see it myself.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:49 pm

for clarification of those that don't know:

RGB in consumer electronics isn't carried over the set of RCA jacks that are colored red, green and blue, thats Component(Y'PbPr) . RGB uses VGA, DVI or SCART connectors.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:57 am

funkyass wrote:for clarification of those that don't know:

RGB in consumer electronics isn't carried over the set of RCA jacks that are colored red, green and blue, thats Component(Y'PbPr) . RGB uses VGA, DVI or SCART connectors.

Or 5 BNC connectors!

Yes, that actually hit consumer-level stuff. Mainly on early HDTV monitors.

whicker · Post by **whicker** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:45 am

Gil_Hamilton wrote:
blackmyst wrote:Alright, so RGB and component are pretty comparable in quality then.

I don't get the whole point of having separate black and white and colour info, since screens are made up of red, green and blue dots of course so anything that has to be displayed needs to be merged back anyway. What's more accurate than directly setting the RGB values of each pixel? What's the point of component? Having more cables is cool?
Component doesn't have more lines than RGB.
RGB usually has separate sync lines, making RGB have more.

Component exists because the MPAA wanted a way for macrovision to work on DVD players as the electronics industry FINALLY gave in and started giving the US something more than composite(except for highest-end sets, which'd had s-vido for some time).

It's also easier to convert component to s-video, composite, or RF, since they're all based on the actual TV transmission standards, which are chroma+luma. But that's not why component exists in the consumer market.

Conspiracy theory ahoy.

Would you believe Y Pr Pb has something to do with the way the data on the DVD's are compressed? That by essentially leaving the color space rotated and skewed, that the signal-to-noise ratio through the cable is also improved? That after the sync separation, the conversion from Y Pr Pb to RGB is a simple 3x3 matrix multiplication?

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:17 am

well, for a little history on transmissions standards.

When tv was born it was black and white, that went on for a bit, then smart people started getting colour to work, but where stuck with a problem: how to broadcast colour without leaving all the black and white sets in the dark.

The answer was the chroma+ luma system thats in use today, you have a B+W signal for the old tv, and one that added colour information to the B+W signal for the new ones.

And from this we get modern video compression.

Panzer88 · Post by **Panzer88** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:25 am

nice explanation, that makes sense. On a side note while black and white tvs are meh, black and white film rules in contrast and clearity, only now are we besting it with digital recording.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:36 am

whicker wrote:
Gil_Hamilton wrote:
blackmyst wrote:Alright, so RGB and component are pretty comparable in quality then.

I don't get the whole point of having separate black and white and colour info, since screens are made up of red, green and blue dots of course so anything that has to be displayed needs to be merged back anyway. What's more accurate than directly setting the RGB values of each pixel? What's the point of component? Having more cables is cool?
Component doesn't have more lines than RGB.
RGB usually has separate sync lines, making RGB have more.

Component exists because the MPAA wanted a way for macrovision to work on DVD players as the electronics industry FINALLY gave in and started giving the US something more than composite(except for highest-end sets, which'd had s-vido for some time).

It's also easier to convert component to s-video, composite, or RF, since they're all based on the actual TV transmission standards, which are chroma+luma. But that's not why component exists in the consumer market.
Conspiracy theory ahoy.

Would you believe Y Pr Pb has something to do with the way the data on the DVD's are compressed? That by essentially leaving the color space rotated and skewed, that the signal-to-noise ratio through the cable is also improved? That after the sync separation, the conversion from Y Pr Pb to RGB is a simple 3x3 matrix multiplication?

Would you believe that the DVD forum explicitly bans standalone DVD players with RGB outputs?

whicker · Post by **whicker** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:36 am

Gil_Hamilton wrote: Would you believe that the DVD forum explicitly bans standalone DVD players with RGB outputs?

You spurred me on to do some more research.

You're correct in that the license for Content Scrambling System (CSS) forbids RGB output.