@marshallh, could you verify what happens on the "streched" PAL ports that just draw the 240 line picture on the 288 lines? will this still happen or do we get a sharper result because we prevent the stretch?
So that means getting a NTSC console is still the best method (with 64drive).
Hmmm
actually, to be 100% precise, the best would be to have both, one PAl and one NTSC console and pick the best version of each game. the "best" version would be decided by a few factors (cut content, resolution, framerate).
I made a list of all the games that COULD be better in PAL (eg have both, a PAL and a NTSC version) and also started collecting some info on a few games but also noticed quite early that a lot of the info about resolution and framerate out there is contradictory or that I couldn't validate it in my tests. what's worse, I wasn't able to get real comparisons as, in my opinion, that would actually require both games running side by side doing the same actions instead of just recording the intro or similar - lack of monitors and carts...
The list is huge tough and I don't think I will ever get around to doing 240 side-by-side comparisons of pal and ntsc versions. most probably, no one else will, too.
I'm interested in seeing a comparison between Conker's Bad Fur Day running on Rare Replay for the Xbone vs N64 cartridge with a modded system. I assume the Rare Replay version will look a bit better as they probably did some tweaks with whatever emulation method they programmed in, but would it be a huge difference?
Anyone able to check this out?
as far as I can tell the n64 titles feature what you would get from running them in any other emulator at a higher internal resolution. eg still as pixelated for all the sprites but way better for polygonal models. it's the same as you can see on the recent "ps2 on ps4" ports or similar. it looks better than "original" in some parts but the same on the sprites. This "cut" actually might make the whole thing worse for some people, I could imagine.