>>15468903
>Failing to provide any reason why innacurate emulation is superior
>When I literally give two examples, in better resolutions and graphics and overriding hardware limitations
>Thing like skipping terrible control layouts, ass backward save schemes that rely on hardware with very limited space or widescreen mods are not upsides
>Completely ignores the existance of cicle accurate emulators
You could at least try not to look like an idiot
I still use my PS2, N64 and Xbox and theres not one day that I wish I wasnt limited to the blurry awful slow mess that is N64 games or the equally blurry but not as slow PS2 and its fucking memory cards. Even the Xbox needed expensive component cables, a modchip and a huge ass hard drive to not be a painin the ass while playing games, and I still wish I could widescreen patch more of them and run them at not terrible resolutions.
Good thing its the one console I can't just emulate on my computer, otherwise I would just give up having a TV on my room altogether and play everything emulated, only three of all the games I want to play dont emulate properly between the N64, SNES, PS1 and PS2. Playing on the original consoles has as many downsides as it does upsides, and most of those are non issues if you can get over not using the original hardware and having most likely not game impacting glitches, if any at all.
>>15469194
People tend to cling to whatever they think makes what theyre defending superior, without any regard for how that affects the reality of its use. Just llike latency, cicle accuracy never mattered for anyone but speed runners or people looking to mod or make games, but its used to shit on emulators even when theyre glitch free and almost completely compatible.