Request: configurable delay for 240p mode transitions

[Kerin Millar]

Original [issue 262](https://code.google.com/p/genplus-gx/issues/detail?id=262) created by kerframil on 2012-07-27T22:18:17.000Z:

Problem: For those using video upscalers with HDMI output, transitioning from 480p/480i to 240p input can incur a costly transition. For example, the Micomsoft XRGB-Mini takes about 5 seconds before the output becomes visible again. With genplus-gx, this affects those who choose to use the 'original' display mode. A typical side effect would be missing the first few seconds of the introduction upon first starting a ROM. Another issue is that, after saving the game state, one can be put straight back into the action but not be able to immediately see what is happening. Unless one remembers to pause before saving state, this can be the difference between virtual life and death!

Requested solution: Have an option which implements a configurable delay which, if enabled, defaults to 5 seconds. It would need to trigger upon leaving the menu and returning to the emulator (but not in the other direction).

[Former user]

Comment # 1 originally posted by superballena on 2012-07-27T22:39:16.000Z:

Another solution I can think of would be to have an option that keeps the emulator's UI running at the same video mode as the current game.

[Former user]

Comment # 2 originally posted by ekeeke31 on 2012-07-28T07:38:45.000Z:

Hmm, no, i won't add options that does not make any sense for 99.9% of users. What if someone suddenly want to use some kind of external sound amplifier that introduce latency between video and audio, i should add an option to delay video emulation ?

Also, i don't really understand the need for you to use 240p: it's an upscaler, which means that no matter what the source is, it will output HD video, just stick with unfiltered 480p or 480i. I'm also pretty sure this kind of device only fakes scanline so a lower resolurion signal won't make the output more accurate.

As for using 240p in menu, i don't think you would like it very much considering all the gui images are designed for 640x480 screen.

[Kerin Millar]

Comment # 3 originally posted by kerframil on 2012-07-28T07:57:01.000Z:

I feel the need to defend my usage of 240p. I can assure you that it \*does\* make it more accurate. Yes, your emulator is accurate in the unfiltered mode. However, with 480p, the placement of the scanlines is not always correct with the XRGB-Mini, meaning that - depending on whichever input/system is being used at the time - it may be required to invert the intensity of the SCANLINES\_A and SCANLINES\_B setting. There is no option to toggle between odd and even, so adjusting these settings is a slow process. Nor is there an option to store different arrangements of settings. With 240p inputs, it \*always\* gets it right. This scaler is designed from the ground up to work with 240p signals.

Yes, I'm probably a niche case but I find this a bit disappointing, given the target audience of an emulator such as this. Still, I can probably fudge in a usleep() statement somewhere for my own purposes.

[Former user]

Comment # 4 originally posted by ekeeke31 on 2012-07-28T08:20:03.000Z:

Honestly, it seems like to me than having to reconfigure scanlines once in a while when you want to play with a 480i/480p source is much less inconvenient than having to wait 5s (!) everytime you load a new game or simply return from main menu. I would be more disappointed by the hardware i am using if i were you since it's really a major flaw and in my opinion, certainly not the role of the emulator (or even good design for any program) to restrict itself in order to deal with exotic hardware's issues.

That's the point of open-source, anyone is free to add whatever "feature" he wants, but that does not mean I am supposed to add any possible options (especially those I have zero need for) in official trunk or that it is supposed to be the ultimatest configurable emulator of the world, because there is really no limit with user's imagination (or crazyness ?) ;-)

[Kerin Millar]

Comment # 5 originally posted by kerframil on 2012-07-28T08:35:05.000Z:

Of course, you are under no obligation to add any feature you don't think belongs. I wouldn't even think of suggesting otherwise. I can but ask.

Yes, I suppose the 480p scanline placement could be considered a defect. But this device does a lot of things right. It works magic with a wide range of 15kHz sources operating at various resolutions, with crystal-clear upscaling and few quirks (even with unstable sources). In that respect, it's a retro gamer's dream. That I use one is perhaps not so unusual. Rather, it's the fact that I don't use a \*real\* MegaDrive that makes me a niche case. This is probably the road I will eventually go down.

I'm guessing that one of the reasons it doesn't fare so well with scanline placement on 480p sources is that the heuristics are easier to implement when it is getting the 'genuine' picture. At least, that is where they have concentrated their development effort. Maybe I can file another bug asking for an option to offset the image by 1px in the vertical axis (just kidding ...)