Keep in mind the context was "There is no screen tearing in Nintendo consoles."

But lets see you try disputing Digital Foundry, with Dark Siders 2 on the Wii U.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-darksiders-2-on-wii-u-face-off

Again. I have elaborated that both the console and display need to support it to work. Not sure why you keep bringing that up.

And Really? You think that having an Nvidia chip excludes you from having Freesync? News flash. It doesn't.
Freesync is an open standard. FreeSync is royalty-free. Freesync is free to use.

The VESA or the "Video Electronics Standards Association" standard has adopted AMD's Freesync dubbed "Adaptive Sync" and integrated it as part of the Displayport 1.2a, 1.3, 1.4 and newer standards.

Nintendo is free to use and license it. And so is nVidia. Nintendo is paying nVidia for it's "semi-custom" SoC. A large part of the work is on the software side as long as the display supports variable refresh rates.

Fine.

https://developer.nvidia.com/postworks

Turn 3D off and on.

Doesn't matter. Anti-Aliasing is cheap. Use at-least 2x.

I never said they did come out at the same time.

Component and Composite RCA. Learn the differeces.





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component_video
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_video

Here are the original Xbox and PS2 Component RCA cables.

Heck, it's part of HDMI 2.1 specs.

• Game Mode VRR features variable refresh rate, which enables a 3D graphics processor to display the image at the moment it is rendered for more fluid and better detailed gameplay, and for reducing or eliminating lag, stutter, and frame tearing.

1. I didn't know about Darksiders 2 on WII U. Glad I didn't bought it. It's really the first game which I see that actually do has screen tearing on a Nintendo console. Are there others or is this the only one?

2. Nvidia doing Freesync is as likely as AMD doing PhysX rendering. Even if Freesync is open standard, do you really think that Nvidia will ditch their money and resources that went into G-Sync and go for Freesync? That's why your point leads to nowhere. But hey, I would still welcome it, but as for now, that's just fiction.

I'm not 100% certain, but which console uses Display Port? Afaik, none does. I also doubt that a lot of TV's even have a DP interface built in. So, why are you even bringing this up? Your argument just doesn't follow.

3. How does your answer has anything to do with my prior statement? Btw. TXAA has a higher impact on Performance than FXAA because it also uses MSAA. Don't you mean TAA instead?  

4. If you don't want to take this serious, then why should I? That's a non sequitar. Go for my original statemant.

5. Besides the point. You obviously don't get what I am trying to say. Must be your hostility towards me.

6.  Then why mention the Xbox at all? Do you actually remember what you are arguing against? Because I have a feeling that you either don't understood what I was saying or you deliberately want to argue for the opposite of who knows what. Reread my original Statement and see what I wrote there.

Great, video composite can even achieve 2560p. Didn't knew about that. But it cannot do HDCP, so if the devices use this encryption then they won't work with this inteface. And that is also besides the entire point I was going for. You wasted your time for actually nothing here. Why? What resolution is the N64 capable of and what devices were present in the living room around prior to the release of 1996 (Development Time) and for the next 4-5 years even before the Xbox launched? Again, do you remember what you are actually arguing against?

FXAA is not the only cost-effective method of anti-aliasing these days. Plenty of games employ post-process or temporal AA techniques that allow for clean image quality while still maintaining stable framerates. 

Heck, let's even go back to Nintendo's own Wii U games and look at the improvement even simple AA can offer to image quality:

Both games are 720p, yet 3D World has significantly cleaner image quality, and still runs at a locked 60fps.

15 hours later. Still no reworked reply.

That must have been one heck of a post...

That's great. Now tell me why Nintendo didn't use AA for Mario Kart 8. Like Pemalite said, I don't wanna hear excuses.

Edited.

Is this post of yours really necessary? You know, I got a life besides VGchartz, I have to sleep, I have to work. I post when I got the time to do so.

Your post has only the purpose of ridiculing me. Stop that! 

I'm not privy to the reasoning behind EAD's decision, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't automatically accept Nintendo not meeting a more than decade-old technical standard.

The issue here is that you pretend to know more than Nintendo does in this regard. It's their development team, and we already both know that Nintendo used AA in the past, and obviously left it out for Mario Kart 8. If it was easy to implement or if there are still resources left for them to use, then they would probably add it. But fact is, they didn't. And you and me and even Pemalite don't know the real reasoning behind this decision. So we have to go with what the are offering us. Just accept it. Simple as that. If they decide to patch it later in and it doesn't look like shit, then great. I am not and never have argued against AA in general. I just don't like washed out screens. And there are different methods of AA to achieve a visualy good effect, but we still don't know why they opted it out.

There sure is more. But I have already proven you wrong on this point.
Feel free to do some of your own research on games with frame pacing/screen tearing/framerate drops etc on the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, Wii, Wii U, Switch, Gameboy, Gameboy Colour, Gameboy Advance, Nintendo DS, Nintendo 3DS rather than moving the goal post and wasting my time.

I don't think you get it. It's not up to nVidia.

Do you understand what a VESA standard is?
Regardless. A console doesn't need to have Display Port. HDMI supports it as well.

I have already proven you wrong on this point. So I think you are just arguing for arguing sake.

No. I don't mean TAA instead.

I treat everyone equally. I'm far from being hostile.

It's called an e-x-a-m-p-l-e.

It wasn't besides the point. I just proved your point factually incorrect. And that was RCA can support high-definition resolutions. You asked the question, I answered the question and now you are trying to undermine the evidence I provided by shifting the goal post. Aint happening.

If you go farther back before... You stated consoles are made to match the displays that are on the market. Again. That has been proven incorrect.

The bulk of Nintendo 64 games operated at 320x240. CRT TV's are often more than happy to resolve twice that resolution. Minimum.

Heck. I only have to say the word "Wii" in the era of HD to prove your entire point incorrect.

So I think whatever argument you have on this point has been thoroughly and utterly, debunked and you should move on.