Has anybody mentioned the 6th reason? (But maybe it's the FIRST one )

6) Being part of the PC Gamers Master Race!

6. Steam

In that case, they are not emulators. I don't think you quite understand how assumptions put into code directly translate to "better" when the game wasn't designed for such a task. What game developers want in a sprite or polygon cannot be replicated "better" in all instances. Sometimes it can appear better, but other times it's just going down a path where assumptions skew on the developer's idea of how the game should be. This is why the theoretic process of emulation stops at the logical process of how the game is interpreted EXACTLY like the original, and not makes assumptions, or jumps to conclusions. What can be an improvement in framerate in some games totally fucks up the framerate in others that are perhaps deliberately limited by the original hardware.

Look back at the original argument. There was an argument trying to be made that PCs are better than consoles because of emulation. My point is that emulation can NEVER fully replace the original consoles. Why do you think that Video game record keepers do not allow emulators to be used to set records? I'll give you a hint....29.97Hz vs 30Hz.

EDIT: Just to add, I don't think you have the relevance to speak for EVERYONE who uses emulators as to what they want...

are you a last word warrior!

Well if you want your games to look much better then on consoles, you have to upgrade your PC frequently. And the PS3 has gratis online MP plus a very sweet gamepad. But yeah many games work much better with keyboard and mouse, plus RPG profit a lot from mods. I play on my PS3 and PC and enjoy them equally.

thats not true, unless you buy basic parts and i mean basic $50 graphics card $50 cpu then yes but most PC gamers spend on average $500 every 3 years just to keep their gaming PC in the sweet spot, there are still quite a lot of PC gamers using GTX 480 gpus and 1st gen i5's/i7's, its a common misconception that PC games have to frequently upgrade their computers.

One is bragging about like its good thing that imo is sick.

Are you one who cannot find a valid argument to the above points mentioned, and has to resort to name calling?

I've already stated WHY emulation will never fully replace consoles, and it seems videogame record keepers agree with me. The only defense to that is calling me a 'last word warrior'? Let me give you the definition of that. A last word warrior is one who replies even IF they don't have relevant points to say. I put it to you that your own post, being as irrelevant as it is, makes you what you accuse me of being...

seams you cant read or that you did not understand the question 'are you' is not the same as 'you are', you assumed i name called which i did not and ill answer you rather stupid argument with this, why would i emulate any console to its actual spec resolution hz fps ect when using a HD display and a PC costing £1000 is completly pointless, the point we are trying to get across is that with a PC you can not only emulate but improve the games being emulates substantually with the latest PC hardware.

playing old games is great fun but improving to look and feel can some times make the experience better, for example GT1 on the ps1 back in 98 was a stunning looking game but by todays standards on even running it on the ps3 it still looks messy and pixilated, boosting the ps1 graphics by upping the res makes the game playable again with the added bonus of higher resolutions  and all the bonuses modern graphics cards can provide, if you want to play games at the origonal settings then just play them on the original console as that defeats the point of emulation on the PC.

now last word warrior is not how you discribed it, it is some one who no matter what has to have the last word hence last word warrior and i know you will replay hence you having the last word lol.

And once again we have the same ignorance that I've answered before. 

Listen, improvement and emulation are two completely different things. "Improvement" upon something is a matter of opinion, emulation implies a logical goal to head towards: which is to get as close to the original specification as possible. "Improvement" is further extending the concept by that the designer had in mind, by ASSUMING what the game would be at eg. a higher resulution. Once again, unless you're part of the original design team, it cannot really be called a logical "improvement" by itself. And here you are trying to argue that the additions to an emulator can not only improve one game, but every game in the library...through use of assumption to say "well when the game meant *this*, it actually meant *this*. Trust me on this." Once again, "improvement" is only a matter of opinion.

Why would I want to play a game at it's designated speed? I dunno, probably because THE GAME ENGINE WAS BUILT TAKING THAT INTIO CONSIDERATION? That sounds like pretty damn good reason to me. do yourself a favour and read up a little on game design and mechanics before you go arguing about timing being irrelevant enough to change.

As I've already stated, emulation is handy, but nobody can argue that it will fully replace the real thing. That would be quite an ignorant approach to take.