This seems a bit focused on a specific era of pixel art games AND CRTs. For me, nostalgia was things like Master of Magic or Civilization 1/2, and I played those on CRTs attached to PCs, not in an arcade - the pixels absolutely did not blend together into rounded shapes due to fuzzy scan lines.
The article is about SD CRTs (480i for NTSC or 576i for PAL, or more commonly for games 240p/288p progressive scan using non-standard timing, often underscanned with pixels left unused in the borders).
VGA MS-DOS games usually ran at 320x200, but VGA CRTs supported up to 640x480 resolution. There was hardware line doubling from 200 lines up to 400 lines so you actually got two scanlines per pixel. It wasn't LCD sharp but the individual pixels were easily distinguishable. And lots of people played these game on SVGA CRTs so the pixels would be even sharper.
If you assume a SD CRT, as the article does, then yes, the display connection makes the most difference (although there are still differences between individual CRTs).
But that does not cover all CRTs relevant to pixel art. If you display low resolution art on a CRT designed for high resolutions it makes a big difference in pixel sharpness.
>PC CRTs would always be quite sharp, due to VGA, no matter whether it (the CRT) had a low or high resolution.
VGA CRTs are always "high resolution" compared to the SD CRTs discussed in the article. If you display a mode 13h DOS game on SD CRT, which is possible with special hardware, it will not look as sharp as it would on the VGA CRT is was designed for.
This sharpness from using higher resolution CRTs is in addition to the sharpness from using RGB connections. And if you somehow manage to connect a VGA CRT over composite, it will be less sharp but still sharper than a SD CRT over composite.
The point is there are two factors here: the sharpness of the CRT itself and the sharpness of the connection method. The article only talks about SD CRTs, so the CRT's sharpness isn't going to make much difference there. But when you consider MS-DOS games, which used sharper CRTs, the CRT's sharpness becomes important.
AdeptusAquinas · · focus · HN ↗
mrob · · focus · HN ↗
VGA MS-DOS games usually ran at 320x200, but VGA CRTs supported up to 640x480 resolution. There was hardware line doubling from 200 lines up to 400 lines so you actually got two scanlines per pixel. It wasn't LCD sharp but the individual pixels were easily distinguishable. And lots of people played these game on SVGA CRTs so the pixels would be even sharper.
cubefox · · focus · HN ↗
mrob · · focus · HN ↗
But that does not cover all CRTs relevant to pixel art. If you display low resolution art on a CRT designed for high resolutions it makes a big difference in pixel sharpness.
cubefox · · focus · HN ↗
mrob · · focus · HN ↗
cubefox · · focus · HN ↗
mrob · · focus · HN ↗
cubefox · · focus · HN ↗
> If you display low resolution art on a CRT designed for high resolutions it makes a big difference in pixel sharpness.
Basically, PC CRTs would always be quite sharp, due to VGA, no matter whether it (the CRT) had a low or high resolution.
mrob · · focus · HN ↗
VGA CRTs are always "high resolution" compared to the SD CRTs discussed in the article. If you display a mode 13h DOS game on SD CRT, which is possible with special hardware, it will not look as sharp as it would on the VGA CRT is was designed for.
This sharpness from using higher resolution CRTs is in addition to the sharpness from using RGB connections. And if you somehow manage to connect a VGA CRT over composite, it will be less sharp but still sharper than a SD CRT over composite.
The point is there are two factors here: the sharpness of the CRT itself and the sharpness of the connection method. The article only talks about SD CRTs, so the CRT's sharpness isn't going to make much difference there. But when you consider MS-DOS games, which used sharper CRTs, the CRT's sharpness becomes important.