PixelFX Morph

The place for all discussion on gaming hardware
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

strayan wrote:If I want to downscale a 480p line doubled source (like the 480p output you get from a ultrahdmi modded n64 or some PS2 games in 480p mode) to 240p for upscaling by the morph will I have to buy a second morph (one to downscale to 240p and the other one to upscale 240p to a higher resolution)?

Also, will there be reduced blanking timings alongside custom output resolutions?
Just one Morph. It has a pre-scaler to restore original resolution (240p in this case), and then can use it's polyphase scaler to bring it back to 1080p/1440p.
User avatar
WobblingPixels
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2021 8:23 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by WobblingPixels »

Woozle wrote:
strayan wrote:If I want to downscale a 480p line doubled source (like the 480p output you get from a ultrahdmi modded n64 or some PS2 games in 480p mode) to 240p for upscaling by the morph will I have to buy a second morph (one to downscale to 240p and the other one to upscale 240p to a higher resolution)?

Also, will there be reduced blanking timings alongside custom output resolutions?
Just one Morph. It has a pre-scaler to restore original resolution (240p in this case), and then can use it's polyphase scaler to bring it back to 1080p/1440p.
Does this also mean I can first downscale native 480p/480i to 240p and then upscale to 1080/1440p with one unit?
strayan
Posts: 671
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by strayan »

Woozle wrote:
strayan wrote:If I want to downscale a 480p line doubled source (like the 480p output you get from a ultrahdmi modded n64 or some PS2 games in 480p mode) to 240p for upscaling by the morph will I have to buy a second morph (one to downscale to 240p and the other one to upscale 240p to a higher resolution)?

Also, will there be reduced blanking timings alongside custom output resolutions?
Just one Morph. It has a pre-scaler to restore original resolution (240p in this case), and then can use it's polyphase scaler to bring it back to 1080p/1440p.
Oh. God. Yes.
RENI
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2022 6:43 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by RENI »

Will there be a RGBS (RGB+Separate Sync) input module for cables like this?
Image
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

WobblingPixels wrote:
Woozle wrote:
strayan wrote:If I want to downscale a 480p line doubled source (like the 480p output you get from a ultrahdmi modded n64 or some PS2 games in 480p mode) to 240p for upscaling by the morph will I have to buy a second morph (one to downscale to 240p and the other one to upscale 240p to a higher resolution)?

Also, will there be reduced blanking timings alongside custom output resolutions?
Just one Morph. It has a pre-scaler to restore original resolution (240p in this case), and then can use it's polyphase scaler to bring it back to 1080p/1440p.
Does this also mean I can first downscale native 480p/480i to 240p and then upscale to 1080/1440p with one unit?
Should be possible, but why would you want to do that versus scaling 480p straight to 1080p/1440p?
User avatar
awe444
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:58 am
Location: New York

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by awe444 »

Woozle wrote:
WobblingPixels wrote:
Does this also mean I can first downscale native 480p/480i to 240p and then upscale to 1080/1440p with one unit?
Should be possible, but why would you want to do that versus scaling 480p straight to 1080p/1440p?
Scanlines would be at least one reason. In this scenario the scanlines would need to reflect a 240p source as opposed to 480p, else you’ll have twice as many scanlines as you want
fernan1234
Posts: 2175
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by fernan1234 »

Would that be perhaps for modern retro-style games that don't go below 480p but you'd like to see them in a 240p kind of look? If the games and graphics were not originally low res then you'd be losing actual picture by doing that and introducing scanlines, but I can see how some retro game graphics could look interesting regardless, in which case I wonder if it would be easier to have a 480p mode that blanks every other line, and then you just upscale that.
User avatar
awe444
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:58 am
Location: New York

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by awe444 »

Yep there are a ton of modern “240p” games on Switch, PC etc. where every other line and column of the image is duplicated (or every 3 replicated for 720p output). No information to be lost whatsoever in those cases.

But even aside from modern content, there’s things like clone consoles and internal HDMI mods that don’t natively go below 480p or 720p, for which it’d be great to pre-downscale in this manner followed by an upscale to 1440p with hires scanlines.

Alternatively, one could make scanline options be flexible enough to allow “skipping” lines and render only half or a third as many scanlines as the number of upscaled (or even just passed through) lines.
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

[quote="RENI"]Will there be a RGBS (RGB+Separate Sync) input module for cables like this?
For that you could use either the RCA module or the BNC module.
User avatar
Guspaz
Posts: 3136
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 7:37 pm
Location: Montréal, Canada

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Guspaz »

Woozle wrote:
RENI wrote:Will there be a RGBS (RGB+Separate Sync) input module for cables like this?
For that you could use either the RCA module or the BNC module.
How would you get the sync connected to the RCA module? I would have expected the s-video port's luma pin to be connected to the same thing as the green RCA input.
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

Guspaz wrote:
Woozle wrote:
RENI wrote:Will there be a RGBS (RGB+Separate Sync) input module for cables like this?
For that you could use either the RCA module or the BNC module.
How would you get the sync connected to the RCA module? I would have expected the s-video port's luma pin to be connected to the same thing as the green RCA input.
Woops, good catch. It would need the BNC module.
User avatar
vrunk11
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 8:56 am
Location: Europe

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by vrunk11 »

i was thinking if you want an easy way of getting digital and analog out you could use a DVI-I connector it's royalty free, and it can be converted to HDMI with a passive adapter and i guess any custom analog signal you want could be sent on analog pin like … CVBS/YC PAL 60 or RGsB ... then i could be connected to an (inverted) infinity switch that take lets say a d-sub connector (so we can use standard dvi-i to vga passive adapter) and then it can be out on whatever output you want , RCA ,scart ,vga, bnc
User avatar
VEGETA
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon May 31, 2021 10:40 am

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by VEGETA »

you can use an fpga to do tmds signal encoding which is what hdmi and dvi is, and not call it hdmi. this is legal.

however, the audio is still to be added somehow
User avatar
Kez
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:09 am

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Kez »

vrunk11 wrote:i was thinking if you want an easy way of getting digital and analog out you could use a DVI-I connector it's royalty free, and it can be converted to HDMI with a passive adapter and i guess any custom analog signal you want could be sent on analog pin like … CVBS/YC PAL 60 or RGsB ... then i could be connected to an (inverted) infinity switch that take lets say a d-sub connector (so we can use standard dvi-i to vga passive adapter) and then it can be out on whatever output you want , RCA ,scart ,vga, bnc
Ultimately there is a lot more than the connector that goes into producing analogue out, and analogue out is probably a niche use for the morph. I suspect most people will be wanting HDMI out, and the few that want analogue can easily enough secure their own DAC. Analogue output will increase the base cost of the unit and pass it on to everyone, even the majority of users who just want HDMI (with a further cost and complication of an DVI+Audio to HDMI). The morph is probably too far along at this point for any major changes to the design to happen.
fernan1234
Posts: 2175
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by fernan1234 »

Having a built-in analogue output as originally planned would have been a fantastic value added to the Morph. Relying on an external DAC is annoying and can be unreliable, especially since virtually all DACs expect to work with limited range video, there are often black crush issues, etc.

Moreover, with the external DAC route you kind of have to choose in practice between the simplicity of an HDMI to YPbPr DAC, which can be non-ideal for those with an all RGB analogue setup, or an HDMI to VGA (RGBHV) DAC where you'll most likely also need an RGB interface or other sync combiner to get RGBS which is what most RGB monitors accept.

If the Morph had its own analogue output, none of this would be an issue, people could select various profiles, YPbPr, RGBS, RGBHV, RGsB, and so on to conveniently fit their particular setup, without worrying about an additional point of failure or deficiency in external devices.

Now think about this: the space taken up in the Morph by the 5 BNC connectors would be enough to fit TWO D-Sub15 ("VGA") connectors, one which would be used for input and another for output. That's the beauty of DSub 15, its versatility (any signal type including CVBS, S-video, YPbPr, and all the flavors of RGB can be used with corresponding adapters) combined with its small footprint.

So I think it was a missed opportunity for PixelFX to not use D-Sub connectors in the new design, even if they still decided to omit the analogue output. The BNC choice is definitely better than having both a SCART and RCA set of connectors, but D-Sub would have been better in terms of functionality and versatility, and probably also marginal cost. I see the practical side of it more easily accommodating both the majority of people using SCART (who probably also already have SCART to BNC cables if they use RGB monitors) along with YPbPr users who would only need RCA to BNC adapters, rather than asking them to obtain SCART to D-Sub or D-Sub <-> 3 RCA cables, but the tradeoff would have been worth it, and I think demand would lead to its own supply for these adapters. Monoprice and such already cheaply offer all D-Sub related adapters, with the only exception of SCART to D-Sub, where people would need to rely on the usual hobby sources.
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

fernan1234 wrote:Having a built-in analogue output as originally planned would have been a fantastic value added to the Morph. Relying on an external DAC is annoying and can be unreliable, especially since virtually all DACs expect to work with limited range video, there are often black crush issues, etc.

Moreover, with the external DAC route you kind of have to choose in practice between the simplicity of an HDMI to YPbPr DAC, which can be non-ideal for those with an all RGB analogue setup, or an HDMI to VGA (RGBHV) DAC where you'll most likely also need an RGB interface or other sync combiner to get RGBS which is what most RGB monitors accept.

If the Morph had its own analogue output, none of this would be an issue, people could select various profiles, YPbPr, RGBS, RGBHV, RGsB, and so on to conveniently fit their particular setup, without worrying about an additional point of failure or deficiency in external devices.

Now think about this: the space taken up in the Morph by the 5 BNC connectors would be enough to fit TWO D-Sub15 ("VGA") connectors, one which would be used for input and another for output. That's the beauty of DSub 15, its versatility (any signal type including CVBS, S-video, YPbPr, and all the flavors of RGB can be used with corresponding adapters) combined with its small footprint.

So I think it was a missed opportunity for PixelFX to not use D-Sub connectors in the new design, even if they still decided to omit the analogue output. The BNC choice is definitely better than having both a SCART and RCA set of connectors, but D-Sub would have been better in terms of functionality and versatility, and probably also marginal cost. I see the practical side of it more easily accommodating both the majority of people using SCART (who probably also already have SCART to BNC cables if they use RGB monitors) along with YPbPr users who would only need RCA to BNC adapters, rather than asking them to obtain SCART to D-Sub or D-Sub <-> 3 RCA cables, but the tradeoff would have been worth it, and I think demand would lead to its own supply for these adapters. Monoprice and such already cheaply offer all D-Sub related adapters, with the only exception of SCART to D-Sub, where people would need to rely on the usual hobby sources.
It comes down to analog output being a niche use case on a product primarily used for scaling content to a digital display. The Infinity Switch has dual analog output, so it then becomes a niche within a niche for those who really need analog output on the Morph itself and can’t make the Infinity dual output or an external DAC work for their setup. BNC is a much more versatile connector and it’s a tough call to change the Morph in many ways and add a lot of cost for a small percentage of users, at the expense of the majority of users.

Maybe in the future we’ll make our own standalone video DAC to solve a lot of the problems that cheap off the shelf DACs are giving people.
ldeveraux
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by ldeveraux »

Woozle wrote:BNC is a much more versatile connector and it’s a tough call to change the Morph in many ways and add a lot of cost for a small percentage of users, at the expense of the majority of users.
Sure, but will more people use BNC over analog output?
fernan1234
Posts: 2175
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by fernan1234 »

Woozle wrote:Maybe in the future we’ll make our own standalone video DAC to solve a lot of the problems that cheap off the shelf DACs are giving people.
This would be a nice compromise. Looking at the success of Analogue's DAC, it does seem like there's quite a good deal of demand for high quality retro game-oriented DACs, even one that exclusively works with a specific company's systems. A DAC that works just as well with those Analogue consoles as well as any other digital source should be very attractive.

I totally understand the argument for omitting the analogue output from the Morph, even though doing so also makes the HDMI input even more niche. As to the selection of BNC for the analogue input, I'll repeat that it was a good choice compared to SCART+RCA. At the same time, I'm recalling now that users will need SCART to BNC cables that are only really available from the usual hobby sources (Retro-Access/wookieewin/Retrogamincables), which is not really much different from the situation they would face if they needed SCART to D-Sub cables instead (except that these could be cheaper since it's cheaper to manufacture D-Sub cables compared to BNC cables, so that would actually be an advantage for users).
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

fernan1234 wrote:
Woozle wrote:Maybe in the future we’ll make our own standalone video DAC to solve a lot of the problems that cheap off the shelf DACs are giving people.
This would be a nice compromise. Looking at the success of Analogue's DAC, it does seem like there's quite a good deal of demand for high quality retro game-oriented DACs, even one that exclusively works with a specific company's systems. A DAC that works just as well with those Analogue consoles as well as any other digital source should be very attractive.

I totally understand the argument for omitting the analogue output from the Morph, even though doing so also makes the HDMI input even more niche. As to the selection of BNC for the analogue input, I'll repeat that it was a good choice compared to SCART+RCA. At the same time, I'm recalling now that users will need SCART to BNC cables that are only really available from the usual hobby sources (Retro-Access/wookieewin/Retrogamincables), which is not really much different from the situation they would face if they needed SCART to D-Sub cables instead (except that these could be cheaper since it's cheaper to manufacture D-Sub cables compared to BNC cables, so that would actually be an advantage for users).
BNC is really nice because you get component/composite support practically for free, svideo adapters are available, vga with a straight cable, plus bnc cables for linking to other equipment are usually high quality. In the end many are using video switches, so it’s just one cable to figure out from switch to the Morph for the average setup.

Regarding scart to BNC, check this out. Looks familiar :) https://m.alibaba.com/product/160027215 ... Cable.html
strayan
Posts: 671
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by strayan »

Woozle wrote: BNC is really nice because you get component/composite support practically for free, svideo adapters are available, vga with a straight cable, plus bnc cables for linking to other equipment are usually high quality. In the end many are using video switches, so it’s just one cable to figure out from switch to the Morph for the average setup.
[/url]
Is this not the case with d-sub too? https://imgur.com/a/ZaaOWju
fernan1234
Posts: 2175
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by fernan1234 »

Yep, while it is true you get composite/component almost "for free" via BNC, I've found the S-video to BNC adapters to be less easy to find than this one, which gives you both composite and s-video all in one:

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=2509

component to d-sub is also basically as "free" as 3 bnc to rca adapters

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=2170

Plus maybe a couple of bucks for some RCA gender changers.
strayan
Posts: 671
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by strayan »

fernan1234 wrote:I've found the S-video to BNC adapters to be less easy to find than this one, which gives you both composite and s-video all in one
I have one if these https://www.extron.com/product/svifetbncmaad but I agree it’s much harder to find than dsub to s-video.

While it doesn’t bother me personally as I already have all the necessary BNC cables, BNC seems like a curious choice over dsub.
Woozle
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Florida

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Woozle »

RENI
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2022 6:43 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by RENI »

Woozle wrote:Woops, good catch. It would need the BNC module.
Thanks, so all the 5 ports on BNC module are video inputs (RGBHV)?
User avatar
NewSchoolBoxer
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by NewSchoolBoxer »

BNC connectors and TTL support*, thank you god. Can someone with PixelFX Morph ask Wobbling Pixels to put a notice on his April 14, 2021 YouTube video that the input connectors have changed? It's the first thing I find on Google:
Spoiler
Image
Also, please fix link on first page. I shouldn't have to dig around for what the inputs and outputs and scaling capability are.

I've divided S-Video into 2 RCA with eBay cable to send the white luma connector to GunCon 2 and that worked fine. Running separate RCA/BNC coax cables has lower losses and less crosstalk than shrinking the wires and shielding down so they all fit in the same PVC jacket aka VGA and SCART. Not saying you'd notice the difference at S-Video but it doesn't hurt and keeps costs down.
Looks great. Guess I'll wait for reviews to find out which FPGA and video chips are in there.

edit: Thank you bobrocks95 for pointing out they are an adopter. I could have taken 5 seconds to look myself. Adopter since Jan 2021 so cartel requires for kits too. Minimizing.
Spoiler
HDMI cartel charges $5000 a year to use their port and another $5000 to use HDMI branding versus call it digital video. I'd support PixelFX Morph going with royalty free DVI, Mini DVI or USB-C to keep prices down. I assume OSSC creator switched from original DVI to HDMI after having enough resellers buy the units upfront to cover the licensing cost. Do you not have the pay the fee by selling a kit disassembled like the N64Digital?

DisplayPort is royalty free too and can passthrough HDMI like Guspaz said. Actually, digital video over USB-C would be sick (!) and it can send true DP or analog VGA. Early HDMI that is all we need in retro gaming is just a passive pin rearrangement of DVI-D + audio pins.
Trying to design video circuits myself, I understand not having scaled analog video out. Forces a DAC + active splitter + frame buffer + impedance buffering + VGA (or DVI-A or 5x BNC) plug + pin switching to increase cost with niche use. Analogue breaks down the VGA (D-Sub15) cable pinning to send all video formats with links to Monoprice cables. I don't necessarily agree with fernan1234 that the Analogue DAC has been successful when I'm the only person I know who still owns a CRT (besides it only supporting Analogue's HDMI).

Finally, I did find a single overview of PixelFX Morph.
The Morph now features BNC connectors and HDMI ports (one input and one output, I believe). Previously, it was to have component, VGA, and S-video. By pivoting to BNC, the Morph is now a module scaler. It can accept numerous video inputs and evolve over time...Set to launch in Summer 2022, this is going to be huge for retro game scalers. Between this and the RetroTINK 5X-Pro, we have truly entered the next-generation of retro game scalers. Hot dog I want to get my hands on one of these.
I'm amused by the upsell when I presume he hasn't seen it working yet. Could have stated logical justification of streamlining design and reducing costs. BNC isn't any more modular when VGA, DVI-I and SCART have the pins to spare. Is Max Roberts friends with the team or does he post here?
Last edited by NewSchoolBoxer on Wed Jan 12, 2022 7:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bobrocks95
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:27 am
Location: Kentucky

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by bobrocks95 »

PixelFX is already a licensed HDMI adopter, so it's a moot point: https://www.hdmi.org/adopter/adoptersaffiliates (they are in there as "Pixel FX" with a space btw)
PS1 Disc-Based Game ID BIOS patch for MemCard Pro and SD2PSX automatic VMC switching.
fernan1234
Posts: 2175
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by fernan1234 »

NewSchoolBoxer wrote: I don't necessarily agree with fernan1234 that the Analogue DAC has been successful when I'm the only person I know who still owns a CRT (besides it only supporting Analogue's HDMI).
I don't say that the Analogue DAC has been successful based on how many people I know that use CRTs (I'd be biased on that since I especially online I know tons of people who do, but that's because I join social networks that are organized around CRTs as a hobby). I say it simply because the DAC has sold out soon after it is stocked by Analogue, and it also sells for a premium regularly on eBay, even when it's in stock (which hardly makes sense, but perhaps some find it cheaper overall if buying from abroad, or they have spare eBay bucks).

On top of that, it is still easy to encounter (again, if you're part of CRT communities) discussions and questions about the best DACs to use, and how the cheap ones available often leave one or another thing to be desired. Based on all that, I think a separate DAC product by PixelFX could have a good market fit, even if limited to relatively small production runs.
User avatar
NewSchoolBoxer
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by NewSchoolBoxer »

fernan1234 wrote:I don't say that the Analogue DAC has been successful based on how many people I know that use CRTs (I'd be biased on that since I especially online I know tons of people who do, but that's because I join social networks that are organized around CRTs as a hobby). I say it simply because the DAC has sold out soon after it is stocked by Analogue, and it also sells for a premium regularly on eBay, even when it's in stock (which hardly makes sense, but perhaps some find it cheaper overall if buying from abroad, or they have spare eBay bucks).
That's fair if in your space you see demand for it. The issue with DAC being sold out is we don't know the ratio of consoles to DAC to begin with. Like if they produce 1 DAC for every 100 Nt + Sg, we'd call that a failure, but a success if 1/3 of the customers want one. Analogue is also infamous for under-producing.

I searched completed eBay listings for the DAC and new ones are selling for less than the $80 retail + $26 lol shipping. Almost all sellers taking a loss when you tack on eBay fees. Well, selling for small profit after demand spiked from Pocket shipping for Christmas. Yeah, buy from abroad with spare eBay bucks when shipping to Australia is $50 AUD.

I can't think of a product has analog input and both HDMI and scaled analog output. Either no one thought of it or video encoding chip + output connectors are too much added cost. I want niche things too.

I'm sorry I brought up the DAC though. Not fair to this team.

Other thought, connectors get bulk pricing. 5x BNC makes it easy to hit the 1000 quantity rate and reduce upfront costs.
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3196
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by orange808 »

NewSchoolBoxer wrote: I can't think of a product has analog input and both HDMI and scaled analog output. Either no one thought of it or video encoding chip + output connectors are too much added cost. I want niche things too.
I imagine you meant to say "community hobby product".

Because, there are many video scalers that offer both analog and digital output. I don't have enough time to look up and make an exhaustive list of the already available video scalers that do it. It's a long list.

It's the expense and trouble of doing it. I imagine there could also a small concern about lawsuits? Sony and Disney (they are essentially the masters of the universe now) don't like people converting digital signals into DRM free analog. Firms in China may have an easier time operating in the grey area. Although, there's probably HDCP IP available to handle the problem--and it looks like the Morph may already implement the standards.
We apologise for the inconvenience
Kobeskillz
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2020 9:17 pm

Re: PixelFX Morph

Post by Kobeskillz »

This looks amazing but just like with the Ultra HDMI, DCHDMI, WiiDual, PS1 Digital, Pocket Analogue, and really any other amazing retro product i'll probably miss out on the initial shipment and enjoy this in mmmm maybe 2024-2025 if i'm lucky.

This was an issue way before the chip shortage before anyone mentions that. The chip shortage only makes a bad problem even worse now.

This really does look amazing and i'll try and have the money and try and be ready for when it goes up but like many cool thinks in this hobby we love i'll prepare for disappointment.

If anyone has a PS1 digital i'll make you a good deal for it. lol.

The lack of ports does increase the barrier of entry for more regular folk like myself that aren't super into how all this works but maybe it doesn't matter anyways because regular folk like myself usually miss out and see a big fat "SOLD OUT" when i go to the websites excited to get something.
Post Reply