Girly CD's part of complete set?

[VestCunt]

I think they fall under the Window of NEC software. But I see the LaserActive stuff as being a different platform as it used a media exclusive to Pioneer only hardware, if dealing strictly with US releases of both hardware and sofware. Now in Japan because there is an NEC branded LaserActive, that's another matter entirely for PC Engine collectors.

I'm aware of the N10s compatibility. The thing is, the N10 wasn't the standard issue for TurboGrafx 16 hardware. Yes it has the widest compatibility of any North American released system in the NEC family. But when I say standard issue, I mean the the original model. The original model has no add-on or peripheral that allows it to play Laserdisc based games.

Could your arguments be any more arbitrary?

According to you, "official" games must be:
1) released on widely-supported media. Popular formats invented by Sony and Phillips are fine, LD's used by Pioneer and Phillips aren't.
2) every required hardware component must be manufactured by the parent video game company and released in every county were their officially-licensed games are sold. The fact that NEC only supplied half of the U.S. hardware nullifies the official-ness of their North American LD games. Japanese games are fine because NEC slapped their name on a licensed Laseractive.
3) all required hardware must be "standard issue", that is, somehow compatible with whatever first-generation hardware the console appeared on (contradicting your statement that Japanese LD-ROM's are part of the PCE set).

None of this makes any sense. The bottom line is LD-ROM games are officially licensed and running on complete TG/PCE hardware from the NEC PAC. Still, I'll humor your points for the sake of argument.

Media: it doesn't matter what the format is. Some formats take off and become popular (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray), some languish with their parent company (LD, minidisc, GD-ROM, HD DVD etc). The TurboGrafx had already dabbled in two formats, adding a third doesn't mean it's suddenly a different console. The media is completely irrelevant.  

Hardware: again, the N10 contains a fully functional TurboGrafx. There are no significant hardware differences. It's not even a SuperGrafx. The backgrounds streaming off an LD-ROM are no different than redbook audio streaming off a CD-ROM.

Licensing: yes, Pioneer hardware was required to play LD-ROMs in the US in 1993. So what? Panasonic hardware was required to play 3DO games. JVC made a Sega. The SNES has a Sony chip. TTI was dead in the water and couldn't even bring 6-botton controllers to the U.S. Allowing Pioneer to house their hardware and supply the optical drive doesn't change the processing hardware or distance the N10 from the "NEC family".

Standard issue: seriously, WTF. Your "standard issue" U.S. hardware was dead by 1993 and barely even got SCD compatibly. The 3.0 card came well after the Duo's release, was never sold in stores, and only sold a few hundred units. By your logic, the Duo and its line of SCD games would be a different platform if not for the belated, pitiful release of the 3.0 card. Just because the line of LD-ROM games never became popular enough for TTI to make some kind of TG16-to-Laseractive interface doesn't mean the TurboGrafx housed in the N10 isn't a TurboGrafx.

[DragonmasterDan]

Could your arguments be any more arbitrary?

According to you, "official" games must be:
1) released on widely-supported media. Popular formats invented by Sony and Phillips are fine, LD's used by Pioneer and Phillips aren't.
2) every required hardware component must be manufactured by the parent video game company and released in every county were their officially-licensed games are sold. The fact that NEC only supplied half of the U.S. hardware nullifies the official-ness of their North American LD games. Japanese games are fine because NEC slapped their name on a licensed Laseractive.
3) all required hardware must be "standard issue", that is, somehow compatible with whatever first-generation hardware the console appeared on (contradicting your statement that Japanese LD-ROM's are part of the PCE set).

None of this makes any sense. The bottom line is LD-ROM games are officially licensed and running on complete TG/PCE hardware from the NEC PAC. Still, I'll humor your points for the sake of argument.

Media: it doesn't matter what the format is. Some formats take off and become popular (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray), some languish with their parent company (LD, minidisc, GD-ROM, HD DVD etc). The TurboGrafx had already dabbled in two formats, adding a third doesn't mean it's suddenly a different console. The media is completely irrelevant.  

Hardware: again, the N10 contains a fully functional TurboGrafx. There are no significant hardware differences. It's not even a SuperGrafx. The backgrounds streaming off an LD-ROM are no different than redbook audio streaming off a CD-ROM.

Licensing: yes, Pioneer hardware was required to play LD-ROMs in the US in 1993. So what? Panasonic hardware was required to play 3DO games. JVC made a Sega. TTI was dead in the water and couldn't even bring 6-botton controllers to the U.S. Allowing Pioneer to house their hardware and supply the optical drive doesn't change the processing hardware or distance the N10 from the "NEC family".

Standard issue: seriously, WTF. Your "standard issue" U.S. hardware was dead by 1993 and barely even got SCD compatibly. The 3.0 card came well after the Duo's release, was never sold in stores, and only sold a few hundred units. By your logic, the Duo and its line of SCD games would be a different platform if not for the belated, pitiful release of the 3.0 card. Just because the line of LD-ROM games never became popular enough for TTI to make some kind of TG16-to-Laseractive interface doesn't mean the TurboGrafx housed in the N10 isn't a TurboGrafx.

1. HuCards I'm counting as offical releases and it was a far less popular medium than LaserDisc.

2. Also the N10 PACs while licensed were made by Pioneer, not NEC.

3. I think because an NEC Laseractive exists for the Japanese market it creates a more solid argument for them being included in a PC Engine collection. I didn't say I definitely think my personal view of what should and shouldn't count includes them among Japanese PC Engine collecting.

I think a better argument for including them as TurboGrafx releases would be made, and that I personally would agree with, if a link cable or some other add on allowing the play of Laserdiscs existed for any US released NEC hardware. But it doesn't.

Just on a side note, I own a LaserActive and an NEC PAC (Japanese one though). I'm well aware of its functionality.

 Here's the big difference between JVC making the X'eye and actual Sega CD software. There are not games that ONLY play on the X'eye. I can only play my LD-ROM2 US released games (I have Vajra and Manhattan Requiem) on a Laseractive. Not on any other variation of US released hardware that we're distinguishing as the same platform.

And I'm not saying the N10 isn't part of the TurboGrafx family. But what I am saying I personally categorize difference between games that can ONLY be run on the Laseractive as being Laseractive Games rather than TurboGrafx 16 games. If there were games that only ran on the X'eye I'd have the same categorization for them.

Added in edit: I also don't categorize the Mega LD games as being Genesis or Sega CD games.

[turboswimbz]

This is the old "lumpers" versues "Splitters" argument.  What makes one thing diffrent enough from another or similar enough to each other to be in the same group?  I love this argument, as anyone who puts forth a valid system for grouping is "right". 

I personally am a splitter, So there is any number of complete sets for me:
Hu-card only
Cds - only
Cd - only
Super CD - only
LD - only
Hu-card + CDs only
All North american released
North American Offical Turbografx-16 released
Non Offical Turbografx-16 released
Games only and no other software or hardware

Over all i view the general complete set as All the games that were released here in the United States by TTI and NEC/Hudson not including the girly games, system cards, or homebrews.

My favorite complete set however is to have some PCE/Turbo Stuff from every active member here: I postit note when and who I got stuff from.  A set I will never quite complete I'm sure, but it's fun as hell to collect.

[JoshTurboTrollX]

Based on the "standard" hardware argument:

If, CD games are required for a full set = true statement
Then, Laseractive games are required for a full set.

If, hu-cards only are required for a full set = true statement
Then, Laseractive games are not required for a full set.

The "If" statements are entirely opinion based, but the "Then" statements are logical truth based on your initial response.

Sounds like a damn BASIC program.

/sighzw.png

It's cool to get various opinions on how a 'collector' views their goals and how they believe a complete collection should be viewed.  Me personally I think anything that plays on my Duo and had a release either via a downloadable or an official (or even unofficial) release is all time spent on the console I grew up loving, so I consider them all part of the family.    I do kind of think that Supergrafx and LaserActive games, given that they require separate hardware aren't really necessary if someone feels the need to collect all the Turbografx or PC Engine games tho...

If you were say collecting PS3 games- would you then need to have all the PSone and PS2 games to have the complete set?  If you have the right PS3 you can play them all. 

[CrackTiger]

Could your arguments be any more arbitrary?

According to you, "official" games must be:
1) released on widely-supported media. Popular formats invented by Sony and Phillips are fine, LD's used by Pioneer and Phillips aren't.
2) every required hardware component must be manufactured by the parent video game company and released in every county were their officially-licensed games are sold. The fact that NEC only supplied half of the U.S. hardware nullifies the official-ness of their North American LD games. Japanese games are fine because NEC slapped their name on a licensed Laseractive.
3) all required hardware must be "standard issue", that is, somehow compatible with whatever first-generation hardware the console appeared on (contradicting your statement that Japanese LD-ROM's are part of the PCE set).

None of this makes any sense. The bottom line is LD-ROM games are officially licensed and running on complete TG/PCE hardware from the NEC PAC. Still, I'll humor your points for the sake of argument.

Media: it doesn't matter what the format is. Some formats take off and become popular (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray), some languish with their parent company (LD, minidisc, GD-ROM, HD DVD etc). The TurboGrafx had already dabbled in two formats, adding a third doesn't mean it's suddenly a different console. The media is completely irrelevant. 

Hardware: again, the N10 contains a fully functional TurboGrafx. There are no significant hardware differences. It's not even a SuperGrafx. The backgrounds streaming off an LD-ROM are no different than redbook audio streaming off a CD-ROM.

Licensing: yes, Pioneer hardware was required to play LD-ROMs in the US in 1993. So what? Panasonic hardware was required to play 3DO games. JVC made a Sega. TTI was dead in the water and couldn't even bring 6-botton controllers to the U.S. Allowing Pioneer to house their hardware and supply the optical drive doesn't change the processing hardware or distance the N10 from the "NEC family".

Standard issue: seriously, WTF. Your "standard issue" U.S. hardware was dead by 1993 and barely even got SCD compatibly. The 3.0 card came well after the Duo's release, was never sold in stores, and only sold a few hundred units. By your logic, the Duo and its line of SCD games would be a different platform if not for the belated, pitiful release of the 3.0 card. Just because the line of LD-ROM games never became popular enough for TTI to make some kind of TG16-to-Laseractive interface doesn't mean the TurboGrafx housed in the N10 isn't a TurboGrafx.

1. HuCards I'm counting as offical releases and it was a far less popular medium than LaserDisc.

2. Also the N10 PACs while licensed were made by Pioneer, not NEC.

3. I think because an NEC Laseractive exists for the Japanese market it creates a more solid argument for them being included in a PC Engine collection. I didn't say I definitely think my personal view of what should and shouldn't count includes them among Japanese PC Engine collecting.

I think a better argument for including them as TurboGrafx releases would be made, and that I personally would agree with, if a link cable or some other add on allowing the play of Laserdiscs existed for any US released NEC hardware. But it doesn't.

Just on a side note, I own a LaserActive and an NEC PAC (Japanese one though). I'm well aware of its functionality.

 Here's the big difference between JVC making the X'eye and actual Sega CD software. There are not games that ONLY play on the X'eye. I can only play my LD-ROM2 US released games (I have Vajra and Manhattan Requiem) on a Laseractive. Not on any other variation of US released hardware that we're distinguishing as the same platform.

And I'm not saying the N10 isn't part of the TurboGrafx family. But what I am saying I personally categorize difference between games that can ONLY be run on the Laseractive as being Laseractive Games rather than TurboGrafx 16 games. If there were games that only ran on the X'eye I'd have the same categorization for them.

Added in edit: I also don't categorize the Mega LD games as being Genesis or Sega CD games.

All Turbo/PCE hardware is arguably in the same boat as the X'eye and Laseractive, since Hudson is the equivalent of Sega/Nintendo and NEC is only one of multiple manufacturers of Turbo/PCE compatible hardware.

[DragonmasterDan]

All Turbo/PCE hardware is arguably in the same boat as the X'eye and Laseractive, since Hudson is the equivalent of Sega/Nintendo and NEC is only one of multiple manufacturers of Turbo/PCE compatible hardware.

Agreed, but the question was about whether or not games that exclusively play on a system not made by the original vendor but using the same hardware architecture should count.

In my mind The X'eye is just a Genesis/Sega CD/Karaoke combo. It doesn't play any games that the Genesis/Sega CD does not. The LaserActive with the Sega PAC is in the same boat as the LaserActive and the NEC PAC. It plays games using the same architecture as another system, but only plays them on that platform. The systems definitely count as compatible and licensed units. But the games specific to those systems are a whole different animal.

[SignOfZeta]

All Turbo/PCE hardware is arguably in the same boat as the X'eye and Laseractive, since Hudson is the equivalent of Sega/Nintendo and NEC is only one of multiple manufacturers of Turbo/PCE compatible hardware.

Agreed, but the question was about whether or not games that exclusively play on a system not made by the original vendor but using the same hardware architecture should count.

In my mind The X'eye is just a Genesis/Sega CD/Karaoke combo. It doesn't play any games that the Genesis/Sega CD does not. The LaserActive with the Sega PAC is in the same boat as the LaserActive and the NEC PAC. It plays games using the same architecture as another system, but only plays them on that platform. The systems definitely count as compatible and licensed units. But the games specific to those systems are a whole different animal.

Check it out:



Only runs on Mk1 Wondermega, manufactured by Victor, since it needs the MIDI port.

Btw, you're insane. LDROM2 games are officially licensed Turbo Grafx games, PERIOD, therefore any "complete" collection has these. There is nothing debatable here and your labyrinthian logic changes nothing. The "standard hardware" thing makes no sense to anyone but you, but anyone can grasp the idea of officially licensed products. Deals were made, money changed hands. The logos present on these hardware and software are being used %100 legally.

Of course, anyone going for a "complete" anything irrispective of quality, interest level, etc is a fucking idiot, IMO, but that doesn't make plain basic facts any different. If you don't want to spend thousands of dollars buying all the LA games (or even compiling a list for that matter) then fine, I support that. Why WOULD anyone want every LA game? However, they are part of the set. No question whatsoever. If you aren't going to collect them then just don't collect them. Your collection will be "everything that runs in my Duo" or whatever, but it won't be "complete". And that's perfectly fine.

[DragonmasterDan]

Check it out:



Only runs on Mk1 Wondermega, manufactured by Victor, since it needs the MIDI port.

Btw, you're insane. LDROM2 games are officially licensed Turbo Grafx games, PERIOD, therefore any "complete" collection has these. There is nothing debatable here and your labyrinthian logic changes nothing. The "standard hardware" thing makes no sense to anyone but you, but anyone can grasp the idea of officially licensed products. Deals were made, money changed hands. The logos present on these hardware and software are being used %100 legally.

Of course, anyone going for a "complete" anything irrispective of quality, interest level, etc is a fucking idiot, IMO, but that doesn't make plain basic facts any different. If you don't want to spend thousands of dollars buying all the LA games (or even compiling a list for that matter) then fine, I support that. Why WOULD anyone want every LA game? However, they are part of the set. No question whatsoever. If you aren't going to collect them then just don't collect them. Your collection will be "everything that runs in my Duo" or whatever, but it won't be "complete". And that's perfectly fine.

I see the LA games as being part of the same family. I see them as being exempt from what I count as a TurboGrafx collection as there is no way to actually play these games on a TurboGrafx. This is where I divide these up.

They can only be played on a LaserActive with a TurboGrafx (or PC Engine module since there's no region lock) module, and while they are licensed by TTI/NEC. I see them as Laseractive specific games. I think it's a pretty clear cut line I've drawn.

Added in edit: With regards to the WonderMidi disc, if someone had a Mega CD collection I would say that's likely exempt even though it might boot on the Mega CD itself. With that said, the LA games are even further exempt because there's no means of running them on a Mega CD/Mega Drive system except the LaserActive.

[DragonmasterDan]

Just a side note since everyone has their own means of determining what are valid "complete" collections. I figured I'd make a list of criteria and types of "complete collections" there might be.

All TurboGrafx 16 Family Media:. This includes all licensed titles intended for sale to consumers, all demo discs, all homebrew titles, the girlie discs and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture.

All TurboGrafx 16 licensed Family Media: This includes all licensed titles intended for sale to consumers all demo discs, all and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture. (this leaves out homebrews and the girlie discs)

All TurboGrafx 16 Family retail released games: This includes all licensed titles intended for sale to consumers, all homebrew titles, the girlie games, all and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture. (this leaves out the demo discs)

All TurboGrafx 16 retail released games: This includes all licensed titles intended for sale to consumers, all homebrew titles, the girlie games produced for play on the TurboGrafx 16 intended distribution in North America (this leaves out the demos and the LA games)

All TurboGrafx 16 licensed games: This includes all licensed retail titles produced and demo discs for play on the TurboGrafx 16 with intended distribution in North America (this leaves out the demos, homebrews, girlie games and Laseractive games)

All TurboGrafx 16 licensed retail released games: This includes all licensed retail titles produced for play on the TurboGrafx 16 with intended distribution in North America (this leaves out the demos, homebrews, girlie games and Laseractive games)

Everyone seperates things differently. That's my set of different criteria that's suitable for a complete set. Been rewording it a bit in edits.

[SignOfZeta]

Just a side note since everyone has their own means of determining what are valid "complete" collections. I figured I'd make a list of criteria and types of "complete collections" there might be.

All TurboGrafx 16 Family Media:. This includes all licensed retail titles, all demo discs, all homebrew titles, the girlie discs and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture.

All TurboGrafx 16 licensed Family Media: This includes all licensed retail titles, all demo discs, all and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture. (this leaves out homebrews and the girlie discs)

All TurboGrafx 16 Family retail released games: This includes all licensed retail titles, all homebrew titles, the girlie games, all and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture. (this leaves out the demo discs)

All TurboGrafx 16 retail released games: This includes all licensed retail titles, all homebrew titles, the girlie games produced for play on the TurboGrafx 16 intended distribution in North America (this leaves out the demos and the LA games)

All TurboGrafx 16 Family retail released games: This includes all licensed retail titles, all homebrew titles, the girlie games, and all LaserActive LDROM2 titles produced for intended distribution in North America that are compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 architecture. (this leaves out the demos)

All TurboGrafx 16 licensed retail released games: This includes all licensed retail titles produced for play on the TurboGrafx 16 with intended distribution in North America (this leaves out the demos, homebrews, girlie games and Laseractive games)

Everyone seperates things differently. That's my set of different criteria that's suitable for a complete set.

I had to read each of those catagories multiple times to make any sense of them. Having one of them listed twice with slightly different wording proves that even the OCD weirdo that made this list was confused by it.

Here is a simple answer to the original question, "Are the pseudoporn games part of a complete set?" Answer: No, but if you really like garbage then just buy them.

[DildoKKKobold]

For some laughs, check out the wars that start on NintendoAge when someone asks this same question about Stadium Events.

(For those not in the know, SE is a ~$3,000 version of the $2 game, "World Class Track Meet," which came with every Power Pad. Nintendo wanted to license the game from Bandai, so as part of the agreement, the game was pulled from shelves ~1 month after release, making it a retail-released game, but incredibly rare. )

I have some familiarity with that game.

So, you own a legit NTSC SE cart? Props.

While I'd love to have it in my collection, I'd feel bad spending even $100 on it. I'd get mad buyers remorse, even at that level.

[VestCunt]

the question was about whether or not games that exclusively play on a system not made by the original vendor but using the same hardware architecture should count.

Video games are no stranger to second-party hardware. Again, see the 3DO and the HE system.

I see them as being exempt from what I count as a TurboGrafx collection as there is no way to actually play these games on a TurboGrafx.

The N10 is a TurboGrafx. Don't let the funny box fool you.

They can only be played on a LaserActive with a TurboGrafx (or PC Engine module since there's no region lock) module, and while they are licensed by TTI/NEC. I see them as Laseractive specific games. I think it's a pretty clear cut line I've drawn.

Reverse this logic: think of the Laseractive as an optical drive (like it is) and the N10 a TurboGrafx. LD-ROMs are TurboGrafx games that can only be played with a LD drive, just as CD-ROM2's are TurboGrafx games that can only be played with a CD drive. Whether these different drives connect to an archiac TG16 made in 1989 doesn't make any difference.

[DragonmasterDan]

So, you own a legit NTSC SE cart? Props.

While I'd love to have it in my collection, I'd feel bad spending even $100 on it. I'd get mad buyers remorse, even at that level.

I spent 3.99 + sales tax on it. So there was no remorse.

Reverse this logic: think of the Laseractive as an optical drive (like it is) and the N10 a TurboGrafx. LD-ROMs are TurboGrafx games that can only be played with a LD drive, just as CD-ROM2's are TurboGrafx games that can only be played with a CD drive. Whether these different drives connect to an archiac TG16 made in 1989 doesn't make any difference.

I see it like the Neo-Geo CD. If I collect AES games, I'm only collecting cartridges. However, if I want to collect all Neo-Geo games then I go for CDs as well. I see them as the same platform but a different enough format to be eligible for being a separate collection.

[VestCunt]

I see it like the Neo-Geo CD. If I collect AES games, I'm only collecting cartridges. However, if I want to collect all Neo-Geo games then I go for CDs as well. I see them as the same platform but a different enough format to be eligible for being a separate collection.

OK, you've dropped the second-party hardware argument and "standard issue" defense, so I guess we're getting somewhere.

As for "different enough formats"...
The TurboGrafx architecture already had substantially different formats, but no one denies that CD's are TurboGrafx games. Sure, format is a convenient way for collectors to subdivide their checklists (I like to keep my Sega Cards and HuCards separate), but differences end there. If we're going to measure the extent of a console's library, we're talking about the processor, the architecture, and the officially licensed games. If doesn't matter if the LD-ROM didn't get much support or if laserdiscs look weird or if an extra licensing deal was involved in the hardware or if TTI tanked before they could make some kind of RAU-30 for the Laseractive. The fact is the TurboGrafx saw more media formats than any other system ever. Technology changed a lot in the late-Eighties/early-Nineties. Get used to it.

[DragonmasterDan]

OK, you've dropped the second-party hardware argument and "standard issue" defense, so I guess we're getting somewhere.

As for "different enough formats"...
The TurboGrafx architecture already had substantially different formats, but no one denies that CD's are TurboGrafx games. Sure, format is a convenient way for collectors to subdivide their checklists (I like to keep my Sega Cards and HuCards separate), but differences end there. If we're going to measure the extent of a console's library, we're talking about the processor, the architecture, and the officially licensed games. If doesn't matter if the LD-ROM didn't get much support or if laserdiscs look weird or if an extra licensing deal was involved in the hardware or if TTI tanked before they could make some kind of RAU-30 for the Laseractive. The fact is the TurboGrafx saw more media formats than any other system ever. Technology changed a lot in the late-Eighties/early-Nineties. Get used to it.

I don't think I actually disagree with you in principle. I think our arguments are strictly semantics.

They're part of the TurboGrafx architecture. And if you're collecting everything for that architecture I agree they should be included.

The issue here is that the format of the LDROM2 is only playable on the LaserActive which I see as a seperate device from the TurboGrafx 16 itself. While it has a PAC that enables the full functionality of not just a TurboGrafx but a Turbo Duo, I see it as being a separate format due to the reasons I've elaborated on over the past few pages.

My opinion on this really hasn't changed. There's basically collecting for the whole family/architecture, or just games that can be played on the original TurboGrafx 16 that are at the root of the do LaserActive games count question.

Added in Edit:
So the word TurboGrafx can have two meanings. TurboGrafx the architecture/platform. And TurboGrafx as in TurboGrafx 16 the original hardware system.

A complete collection of the first encompasses everything. The second merely encompasses having every domestic playable title that will run on the original hardware.

Based on that I divide them up, but anyone is free to use whatever methodology they choose.

[SignOfZeta]

You'd have an argument if Tommo made a Turbo Grafx X that was emulation based and only a Turbo in name (as with the Neo Geo X) but the Turbo PAC is ABSOLUTELY a Turbografx. It has the same CPU and graphics chips, the same controller socket, a HuCard slot, runs everything a Duo will, is officially licensed and partially manufactured by NEC and has Turbo Grafx logo RIGHT ON THE FUCKER. If it had the proper sockets on the back it wouldn't even need an LA to be a functioning Turbo Grafx (note to self: that would be a cool mod).

If it isn't a Turbo Graphx then I'm Robert Redford.

You actually have less of an argument with the AES vs Neo CD since there is zero cross compatibility between the systems and every game being rebuilt for the CD. It's a much easier line to draw because of this. It's a cart or its a CD.

[turboswimbz]

This thread is fantastic!  PCE and Turbografx is kinda like this:

Gotta collect them all and everything is a little blurry!

 

[VestCunt]

I don't think I actually disagree with you in principle. I think our arguments are strictly semantics.

They're part of the TurboGrafx architecture. And if you're collecting everything for that architecture I agree they should be included.

Fair enough. I've decided: we can still be friends! Sorry I got snarky.

[geise]

The hardware argument has nothing to do with the original post.  The girly cd games are non licensed and (in my opinion) are gaijin hentai doujin for the US.  Therefore they are not needed (to me) if I personally want a complete set.  Funny thing about the Girly CD's is that they could also be considered for a "complete" pc-engine cd collection as well with there being no region lock out.  I wonder if Japanese pc-engine collectors go for the Girly CD's?

For the off topic discussion if I wanted to collect every licensed software available, then yes I would add the LD games as well.  Same goes for regular licensed CD ROM2, and SCD games.

[CrackTiger]

Here is a simple answer to the original question, "Are the pseudoporn games part of a complete set?" Answer: No, but if you really like garbage then just buy them.

In the case of the girly cds, "games" isn't even appropriate, as it is only software running a gallery (similar to the Saturn's Virtrua Fighter Portrait series). Some people who are not fans of digicomics occasionally argue that they aren't real games either, but anyone who has played several knows that it is not the case, especially when compared to some of the gameplay in today's games.

[roflmao]

I love it when the long-time members find something new to discuss.  Thanks DragonmasterDan for posting such an interesting topic!

Just to contribute something, here's my take:

Before I found out about these forums, I didn't know the LaserActive even existed.  Of course the games made for the LA are not canon.  However, they do exist and any completionist (however ridiculous it is) would have to have them for completion's sake.  Now that I know they exist, if I ever stumbled upon them for cheap I would pick them up in a heartbeat and post pictures here.

EDIT: The Girly CDs are not part of the complete set in my mind.


...but the homebrew stuff is. 

[esteban]

FINAL CONSENSUS: The Girly CD's are NOT canon. They should never, ever, ever be mentioned again. Thank you.

[Tatsujin]

[VestCunt]

Of course the games made for the LA are not canon.  However, they do exist and any completionist (however ridiculous it is) would have to have them for completion's sake. 

Well, at least you agree the LA games exist!

[xcrement5x]

Why WOULD anyone want every LA game?

Discussed yesterday in chat, but:
1) Boobs
2) 3D
3) Boobs in 3D

[DragonmasterDan]

You'd have an argument if Tommo made a Turbo Grafx X that was emulation based and only a Turbo in name (as with the Neo Geo X) but the Turbo PAC is ABSOLUTELY a Turbografx. It has the same CPU and graphics chips, the same controller socket, a HuCard slot, runs everything a Duo will, is officially licensed and partially manufactured by NEC and has Turbo Grafx logo RIGHT ON THE FUCKER. If it had the proper sockets on the back it wouldn't even need an LA to be a functioning Turbo Grafx (note to self: that would be a cool mod).

If it isn't a Turbo Graphx then I'm Robert Redford.

The hardware is the same ICUs using the same architecture. I don't disagree that the PAC qualifies as a member of the TurboGrafx Family. My opinion is simply that the LA specific games that run only on the Laseractive are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based LaserActive games.

Added in Edit: As far as the Neo-Geo CD goes the reason I used that as a comparison was even though the games were modified to load into RAM. From my understanding it's architecturally identical to the AES. A far more apt comparison is Sega/Mega CDs and Mega LDs. Simply put I hold the same rule true. Mega LDs are Sega/Mega CD hardware based games that run on the LaserActive, they are not Sega/Mega CDs themselves.

[VestCunt]

LA specific games that run only on the Laseractive are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based LaserActive games.

And CD specific games that run only on the CD-ROM2 drives are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based CD games.

Picture this: the Laseractive is just a really big, console-swallowing, Super CD ROM. Like the SCD and its little elbow power cable, the Laseractive passes power along to the HE system. It provides an AV out. It provides an optical drive.

[SignOfZeta]

Yeah, the Laseractive itself is barely more than a mid-tier LD player from the early 90s. It can't execute any code other than the TOC on a standard CD/LD. The PACs do absolutely everything that we know to be "game", including the boot screen.

The LA itself produces whatever video and sound are on the disc, provides overlay capabilities, responds to specific commands from the PAC (play, stop, skip) and...I'm not sure it it can actually do anything else. All that stuff is built into every LD player, come to think of it. Somehow the PAC reads code from the LDROM2s/MegaLDs, but I'm not sure exactly how. That might actually just be hidden in the digital audio tracks and completely transparent to the LA itself.

As grandios as it looks, I'm pretty sure there was actually more "game system" in the CDROM2 systems. They actually had dedicated RAM and save space. On the LA, all that stuff is in the PAC.

[Otaking]

The answer to the OP question is simplicity in itself.
First you have define a "complete set", simply are you going for a complete retail licensed release set or collecting everything.
These are the two common goals for collecting for most consoles.
So if you decide from the outset that you are going for a complete retail licensed release set then you can forget about the Hawaiian ladies.

[DragonmasterDan]

And CD specific games that run only on the CD-ROM2 drives are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based CD games.

Picture this: the Laseractive is just a really big, console-swallowing, Super CD ROM. Like the SCD and its little elbow power cable, the Laseractive passes power along to the HE system. It provides an AV out. It provides an optical drive.

I'm not aware of any that run only on the CDROM2, I'm pretty sure (short of PC Engine Altered Beast which I know has system card compatibility issues) all US released games can be played on a CDROM add on with the appropriate system card, OR a Duo.

[DragonmasterDan]

The LA itself produces whatever video and sound are on the disc, provides overlay capabilities, responds to specific commands from the PAC (play, stop, skip) and...I'm not sure it it can actually do anything else. All that stuff is built into every LD player, come to think of it. Somehow the PAC reads code from the LDROM2s/MegaLDs, but I'm not sure exactly how. That might actually just be hidden in the digital audio tracks and completely transparent to the LA itself.

The LA loads almost everything used during the game into it's digital memory and then overlays the video from that. There's a resolution difference when an LA games video is played back just as LD video compared to when played during a game since the stored digital memory outputs at a lower resolution. There's also a little digital video light on the front that indicates the digital memory is in use most of the time if you're playing an LA game where it has moving video. Generally speaking it's not actively streaming stuff off the disc, but is loading what's needed for the next 15 or so seconds into digital memory.

[VestCunt]

I'm not aware of any that run only on the CDROM2, I'm pretty sure (short of PC Engine Altered Beast which I know has system card compatibility issues) all US released games can be played on a CDROM add on with the appropriate system card, OR a Duo.

So... if Turbografx media can be played on multiple pieces of hardware, it's a TurboGrafx game. If it can only be played on one piece of hardware, it's a separate platform?

CD games aren't compatible with all of the U.S. hardware (i.e. the TurboExpress) and LD games aren't compatible with all of the U.S. hardware, what's the difference? For whatever reason, NEC left some things incompatible. If the TG and laserdiscs had been more successful, we would have seen more LD hardware and your "exclusive hardware" argument would be bullshit (which it is). If the TG had died sooner, the Duo wouldn't exist and you'd be arguing that CD-ROMs are a "separate platform" (which they're not).

You're entitled to your opinion, but if you're going to continue arguing, stop saying "I feel" and "I see" and try to make a logical statement.

[VestCunt]

Oh, I see my statement was confusing. Here's a fixed version:

LA specific games that run only on the Laseractive are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based LaserActive games.

And CD specific games that run only on the CD-ROM systems are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based CD games.

There. See that your argument applies equally to CD games? Therefore, if CD games are TurboGrafx games, LA games are Turbografx games.

[DragonmasterDan]

So... if Turbografx media can be played on multiple pieces of hardware, it's a TurboGrafx game. If it can only be played on one piece of hardware, it's a separate platform?

Again, this is where we get into the distinction of use of the word "TurboGrafx game". If a game can only be played on one member of the TurboGrafx family, I see it as being a game specific to that member of the family. If a game can be played on multiple, then an argument can be made for it being a game that encompasses the family.

You're entitled to your opinion, but if you're going to continue arguing, stop saying "I feel" and "I see" and try to make a logical statement.

The reason I'm saying I feel or see is these things are opinions. How someone chooses to categorize something is completely up to them. With regards to the LA not having any extra hardware. I made a quick demonstration video to show the Digital Video that it uses. The LA provides digital video memory (IE some extra hardware) rather than simply being a different media format than the CD or Super-CDROM games.

[DragonmasterDan]

There. See that your argument applies equally to CD games? Therefore, if CD games are TurboGrafx games, LA games are Turbografx games.

Here's the argument.

If US released games using TurboGrafx architecture can be played on multiple hardware configurations = TurboGrafx games
If US released games using TurboGrafx architecture can be played only on one hardware configuration = TurboGrafx powered game specific to that hardware configuration

[CrackTiger]

The reason I'm saying I feel or see is these things are opinions. How someone chooses to categorize something is completely up to them. With regards to the LA not having any extra hardware. I made a quick demonstration video to show the Digital Video that it uses. The LA provides digital video memory (IE some extra hardware) rather than simply being a different media format than the CD or Super-CDROM games.

The CD-ROM adds extra backup ram, adpcm and redbook audio streaming hardware.

[TheClash603]

Oh, I see my statement was confusing. Here's a fixed version:

LA specific games that run only on the Laseractive are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based LaserActive games.

And CD specific games that run only on the CD-ROM systems are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based CD games.

There. See that your argument applies equally to CD games? Therefore, if CD games are TurboGrafx games, LA games are Turbografx games.

Vestcunt has gotten into my logic stream, because it makes complete sense.

Dan is a little confused still, but he will get on board soon enough

[DragonmasterDan]

The CD-ROM adds extra backup ram, adpcm and redbook audio streaming hardware.

Correct the reason I brought up the fact that everything on the LA running in digital memory was in response to Zeta's comment  quoted below.

"The LA itself produces whatever video and sound are on the disc, provides overlay capabilities, responds to specific commands from the PAC (play, stop, skip) and...I'm not sure it it can actually do anything else. All that stuff is built into every LD player, come to think of it."

So there is some hardware in the LA used for playing games that isn't found in every LD player out there.

That isn't even the whole point here though. This was simply to debunk the idea that LD-ROM2 games are simply Super CDs on a LaserDisc and should be treated the same. My feeling with regards to categorization remains what I stated above.

If US released games using TurboGrafx architecture can be played on multiple hardware configurations = TurboGrafx games
If US released games using TurboGrafx architecture can be played only on one hardware configuration = TurboGrafx powered game specific to that hardware configuration

[DragonmasterDan]

Oh, I see my statement was confusing. Here's a fixed version:

LA specific games that run only on the Laseractive are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based LaserActive games.

And CD specific games that run only on the CD-ROM systems are not TurboGrafx games but are TurboGrafx based CD games.

There. See that your argument applies equally to CD games? Therefore, if CD games are TurboGrafx games, LA games are Turbografx games.

Vestcunt has gotten into my logic stream, because it makes complete sense.

Dan is a little confused still, but he will get on board soon enough

I don't actually disagree with classifying them as CD based TurboGrafx games. But they're playable on multiple configurations.

If there were no US Super CD system card and no Laseractive, and there were Super CD games released in the US. I actually would count those as seperate from regular CD-ROM releases or HuCards for example. Because they could only be played on the Duo, I'd call them Duo games. However, since there is a US Super CD System card (and the laseractive) it's usable on a wider variety of hardware, and thusly is categorized under a wider banner.

[esteban]

The reason I'm saying I feel or see is these things are opinions. How someone chooses to categorize something is completely up to them. With regards to the LA not having any extra hardware. I made a quick demonstration video to show the Digital Video that it uses. The LA provides digital video memory (IE some extra hardware) rather than simply being a different media format than the CD or Super-CDROM games.

The CD-ROM adds extra backup ram, adpcm and redbook audio streaming hardware.

I finally see what Dan is saying. The LA adds an extra layer of hardware-specific requirements to the BASE SYSTEM for CD-ROM...namely, LD games rely on caching the video, something only the LA has the capacity to do. Now, there might be additional LA-specific dependencies for LD-ROM (possibly some video overlay capabilities?), but even if there aren't, video caching alone means that development for LD was quite specific.

I find it hilarious that folks are arguing vehemently with Dan over the classification of PCE LD-ROM. Ha!






I don't really care about this hullaballoo, to be honest. THE TECHNICAL DISTINCTIONS CAN SUCK MY LEFT ONE. Yes, I'm saying that to EVERYONE, especially the folks arguing against Dan, because they are stoopid.

As soon as discussions devolve into this stuff, you miss the BIG PICTURE:

Esteban's Law: If something genuinely captures the spirit of TG-16/PCE, then it IS TG-16/PCE. Period.

Therefore...
SUPERGRAFX and the SUPER HuCARD = PCE = TG-16.

LD-ROM = motherfuckin' unobtainable fantasy for me (but of course it is TG-16 / PCE).

PC-FX is NOT TG-16/PCE, because PC-FX can suck my left one.

HUDSON games on other platforms are NOT TG-16/PCE, because they can suck my left one.

PCE GT/TurboExpress is TG-16/PCE.

North American cover art IS TG-16/PCE, naysayers can suck on a Japanophile's left one.

BLAZING LAZERS is an honorary member of the Star Soldier series because you COMPILE blowhards can suck my left one.

"SHMUP" is most-fucking-definitely NOT TG-16/PCE. This imbecilic term "shmup" is a fucking disgrace to dullards across the cosmos, let alone Earth-bound fans of the genre. Personally, I'm ashamed the genre I love has been sullied by this designation.




NOTE: Yes, I am purposefully conflating all categories into ONE, namely "TG-16/PCE", because TG-16/PCE is all that matters. I will die knowing this is the Truth. Godspeed, comrades.

[TheClash603]

If a game has link cable capabilities, thus can only played in its entirety on a Turbo Express...  does this disqualify it as being a Turbografx game?

Only one set of hardware can play the game fully and that hardware is not the base system.

[DragonmasterDan]

If a game has link cable capabilities, thus can only played in its entirety on a Turbo Express...  does this disqualify it as being a Turbografx game?

Only one set of hardware can play the game fully and that hardware is not the base system.

It's not about playing it in it's entirety. The question is does basic functionality of the game work on multiple configurations. If yes, then it's a TurboGrafx game by my count.

If it only works on one configuration it's a game powered by the architecture specific to that hardware configuration.

[SignOfZeta]

The LA itself produces whatever video and sound are on the disc, provides overlay capabilities, responds to specific commands from the PAC (play, stop, skip) and...I'm not sure it it can actually do anything else. All that stuff is built into every LD player, come to think of it. Somehow the PAC reads code from the LDROM2s/MegaLDs, but I'm not sure exactly how. That might actually just be hidden in the digital audio tracks and completely transparent to the LA itself.

The LA loads almost everything used during the game into it's digital memory and then overlays the video from that. There's a resolution difference when an LA games video is played back just as LD video compared to when played during a game since the stored digital memory outputs at a lower resolution. There's also a little digital video light on the front that indicates the digital memory is in use most of the time if you're playing an LA game where it has moving video. Generally speaking it's not actively streaming stuff off the disc, but is loading what's needed for the next 15 or so seconds into digital memory.

Two things:

1) My point of bringing up what is actually in the LA was the illustrate that while you think of the CDROM2 system as being more "true" or "normal" it was, honestly, a much larger upgrade, a bigger departure, from the standard PCE than the LA was. The LA's duties are almost totally analog. Everything important is in the PAC (including all the stuff normally built into the IFU), which is clearly a Turbografx. While the stuff in an LA certainly isn't in any other PCE accessory, its standard stuff in many many many LD players. My point: the LA basically just plays LDs. The CDROM2 systems don't just "play CDs" they do much more.

2) I'm NOT an expert on the LA or really even Laserdisc in general, but from the brief period time I've spend with the system I'm pretty sure you are misunderstanding the way it works. The digital memory used in the LA is basically the same as many (possibly most) LD players at that time. The reason its low res is because of the way interlaced video works.

I will use the POWER POWER POWER of Triad Stone to illustrate my example. Some games may work in a completely different way, I don't know, like I said, limited knowledge.

On any LD player that I've seen with digital field memory the player can only store one field at a time. This function was mainly used so that people could get still frames from CLV discs. On any player a CAV disc (30 min per side) would give a very good still frame, but CLV discs (60 min per side) would just give you a blue screen. The reason for this is that CAV discs store one frame (two fields) per lap of the disc, so to get a still pause you just keep the laser where it is and keep reading the exact same spot over and over. On a CLV disc the frames are all stored much more efficiently, end to end, so if you leave the laser parked you might get .8 frames per lap or 3.4 frames per lap. Therefore, to get a still frame the video had to be digitized and stored in memory. This was hella tech when it came out, quite expensive. There is a downside though, and that is that LD video is interlaced. Every field is only half a frame, every other line, and the digital frame buffer only grabs one field (ie: half a frame, every other line. This is why when you pause a CLV disc on any player (certainly most) you get a low res image, an inferior pause to a CAV disc.

This "crappy low res pause" is 240 lines in 8 bit color. The first player to have digital field memory was the psychotically quixotic and totally amazing Pioneer LD-W1. I have one of these. I also have a Pioneer CLD-99, which was a $2500 player made 2 years after the LA which contained variable noise resistance, 3D comb filter, and every other bell and whistle they could throw an an LD player. It isn't the best player made, but its up there, the last of the Elite line before they were forced to add DVD functionality into their LD players and everything went to shit. The reason I bring up all these other decks is that the crappy low res pause on CLV looks identical on the LD-W1, the Laseractive, and the CLD-99. I don't know from experience, but I'm assuming it looks the same on an HLD-X0, which is the best player ever made. Now, I do know that some LD players have more memory than others, but AFAIK this is either to increase the color depth, or to allow the 3D comb filter to work (since it needs to compare frames) or more horizontal resolution, or to help with the DNR. Every paused CLV frame is still low res though. The increase in memory from one player to another was still laughably small, like 2Mb versus 4Mb or something like that. Nothing like what it takes to store video, just a field or three.

PRO TIP: if you are just playing normal movies with your LA, for God's sake remove the PAC. The PAC, for some reason, makes it so that the digital field memory is used EVEN WITH PAUSED CAV DISCS which makes for crapy CLV-quality low res still frames. It also makes its own shitty overlays.

Now, onto LA games...

When you see the live action intro and the attract reel for Triad Stone the video appears to be very high quality, but when playing the game things get much grainier. Its in 240 lines. This isn't because the LA is queuing digital video ahead, as you suggest, but because (and IMO this is brillient low tech innovation, IMO, very clever, the LA is only showing one field on purpose. Why not the other field? Because the other field is completely different video! There are basically two fields, two totally different video streams, and the LA is only showing one of them. This allows the video on LA games to be twice as dense, to take up only half as much space on the LD, and therefore to cut seek times (the bane of any FMV game) down by a considerable amount.

How do I know this? Remove any PAC from your LA and put Triad Stone in. Turn the green button off. The player now doesn't know that its a LA game because without the PAC the LA doesn't even know what an LA game even is. Its just an LD player. When you watch the Triad Stone disc you'll see things like the intro, perfect video, but when you get to the in-game footage you'll see an unfiltered version of what I just described, two video streams at once giving you basically unwatchable but recognizable garbage.

So, and again, I don't have much technical info on the LA, but I'm pretty sure there isn't anything like 15 seconds of video cache in an LA. In fact, there isn't even one second. There is 1/60 of a second, one field, the same as any decent LD player from that era, and even some VCRs. I'm not entirely sure that the video from the LA, digital or analog, is ever actually in the same piece of memory as the PCE/MD generated graphics. That is, I think they are mixed in a passive way, sort of like a 32X or the basic Play/Pause/Stop on screen display on all but the earliest LD players. There was very little, if any, new tech in a Laseractive. You could built the entire thing from whatever shit (a lot of it) they had laying around at Pioneer/Sega/NEC.

In short, while I might be missing something, I'm pretty sure that the LA doesn't do anything that any other LD player did other than have a PAC-sized hole in the front giving transport control and AV muxing capability to whatever you could put in there. It really just plays LDs, as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure the only reason why the digital field memory system is used at all is for the occasional still frame and the strategic de-interlacing, maybe for the overlays....I think that's all it CAN do.

CLARIFICATION:

Listen, the reason I typed all this isn't because I love the LA and want people to start hoarding LA junk with their stupid US collections. Its bad enough they had to pay $100 for a Darkwing Duck (aka "Cockwing Fuck" by the people that spent money on it) they don't need the LA burden. However, it seems, DragonmasterDan, that no matter what sort of Rube Goldbergian fortress of bullshit you build to define what is "standard" or "complete"...I'm just not buying it. You clearly just think the LA is...weird and stupid. And I agree, it IS weird and stupid (also, even for something weird and stupid, they could have done a better job) but that's it. There is no reason to exclude it from any complete collection of licensed US games unless you just think its not in the spirit of what you define TG-16 to be, and that's just illogical and dishonest and far too personal. It is this logical and anti-human incongruity that causes me to hammer home my point. I don't care what you advocate collecting, but here you are advocating that people basically stop thinking when they encounter something they aren't comfortable with, and that is a much bigger issue than games. The LA simply IS a TG-16, and the NEC games for the LA simply ARE TG-16 games. You can't make it not so just because you don't want it to be so.

Free yourself from the need for hard definitions and maybe you'll realize that collecting by region or going for "complete" anything is just dumb and self destructive to begin with. If people only bought the games they actually liked they'd be happier people with a much higher percentage of stuff worth owning and spending time with.

Also: I'd like to ban anyone who says "SHMUP". I'd also like to give them a hot foot and poor sugar in their gas tank, but the ethical thing would probably just ban them.

[DragonmasterDan]

How do I know this? Remove any PAC from your LA and put Triad Stone in. Turn the green button off. The player now doesn't know that its a LA game because without the PAC the LA doesn't even know what an LA game even is. Its just an LD player. When you watch the Triad Stone disc you'll see things like the intro, perfect video, but when you get to the in-game footage you'll see an unfiltered version of what I just described, two video streams at once giving you basically unwatchable but recognizable garbage.

I just did this. The LA definitely recognizes  Triad Stone as an LA game. I figured I'd record this for evidence. I don't have another LaserDisc player in my house at the moment to test the field order hypothesis, but I recall putting Triad Stone into an LD player more than ten years ago and it playing through the attract mode, then various scenes and deaths and not noticing any degradation in video quality.

Some games might be using the field order trick you mentioned. But I recall when people pulled the video for Time Gal and Triad Stone to make the Singe emulation versions, those were both higher quality video than actually playing in the LA. My understanding was that this was due to it going into digital memory.

Listen, the reason I typed all this isn't because I love the LA and want people to start hoarding LA junk with their stupid US collections. Its bad enough they had to pay $100 for a Darkwing Duck (aka "Cockwing Fuck" by the people that spent money on it) they don't need the LA burden. However, it seems, DragonmasterDan, that no matter what sort of Rube Goldbergian fortress of bullshit you build to define what is "standard" or "complete"...I'm just not buying it. You clearly just think the LA is...weird and stupid. And I agree, it IS weird and stupid (also, even for something weird and stupid, they could have done a better job) but that's it. There is no reason to exclude it from any complete collection of licensed US games unless you just think its not in the spirit of what you define TG-16 to be, and that's just illogical and dishonest and far too personal. It is this logical and anti-human incongruity that causes me to hammer home my point. I don't care what you advocate collecting, but here you are advocating that people basically stop thinking when they encounter something they aren't comfortable with, and that is a much bigger issue than games. The LA simply IS a TG-16, and the NEC games for the LA simply ARE TG-16 games. You can't make it not so just because you don't want it to be so.

Again, I think our differences here are semantic, I see them as members of the TG-16 family. But because there's no way to play them on any hardware besides the Laseractive, I see them as being Laseractive games powered by the TG-16 architecture.

Added in edit: Again, how to categorize these things are all opinion based. There's no right or wrong answer. I'm simply backing up the reasoning for my opinion.

 I shot an email to someone who might know a little more about whether or not LD games use the digital video for caching. That was my understanding of how some of them worked, but I could be mistaken.

[DragonmasterDan]

And just for some more technical background, this is with regards to Mega LDs but is important to note how the digital buffer is used. This is a link from a thread where some folks are putting together an emulator.

http://gendev.spritesmind.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=563&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=111

Here's the key part

I don't have any other LaserDisk players to test on, but I'm fairly sure the video degredation you're talking about on the LaserActive only occurs when the digital buffer is enabled, which it needs to be in order to combine the analog video signal with the Mega Drive graphics. The video signal is noticably affected when the digital buffer is enabled. I'll be ripping the video tracks with the digital buffer turned off however, so I'm hoping this is comparable to any other LaserDisk player.

As part of the mixing on at least some of the games, it appears to be going into the digital video buffer as referenced before.

Added in edit:
Some games are using the field order trick you mentioned as cited here.
http://gendev.spritesmind.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=563&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=110

Only a minority of games do that - from what I've seen so far, Blue Chicago Blues and Road Prosecutor. (Blue Chicago Blues is kind of oddball in general; it also uses its digital audio track BOTH for LA data and for standard LD digital audio. Every other game I've seen reserves the digital audio track for data and uses analogue audio exclusively for audio.)

But this isn't the norm or the rule.

[PunkCryborg]

if you dont own the girlie games or laseractive games you arent a true turbo fan.

[VestCunt]

You clearly just think the LA is...weird and stupid.

Again, how to categorize these things are all opinion based. There's no right or wrong answer. I'm simply backing up the reasoning for my opinion.

I agree with Zeta. You're not backing up your reasoning because your reasoning changes constantly. Your argument has been a nonstop hydra: cut off a head and two take its place. Licensing, logos, hardware, vendors, manufacturing, exclusivity, digital buffers, standard-issue hardware, it doesn't stop. You're clutching at straws. A few pages ago, you were comfortable with the idea of JP LD-ROMs being PCE games. You refuted your current argument! All that mattered to you was first-party hardware, now it's multiple hardware compatibility.

There is a right or wrong answer: official games + official hardware + identical architecture = HE System. This shit is all the exact same family. LOOK. There's the LD-ROM right there with its little brothers and sisters. One big happy family.

What would it take for you to stop drawing an arbitrary line in the sand after the TG's first two software formats? LD-ROMs for sale in Toys R Us? A NEC PAC for Xmas when you were twelve? An original MSR of $149.99?

[DragonmasterDan]

I agree with Zeta. You're not backing up your reasoning because your reasoning changes constantly. Your argument has been a nonstop hydra: cut off a head and two take its place. Licensing, logos, hardware, vendors, manufacturing, exclusivity, digital buffers, standard-issue hardware, it doesn't stop. You're clutching at straws. A few pages ago, you were comfortable with the idea of JP LD-ROMs being PCE games. You refuted your current argument! All that mattered to you was first-party hardware, now it's multiple hardware compatibility.

There is a right or wrong answer: official games + official hardware + identical architecture = HE System. This shit is all the exact same family. LOOK. There's the LD-ROM right there with its little brothers and sisters. One big happy family.

What would it take for you to stop drawing an arbitrary line in the sand after the TG's first two software formats? LD-ROMs for sale in Toys R Us? A NEC PAC for Xmas when you were twelve? An original MSR of $149.99?

This discussion has definitely become a muddled mess.
There's a variety of other criteria at work, and part of this argument was debunking some of what was thrown at me.

For example, the argument that the LaserActive is merely a Super CD with a different media format and that if I accept Super CDs, I must accept LD-ROM2s. Countering that argument was the reason for going into the digital buffer rant. Because the digital buffer used for caching video is hardware that clearly isn't built into the standard TurboGrafx architecture provided by Hudson/NEC, yet is needed to operate LaserActive games.

With that said. Those things aren't actually the main reason I don't categorize it that way though they help support my position.
There are some other sub reasons for this categorization as well that I've touched on over the past few pages.
Such as the US LaserActive not being first party hardware, though licensed (one of several reasons that make it non-standard).

Putting those aside, my main reason is that LD-ROM2 games only play on the LaserActive which I see as LaserActive games. It's really that simple. I do see them as being in the same family, and I think there's different ways of looking at TurboGrafx as mentioned before. TurboGrafx as far as the family that includes all variations (much like how PC Engine would include SuperGrafx and LDROM games as well). And TurboGrafx as in the short name for the original system. They're two different things, and I see them as being separate.

With regards to what it would take for me to stop drawing the line, it would be another piece of hardware that isn't branded as being the LaserActive being able to play the LDROM2 games.

Like I've said, are they TurboGrafx games? Sure they are in the sense that they're licensed and are running on a piece of TurboGrafx licensed hardware using the same architecture. Are they TurboGrafx games in the sense that they're expandable for use on the original (or anything besides the LaserActive) hardware? No

And that's where I differentiate them.

Added in edit:
I'm not saying "No one should ever categorize these as TurboGrafx games" I'm just saying by my standards they are different enough for a variety of reasons to where a legitimate argument can be made that they should/could be excluded.

[Sparky]

if you dont own the girlie games or laseractive games you arent a true turbo fan.

What?

[SignOfZeta]

Correction: I may have put Triad Stone in another LD player and that might have been where I saw the two video streams mixed. It's not a "degraded video quality" it's two videos on top of either other. Field one is one video where field two is completely different video.

EDIT: I read that link from the emulation guys. The way they talk about the frame buffer is completely in line with what I was saying. It might be able to cache a lot, but from my personal (again, limited) experience the buffer is the same as many LD players; one field.

EDIT EDIT: The Mega Drive PAC would have digital video cache functions, of course, because the Mega Drive PAC has everything that the Mega CD setup has.

However, certainly remove the PAC when watching movies.

And LDROM2s are totally TG-16 games.

And "SHMUP" is offensively stupid unless you are talking from the perspective of a 1980s UK C64 fan.