I don't get the review. A review of the product should be judge by how well it achieves the purpose of the product. So, if you were reviewing a new console now that has the power/speed, pixilation and other issues of a os1/n64 era console then yes it is appropriate to give it negative scores when compared to other modern console. But this product is an alternative to emulation..as it is not actually emulating a console. It is using an fpga to achieve essentially perfect hardware functionality if the original console. Essentially preservation of the console for modern era do that you can even use you old cartridges (as opposed to ROMS) to play. For the goal that it set out for it did a fantastic job.
It's job was not to fix, upscale, add triple buffering or other software hacks to make the n64 to look more up-to-date. So again. Why an 80 score. It seems the negative points really is an indictment of ps1/n64 era graphics. Which we all agree and already know was not good and it was a transitionary console going from the beautiful pixels to very pixilated first generation 3D. But all this we knew already since 1996. There is a reason why you can remaster a PS2 era game such as FFXII to make it look good on modern hardware, while there is limited attempts to do this with ps1 era titles.
www.engadget.com
www.analogue.co
