I can't imagine why/how anyone would complain about fake parallax (how can you even tell?)
If the fake parallax isn't done well, parts of it will flicker away when there is too much action on certain parts of the screen.
Black Tiger was saying something kind of similar I think, but I'd like to drive the point home: I am more impressed when a TurboGrafx game does parallax scrolling than I am when a Genesis game does it. Why? Because I know the Turbo only has one background to mess with since it is super crippled/weak/handicapped/mentally incompetent/mentally disturbed/etc. When the Genesis does this effect, I think "OK whatevs" since it does it all the time. But on the Turbo the developer needs to put more effort into it which usually makes the game a bit more special to me. I am impressed by the evil programming trickery done to fool me.
The flicker break in a back ground for 'fake' scrolls isn't a deal breaker for me. If anything I rather them try to make the effort than not. I bet even if you didn't know the exact technical reason as to why more complex/parallax scrolling was absent for the majority, it wouldn't change anything. You'd still assume something was more difficult to over come to get to that level of scrolling complexity. And in fact most people don't really understand why or how, but they can still tell you that it's more of an exciting visual accomplishment on the system than it would be on the Genesis or SNES.
I'm both a Genesis fan and a PCE fan. While I don't have a need for an over abundance of complex scrolls to reach some visual gamer climax/orgasm, I do like something other than a flat BG all the time. Complex layering doesn't have to be all the time or everywhere. Use it to transition starting areas into a level, or such. Or just part(s)
in a level, etc. That can go a long way in the over feel of a game. A handful of PCE games do this, but not enough through out the game and/or not games even attempt it. That's rather sad IMO. But I think that reflects back on the systems library as whole, or rather how developers treated it. It's the accumulation of small touches like that, that go a long, long way. And vice versa (stand out when missing). I probably couldn't give a more perfect example than Rondo of Blood. Disregarding all the high level of production values that went into this game, just specifically look at how they sprinkled the game with more complex layered scrolling. They didn't try to add complex layered scrolling in every single part of the game. But they added it in transitional areas and other small areas. If many of the 'flat' PCE games replicated that approach to even just a third of what Rondo does, it wouldn't have this stigmata that it has now IMO. Fun factor is important, but it's not the only important factor in a game. Impressive/great visual and auditory parts of a game, can make a good
fun game into fantastic game. No matter how fun a game is, if those other parts of a game don't meet the bar per se - it just leaves you with an unsatisfying feeling overall. I feel cheated when I play Super Air Zonk. Especially when I clearly see areas that even look like they have been setup for linescroll or dynamic tiles.
Soldier Blade music NES -
That's not a stock NES. That also uses the N106 which is a lot like the PCE's audio chip.
