[Shifty Geezer]

What about AA, and have you any iPad3 experience to relate Vita to?

[gongo]

Originally Posted by reptile

Ive just finished porting our shmup to the vita (from x360), and while i think it's a great kit, it was definitely NOT easy to hit 60fps at native resolution. We ended up dropping transparency resolution a bit, and removing some extra graphical effects, even using the cpu to assist the gpu (kind of ps3 style..). There were also some other interesting compromises to be made, and although i cant talk about it without violating some NDA, there ARE other options than dropping rendering resolution. I'm personally a bit disappointed with the lack of native resolution rendering in current vita titles, fixed res portable displays should not be underused like that. (altho as i said, my transparency buffers are quite small so im not innocent in this either...)

sounds like fillrate limit or ...something?
the thing about mobile parts i noticed is...all that upgrades in shaders..but also comes with poor ROPs and dem gigapixels...and slow vram too.....

we need to know moar about psvita clocks....strangely...no other docs leaks with vital vita specs yet?

[Arwin]

Thanks for sharing, guessing that title starts with an S and ends with an A? It makes sense though that a game for 360 would take some effort to get running on Vita? And yeah, from what I've seen so far framebuffer and shaders in particular have to be pared down. Textures too, probably?

And yes, non-native res and low framerates are a bit of a shame. Particularly on a portable I think I prefer smooth framerates and crisp graphics over insane amounts of geometry.

[minimoke]

Are there any Vita games that render at full native resolution that run at 60fps? LBP beta looks amazing but I'm not sure what resolution it's rendered at, seems to run at 30fps.

[Arwin]

I think all fighters are 60fps native, and all 2D games obviously. Not sure about the rest though. Of the 3D games I own I think Super Stardust and Virtua Tennis are native and 60fps.

[BoardBonobo]

Originally Posted by minimoke

Playing Resistance online MP definitely drains the battery, apart from that the Vita is pretty good on battery use and I can usually get a good couple of days of average use before a charge.

Regarding the H/W specs, all I can say is that I haven't seen anything on ipad 3 to match LBP beta on the Vita

It is rather good, they don't seem to have cut back on any tools or effects and, IMO, it actually runs better on the Vita than it did on the PS3.

[reptile]

Shifty: AA is pretty cheap, altho we ended up not using it, due to conflicts with the slow-down posteffect, and to be honest, i needed every little performance i could get for the more demanding levels. The ipad performance is very close, but its native res is much higher, so i definitely wouldnt expect anything cutting-edge at that res. Not that people care - most of them seem to be happy thinking IB2 is "retina"

gongo: yes, and geometry, and everything else mobile gpus are much more... fragile, you really really have to consider all hardware peculiarities when writing your shaders.

Arwin: yeah, that game it's not really a secret since its already been announced, i just didnt want people think im only here to advertise it Textures were downscaled and some of them omitted, and yes, shaders had to be pared down quite a bit. In the end, seeing the end results, i think it was a good compromise - the small(er) screen kind of hides these cutbacks, and i totally agree with you that crispness and framerate are much more important for a handhend action game.

[Fafalada]

Originally Posted by reptile

I'm personally a bit disappointed with the lack of native resolution rendering in current vita title

People keep saying this on forums, but in the-launch window overwhelming majority of titles were native (as were titles with AA), which is more then I can say for most other consoles in the past.

Originally Posted by Arwin

Of the 3D games I own I think Super Stardust and Virtua Tennis are native and 60fps.

Fifa is 60fps in practice mode if that counts
Frankly given the way last generation went I was surprised there was any 60fps title in launch window at all, in any resolution.

[Arwin]

I just finished Uncharted tonight and man, not native, shaky framerate, but it gets more stable and impressive towards the end and left me very satisfied.

[Gitaroo]

Originally Posted by reptile

Shifty: AA is pretty cheap, altho we ended up not using it, due to conflicts with the slow-down posteffect, and to be honest, i needed every little performance i could get for the more demanding levels. The ipad performance is very close, but its native res is much higher, so i definitely wouldnt expect anything cutting-edge at that res. Not that people care - most of them seem to be happy thinking IB2 is "retina"

gongo: yes, and geometry, and everything else mobile gpus are much more... fragile, you really really have to consider all hardware peculiarities when writing your shaders.

Arwin: yeah, that game it's not really a secret since its already been announced, i just didnt want people think im only here to advertise it Textures were downscaled and some of them omitted, and yes, shaders had to be pared down quite a bit. In the end, seeing the end results, i think it was a good compromise - the small(er) screen kind of hides these cutbacks, and i totally agree with you that crispness and framerate are much more important for a handhend action game.

So does it runs at vita native res? I really hope you can tweak the tunnel part a bit, me and my friends got really frustrated in that part.

[Karamazov]

so is it a weak system ?
I bought it because i thought it was powerful and that future games would look way better than launch games

[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by Karamazov

so is it a weak system ?
I bought it because i thought it was powerful and that future games would look way better than launch games

There was nothing more powerful at launch, certainly not in the price range, and nothing that'll use the hardware as well as PSV, and nothing that has the game control systems of Vita. If the only reason for buying it was to have the most powerful hardware for years to come, buy yourself the most powerful handset money can buy and keep upgrading every year, playing touch-screen games without proper sticks or buttons.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by Gitaroo

So does it runs at vita native res? I really hope you can tweak the tunnel part a bit, me and my friends got really frustrated in that part.

I think he already answered that question? (yes native res, but framebuffer effects had to be scaled down - much like with many PS3 games incidentally)

[SedentaryJourney]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

If the only reason for buying it was to have the most powerful hardware for years to come, buy yourself the most powerful handset money can buy and keep upgrading every year, playing touch-screen games without proper sticks or buttons.

And even then iOS and Android games will still target a wide range of hardware, some of it pretty old like the iPhone 3GS.

[gongo]

This topic...made me curious to try out a real PS Vita...what i did not expect to see is..how much the geometry is like sub-Xbox1 levels..Ninja Gaiden Vita ain't no Xbox1 NG Black....even the DOF effects look bad....so what about all the hype on mobile gpu catching up to PS3 levels by 2013...?

I noticed the sub-native resolution in W..i..p....e...o....u...t..whats with the LOAD TIMES btw? The sub-native resolution blown up made the game looks just slightly more eye pleasing than Wipeout on PSP..(due to the higher environment geometry)...I found VT4 the best eye pleasing of PS Vita titles....very clean and sharp..but again the player models look sub Xbox1 levels..Fifa was alright...and Gravity Daze was full of jaggies.. dat is about.PS2 levels with better filtering..

The other PS Vita titles look closer to PSP with ...better textures and filtering...and some lighting effects...not impressed about what Vita is doing atm...not too interested in what it could be doing in the next year...Sony is serious need to re-do the Vita...give it 1GB of main ram..upgrade the web browser...get more apps...slim it down....let in use standard msd cards...i may jump in...but the games performance left me disappointed...imho

[Arwin]

What did you try with Wipeout? It's native, though can drop dynamically when needed. This happens in the original Wipeout too, but more often here and with half the framerate it stands out more. And it has MSAA

Sub 360 levels of geometry sure, but sub Xbox1?

A few launch games are definitely rough though for sure. But closer to this gen launch titles than last gen, yes?

Final release patched wipeout loadtimes are pretty good.

[theLonely1]

Originally Posted by Arwin

Final release patched wipeout loadtimes are pretty good.

Better, yes, but far from "pretty good" imo.

[antwan]

Originally Posted by gongo

...

Quoted for truth.
Not the xbox part, but the loading times.
I hated that the most about the PSVita.
The problem is probably the developers, and the development kits.
My guess is the devkit has a 30-40 megabyte per second load time.

Final hardware? 5-6 MB/second loading? Somebody should be fired for that (or even shot).
So what happens after the developers find out that loading a level not takes 7-8 seconds, but 50-60 seconds?
They ship the game... They did shave it down to 30-40 seconds eventually. But boy did I feel like a fool playing a game which was loading more than 30% of time

So why would you need 100's of MBs of textures on a 5 inch screen if you are going to drop the framerate to 30, and the resolution to (what feels like) 320*240 most of the time?
Imagine the game, but with razor sharp graphics.. 60 frames per second.. Loading within 10 seconds.
PSVitas would be flying off the shelves.

Sony should have put limits on loading times from the start.

[Arwin]

I'm playing the HD and Fury DLC now. First race with oppenents after fresh start of game takes 24,6 seconds. Back to main menu 1 sec. Second race, time trial on different track: 15 secs. This holds up pretty well against PS3 games. I have a 16GB memcard (bigger means faster as was tested by Digital Foundry). Yes, I do agree the speed of the memory cards could and probably should have been faster (and cheaper), but these are not bad load times.

And resolution is native with AA most of the time. Worst case horizontal is halved as far as I know. The game still looks pretty fantastic, great lighting effects, bump mapping, shader effects etc. I also love that I got the DLC for free because I owned it on PS3, and that all my PS3 personal bests and friend laptimes for the DLC show up here too.

[antwan]

Originally Posted by Arwin

I'm playing the HD and Fury DLC now. First race with oppenents after fresh start of game takes 24,6 seconds. Back to main menu 1 sec. Second race, time trial on different track: 15 secs. This holds up pretty well against PS3 games. I have a 16GB memcard (bigger means faster as was tested by Digital Foundry). Yes, I do agree the speed of the memory cards could and probably should have been faster (and cheaper), but these are not bad load times.

And resolution is native with AA most of the time. Worst case horizontal is halved as far as I know. The game still looks pretty fantastic, great lighting effects, bump mapping, shader effects etc. I also love that I got the DLC for free because I owned it on PS3, and that all my PS3 personal bests and friend laptimes for the DLC show up here too.

I guess they were more careful with the texture budget in the HD and Fury DLC?
As I said, the developers as well as the devkits are to blame imo.
When they design another PSV Wipeout game, I am positive they will make sure that it has fast load times
I agree that the game looks amazing (even better than the PS3 version, the 2048 tracks; they are more dense and packed), but I rather sacrifice that for the framerate of the PS3 version.
I also remember the 1.03 path (maybe 1.02) improving the framerate and probably also lowering the need to halve screen resolution.

the devs said they ported the PS3 engine to the vita, maybe that is where the problem lies?
another possibility could be that the final vita system is lower specced (clocked) than the dev kits

[ERP]

Load times are often addressed very late in development.
Generally you don't develop with the same packed assets as the game ships with, usually you don't use the same media (i.e. it's streamed over the debug interface rather than being on the device).
Launch games had very compressed schedules.
I personally find the loading in Wipeout horrid, but I understand how it happened.
Most of the other titles did not have this issue, I don't remember loading being an issue in Uncharted or Gravity Daze.

[Arwin]

No, I think Uncharted can be played through much like the PS3 versions. I think I've played through the last few hours without pause maybe seeing a load screen once for 2 seconds in total.

[(((interference)))]

The load times are bad because Sony's proprietary memory cards used for the games and storage are pretty slow (not to mention, expensive):
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df...a-memory-cards

[ERP]

That test if flawed for a number of reasons, but they aren't particularly fast.

[gongo]

Originally Posted by Arwin

What did you try with Wipeout? It's native, though can drop dynamically when needed. This happens in the original Wipeout too, but more often here and with half the framerate it stands out more. And it has MSAA

Sub 360 levels of geometry sure, but sub Xbox1?

A few launch games are definitely rough though for sure. But closer to this gen launch titles than last gen, yes?

Final release patched wipeout loadtimes are pretty good.

It is the wipeout demo from PSN..i guess....it looked pretty 'blown up'..
Ryu and enemy ninja models are dreamcast levels imho....looked sharp and paper thin like the old days!