New Playstation Plus Subscription Tiers [2022-03-29]

[Shifty Geezer]

The chalk probably was 2d texture that got billinar scaled?

One possibly is texture upscaling methods are being applied to HD-ify the very low res textures. These would use the sorts of 2D techniques we see elsewhere and potentially could run in realtime on the emulator on texture operations.

 

[orangpelupa]

One possibly is texture upscaling methods are being applied to HD-ify the very low res textures. These would use the sorts of 2D techniques we see elsewhere and potentially could run in realtime on the emulator on texture operations.

Yeah. Texture/2d scaling always disabled for my taste mas I prefer them to be sharp (albeit blocky) rather than smoothly blurry

 

[Deleted member 11852]

You're basing your whole counterpoint on a single outlier?? You're arguing that whatever it is that causes those lines to be blurry (likely texture upscaling instead of rendering res), that upscaling algorithm is also managing to reconstruct the high-def geometry of the pixel from the source pixels??

No, not at all. But it feels like you did. Increasing the baseline rendering resolution internally should not introduce a bunch of graphical artefacts that need a bunch a bespoke graphical techniques to correct.

Various disparate emulation techniques and emulators, cores, settings and filters have become as complicated as they are because it's pretty easy to have an emulator 'enhance' the graphics in ways that create issues that didn't exist on the original system.

I use RetroArch, and other emulators, a lot. It doesn't need feel like you do, it feels like you're googling images output from emulators. So to be clear, what is it - exactly - that you are referring too?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I use RetroArch, and other emulators, a lot. It doesn't need feel like you do, it feels like you're googling images output from emulators. So to be clear, what is it - exactly - that you are referring too?

The clear evidence that internal rendering resolution, the rasterisation of the triangle data, is higher in emulators than PS1's native baseline as evidenced by detail in the polygon rendering not obtainable via interpolation using whatever algorithm from a 240p reference image, coupled with settings in DuckStation literally stating you can select the internal render resolution,disproving your theory that games are rendered at, and need to be rendered at, native resolution and then upscaled, from this post:

Support of changing the internal resolution of rendering for PS1 games seems very limited in most emulators...

I don't know what layers of abstraction exist in which to increase the literal mathematic resolution/precision to make graphics scale better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

...and...

Internally? Why do all PS1 emulators output look like crap and the polygons do not approach the resolution of the target window's resolution?

Not all PS1 emulators look like crap and the polygons do very clearly approach the resolution of the target window.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

The clear evidence that internal rendering resolution, the rasterisation of the triangle data, is higher in emulators than PS1's native baseline as evidenced by detail in the polygon rendering not obtainable via interpolation using whatever algorithm from a 240p reference image, coupled with settings in DuckStation literally stating you can select the internal render resolution,disproving your theory that games are rendered at, and need to be rendered at, native resolution and then upscaled, from this post:
...and...

What I said was "limited". As in, it doesn't seem possible to have the emulator adopt the native resolution of the screen.

Support of changing the internal resolution of rendering for PS1 games seems very limited in most emulators. As I said above, I don't know what how the early/crude 3D rendering worked on first generation of 3D consoles but I imagine it's fairly limited. There was likely a lot of addressing specific hardware functions directly and not much in the way of traditional APIs because the overhead would have been crippling to performance. I don't know what layers of abstraction exist in which to increase the literal mathematic resolution/precision to make graphics scale better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Shifty Geezer]

"Very limited" - as in, not really an option, and needing to upscale from pixel data. Hence numerous replies to people reiterating your view that it can't be/isn't being done:

orangpelupa, you keep saying that Sony's implementation should use a higher internal resolution. What emulators can do this? How would you approach doing this technically? Is it even possible?

I would really be interested if there are any emulators on Windows, macOS or linux that can emulate PS1 and run game code at even 1080p internal resolution, let alone 4K.

I've yet to find any emulator that was able to fake the internal resolution higher than 2X. For whatever reason, anything more seems impossible.

You've subsequently repeated the same perspective despite numerous screenshots and videos showing triangle rendering fidelity greater than 2x game res without once providing any images or videos or evidence supporting your view that PS rendering is capped at 2x internal resolution or in any way extending your argument beyond, "my experiences with emulators is this (no evidence of what you are seeing) which I interpret as upscaling (no material we can analyse and talk about)."

While now moving the discussion away from a technical analysis of the emulators output and into a discussion about the discussion and what people have and haven't said...

To move the discussion forward constructively, you need to present a screenshot or two of 4K showing the upscaling artefacts on geometry that the rest of us are not seeing.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

"Very limited" - as in, not really an option, and needing to upscale from pixel data. Hence numerous replies to people reiterating your view that it can't be/isn't being done:

Yeah, no. "very limited" as in there are limits of what you can you do in terms of improving the internal resolution and it is limited. Many emulators, I would even go as far as say most that I have used (which is most) which included the cores included in RetroArch on many platforms balk at any suggestion of doing this beyond 2X.

And to be really clear, I have only referred to the internal resolution, not the resolution games get output at. Just like I said waaaaay back at the beginning of this thread diversion.

"You've subsequently repeated the same perspective despite numerous screenshots and videos showing triangle rendering fidelity greater than 2x game res without once providing any images or videos or evidence supporting your view that PS rendering is capped at 2x internal resolution or in any way extending your argument beyond, "my experiences with emulators is this (no evidence of what you are seeing) which I interpret as upscaling (no material we can analyse and talk about)."

Let's fact-check some your projected narrative here, I've never said its not possible to boost the resolution beyond 2X but I have said that it's kind of weird that many PS1 emulators draw that line where as N64 and Saturn emulators do not. I have disclosed that I have no idea about how games calculated and used 3D on this ancient hardware. Don't claim to tell me what me view is, my view is what my posts include, nothing more and certainly not the narrative you're peddling here.

As for screen shots and videos,I have sought clarification on which emulation cores, settings, plug-ins and filters were used to capture them because they often make a much bigger difference to the final output than the emulated internal resolution. There are ton of game-specific plug-in that fix/improve old games. Many filters correct artefacts introduced by boosting the graphics in the emulator. Unless an imagine or video discloses this, you have no idea what you're looking at.

To move the discussion forward constructively, you need to present a screenshot or two of 4K showing the upscaling artefacts on geometry that the rest of us are not seeing.

How about a video? This is an example of rendering artefacts that get introduced when boosting the resolution. Gran Turismo 2 is also one of the least problematic games but the side mirrors rendering issue is well known. It's also one of those things than you can never un-see so apologies to anybody still playing GT2 via emulation.

 

[orangpelupa]

I would even go as far as say most that I have used (which is most) which included the cores included in RetroArch on many platforms balk at any suggestion of doing this beyond 2X.

I'm curious, what emulators (or retroarch cores) did you use that struggles to go beyond 2x? Even bleem! from eons ago can go beyond 2x IIRC

Any plan to report it as bugs?

This is an example of rendering artefacts that get introduced when boosting the resolution. Gran Turismo 2 is also one of the least problematic games but the side mirrors rendering issue is well known. It's also one of those things than you can never un-see so apologies to anybody still playing GT2 via emulation.

do you mean that the rear view mirror didn't move together with the car?
i wonder why the emulator didn't include a fix. Usually hidden in the settings, there will be game specific fixes, IIRC Inuyasha got one.

EDIT:
duckstation didn't have that rear view mirror position issue

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'm curious, what emulators (or retroarch cores) did you use that struggles to go beyond 2x? Even bleem! from eons ago can go beyond 2x IIRC

I've yet to find a core that doesn't introduce artefacts at higher-than 2X resolution. PCSX ReARMed and Beetle do on the games I'd like to play.

do you mean that the rear view mirror didn't move together with the car?

This is kind of my point. A whole bunch of PS1 games are playable with game-specific fixes. This is, I assume, a side effect / consequence from trying to run the games in a way they were not designed for. And again, and I can't emphasise this enough, this feels like an issue that is very specific to the original PlayStation issue. The same issues do not occur emulating N64 and Saturn games. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Why is that?

 

[orangpelupa]

I've yet to find a core that doesn't introduce artefacts at higher-than 2X resolution. PCSX ReARMed and Beetle do on the games I'd like to play.

have you reported them as bugs? as they should not introduce artifacts. Make sure to include a screenshot (or even better, a video), complete with your system hardware spec and software version to them

BEETLEPSX https://github.com/libretro/beetle-psx-libretro/issues
PCSXREARMED https://github.com/notaz/pcsx_rearmed/issues

This is kind of my point. A whole bunch of PS1 games are playable with game-specific fixes.

see my previous post. I've edited it with a video of duckstation playing GT2. it didn't have that rear view mirror issue.

This is, I assume, a side effect / consequence from trying to run the games in a way they were not designed for. And again, and I can't emphasise this enough, this feels like an issue that is very specific to the original PlayStation issue. The same issues do not occur emulating N64 and Saturn games. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Why is that?

how do you manage to assume that? what was the thinking and investigation/testing process? Please include this in the bug report.

your information would be beneficial for the further development of the emulator. As it seems very few people encountered your issues.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

have you reported them as bugs? as they should not introduce artifacts.

No, my MO for effort when bug reporting is to look at the open issues and if there is anything more than 12-18 months old, for a piece of software much older, it's unlikely going to get fixed. Open issues for Beetle go back to 2015 and PCSX Rearmed to 2012. And some of those of fundamental issues impacting all games.

see my previous post. I've edited it with a video of duckstation playing GT2. it didn't have that rear view mirror issue.

Can you link to it?

how do you manage to assume that? what was the thinking and investigation/testing process?

Because many of the artefacts only occur when trying to improve the graphics and when you disable those options the issues go away.

 

[orangpelupa]

No, my MO for effort when bug reporting is to look at the open issues and if there is anything more than 12-18 months old, for a piece of software much older, it's unlikely going to get fixed. Open issues for Beetle go back to 2015 and PCSX Rearmed to 2012. And some of those of fundamental issues impacting all games.


Can you link to it?


Because many of the artefacts only occur when trying to improve the graphics and when you disable those options the issues go away.

https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...n-tiers-2022-03-29.62801/page-11#post-2254108

old open issues doesn't automatically means no one is bothered to fix it. It could means the issue is so rare, like your issues, no one managed to understand/reproduce it yet.

your conclusion was

a side effect / consequence from trying to run the games in a way they were not designed for

so, with your latest reply

Because many of the artefacts only occur when trying to improve the graphics and when you disable those options the issues go away.

i got confused.

so by "trying to run the games in a way they were not designed for", you meant specifically was for things related to graphics (filtering, scaling, resolution, and so on)?
and not also faster load time, etc?

or the discussion was specifically just about resolution?

this makes me wonder, is sony's engineering teams are so understaffed, they cant even beat duckstation?
What preventing them from simply using open source emulators and do their own improvements? Like what they did with PS Classic that used PCSX REARMED?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

old open issues doesn't automatically means no one is bothered to fix it. It could means the issue is so rare, like your issues, no one managed to understand/reproduce it yet.

That is not such a rare issue, that was literally the first video YouTube serves when I searched for "Gran Turismo 2 emulator 1080p".

i got confused.

so by "trying to run the games in a way they were not designed for", you meant specifically was for things related to graphics (filtering, scaling, resolution, and so on)?[/QUPTE]
Yes. Emulating the original PlayStation accurately has been a solved problem for nigh on twenty years, enhancing that experience - particularly graphically - is seemingly more complex hence the array of settings, options, shaders, plugins and filters. If you could just turn the graphics to 11, I think that would be a common emulator setting ;-). So many games exhibit different weird artefacts is probably why those array of settings exist.

this makes me wonder, is sony's engineering teams are so understaffed, they cant even beat duckstation? What preventing them from simply using open source emulators and do their own improvements? Like what they did with PS Classic that used PCSX REARMED?

[/QUOTE]
I think the answer to your first question is that I don't think Sony care that much. As for why Sony didn't use existing open source software, I thought that PCSX ReArmed was used in the PlayStation classic but perhaps having to rebuilt it for the PlayStation 4/5 environment was too much work?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How about a video? This is an example of rendering artefacts that get introduced when boosting the resolution. Gran Turismo 2 is also one of the least problematic games but the side mirrors rendering issue is well known. It's also one of those things than you can never un-see so apologies to anybody still playing GT2 via emulation.

Rather than post evidence, can you please include the argument. You wouldn't at a trial just drop Exhibit A on the desk and expect everyone to infer the meaningfulness of it.

Watching that video, I see a number of points that confirm to me higher internal rendering:

1) The boot scene, the Sony and PS logos are very clean where the text is pixelated. If de-pixelising of the output buffer is in effect, that should affect the text as well as the logo.
2) There are clear differences between clean geometry and pixelated textures. Here we see clean lines around the model silhouette, and chunky pixels from the texture.



I'm not seeing anything around the geometry that's an artefact or fault or not what you'd expect from rendering natively at that resolution. This extends to all signs, fences, and buildings. Evidence is the emulator is rendering to a 1080p framebuffer, drawing the geometry at that resolution.

Edit: Same sampling Duckstation for Wipeout. In this vid, 2D upscaling is being applied to the interface while 3D rendering is native, no obvious artefacts that I can see.

And this one of another example you cited, Tomb Raider. We see the pixelated rendering of the low video, the pixelated loading screen, and then clean, crisp geometry the moment we start rendering the game properly:

What's more interesting is we can see the 2D upscaling in effect on the textures, producing the classic 'blobbiness' of 2D upscaling that is completely absent from the geometry.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Rather than post evidence, can you please include the argument. You wouldn't at a trial just drop Exhibit A on the desk and expect everyone to infer the meaningfulness of it. Watching that video, I see a number of points that confirm to me higher internal rendering

Yeah, me too. I do not understand why you are arguing this point because I've never claimed there wasn't a higher internal resolution.

As for the artefacts in the video, it's the wing mirrors. In higher-resolutions they detach from the vehicle completely and often clip through the car. As I said before, posting posting videos of games looking without knowing what the settings are and - more importantly - if there are any of game patches - isn't helpful. There are all sorts of patches for PlayStation games from simple ones that remove copy protection to ones that improve the graphics.

Of course, if by emulate we do mean emulate, enhance, patch, filter etc. I don't have a problem if that's what people mean but that wasn't what I understood was being talked about.

 

[orangpelupa]

but that wasn't what I understood was being talked about.

May I ask to Remind me What was being talked about?

I'm very confused right now.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yeah, me too. I do not understand why you are arguing this point because I've never claimed there wasn't a higher internal resolution.

Everyone responding to you thinks you were. Thems the words we've been reading! The more you say, the more I think your argument is about not so much rendering artefacts but rather game glitches, like said wing-mirrors moving. That's not what you started this conversation with and not what you've tried to correct people on when they've been posting repeatedly about resolution and rendering artefacts and evidence of higher internal resolutions. If the idea is that rendering at higher resolutions causes other issues not related to the geometry drawing, that point wasn't clear to any of us.

 

[tuna]

I am pretty disappointed in Sony for making such a crap emulation implementation. I would be interested in some of these games, but this is just crap. I guess I will go pirate instead.

 

[see colon]

I am pretty disappointed in Sony for making such a crap emulation implementation. I would be interested in some of these games, but this is just crap. I guess I will go pirate instead.

Sony is much like Sega in this regard. They know their back catalog is worth something, they just don't know if it's worth their own respect.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Sony is much like Sega in this regard. They know their back catalog is worth something, they just don't know if it's worth their own respect.

I'm sure I recall reading something along the lines of Sony not bothering with back catalogs much on PS3 was due to lack of commercial interest. It's all about the money with these greedy bastards.