Provocative comment by Id member about PS2 (and Gamecube)!

[DeathKnight]

Going by your way of thinking randycat then why don't developers lock games at odd rates between 30 and 60?

It's better to have a signal sync'd with a TV's refresh rate, just like a monitor. Anything over causes tearing and/or anomalies. Analog televisions with an interlaced signal refresh at 30Hz. Progressive scan televisions can refresh at 60Hz. Developers tend to stick to one or the other for obvious reasons.

 

[randycat99]

Going by your way of thinking randycat then why don't developers lock games at odd rates between 30 and 60?

They don't need to. Pick the obvious rates. That hardly serves as proof of anything.

Anything over causes tearing and/or anomalies.

That's arguable. Stuff like that has more to do with how the frame buffers are implemented.

Analog televisions with an interlaced signal refresh at 30Hz.

Actually they "refresh" at 60. If you are concerned with how often an entire frame is refreshed, then that would be zero, because they simply don't work that way.

Progressive scan televisions can refresh at 60Hz. Developers tend to stick to one or the other for obvious reasons.

P-scan televisions show an entire frame at 60 Hz. So we have 60 Hz refresh in either scenario.

...but all this is an unnecessary departure from the topic. Just concede that it isn't as simple as you had originally asserted.

 

[DeathKnight]

They don't need to. Pick the obvious rates. That hardly serves as proof of anything.

Simply a question posed to your awkward way of thinking. You implied that fluctuations between 30 and 60 aren't a problem. Therefore I responded with the question of why don't developers lock refreshrates in between 30 and 60 (barring it's feasible) if it's not a problem?

That's arguable. Stuff like that has more to do with how the frame buffers are implemented.

It's not arguable. It'll behave just like the monitor you're looking at. Try running games at an fps that exceeds your refresh rate. You'll get tearing. Why do you think there's a little thing called v-sync?

Actually they "refresh" at 60. If you are concerned with how often an entire frame is refreshed, then that would be zero, because they simply don't work that way.

No, analog televisions refresh at 30Hz. They follow the NTSC standard of a 30Hz refresh rate (it's actually 29.97Hz from the source, but the TV refreshes at 30Hz).

P-scan televisions show an entire frame at 60 Hz. So we have 60 Hz refresh in either scenario.

Not either scenario. Only with progressive scan. A 60Hz progressive signal will be sampled down into a 30Hz interlaced signal for analog televisions (in the case of the consoles this is in the video encoding chip).

...but all this is an unnecessary departure from the topic. Just concede that it isn't as simple as you had originally asserted.

The only thing to concede here is that you're spewing a bunch of bullcrap.

 

[randycat99]

It's not arguable. It'll behave just like the monitor you're looking at. Try running games at an fps that exceeds your refresh rate. You'll get tearing.

This will be contingent on the findings below.

No, analog televisions refresh at 30Hz. They follow the NTSC standard of a 30Hz refresh rate (it's actually 29.97Hz from the source, but the TV refreshes at 30Hz).

A full frame occurs effectively at 30 Hz (but that is a pretty abstract association given the nature of interlaced operation). Each field comes in at 60, however. A field on an interlaced display would constitute a "refresh".

So that leaves both types of TV's with an effective 60 Hz refresh in their own way. So your above comment doesn't really apply since the console isn't outputing a rate that exceeds either setup.

In fact, tearing can occur when the console is rendering reduced framerates due to load, if the frame buffers are setup in such a manner. I've seen it happen on A early PS2 game (it wasn't even hitting 30 fps, I'd estimate). I haven't seen tearing in any game since.

 

[DeathKnight]

Bah. You're right. Sorry for being so harsh to begin with. It's a bit late (almost 2 in the morning here) and I'm getting edgy Would appear I can't think straight either. No hard feelings eh?

 

[randycat99]

I appreciate your owning up.

 

[chaphack]

Oh btw, to give you more food to troll, the screens of the game you posted don't even selfshadow

hehe. you meant those Hardware screens? I did notice that part on self shadowing. Just didnt want to point that out. No ruckus needed to be created.

 

[randycat99]

...and the blurry ground textures, no bumpmapping in the street, lack of AA, bland/grainy colors, and no shiney-shine...

 

[chaphack]

I'm talking about that many high end Xbox games run at 30fps.

In most cases the developer chooses to push the graphics to the point where a locked 30fps is the only feasible choice (fluctuating framerates between 30 and 60 are not good). This can happen on any of the systems. Obviously the Xbox has a higher threshold overall than the other systems (the height depending largely on the developer as well). Ninja Gaiden is absolutely beautiful and that runs at a rock-solid 60fps. RSC2 is arguably one of the best looking racers ever and that runs at a rock-solid 60fps.

The other two systems are no less bandwidth limited than the Xbox. They're just bandwidth limited in different ways. All three systems also function differently in their way of handling the graphics pipeline. Both the PS2 and Cube use huge caches to offset smaller system memory size and smaller bandwidth to that memory. The Xbox doesn't rely on a huge cache because it doesn't have the smaller system memoy size and smaller bandwidth to that memory. It still has an insanely fast cache array (either quad or triple of vertex and pixel) with roughly 32GB/sec of bandwidth (that's enough to feed the entire pipeline full speed ahead).

I really don't think it's a problem (developers don't seem to think it's really a problem either). You're trying to make it a problem as a last defense sort of thing. That don't float.... Sure, the Xbox isn't without limitations just like the other systems, but it's surely a lot less limited than them.

Knighty, why bother with an obvious joke character?

He probably didnt know that most, and i do mean moooost, Ps2 -> Xbox ports run better AND look cooler than whats originally on Ps2. There are also many 60fps Xbox games that easily pushed the technical bar farther than what Ps2 is capable of.

Leave that confused soul alone.

 

[chaphack]

...and the blurry ground textures, no bumpmapping in the street, lack of AA, bland/grainy colors, and no shiney-shine...

KORrect. But beware of pointing out the flaws of a Ps2 game. The horde might come for you at night...:shudders:

 

[randycat99]

...and the blurry ground textures, no bumpmapping in the street, lack of AA, bland/grainy colors, and no shiney-shine...

KORrect. But beware of pointing out the flaws of a Ps2 game. The horde might come for you at night...:shudders:

No doubt you equate those shots as the best technical graphics available of the console? Your penchant for misrepresentation is unrivaled.

 

[randycat99]

He probably didnt know that most, and i do mean moooost, Ps2 -> Xbox ports run better AND look cooler than whats originally on Ps2. There are also many 60fps Xbox games that easily pushed the technical bar farther than what Ps2 is capable of.

...and the reverse has happened, as well. You seem to only be interested in collecting evidence that falls in line with your existing beliefs. That's a pretty perilous approach.

 

[chaphack]

...and the blurry ground textures, no bumpmapping in the street, lack of AA, bland/grainy colors, and no shiney-shine...

KORrect. But beware of pointing out the flaws of a Ps2 game. The horde might come for you at night...:shudders:

No doubt you equate those shots as the best technical graphics available of the console? Your penchant for misrepresentation is unrivaled.

What now?
The only reason i posted those screens was because MrWibbles brought up stencil shadows in anoteher Ps2 game. No need be getting so tensed up. All getting geared up for defense mode mock-II?

 

[chaphack]

He probably didnt know that most, and i do mean moooost, Ps2 -> Xbox ports run better AND look cooler than whats originally on Ps2. There are also many 60fps Xbox games that easily pushed the technical bar farther than what Ps2 is capable of.

...and the reverse has happened, as well. You seem to only be interested in collecting evidence that falls in line with your existing beliefs. That's a pretty perilous approach.

Yeayeay, you guys are going to bring up MGS2(the only failings are one small rain level and a less stable 60fps, nevermind the display out looks sharper and is 480p), right?
Again, moooost 3rd party games run/look better on Xbox. Agree?

Cant believe there are still people hanging onto their tiny beliefs. Must be remnants of a well conceived PR drive of the past.

 

[PC-Engine]

MGS2 on PS2 has visible tearing on some sections of the game.

 

[chaphack]

ANYWAY, since we are moving onto IQ again, i like to ask fellow PS2/console developers(mrwibble/thowlly/faf/crazyace/simonF/ERP etc?) what you thinketh of the following:

Based on experience, my thoughts on why PS2 has the poorest IQ:

-4mb vram/ 1.2gb/s rendering bus or something -> explains the lack of 480p support and limited texture variety/quality
-CLUT -> explains the grainy/muted, poorer color fidelity textures, more evident in complex patterned textures
-640x448 -> explains the slight lowresy look
-poor DAC video out -> explains the slight bluriness over screen display and poor flicker filter
-poor texture filtering -> explains the shimmers artifacting

Is that a fair assesment based on your experience with the hardware?

 

[_phil_]

Cant believe there are still people hanging onto their tiny beliefs.

it would be nice and fair to include yourself.

 

[bbot]

Posted on a teamxbox forum:

http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?postid=2747189#post2747189

 

[jvd]

All posts bashing others will be deleted just so you know. No matter what you say in the post. If there is an attack against another forum member and the meaning of life it will be deleted .

 

[Qroach]

Just as the post at TeamXbox says, Id knows what they are talking about, so i don't know what people hear are questioning their comments for. PS2 couldn't handle doom 3, gamecube couldn't handle doom 3, with Xbox being able to handle it withe h only difference being chopped up levels from PC (as carmack has already said. After all, Doom 3 was designed to run on hardware like that and carmack was invvolved withteh creation of Xbox to a small extent, jut like time sweeny was aware of them creating the platform.