PS2 the Bumpmap KING

[Paul]

Halo 2 uses a Doom3 style in graphics, that 'metal' look. Anyone else see it? Kinda neat.

 

[randycat99]

You mean the specular highlights of shiny metal look?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

the texture quality is bad as usual, which is PS2's biggest fault(small texture cache, and absolutely no texture compression)..

Are you sure you are in the right thread and/or that you know what you are talking about?

Uhm, yes, this thread is where someone posted a single plane spinning in space, and its supposed to show that PS2, a console where you NEVER find bumpmapping being used, is somehow all of a sudden the "King" of bumpmapping because of this. as I said, I'm just not very impressed, and I dont think a single poly tech demo is going to change anything.

 

[marconelly!]

CaptainHowdy, I know what you wanted to say, but the texture quality comment, in all honesty, sounded like a mindless rambling that you just had to plug in there for the sake of bashing "the one you hate with all your heart". That's why I singled it out and asked if you are in the right thread.

 

[randycat99]

It's got to start "somehow". Maybe this is the sort of thing that pops up when you have someone toodling around on the hardware to explore, instead of having a gun to the head to finish a playable game by a deadline? I think everybody should not get too riled up by the title. Think of it as just exuberance out of personal accomplishment- nothing wrong with that.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

CaptainHowdy, I know what you wanted to say, but the texture quality comment, in all honesty, sounded like a mindless rambling that you just had to plug in there for the sake of bashing "the one you hate with all your heart". That's why I singled it out and asked if you are in the right thread.

I just feel people here are trying too hard to somehow make a case that the PS2 really is on par with the XBox and GC, when its not, it is hanging, because the games of today, are built with the PS2 in mind..

I just feel you dont NEED to make a case, the PS2 doesnt NEED to compare graphically, you only need one argument on your side, PS2 gets all the games, and thats all you need.

 

[randycat99]

I just feel people here are trying too hard to somehow make a case that the PS2 really is on par with the XBox and GC, when its not, it is hanging, because the games of today, are built with the PS2 in mind..

I don't think that was the intent at all with the creation of this topic, nor the posts that followed, all the way up to when "somebody" brought up a "certain game" on a "certain other console". That's when the topic got "infected".

Toodling with new features and effects strikes me as a perfectly justified past time for PS2 hardware. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, at least somebody tried.

 

[vers]

is there anyone here that actually think that looks good? the texture quality is bad as usual, which is PS2's biggest fault(small texture cache, and absolutely no texture compression)..

putting bumpmapping on a single polygon and spinning it around in space isnt what I call impressive, when they actually pull that off in game, I might reconsider, when they can pull it off in a game and also have some high quality textures along with it, I will be very impressed.

"and absolutely no texture compression"

FALSE, ps2 have JPEG texture compression by IPU


"putting bumpmapping on a single polygon"
yes, this is technology demo and isnt power demo, but i will make POWER demo with much more bumpmaps and polygons


other own demo:

 

[zidane1strife]

Hey vers when you do, please post it on this board too. I'm interested, I've always liked demos.

 

[PC-Engine]

CaptainHowdy, I know what you wanted to say, but the texture quality comment, in all honesty, sounded like a mindless rambling that you just had to plug in there for the sake of bashing "the one you hate with all your heart". That's why I singled it out and asked if you are in the right thread.

I just feel people here are trying too hard to somehow make a case that the PS2 really is on par with the XBox and GC, when its not, it is hanging, because the games of today, are built with the PS2 in mind..

I just feel you dont NEED to make a case, the PS2 doesnt NEED to compare graphically, you only need one argument on your side, PS2 gets all the games, and thats all you need.

EXACTLY!

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

FALSE, ps2 have JPEG texture compression by IPU

Umm...yeah but does any game use that method ingame for textures? Hollow argument.

 

[chaphack]

CaptainHowdy, I know what you wanted to say, but the texture quality comment, in all honesty, sounded like a mindless rambling that you just had to plug in there for the sake of bashing "the one you hate with all your heart". That's why I singled it out and asked if you are in the right thread.

I just feel people here are trying too hard to somehow make a case that the PS2 really is on par with the XBox and GC, when its not, it is hanging, because the games of today, are built with the PS2 in mind..

I just feel you dont NEED to make a case, the PS2 doesnt NEED to compare graphically, you only need one argument on your side, PS2 gets all the games, and thats all you need.

EXACTLY!

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

+1 Captainhowdy
+1 PC-Engine

That is exactly what i am trying to convey here too.

 

[Phil]

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

How about doing bumpmapping in software + ~6 million polygons/sec at the same time + ingame related stuff on that Pentium MMX 200 MHz?

You seem to forget that that demo runs entirely on VU1 alone...

 

[jvd]

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

How about doing bumpmapping in software + ~6 million polygons/sec at the same time + ingame related stuff on that Pentium MMX 200 MHz?

You seem to forget that that demo runs entirely on VU1 alone...

why does that matter , most 3d cards since the geforce do bump mapping in hardware. Not only that but we were entering the p3 and athlon years when the ps3 came out. So really why would a pentium mmx 200mhz need to d software bump maping ? Hell even th dreamcast does hardware bump mapping in hardware and that was out in 98' 2 years before the ps2. Its a limitation of the almighty ps2. That is why it has todo i n software.

 

[Phil]

I wasn't the one that brought up 'Pentium MMX 200MHz'... but if it suits you better, replace the MMX with a Pentium 3 500 MHz if you think it can pull it off.

Its a limitation of the almighty ps2.

Limitation? Hardly, I'd call it a different approach, that's all.

 

[jvd]

I wasn't the one that brought up 'Pentium MMX 200MHz'... but if it suits you better, replace the MMX with a Pentium 3 500 MHz if you think it can pull it off.

Its a limitation of the almighty ps2.

Limitation? Hardly, I'd call it a different approach, that's all.

Sorry i was quoteing a quoted quote haha

Still why would a p3 500mhz need to do it if there is dedicated hardware to do it ? It may be a different approach but if it was an acceptable one why would we be making excuses for it by comparing it to something no where near its class to make it look better ?

 

[vers]

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

How about doing bumpmapping in software + ~6 million polygons/sec at the same time + ingame related stuff on that Pentium MMX 200 MHz?

You seem to forget that that demo runs entirely on VU1 alone...

why does that matter , most 3d cards since the geforce do bump mapping in hardware. Not only that but we were entering the p3 and athlon years when the ps3 came out. So really why would a pentium mmx 200mhz need to d software bump maping ? Hell even th dreamcast does hardware bump mapping in hardware and that was out in 98' 2 years before the ps2. Its a limitation of the almighty ps2. That is why it has todo i n software.

VU0 + VU1 + GS = GPU
vu0, vu1 is ps2's vertexshaders

 

[London Geezer]

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

How about doing bumpmapping in software + ~6 million polygons/sec at the same time + ingame related stuff on that Pentium MMX 200 MHz?

You seem to forget that that demo runs entirely on VU1 alone...

why does that matter , most 3d cards since the geforce do bump mapping in hardware. Not only that but we were entering the p3 and athlon years when the ps3 came out. So really why would a pentium mmx 200mhz need to d software bump maping ? Hell even th dreamcast does hardware bump mapping in hardware and that was out in 98' 2 years before the ps2. Its a limitation of the almighty ps2. That is why it has todo i n software.

se thats the whole thing i've been telling u.

Dreamcast supports it in hardware. big deal, it would be a performance nightmare puttining it in-game.

Ps2 does not support it in hardware. big deal, at least u can focus your attention to do all those effects that would kill a dreamcast.
still, i'm not sure how the performance hit would be for DC compared to the PS2. i'm sure that PS2 has much more performance headstart to take a hit for the sake of bump mapping.... like, from 20 million polys to 10 millions if the hit is enormous (which is likely not to be)... on DC u would go from 5 million polys to god knows how many........ see the trend here????

 

[jvd]

Anybody want to see a Pentium MMX 200MHz do bumpmapping in software?

How about doing bumpmapping in software + ~6 million polygons/sec at the same time + ingame related stuff on that Pentium MMX 200 MHz?

You seem to forget that that demo runs entirely on VU1 alone...

why does that matter , most 3d cards since the geforce do bump mapping in hardware. Not only that but we were entering the p3 and athlon years when the ps3 came out. So really why would a pentium mmx 200mhz need to d software bump maping ? Hell even th dreamcast does hardware bump mapping in hardware and that was out in 98' 2 years before the ps2. Its a limitation of the almighty ps2. That is why it has todo i n software.

se thats the whole thing i've been telling u.

Dreamcast supports it in hardware. big deal, it would be a performance nightmare puttining it in-game.

Ps2 does not support it in hardware. big deal, at least u can focus your attention to do all those effects that would kill a dreamcast.
still, i'm not sure how the performance hit would be for DC compared to the PS2. i'm sure that PS2 has much more performance headstart to take a hit for the sake of bump mapping.... like, from 20 million polys to 10 millions if the hit is enormous (which is likely not to be)... on DC u would go from 5 million polys to god knows how many........ see the trend here????

Right now we are not talking about the dreamcast but how do you know the dreamcast will take a hit. Is it said anywhere ? mabye simon can chime in here .

And i dunno it sounds like the bump mapping on a large scale will take alot of power away from the ps2. Not only that but then all the other effects that need to be done in software will take up even more power. So mabye a game that has 20million polygons in it when used with bumpmapping may drop down to 5 million for all we know. It may just choke on it.

 

[chaphack]

mabye simon can chime in here .

The hardware developer of DC said that it can do BM in 2 pass. The reason it was not used was the unfamilarity with BM algorithm back then.

 

[Phil]

Still why would a p3 500mhz need to do it if there is dedicated hardware to do it ?

Perhaps you should ask that PC-Engine since he was the one bringing it up. I guess he tried to say that it isn't an impressive feat considering that a 200 MHz Pmmx could do it. What he forgot though, is that it's just VU1 doing it, leaving plenty of resources to take care of in-game related stuff (adding what the engine is already capable of).

It may be a different approach but if it was an acceptable one why would we be making excuses for it by comparing it to something no where near its class to make it look better?

An acceptable one perhaps for bump mapping alone. The Vertexshaders on PS2 give developers the freedom to do a lot of things really. Bump mapping may be supported by todays graphicscard - what if there's something new? Obviously, graphicscard with fixed rendering functions and limited shaders would have a hard time emulating certain things. That's where PS2 might have an advantage. vers research basically proves how versatile the PS2 architecture is, what can be done, despite the lack of those fixed hardware functions. That's impressive.