PSone...what was the avg polygon count for the avg game?
- Thread starter kenneth9265_3
- Start date
Shogmaster
Regular
Bohdy said:
Why do people still get hung up on this? You CAN show 60FPS animation on interlaced TV! Each field shows single frame of animation!
Here's a similar post recently at GA that I answered the exact Q:
myself said:You are obcourse right and he is wrong, and the explaination is (IMO) simple.
Make sure he knows that even though TVs only updates 30 full frames per second, it does that by updating 60 half screens (fields) per second and letting your persistance of vison put it together in your brain. A field is literally a half of a frame, constructed of every other scan line.
So when you see a game runnning 60FPS on a TV, you are seeing animation of the fields, not frames. And even though the animated images are only halves of the full image, the image division is so fine (every other line of around 500 lines) and it happens so fast (60 times per second) that your brain interpretes it as a complete image.
Here's some screen caps to help illustrate this better:
In all those captures, you can see the characters composed of two scanline fields frozen in the middle of two frames of animation (what uneducated might call "motion blur", but as we all know, DC hardware didn't support Temporal blending FXs in hardware). Very clear illustration of how TV can display 60FPS action.
Back to topic, anyone can tell me if ePSXe has a polys per frame counter and how to activate it? Or point me to a PSX emulator that has such an option?
kenneth9265_3
Newcomer
Guden Oden said:kenneth9265_3 said:20,000 poly per sec? Wow!to me thats kind of low for a orginal Playstation game, but you would probally know more than me...
Nah, not per sec; per scene; or in other words, what is currently displayed on the screen. This number would be multiplied by the game's framerate to get the polygons-per-second figure. Thus, a very well-optimised PS1 game running at 60fps would get 120,000 polys/sec.
It might be noted that the first Crash Bandicoot game had some seriously high poly numbers in the "tunnel-like" levels where the player runs "into" the screen because it streamed precalculated data straight off the CDROM and passed it straight to the graphics hardware. No numbers were mentioned by the devs except that often distant polys were as small as one pixel in size - which means the game can fit in a lot of them at any one instance.
Of course this meant that the gameplay was very limited too - as I recall the screen didn't scroll from side to side at all in those tunnel levels. It was a pure "on-rails" experience.
Thanks Guden Oden! I have been trying to find that answer for years!
No, I don't know a lot about programing or engineering, I am a adult gamer that have always been interested technology.
It is amazing to me the progress of gamming and graphics from those software in seeing how far and fast it have progressed in the last 20years.
I tend to find that learning about the past can help you know what ahead for the future, and technology tends to fit into this catagory.
kenneth9265_3
Newcomer
Megadrive1988 said:
Cool so from what I am getting from you guys is that the Playstation was pushing around 60,000-120,000 poly on the avg per sec for games? Thanks, you guys are the best!
You're all doing it wrong.
If PS1 = 60 FPS with 20,000 polys/s = 333 polys per scene.
If PS1 = 30 FPS with 20,000 polys/s = 666 polys per scene.
Seems about right to me. 333 polys is pretty small when you think about it.
If PS1 = 60 FPS with 20,000 polys/s = 333 polys per scene.
If PS1 = 30 FPS with 20,000 polys/s = 666 polys per scene.
Seems about right to me. 333 polys is pretty small when you think about it.
insanepunkclown
Newcomer
It is amazing how few polygons were rendered back in the time... There was one late PS1 game that pushed the console to the limits, it looked like an early/launch game for the Dreamcast in terms of polygons, it was a shooter.
I read somewhere(along time ago) that one game on Nintendo 64 managed 200K polygons per second...
On Unseen64 there is an article on a GBA game that rendered 40+K polygons textured in actual gameplay which is insane and if it was flat shaded then I would't be surprised if it could render Sega 32X version of Virtua Racing at 45-60FPS though GBA has 240x160 resolution while PS1 games rendered at 320x240 which is twice as much pixels to render.
I read somewhere(along time ago) that one game on Nintendo 64 managed 200K polygons per second...
On Unseen64 there is an article on a GBA game that rendered 40+K polygons textured in actual gameplay which is insane and if it was flat shaded then I would't be surprised if it could render Sega 32X version of Virtua Racing at 45-60FPS though GBA has 240x160 resolution while PS1 games rendered at 320x240 which is twice as much pixels to render.
Resurrecting an 11 year old thread must be a record on here!
PS1 had many 60fps games. All Tekken games, Tobal 1& 2, Ergheiz, Rapid Racer, Dead or Alive, Forsaken, Klonoa, Einhander, Omega Boost (I think). Motor Toon, and I am sure there were many others too
Which one?
insanepunkclown
Newcomer
Delta Force Urban Warfare... I know, it doesn't look pretty... Specially the textures, but the lightning well done and some environment is good. It is not Soldier of Fortune on Dreamcast, but if DFUW was a launch game then considerably better textures, solid frame rate and rendered at 640x480P.
I'd wager a decent sum that this is utter bollocks, I can't begin to imagine which game this would be. Most N64 titles struggled to even hit 30fps, so to hit 200k polys/sec would require hugely detailed levels (for its time). I know of no such game, it would be difficult to fit it on a cart to begin with due to storage requirements.
This I also doubt very much, GBA had no hardware 3D acceleration to my knowledge, and a very slow main CPU. Doing 3D math in software is slow as hell unless you got some sort of on-chip vector math unit or similar like in Sega Dreamcast's SH4.
Sounds like a PR spinmeister out of control, bullshitting on purpose in a printed magazine article, knowing they'd be likely to get away with it (people didn't have this internet thing back in the GBA days, or if they did it was not what it is today. Be glad if you're too young to never have experienced dial-up internet access!
)insanepunkclown
Newcomer
I don't know which game pushed that, I forgot. It was over a year ago...
Though this game pushed (considerably?) more than average PlayStation game
http://digitalfantasy.angelfire.com/n64-hardware-specifications.html
Turbo3D microcode pushed 600K polygons at PlayStation quality(eg distorted textures) and it is naive that it would't fit on cart, specially when by late 90's there were compression methods for Nintendo 64 and carts were as large as 32MB and Resident Evil 2 was 64MB.
[QUOTE="Grall, post: 1846164, member: 434"
This I also doubt very much, GBA had no hardware 3D acceleration to my knowledge, and a very slow main CPU. Doing 3D math in software is slow as hell unless you got some sort of on-chip vector math unit or similar like in Sega Dreamcast's SH4.
Sounds like a PR spinmeister out of control, bullshitting on purpose in a printed magazine article, knowing they'd be likely to get away with it (people didn't have this internet thing back in the GBA days, or if they did it was not what it is today. Be glad if you're too young to never have experienced dial-up internet access!
)[/QUOTE]It is not 40K polygons, it is 45K polygons! My bad... Sorry.
It always boggled my mind how they managed to fit everything into a 64MB card and make it better. They say that the sound was also improved. I am not sure if they mean cleaner sounds or simply the inclusion of surround sound.
Rikimaru
Veteran
It was not better. Textures were worse. I do not think audio quality could be better too.
insanepunkclown
Newcomer
1.) Its a cartridge. That's pretty sweet.
2.) Highest quality music of all versions? Not sure.
3.) Supports the console's Expansion Pak accessory for a maximum resolution of 640×480 during gameplay & adjusts its display resolution depending on the number of polygonal models currently on screen.
How does that compare to the Dreamcast running at 60 frames per second during gameplay?
4.) Other visual enhancements include smoother character animations and sharper, perspective-corrected textures for the 3D models.
Smoother than the PS1 but smoother than the Dreamcast & GameCube also?
5.) Alternate costumes, the ability to adjust the degree of violence and to change the blood color, a randomizer to place items differently during each playthrough, and a more responsive first-person control scheme. All of that sounds great, N64 your control scheme is more responsive? You sons of bitches.
6.) 16 new in-game documents known as the "Ex Files. Damn I'm a sucker for extras.
http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showth...nt-Evil-2-Dreamcast-Version-Vs-N64-GC-Version
Well the reference was about the PS1 vs the N64 version. So I dont think any other version would fit into the picture. The game shipped on 2 disks on the PS1 for God's sakes. They crammed up everything in a 64 Mb cartridge.
Did the prerendered backgrounds look better i.e were they in higher resolution? (Not referring to the display output)
Did the prerendered backgrounds look better i.e were they in higher resolution? (Not referring to the display output)
