PSP: Playable on show floor, impressions inside.

[PC-Engine]

FWIW, I've compared DC SC to GCN SCII in progressive scan on my VGA monitor and DC has better texture detail and overall image quality. GCN textures are pretty blurry and overall sharpness of the output is not as sharp as DC. Don't know how SCII on PS2 compares as I don't have a PS2. I picked SC because it's a good sample for comparison.

A few things.....
1. You're using a vga transcoder to convert the pscan image to vga? Might cause problems....
2. GameCube could be using some form of antialiasing.
3. Yes, you are right, the DC soul calibur is much shaper than pscan sc2 on gamecube, but it also is much more jaggy, and not all gamecube games are as blurry as this in pscan...for instance ssbm, fzero, metroid prime, super monkey ball series, and more are pretty sharp.(maybe enabling pscan is a bit more complex than just adding a line of code? maybe some games require significant recoding not to look crappy or blurry and that's why not all games have it?)

BTW, I wanna see a picture of the bump mapped bottle in shenmue.

Well for DC I use SEGA's VGA Box. For GCN I use the modified component -> VGA cable. Some games are very sharp with the GCN cable like F-Zero GX, MP, ED...others are really soft like RSII. SCII falls somewhere in between RSII and those other games I mentioned. F-Zero GX looks really good in widescreen and you can tell the resolution is higher.

As I've mentioned earlier, it's not just overall sharpness as DC's textures are sharper too. I chose SC because it's made by Namco on both platforms and both are basically the same game.

According to a recent Reuters report, Sony does not expect to make any money from its PSP handheld during its initial sales period because of both the development costs already incurred and the price of PSP components and manufacturing.

Isn't this a complete 180 from what some guy at SONY said a few months ago? I thought they said the hardware would have to be profitable at launch?

 

[Ty]

As PC-Engine said a video gives perspective and allows you to see something from more angles, which can be imporant. Of course a picture can also give you perspective, but its something those PR pics didn't do.

No argument from me that the still image from the video shows off scale better than the digital still from Nintendo. Yet you can't compare them when talking about color. It's apparent the video is lacking accuracy and resolution compared to the still.

Nintendo often do pretty poor PR shots IMO. They did the same with GBA-SP AFAIR. That system looked SOO plasticy and cheap in the PR pics, but in reality it looked a lot better. Anyway I've found a decent pic of DS in a real life situation to compare to a PR shot.

There's not much more you could possibly do to make the OEM marketing image better (and this goes for Nintendo or Sony) unless you are purposely tried to doctor it. Obviously it has way more resolution than you're going to get from a video shot 6+ feet away. Generally the quality of images (in order) are going to be; OEM media, Digital Still, Video. So given that the PSP looks better with Digital stills (decent quality) than the media provided by Nintendo (best quality) pretty much seals the verdict imo. In other words, I think it's fair to compare OEM marketing shots of the PSP against the OEM marketing shots of the DS. They both represent the best possible light they are trying to shine their respective products in.

Re: OEM media shot. I guess scale was something I actually didn't consider. I was only interested in it's "plasticky" appearance and the curves. Size was not an issue since I knew it was somewhat small anyhow.

Re: Video shot - I think it still looks bad and only less "plasticky" because of the poor quality of video in the first place - i.e. the same with TV's built-in AA hiding jaggies on video games.

Cool that it's good enough for you. No problem there as you are more than entitled to your opinion.

Your perception is backward. The problem is not the ones pointing out the truth on the matter; it's those who choose to argue the obvious whenever it's mentioned in passing. No one cares when someone remarks that a low-poly game looks 'Dreamcast-level' because it's been accepted that the newer machines can do more geometry. Why is it someone always has to take exception whenever DC is mentioned to have better IQ than PS2 in light of the specifics?

Because DC is long dead and rotting in the grave. Why would anyone but diehard DC fanatics care about how DC IQ looks compared TO others (DC being the focus)?

When others are comparing TO DC (your example of geometry) it's because that's a comparable focal point (and the focus is on another console). You're better off served by comparing to its peers.

You say this like you've got some 'Console Wars' handbook or something. They're just videogames... there are no sides to take.

I don't think you really believe this so waving this banner is quite disingenuous of you. It's like an arsonist saying that playing with matches is dangerous.

Isn't this a complete 180 from what some guy at SONY said a few months ago? I thought they said the hardware would have to be profitable at launch?

Profitable or not at a loss?

 

[Simon F]

Lazy,

Give it UP already!!! It's a well-established fact not a single DC game used bumpmapping. We've gone over this what feels like a billion times by now and it's getting rather tiresome.

Hell, even Simon Fenney's said as much.

No. I said I don't know of any, but then I generally only play (and very rarely at that) Craxy Taxi, Virtual Tennis, and Mr Driller

 

[PC-Engine]

Lazy,

Give it UP already!!! It's a well-established fact not a single DC game used bumpmapping. We've gone over this what feels like a billion times by now and it's getting rather tiresome.

Hell, even Simon Fenney's said as much.

No. I said I don't know of any, but then I generally only play (and very rarely at that) Craxy Taxi, Virtual Tennis, and Mr Driller

Hehe Simon is a hardcore gamer!

 

[Lazy8s]

Ty:

When others are comparing TO DC (your example of geometry) it's because that's a comparable focal point (and the focus is on another console).

The tangents begin when someone jumps to deny what's already been established. A line of discussion has proceeded from PSP impressions, to the placing of PSP into perspective (comparing it to competing technologies), to MBX, and to the placing of MBX into perspective (since footage is scarce, DC gets used as a parallel). At that point, any references made were done in passing and for the purpose of context; the discussion is still on track. However, this is inevitably followed by some dismissal that DC didn't actually accomplish what it did, beginning a tangent.

This is readily seen by following the quotations back through a thread.

 

[Teasy]

Ty

I think there were certainly far better ways to take that DS PR shot then to zoom right in so that the DS fills the entire picture and looks like a massive clunky monster of a system

I guess scale was something I actually didn't consider. I was only interested in it's "plasticky" appearance and the curves. Size was not an issue since I knew it was somewhat small anyhow.

Well I do think that even when you know the system will be quite small in reality the illusion of it being a massive clunky block still effects how it looks in those shots. For instance the curves you mentioned are accentuated in the Nintendo shot and made to look massive. Which makes them look very ugly. In the other shot I showed they don't look bad IMO (certainly nowhere near as bad even if you still don't like them).

Even though I think DS looks ok as it is, it certainly still could use some improvements. GBA-SP looks great IMO. So lets hope the same design team get a chance at the DS between now and release.