PSP to 'outclass' PS2 graphically?

[Vince]

No vince, i hate Sony because of their overflowous PR. MS PR is there, but Sony is worse.

Sony is Worse? I can't think of a more hated company (Rambus?!?) than Microsoft due to their tactics that more often than not include selling their products based on hype over substance. How many bugs are launched in any of they major OS releases? For how many years did they hype their OS's based on code dating back to the early '90s? How many companies with superior products did they wreck because of their hype and monopolistic dealings since their founding?

While Sony is hardly an angel, you're delusional.

Now if maybe MS have said something like "Xbox blah blah blah, you can display movie graphics that blurs reality and fantasy" then maybe it is bad like Sony with the CG at home shit. But it is not, they do not hype on as superficious as Sony.

Um, thats basically what they said. This is quickly sinking to the level of semantics and I have no need to fight over linguistsic with you. They said:

"Xbox empowers game artists by giving them the technology to fulfill their creative visions as never before, creating games that blur the lines between fantasy and reality."

We then ask:

- Does XBox "empower" developers to blur the lines between "fantasy" and "reality" due to the "technology" given to them?

The answer is a resounding No! This is hype that's just as bad as when Sony said that the PS2 could do RT CGI. Not to mention the Microsoft coup d'etat they pulled with the Raven demo... I've seen that calibur graphics on the XBox... and they said used like 50% right of the final power? Excuse me, but I must.

 

[Fafalada]

You mentioned Starship Troopers 3D cartoon. There is no doubt in my mind that many technically illiterate people would think of SH3 cut scenes as better than that or simillar looking. Trust me, I have LOTS of experience with people like that, and they usualy weigh things differently than you'd expect them to.

Well, I've watched the whole Starship Trooper Chronicles series...
obviously you have the benefit of offline renderer precision with accompanying nearly flawless image quality etc.
But other then that... human animation and modelling is visibly worse then what's seen in SH3.
As for CG itself, seeing that 'detailed' around here translates to "it's only detailed if I can see all individual texture pixels", the Show would probably be accused of running on a PS2
On the other hand they do use a ton of various shiny highlights and surfaces so it ought to score points for "pixel shaders" at least.

But anyway, the show had to produce 40episodes on a very limited budget with a ton of large scale CG battles, so I think they still did a remarkable job overall.

A better comparison would be SH3 cutscenes to SH1 FMV, where the gap between character models is all the more obvious.
Of course - artists abilitiy to model humans have advanced significantly over the years, so it's only to be expected.

 

[chaphack]

You didnt read my quote from official XBox site....

OF coruse i did, i even requoted that statement.

Fantasy / Reality reference is just laughable, though... much moreso than any of the Sony's movie references.

Nope sorry. More on that later.

You mentioned Starship Troopers 3D cartoon. There is no doubt in my mind that many technically illiterate people would think of SH3 cut scenes as better than that or simillar looking.

How did RC 3D cartoon ST became SH3 cutscenes? But never fear! Chaps here! Now i will just say SH3 cutscenes are overated, yes there are some good ones, but those are mainly focused closeup on one character with minimal scenery, ala Shenmue. It is better than Shenmue but i wont be too proud as to call 30fps closeup head demos 480i as CG beating quality.

When you get to play the game, you will noticed that for many parts, the cutscenes are not as yummy as a few closeups. Heck, you can take a look at Maskraider SH3 op vids and it is easy to spot average looking cutscenes. Prepare to see more of that in the game. One thing though, i noticed the shadows are running at lower res(?) and it has pretty bad alisaing, lacks the stable looking shadows we would expect.

is quickly sinking to the level of semantics and I have no need to fight over linguistsic with you

PS2 fans does that all the time to justify the hype, i think it is fair for us to do too with Xbox.

Um, thats basically what they said

Yep, the developers are more freed to create their ideal games . That said whacha.

We then ask:

- Does XBox "empower" developers to blur the lines between "fantasy" and "reality" due to the "technology" given to them?

The answer is a resounding No

Playing with a little sementics, the answer is YES.

Now i ask of you, looking at the gorgeous Halo2 by Bungie highly talented and creative team churning out hot graphiX, full 5.1 discrete audio, large battlefield and tuff AI. Does the player not get immerse in a fantasy environment battling invading alien scums? And that is the power, the power to produce immersive games, that draws the player into the game world, losing sight of reality. Now throw in full 16p online battle....I AM THE MC, gonna FRAG YEHA ALL!!

That is the meaning and not some SuperCPU wankfest.

Not to mention the Microsoft coup d'etat they pulled with the Raven demo... I've seen that calibur graphics on the XBox... and they said used like 50% right of the final power? Excuse me, but I must.

Hey i have always admit to that dancing butch.

As for CG itself, seeing that 'detailed' around here translates to "it's only detailed if I can see all individual texture pixels", the Show would probably be accused of running on a PS2

Unless PS2 magically unleash its EMOTIONAL powers and clear up the usual PS2 image artifacting......nay.

obviously you have the benefit of offline renderer precision with accompanying nearly flawless image quality etc.
But other then that... human animation and modelling is visibly worse then what's seen in SH3.

Not to forget the lighting.

Now if next gen consoles, which supposedly does CG quality for real, do not have CG quality IQ, i be disappointed. I wont even want to call them CG quality man!

 

[Phil]

When will you all learn that you can't argue with kids. Consider this pure waste of time and bandwidth. Too bad that it's the overall quality of this board that degrades thanks to such blindness, which unfortunately is being tolerated.

:sigh:

 

[Fafalada]

Unless PS2 magically unleash its EMOTIONAL powers and clear up the usual PS2 image artifacting......nay.

? What image artifacting, I was talking about lowres textures.

 

[marconelly!]

How did RC 3D cartoon ST became SH3 cutscenes?

You mentioned it, willing to compare it to PS2 graphics. So I said - go ahead and do it.

Now i will just say SH3 cutscenes are overated, yes there are some good ones, but those are mainly focused closeup on one character with minimal scenery, ala Shenmue. It is better than Shenmue but i wont be too proud as to call 30fps closeup head demos 480i as CG beating quality.

Hey, you said it yourself that those claims about 'walking into a movie' weren't meant to be judged by a gfx whore like you are. Ask the common folks for which those claims were made (your words). I can tell you right now, those people have quite different set of rules when it comes to judging these things. They don't know something is not done in a more complex way because it cannot be done - they think it was designers decision from the start. They also don't pay as much attention to complexity of shading and image quality, but instead look for believabable animation, facial features and the overal appeal of the scene shown. That is exactly where that CG cartoon doesn't fare very well with it's rubbery animation and shiny plasticky faces.

 

[Fafalada]

I know this is pointless, but I figured I'd contrast Chap's critique for the hell of it, with some real life anecdotes.

I've recently learned that there's actually graphics programmers out there (experienced ones at that), that refuse to believe SH3 cutscenes are realtime (after seeing the game on TV).
I guess those cutscenes are just so unimpressive to some people they can't possibly be realtime

The other one is an artist that tried to convince me SH3 is an XBox game ever since it was first unveiled

 

[LogisticX]

Wow Chap.

You rag on Sony for being these huge hype producing behemoths and yet who was the one in this very forum to start an "KillZone Hype Thread"?


Give it a rest already.

 

[Vince]

We then ask:

- Does XBox "empower" developers to blur the lines between "fantasy" and "reality" due to the "technology" given to them?

The answer is a resounding No

Playing with a little sementics, the answer is YES.

General rule of thumb Chap, if you need to clearify the statement by manipulating and utilizing your interpolation of what's being stated - then it's hype.

This is obviously hype, and you spinning it - desperatly trying to make it something it's not isn't changing this. All the vendors do this... deal with it.

Now i ask of you, looking at the gorgeous Halo2 by Bungie highly talented and creative team churning out hot graphiX, full 5.1 discrete audio, large battlefield and tuff AI. Does the player not get immerse in a fantasy environment battling invading alien scums? And that is the power, the power to produce immersive games, that draws the player into the game world, losing sight of reality. Now throw in full 16p online battle....I AM THE MC, gonna FRAG YEHA ALL!!

That is the meaning and not some SuperCPU wankfest.

That is useless talk bud, besides you just sound... eww. It's not only your opinion; but it's hardly - in any way blurring the lines between the game world of Halo and the real world.

A player [myself for example] can get totally immersed in Civilization2. But, just because I'm immersed, doesn't mean I can't tell the difference between the game and the real world just by looking at it - as the MS PR stated.

You don't need anything that XBox has to make an immersive game, infact the best games are often ones which have more going on in your head than on the screen. Just ask Will Wright.. it's obvious that MS was hyping graphics - and they did a nasty job of it that according to your logic is baseless hype. Perhaps you should hate MS too then.

 

[Lazy8s]

marconelly!:

They also don't pay as much attention to complexity of shading and image quality, but instead look for believabable animation, facial features and the overal appeal of the scene shown.

It's not a matter of whether technical qualities or design qualities have a greater influence on making something look realistic. You are right that art direction - stylized realism versus photo realism - and design execution are the factors by which the average person interprets realism in graphics. But in modeling, shading helps present facial features, and image quality contributes towards the overall appeal of a scene also.

The average person doesn't pay attention directly to the technical aspects because those aspects are just there providing the implementation for the design elements.

 

[chaphack]

I was talking about lowres textures.

How about the usual grainy PS2 texture aliasing? ST looks cleaner than any PS2 games.

You mentioned it

Well, i did bring up ST in comparison to RC and not SH3. In any case, it is ultrahumgously wrong to even call SH3 ST quality. It might have better facial animations, but the CG look is far from present.

They don't know something is not done in a more complex way because it cannot be done - they think it was designers decision from the start. They also don't pay as much attention to complexity of shading and image quality, but instead look for believabable animation, facial features and the overal appeal of the scene shown

Like Lazy said, it is the combination of all. Sure they cant tell pixel shading 100000xXx FSAA or what not, but the overall CG look is those put together. Add a layer of alisaing, dim the lights and powered with lores textures to say Finding Nemo, and i am sure people will go EwwW fugly CG, even if it has the best facial animations in the world.

As i said, next gen consoles better have CG quality AA, else they are far from CG capable imo.

I've recently learned that there's actually graphics programmers out there (experienced ones at that), that refuse to believe SH3 cutscenes are realtime (after seeing the game on TV). The other one is an artist that tried to convince me SH3 is an XBox game ever since it was first unveiled

But it is true that SH3 does not come close to CG quality, at least not the level of CG imo(say FF8). The texture quality, aliasing and the subtle lighting is not cool yet. As for Xbox thing, you sure he didnt see the game via tiny IGN or GS trailers. For most part, it looks like SH2 with higher character polygons.

I have to admit though, the op video, the one with Heather sitting on the table, looks great. But that is about it(the rest are ok, not as godly as the PS fans would say), and not to mention it is a video, meaning another layer of blur is added to make it cool. The same raw in game cutscene looks less cool. There are few others using the distortion effects(?) that looks cool, but really SH3 cutscenes are overated.

it's obvious that MS was hyping graphics - and they did a nasty job of it that according to your logic is baseless hype. Perhaps you should hate MS too then.

No its not. Ask any normal friends of yours about "blurring fantasy reality" and "SuperCPU", which one speakth more about tech graphics. I say again, MS hype will usually be taken as "wow a cool gaming machine, time to play out moi fantasy", whilst Sony will leave an impression of "wow im getting a hot supercpu today!"

Maybe you are right, MS did not hypAR as proficient as Sony. They should have stated more specifically about hyper graphics XGPU in that link posted. But they didnt and you cant deny that. Blurring fantasy has too much of an open intepretation than SUPERCPU.

 

[nondescript]

The topic of this thread is PSP and PS2

 

[chaphack]

DO NOT BLAME THE CHAP.

Go back a few pages, it was not i who wanted to start the hype thing again. I really didnt want to but circumstances proved otherwise.

 

[notAFanB]

gotta go with Chap on this one ......

back on opic:

anyway given the timeframe for release theirs no reason the PSP won;t end up with theses specs IMHO

 

[rabidrabbit]

notAFanB, R U chaps mum ya ?

 

[notAFanB]

lets keep this on topic shall. no need to derail the topic everytime flamebait pops up.

 

[marconelly!]

But it is true that SH3 does not come close to CG quality, at least not the level of CG imo(say FF8).

Of course, it doesn't. NOTHING realtime does, on the technical level. FF8 was released in 1999, btw. Why not use Shrek as an example of 'older' FMV... Besides, you have said it yourself that we are not to judge on those claims Sony has made as they've targeted people who don't spend their lives stydying pixel aliasing and polygon anomalies. I am absolutely positive people not obsessed with that would find SH3 cut scenes comparable to that CG cartoon.

As for Xbox thing, you sure he didnt see the game via tiny IGN or GS trailers. For most part, it looks like SH2 with higher character polygons.

Yeah, and Halo 2 looks just like Halo with more bumpmapping... Please, put down those mushrooms. There really is NOTHING on PS2 that comes even close to realistic look of those graphics. Going by that alone, would make one think it's not running on that machine. For that matter, there are *very* few games on other machines that fare better, so it would be pretty obvious to assume what he did.

No its not. Ask any normal friends of yours about "blurring fantasy reality" and "SuperCPU", which one speakth more about tech graphics.

What "Super CPU"? Wasn't the Sony quote you found talking about "walking into a movie" or something like that? I honestly don't see how you can find "blurring fantasy and reality" a more sane quote than "walking into a movie screen".

 

[chaphack]

What "Super CPU"?

http://www.otherlandtoys.co.uk/ps2press.htm
I guess you didnt know there is more to Sony hype, ya?

Please, put down those mushrooms. There really is NOTHING on PS2 that comes even close to realistic look of those graphics.

I think YOU should be the one stopping on yer mushrooms. SH3 looks about SH2, with more beefy characters. Play SH2 indoors again, if you doubt my words. I hope you are not judging it via those pixel perfect SH3 PR screens, because the real game do NOT look that clean. It is about SH2 level. Gosh, you PS2ers should stop taking SH3 as the 2nd/3rd coming of Emotion Synthesizer!

Why not use Shrek as an example of 'older' FMV

FF8 is 1999? Ok does it matter if we use Shrek, no PS2 games even come close to it!

 

[Almasy]

Chap, just shut up. I´d be better if you try to go into an Xbox machine, you certainly do mistake that with reality it seems.

Only a fool would not acknowledge that every single company does advertizes and shows the best image of a product it can(Yeah, I´ll go an hate on whatever Beer company is around because I´m not surrounded by hundreds of ladies with incredibly big boobs evertime I drink one).

 

[chaphack]

Chap, just shut up. I´d be better if you try to go into an Xbox machine, you certainly do mistake that with reality it seems.

Only a fool would not acknowledge that every single company does advertizes and shows the best image of a product it can(Yeah, I´ll go an hate on whatever Beer company is around because I´m not surrounded by hundreds of ladies with incredibly big boobs evertime I drink one).

mummy! chap made me cry! i hate him! let me insult him!


so i ask of you, is it wrong to point out the wrong? or you can just weep in the corner.