When I say shaders I'm specifically talking about various forms of bump mapping and normal maps. Why didn't more devs make use of this? If I remember seeing right, normal mapping was actually in the PS2 programming guide since 2002, and said how to do it. I understand the memory implications of which as well, but it kinda pains me to see such innate abilities go under-used and under appreciated. One other thing: in the PS2 Ace Combat games, are the aircraft models technically self-shadowed? And in that case what defines self shadowing, the fact that a polygonal model has projected shadows back onto itself, or the fact that along a model's curved surfaces a shadow can be produced, not just directly from an arm and the shadow projected to the body a la Shadow of the Colossus? Oh PS2, if only more devs used your weird architecture better.............and if only you had more RAM and multi-texturing capabilities as well..................
Were shaders just too system intensive for the PS2 to be used often?
- Thread starter Mobius1aic
- Start date
Because there is no such accelerated functionality in ps2 hardware. Bumpmapping/normal mapping/other fancy pixel shading effects have been implemented via multipassing or just plain faking with art.
edit. If it makes it easier think of ps2 "gpu" as a very, very fast tnt1 + cpu assisted(vu units) vertex shaders. In some sense graphics synthesizer is even more primitive than tnt1(mipmapping, multitexturing, maybe something else too).
edit. If it makes it easier think of ps2 "gpu" as a very, very fast tnt1 + cpu assisted(vu units) vertex shaders. In some sense graphics synthesizer is even more primitive than tnt1(mipmapping, multitexturing, maybe something else too).
Last edited by a moderator:
A model casting shadows on itself. IIRC AC planes fit that description. On that note, for all of PS2s shortcomings, self shadowing had been in use in PS2 games since day one (Type-S), and hw was by far the best performing platform of its gen for rendering volume shadows, which showed in software.Mobius1aic said:
Implemented as sequence of simpler instructions - so Archie's analogy is perfectly accurate in that regard.ERP said:
Heres the PDF file on how to implement them on PS2
http://playstation2-linux.com/files/p2lsd/ps2_normalmapping.pdf
http://playstation2-linux.com/files/p2lsd/ps2_normalmapping.pdf
A model casting shadows on itself. IIRC AC planes fit that description. On that note, for all of PS2s shortcomings, self shadowing had been in use in PS2 games since day one (Type-S), and hw was by far the best performing platform of its gen for rendering volume shadows, which showed in software.
Implemented as sequence of simpler instructions - so Archie's analogy is perfectly accurate in that regard.
What other PS2 games use self shadowing outside of the AC series and Shadow of the Colossus? And are you sure the PS2 was best at volume shadows? Accept for SotC again and God of War I can't compare the PS2 as having great shadow volume capabilities as compared to the Xbox. If that was the case, I would think that the PS2 had gotten some kind of real port of Doom 3, even if the normal/bump maps got left out in the process.
And I'm well aware of the PS2's lack of multi-texturing, but even still was the performance hit of normal/bump maps so substantial that developers tended to just rule the usage out of their games? Hitman: Blood Money looks great to me with it's bumpmapping (not the best but not bad either) and it runs pretty smoothly. With more overall RAM could we have seen much better overall graphics with the PS2 or was it just mostly the lack of multi-texturing that really limited the machine's graphics capabilities?
Yes, the peak would be something like that, but you wouldn't get full efficiency.
Well, 32 MB is just 32 MB. Heck, you can play Doom 3 without self-shadowing, bump, specular, or dynamic shadows of any kind. It's just if you turn all that stuff off it takes 3.5 seconds to realize how boring it is rather than 35 minutes.
In any case, there are just too many PS2 games with shadow volumes to count. Ghost Hunter had a particularly nice lighting engine, and SH3 is of course quite famous for the stunts pulled off in the cutscenes.
Well, you can never have too much RAM, can you?
Well, 32 MB is just 32 MB. Heck, you can play Doom 3 without self-shadowing, bump, specular, or dynamic shadows of any kind. It's just if you turn all that stuff off it takes 3.5 seconds to realize how boring it is rather than 35 minutes.
In any case, there are just too many PS2 games with shadow volumes to count. Ghost Hunter had a particularly nice lighting engine, and SH3 is of course quite famous for the stunts pulled off in the cutscenes.
Well, you can never have too much RAM, can you?
After all the modeling/texture filter cut ins that GTA: San Andreas had, I think I can agree.
And I must assert that SH3 did look incredible, though obviously each room/area had to be loaded individually. I guess we can thank our lucky stars that in a similar idea to a RAM increase for the PS2, Nintendo did more than just a 50% increase in RAM on the Wii but doubled it and from some points of view just about "quadrupled" it considering that 16 MB of sound/disc drive buffer on the GC was almost worthless. Smart move, even if the console isn't "twice" as powerful (or hasn't shown to be). Oh RAM, why can't I quit you?
I think I speak for everyone when I say: what?
Care to let us in on your knowledge. More insight is always welcome
He's got to be referring to this: http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/xbox/game/914444.html
It's possible to make a Doom3-like game on PS2.
Too bad that people who showed me that proof-of-concept work exclusively with PS3 now...
P.S. Or too good, but it's never good enough...