Retro Video Gamer

There were millions of crisp and stunning games on PS2, more that ran at 60fps than most other consoles.

When talking about frame rates, the DC is not a console I would mention.

The PS2 did well because it was supported with amazing software. Games like Devil May Cry, Onimusha 1-2, WRC, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, Ratchet and Clank, Ace Combat 4, The Thing, Gran Turismo 3, Timesplitters 2, Winning Eleven and god knows how many more all feature vibrant visual, distinct lack of jaggies and 60fps.

The machine is not at all widely know for anything. Only the most staunch haters ignore the machines qualities. Play on a properly setup console and it looks and play great. Granted the DC does have a better display image and more friendly anti aliasing support.

And the DC does have the wonderful Sega arcade feel.

Quote from: "nakamura"There were millions of crisp and stunning games on PS2, more that ran at 60fps than most other consoles.

When talking about frame rates, the DC is not a console I would mention.

The PS2 did well because it was supported with amazing software. Games like Devil May Cry, Onimusha 1-2, WRC, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, Ratchet and Clank, Ace Combat 4, The Thing, Gran Turismo 3, Timesplitters 2, Winning Eleven and god knows how many more all feature vibrant visual, distinct lack of jaggies and 60fps.

The machine is not at all widely know for anything. Only the most staunch haters ignore the machines qualities. Play on a properly setup console and it looks and play great. Granted the DC does have a better display image and more friendly anti aliasing support.

And the DC does have the wonderful Sega arcade feel.

Why not mention the DC and frame rates? Gunlord, Hydro Thunder (who's vibrant looks i much prefer to the 360 game), DOA, Alien Front Line, Sonic Adventure 2, Soul Caliber, Vanishing Point, 4 Wheel Thunder, Super Magnetic Neo, Outtrigger, Rayman 2, Daytona USA etc) DC has nothing to hide, plus games like MDK 2 coded for the DC GPU has better colour, higher res textures etc than the PS2 version, commented on PS2 Makken vs DC Makken other day on here.

Gran Turismo been a graphical show case for PS2 but at expense of A.I, which is awful on A.I drivers.

But on flip side, you'd never see anything as good as the Burnout series, God Of War 1+2 (2 esp.which could pass for a 1st gen 360 game!), Black, Shadow Of The Col,MGS2, MGS3, GTA 3, V.C+S.A etc on Dreamcast as they've been made with the advantages PS2 has over DC.

Sega went it's route:Online, easy to code for, great video output, rich texture memory compression etc, Sony went it's:DVD, very powerful raw power, great if you want to 'code to the metal'.It's a common myth PS2 does'nt support A.A (brought that up in the fact or fiction thread myself), think Stuntman was 1 of the 1st to do full screen A.A.Sony did over claim on things like 5.1 sound though, that left to things like cut scenes, not in-game per say.

We sadly never quite saw just what extra could have been pushed out from the Dreamcast, but we did see the PS2 maxxed out with say God Of war 2.

But even then there were games that were really beyond it (NO:Far Cry, Doom 3 or HL2, only Xbox managed those) and things like Just Cause, which ALL versions were done by same developer and whilst PS2 ver has quicker loading than say 360, it really looks poor on PS2 compared to Xbox.

A well optimised Dreamcast game will always look better than a poorly optimised PS2 game and vice versa.Middleware helped PS2 out a lot.

I've used my PS2 on Scart, awful and now component on an LCD HDTV, results are ok, but the DC's crisp, clean TV output via SCART knows the upscaled PS2 image into a hat, let alone VGA support on DC.

Sony did cut corners on this aspect of the hardware, DC output is cleaner, developers will tell you that from the off as anyone who's read Edges requiem for the DC feature will know.

:-)

Not going to start a seperate thread for this, but the whole 'Question of  which was more powerful'? has never gone away since the 8 Bit days and with new range of consoles awaiting, it's back on again.

Mentioned in my earlier post the different approaches Sony and Sega took with PS2 and DC, somewhat ironic that after the PS1/Saturn, it was Sony who went the difficult to code for, but worth it approach with PS2 and Sega having seen 3rd parties leave the Saturn as it was so difficult to code for, go for off the shelf parts, ease of use for coding etc.

The Saturn used Quads at a time PS1 etc were using Polygons, PS1 was a 3D pushing beast, Saturn more balanced, as i've posted before on here, things like Sonic R or VF2 would have to be very different if converted to PS1 as it's written for the Saturn hardware, on flipside, PS1-Saturn conversions always suffered to a degree on the Saturn as they were coded for Playstation specific hardware.

The Jaguar, so often gets mocked online, ignoring the 'No decent games' crap, it's strength seemed to lie in areas like 24 Bit, true Colour (65,000 colours etc) something niether Saturn nor PS1 could match, also (and i'm sure The Laird can confirm or correct this), it does 'cleaner' textures, Hoverstrike CD being a prime example of this, yes or no Laird?.Plus sure i've read it's raw processing power made it idea for link-up games and A.I routines in games (seem to recal Battlesphere coder saying it was unmatched in this dept and was'nt until PS2 it was beaten).


The Playstation, could on paper render more plain polygons a second than the N64, BOTH Sony+Sega quoted on paper polys per sec figures for DC+PS2, meaningless when you start factoring in A.I routines, light sources, lighting effects etc.Soon as you had optical drives on consoles, games were streaming in assests, be it Soul Reaver on PS1 (No loading times), or likes of Primal on PS2 (Features a higher polygon count than 'normal' PS2 games as it uses a custom streaming method to load assests in.

The Resident Evil+Onimusha games looked great, but used pre-rendered backdrops, not real time.

Plus lot of the flagship games on consoles started elsewhere:Onimusha+DMC were once PS1 games as was The Getaway and Too Human, Res.Evil 0+Eternal Darkness were both N64 titles, Loaded started out on the SNES, Tomb Raider originally a Jag CD game, Alien trilogy a MCD game etc.so in a lot of cases it was'nt as if ONLY console X made it possible.

Good few launch titles have been games that switched formats somewhere along the line as by time they'd have been done, console or computer they were originally planned for was on it's last legs.

I think chances of say The Last Guardian appearing on PS3 now are non-existant, it'll be a PS4 title.

Any hardware is ONLY as good as the support it recieves.Sure the Wii U is capable of a lot better ports from PS3/360 than what it's had so far, but unless people code for the GPU, it's just NOT going to hapen.

Quote from: "nakamura"There were millions of crisp and stunning games on PS2, more that ran at 60fps than most other consoles.

When talking about frame rates, the DC is not a console I would mention.

The PS2 did well because it was supported with amazing software. Games like Devil May Cry, Onimusha 1-2, WRC, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, Ratchet and Clank, Ace Combat 4, The Thing, Gran Turismo 3, Timesplitters 2, Winning Eleven and god knows how many more all feature vibrant visual, distinct lack of jaggies and 60fps.

The machine is not at all widely know for anything. Only the most staunch haters ignore the machines qualities. Play on a properly setup console and it looks and play great. Granted the DC does have a better display image and more friendly anti aliasing support.

And the DC does have the wonderful Sega arcade feel. :o Remind me to buy some of what you is smoking

Rogue has made my point for me about the dreamcasts incredible picture output. Put a DC next a ps2 with the DC running at 60hz via VGA and it will hammer any PS2 game based purely on the clarity of the picture, not saying that there are NO games on the ps2 that have colour but it is notorious for having lots of dull looking games which is to be expected when you have a 2000+ game library.

:-)

I sooo don't want to get into a PS2 VS DC debate (Own+use both) but some of the PS2 KEY games, written purely for the hardware by it's best coders:

ICO, runs at 512X224 NTSC/ 512X256 PAL at....25 FPS and even then it 'forced' PS2 hardware itno doing away with the normal interlaced video output in favor of a low res, progressive scan.

MGS3:Snake Eater ran at 512X448 which the PS2 hardware then UPSCALED to 640X448 for TV output (so it's technically cheating) and that ran at 30 FPS.

So BOTH THE DC+PS2 HAD COMPRIMISES MADE TO GET GAMES DEVELOPERS WANTED RUNNING ON THEM.THE END.


 

Quote from: "dcultrapro"Lol yoir such a joker rogue I  like how your normally like the number 1 culprit when it comes to raging into a debate.. but nevermind! Best to skip that subject completely

Any other good line ups i dont know about? Nice line up laird, bit small but what year did it come oit?

Objection! Shurely shome Mishtake M'laud. :-)

Just trying to offer balance, as i have with the saturn thread, did Jaguar get unfair reviews etc, i've yet to buy a console (on launch or otherwise) that has delivered exactly what was claimed by it it's makers.

Sorry for any de-rail.

lol its cool I was only messin, you do always offer a good arguement for whatever you talk about so fair play to ya, I am probably to blame for derailing this one and I apologise lol

yeah the ps2 launch was pretty awful, that was one of the reasons why I didn't understand how it did so well, was just the hype and popularity of the original that floated it until the good games started coming, and there were some very good games!

I like the God of War games, Armored Core, Transformers (armada that was only on the ps2) Kill Zone, Shadow Of The Colossus was amazing and Chaos Legion was an awesome alternative to (IMHO) the slightly over hyped DMC. And even odd games like Crimson Tears were excellent. It took a while but it pulled it together

Quote from: "dcultrapro"lol its cool I was only messin, you do always offer a good arguement for whatever you talk about so fair play to ya, I am probably to blame for derailing this one and I apologise lol

yeah the ps2 launch was pretty awful, that was one of the reasons why I didn't understand how it did so well, was just the hype and popularity of the original that floated it until the good games started coming, and there were some very good games!

I like the God of War games, Armored Core, Transformers (armada that was only on the ps2) Kill Zone, Shadow Of The Colossus was amazing and Chaos Legion was an awesome alternative to (IMHO) the slightly over hyped DMC. And even odd games like Crimson Tears were excellent. It took a while but it pulled it together

:-) Cheers.I do try and be 'as factual' as i possibly can when going into any debate and they'll be based on machines i have owned or currently do own.Every machine that has come out after another has had to strike a balance between power and price and where it's stronger than it's rival's in 1 dept, it'll be weaker in others, ie SNES had more colours, better sound, custom chips for sprite work, it had a far slower CPU than the MD or, looking at the  3DO whilst far more powerful than SNES overall, was lot weaker when it came to 2D.PS2 out did DC in terms of raw Polygon pushing power and lighting effects (DC lacked hardware lighting routines so only supported Vertex Lighting where as PS2 could do prettier lightmaps etc), the gulf between claimed power and auctual game related was no-where near as bad on DC as PS2:

Sega claiming anything like 3 Million Polys per sec+, developers said more like 1.5 Million.

PS2:Sony claimed 75 Million Polys a sec, developers went hmmnn, we'd guess closer to 66 Million, started working on hardware and said auctually it's 20 Million and that's before you start throwing in A.I, lighting etc. (Also i had to laugh when Sony talked of EMOTION Engine and Graphis synethesis etc, all techno bollox, what they did'nt say so much on was fact the Sound Chip in PS2 was essentially 2X Playstation 1 soundchips joined together :-) ).

General reply here.

Sorry not my intention to make it a vs topic and those that pointed out DC games with high frame rates were right too.

Just on the flip side though, many early DC games like PS2 games suffered from ropey development. Sonic Adventure was a mess, Sega Rally was a frame rate nightmare, Blue Stinger just looked shit and many others. There were stunners of course. But the machine was on the market a year before so it had time under its belt for devs.

Also comparing VGA with RGB is just not fair. Yes credit to the machine for doing VGA, man it was incredible. But so few people had VGA. When you compare machines via RGB it is much close though the DC still has the edge.

Doing back to the PS2 launch. It had better games than many think. Timesplitters was huge and rightly so as it was just a smooth Goldeneye. SSX was utterly massive though I was never a fan. Fifa carried weight, would have taken them about 10 mins to port it to DC though! Tekken also had quite a following.
It wasn't a brilliant launch but far from a terrible one in terms of content. My personal bugbear with the launch was the shitty 50hz displays used. This hurt the machine in the hardcore area to start with. The borders on Ridge V were disgusting.

Quote from: "dcultrapro"

Quote from: "nakamura"The PS2 did well because it was supported with amazing software

ROFLCOPTR!!!! Seriously? wow, um ok... I'll just let that one fall flat on the floor where it belongs  ;)

To ignore this is hilarious by the way. It had ever genre covered, usually with extremely high quality. Not perhaps always the best version of a game and there are plenty of shite ports but the software library is immense. It's also full of a load of crap showelware, but that is the nature of success.

Hey I think we had all moved on from that subject but hey ho, your choice!

well no... because you said "the ps2 did well because..." meaning your attempting to state it as a fact, when everyone knows that the console was only as successful as it was because it was heavily plugged by Sony to an infamous level and the majority of owners in the first year just bought it as a cheap dvd player didn't actually buy much software for it, it was a proven fact that, at the time the Dreamcast was outselling the PS2 in terms of software quite heavily.

I knew a lot of PS2 horn blowers then as everyone was telling me it was better than DC but when asked most of the time the only reason people could give was "its got a dvd player"

no no... It DID WELL because eventually when good games started to come out for it they had already gotten a massive owner base due to the popularity of the brand and the DVD player hook.

Ok.

I always feel its a unfair as Sega pulled support for the platform in 2002 I think it was, so to compare would be the first 2-3 years of the PS2, and for me there were loads more games on the DC than on the PS2 upto that point that I wanted to play.
Plus I to this day hate the ps2 menu system!

The PS2 is a great old workhorse with a brilliant catalogue - I got one to play RType Final and Gradius V and ended up getting loads of games for it. I'm very fond of my old phat PS2 and I wouldn't be without one - but it just doesn't really invoke the same sense of affection that the DC does...

Did'nt expect to come home to find a full blown thread but ok...

yep, Sega Rally and VF3 were poor launch games in terms of not really being optimised for DC, Blue Stinger just looked like a High Res  N64 game and the swimming controls, man alive, horrendous, also as shallow as they were i loved and still play both Incoming and Expendable.

PS2 and i had mine on day 1, all i can recal is even the likes of Playstation plus talking about Jaggies and PS1.5 textures.MGS 2 looked amazing but was a way off, i ended up in the early PS2 days playing Extermination, looked rough, but i enjoyed, Ring Of Red, again, no looker bu superb to play.Was'nt until Silent Hill 2 (AMAZING) and GTA 3 (ditto) i started to see the power of PS2.1st Time Splitters i had, completed, but it too was'nt a great looker, Free Radical admitted it was rushed for PS2 launch, luckily the 2 following games were superb.

Herdy Gerdy was another PS2 title the mags tore into, claiming it looked like a high res N64 game, so it at least had that in common with the DC, lol.

You don't need to compare VGA to RGB on PS2, as DC video output (640X480P, flicker-free etc) is far cleaner than the PS2's video out and already given 2 examples of the graphically trickery PS2 had to pull of in games like Ico+MGS3 and thes by developers with the resources to code specifically for PS2 hardware, rather than use middleware to the degree others did.

Taken on it's own merits the PS2 was a great system, very flexible (Vertex shaders more flexible than those of the Xbox), better lighting than the DC, but Sony just went far too overboard hyping it up, you really should'nt be claiming 75 Million Pols, Emotion in games, Toy Story like visuals, when developers are shouting out about just how much in terms of resources are needed to get the best from it, it's just not good P.R-I can see WHY they did it (destroy Dreamcast specs, make your console look like it'll be worth holding on the extra year for), but it really did bite them in the arse at the start.

Hideo K.went on record to say how dissapointed he was to see PS2 did'nt match upto what Sony had promised and he+staff dreaded going to work each day whilst doing MGS 2, Oddworld creator, up and jumped ship to Xbox etc.

Thanks to improved development tools, middleware,PS2 performance analyser etc, developers soon learnt how to work with the PS2 hardware and we saw what it was capable of, but it never really delivered the huge leap in performance over the DC Sony's inital claims would have had you believe.

Things like Gran Turismo on PS2 for example, whilst stunning to look at, had the same A.I routines as the PS1 series, Rez, whilst running at twice the frame rate of the DC version (60 FPS as opposed to 30) had more Jaggies than DC version, so it was always a trade off it seemed.

The one thing Sony had was the developer support Sega could only dream of and a LOT of that was down to Sega's own failings, no-one elses.But i could fill an entire thread on that subject alone.

Quick quote from Free Radical, from interview with Edge they did on making Timesplitters:

'..With Sony claiming 75 Million Polys per sec, we concluded that we'd be surprised if even 10% of that figure was achievable-and we were right'

Think that says it all on just how much Sony over-hyped the PS2 :-)

Free Radical also said on the plan of Timesplitters  being a Multiplayer game 1st and foremost:

'..Imagine our surprise when the PS2 seemed to be missing a couple of controller ports!'

Quote from: "Rogue Trooper"You don't need to compare VGA to RGB on PS2, as DC video output (640X480P, flicker-free etc) is far cleaner than the PS2's video out

I assume with 480p you are talking VGA as progressive is not available via RGB. Also PS2 had pretty impressive RGB out when the correct flicker filters were applied.

Through RGB there will always be some sort of flicker. It's just less noticable at 60hz and if you are playing only optimised PAL games like Silent Hill 2, you will not see the full benefit of what the PS2 offers.

And for the record I did not start this damn thread.

Quote from: "nakamura"And for the record I did not start this damn thread.

Nope it was split off from the other one because people were de-railing it.

There are some PS2 games that offer progressive scan output if you're using component video cables. You usually have to hold ^ and X simultaneously when the system boots. But, there are very few games that support it for such a large library. And, many of the games that support progressive scan on the NTSC release don't support it on the PAL version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pl ... HD_support (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_games_with_HD_support)

Quote from: "tomwaits"There are some PS2 games that offer progressive scan output if you're using component video cables. You usually have to hold ^ and X simultaneously when the system boots. But, there are very few games that support it for such a large library. And, many of the games that support progressive scan on the NTSC release don't support it on the PAL version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pl ... HD_support (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_games_with_HD_support)

Yeah seem to recal God Of war 2 had an HD cheat mode on NTSC, but not Pal.

Own The Getaway+Primal on Pal, both use Progressive Scan mode via component had no idea until i booted them up and was like ah-ha!

Quote from: "The Laird"

Quote from: "nakamura"And for the record I did not start this damn thread.

Nope it was split off from the other one because people were de-railing it.

And...dare i ask what's wrong with such a thread?.

Not sure about anyone else, but i personally bought hardware on the back of hype, £270 for a launch MCD, impulse buy after the promo.video given away with Mean Machines, Atari Jaguar, impulse buy after seeing video preview of AVP, both made claims that were so far removed from reality it was unreal (Jaguars 850 Million Pixels per sec animation speed etc), does'nt mean the hardware did'nt deliver games i very much enjoyed, nor that i feel i cannot look back with hindsight on the purchase or claims made, even poke fun at myself.

The DC VS PS2 battle as a purchaser of both, was a very interesting era i felt, looks like others do as well.Sega made some advertising gaffes in terms of promoting the online side, Sony with hyping up the power of PS2, there's no reason we owners of both cannot have a debate on where both delivered the goods for us as gamers and where they feel short.

The best way i've always felt to learn the true power of hardware is by reading interviews with those who worked on them, that's why i buy EDGE for it's making of articles, read RG and this forum for the interviews.

I ended up with the DC, the PS2, the Gamecube and Xbox from that era, as i said earlier 1st time i've ever felt need to own more than 2 consoles from 1 generation, it was expensive, but i'd have hoped offered up scope for debate.

I own a PS1, PS2, PSP+PS3 and it's been a very interesting path to see how in the space of a few years Sony has gone from getting things so right with the PS1, to coming back from the brink with PS3 (high prices, PSN hack etc) and seems not to have learnt lessons from the PSP with Vita.

With Sega, watching them go from hardware to software only has again, been very intersting to watch, as an Ex-MD, Game Gear, Saturn and MCD owner, current DC
owner, i wondered what mistakes if any would be learnt from.


Sadly Sega dropped out of the hardware race after the DC, but Sony's hype machine did not learn from the PS2 era, claims of outputting 2X 1080P images at 60 FPS in gaming etc.

Think Laird did the right thing by creating new thread, initally i was thinking oh-oh, this is'nt going to end well, but having slept, woke up and thought why should'nt there be a decent debate on merits of the 2 systems?.

I mean the PS2 (or percived power of..) pretty much killed of Sega in terms of a hardware company, auctual games competing with expected, now we see Sega publishing crud like AVP (Rebellion) and Aliens C.M (Gearbox), so are they a better company now than then?


Just trying to open up some debate here.

I don't mind hearing rogues arguments but most of this more technical information is over my head. All I can do is lend my opinion to the discussion without tabling any published facts or anything, because at the end of the day it is just peoples opinions.

I'm of the opinion that the Picture quality of the Dreamcast when played via VGA to PC monitor is second to none from the 5th generation and that the playstation 2 that I own and use via RGB Scart (not sure if its true RGB) I Think, looks god awful by comparison, the colours are washed out unless you turn contrast and colour up in settings but then they appear to bleed horribly and there is a lot of either screen blur or some form of inconsistency that makes it look like the colours are running

I'd actually be interested to hear some suggestions to make the picture of the PS2 Better because I really like Shadow of the Colossus, King Of Fighters Maximum Impact, Transformers, Auto Modelista and am only able to use the PS2 to play my PS1 games currently

So yeah, how could I get the best picture for it? bear in mind I have a 42" LED 3d tv with all the usual inputs; HDMI, Component, VGA, RGB, RCA etc

Quote from: "dcultrapro"I don't mind hearing rogues arguments but most of this more technical information is over my head. All I can do is lend my opinion to the discussion without tabling any published facts or anything, because at the end of the day it is just peoples opinions.

I'm of the opinion that the Picture quality of the Dreamcast when played via VGA to PC monitor is second to none from the 5th generation and that the playstation 2 that I own and use via RGB Scart (not sure if its true RGB) I Think, looks god awful by comparison, the colours are washed out unless you turn contrast and colour up in settings but then they appear to bleed horribly and there is a lot of either screen blur or some form of inconsistency that makes it look like the colours are running

I'd actually be interested to hear some suggestions to make the picture of the PS2 Better because I really like Shadow of the Colossus, King Of Fighters Maximum Impact, Transformers, Auto Modelista and am only able to use the PS2 to play my PS1 games currently

So yeah, how could I get the best picture for it? bear in mind I have a 42" LED 3d tv with all the usual inputs; HDMI, Component, VGA, RGB, RCA etc

I'd hope my posts are seen as debates, not arguments and with the technical aspects when dealing with any format (PS2, Saturn, DC, Jaguar etc) i'll quote developers who've worked on the hardware, i'm so far from a techy person myself (could'nt even figure out DOS Box on my PC i'm ashamed to say).

Regarding the best piccy quality on modern TV's-This has been a big issue for myself, whilst my Xbox was dead easy, just use Component cable for best picture and Dreamcast even simpler (as i'm currently not a VGA box owner), as SCART delivered a great picture, the PS2+G.C fared far worse.

I cannot even use my G.C as the piccy is so poor via SCART, things like the HOTH levels on Star Wars:Rogue Squadron 2 are just total white out, gutted!.

PS2 originally tried Scart, was'nt great at all, bought Component cable, better and unlocked the 480P modes in some games but i'm still getting the issues you describe.Tried altering TV's settings etc, makes little to no difference.

of course! I wasn't using the term argument in a derogatory way, hopefully it didn't come across like that! Thanks, glad I'm not the only one, it just looks bad and I'm pretty sure I bought component for it somewhere as well, though I'll be buggered if I know where it is lol

Quote from: "dcultrapro"of course! I wasn't using the term argument in a derogatory way, hopefully it didn't come across like that! Thanks, glad I'm not the only one, it just looks bad and I'm pretty sure I bought component for it somewhere as well, though I'll be buggered if I know where it is lol

I'm guessing here, so bear with me, but piccy quality can also be effected by all the signal processing jiggery-pokery your TV is doing, some have game modes, image sharpening features etc, TV's doing all sorts of upscaling, A/D conversion, colour correction etc and it varies from set to set etc, so try turning off some of the features IF your TV has them.

I've seen 3rd part VGA boxes for PS2, but at £50+ and no idea of how 'great' they are, i'm not touching them.

I did buy the Xploder PS2 HDTV kit (boot disc, component cables) etc, but that's just getting your PS2 to 'fake' the images and upscaling games, streching image etc (cable was decent enough mind), few things like Bully and wipeout Fusion loked sharper in 480P over 480i, but taking games upto 720P using the boot disc just streched things to a viewpoint i'd not seen since playing as the Alien on AVP on PC :-)

Think i'm fooked as a Pal G.C owner, stuck with Scart etc, so guess that'll never be used again unless i hook it up to the crummy 14" SD portable (not a happy prospect).

A PS2 via an LCD looks shit, as do ALL  of the other SD consoles but a bit less so.

A PS2 via a top quality CRT and RGB looks fantastic. Vibrant, sharp and certainly no colour bleeding at all. If you are playing an SD console via a HDTV you are doing it wrong anyway.

A DC via RGB on a lovely CRT also looks amazing, a bit better than the PS2 in fact.

The PS2 suffers not so much poor output, more poor development. Very early games like Timesplitters and Ridge Racer used no flicker filter at all which was utterly stupid. Add in 50hz only and you simply have a mess of an image. At 60hz these images are better, add in anti aliasing like Tekken tag on USA and it looks stunning.

Any games looks better in 60hz because there is instantly less flicker, quite a lot in fact and as a result the jaggies are less pronounced because the image is flickering so quickly you can barely see the transition. Sony should have pushed 60hz games much harder from day 1. That would have made PS2 games certainly look much better as no doubt the PAL stuff could be rough.

Sorry, but PS2 does suffer from poor output in terms of video and that honestly is down to Sony's hardware choices.

Sega initally only planned for the Dreamcast to have 8 Mb or main operating ram, but found it restricted the hardware far too much in terms of what it could render, in order for the Dreamcast to handle 5 Million PLAIN polygons a second and anything like 3 Million texture-mapped polygons a second, they increased that to 16 Mb and also added an extra 8 Mb of Video Ram, it's a reason DC textures look so clean and vibrant compared to PS2's.

The Dreamcast has more Ram avaiable to it, than the Playstation 1 and Playstation 2 combined have.Sony scrimped on the Ram and did it again on PS3, but we've seen changes since then from them with Slim'N' Lite models onwards of PSP having double the Ram of the Phat's, Vita having it's Ram increased over original allocation.

Another strength of the Dreamcast hardware lies in it's Video Encoding Processor (and GPU), which offers a fully wired 640X480 TV output, which is interopolated down from the the GPU's 1,920X480 image.Games coded specifically for it, such as MDK 2 have far richer textures, which run in higher res etc.

Both systems suffered from poorly optimised games, basic ports etc, but i'd hardly call ICO, which had fantastic lighting and animation for it's time, poorly coded as it was written specifically for the PS", yet it's base resolution was 512X224 on NTSC (Pal being improved to 512X256) and it FORCED the PS2 hardware to output a lower quality progressive scan image, rather than the normal interlaced output.

Then you have Hideo K.with his MGS games, MGS 2 was seen as the flagship PS2 game and he+team improved on the engine for MGS 3:Snake Eater, again, coded FOR Playstation 2, but it's native resolution was 512X448 which the PS2 hardware then cheated a bit by upscaling to 640X480 for the image which hit the tv screen.


The 3Do similarly 'cheated' it's claimed 640X480 res.is based on the hardware upscaling the image before it hits the TV.So Sony far from the 1st to use hardware to 'cheat' along the way.


By comparison, you'd NEVER have seen something so open world like GTA3 on the DREAMCAST, in the way the PS2 version was.DC version would be far less detailed, lower polygon counts, far more (and longer) loading times etc and something like GTA:San Andreas or God Of war, God Of War 2, Burnout 3 etc, just beyond it, these gamers developed with strengths of the newer hardware in mind.


PAL PS2 games often lacked the Progressive Scan modes NTSC versions had, but as i said earlier, understandable due to so few HDTV's in UK at that time.

Long story short is, PS2 far better at lighting, more complex, open world games, higher polygon count than Dreamcast, but is limited to 4Mb of Video Ram, which means games have to 'offload' textures until they are needed which can cause bottlenecks if your not optimising code for the hardware (reason a lot of early PS2 games ran at 512X384 was developers still learning how toavoid bottle necks as system fought over Ram).

The Dreamcast in comparison as far as textures go has both hardware texture compression and double the video ram avaiable, so it can store higher quality textures and get them when needed far easier than PS2, but you won't see the kinda special FX in terms of lighting or high polygon models etc you will on PS2 when hardware used.

Would have been interesting to see how the following turned out on Dreamcast as they were either canned or switched to PS2:

System Shock 2-Early footage has been found.

Max Payne-PS2 version was rough compared to Xbox version, grainy etc, would DC version had lower quality character models, but richer textures etc?.Despite being annouced, work never seems to have really started.

Gun Valk.Ended up on Xbox, looked gorgeous, but camera+control scheme turned it into a frustration fest.

Buffy The Vampire Slayer-ended up on Xbox.

Toe Jam+Earl 3-again, switched to Xbox.

Shinobi-Project moved to PS2 early on.

PS2 version of Half Life uses DC version code (have DC version, great character models etc, but far too much loading, not that PS2 version is brilliant either).

On subject of poor ports to PS2, Rayman 2 on PS2 suffers in frame rate as it's a DC port, 'helped' by use of Renderware 2 and when E.a took the 1st, W.I.P version of Quake 3 to show John Carmack, he is meant to have took 1 look at it and said 'No F**king Way!) PS2's limited texture Ram causing issues trying to port PC code etc.

Quote from: "nakamura"A PS2 via an LCD looks shit, as do ALL  of the other SD consoles but a bit less so.

A PS2 via a top quality CRT and RGB looks fantastic. Vibrant, sharp and certainly no colour bleeding at all. If you are playing an SD console via a HDTV you are doing it wrong anyway.

A DC via RGB on a lovely CRT also looks amazing, a bit better than the PS2 in fact.

The PS2 suffers not so much poor output, more poor development. Very early games like Timesplitters and Ridge Racer used no flicker filter at all which was utterly stupid. Add in 50hz only and you simply have a mess of an image. At 60hz these images are better, add in anti aliasing like Tekken tag on USA and it looks stunning.

Any games looks better in 60hz because there is instantly less flicker, quite a lot in fact and as a result the jaggies are less pronounced because the image is flickering so quickly you can barely see the transition. Sony should have pushed 60hz games much harder from day 1. That would have made PS2 games certainly look much better as no doubt the PAL stuff could be rough.

Think your being a little harsh on Timesplitters here, bear in mind:

Free Radical were a recently set up bunch of coders (being Ex-RARE team members) and made a decision to do a launch PS2 game in under 12 months, by this i'm talking design and create from scratch (concept to finished game) in that time and they were NOT using someone else's game engine say Unreal 2 engine, instead they built theirs from the ground up and as they themselves have said, the biggest issue with that was finding you had to ignore ALL the hype Sony was giving in regards to the PS2 hardware (75 Million Polys etc) and instead finding just what realistic perfomance would be.

They were used to coding for Nintendo hardware, not the complex beast the PS2 turned out to be and were constantly hitting brick walls with memory limitations, disc access times, music streams etc etc.PS2 hardware must have been something of a shock to the system.

They put the lessons learned from making TS1 into good practice for TS2 and it was'nt until TS2 Sony had the PS2 performance Analyser avaiable, which they used to find bottlenecks in the code.

They've described making 1st Timesplitters whilst getting their heads around PS2 hardwre as 'Aiming for the moon and winging it every step of the way'

'Utterly Stupid' is hardly a fair comment mate, given what they were up again'st, 12 months to make a game on a system your not familar with and is causing headaches for so many other developers, which is currently lacking the tools you need to find out how good your code is and pressure is cranking up to get it out the door.Think we as gamers should be thankful for what they did manage rather than what was missing.

Not having a go, so please don't read it the wrong way, but rather just intending to show the 'bigger picture' here in terms of what it was like developing for PS2, reality coders found compared to what Sony had promised.

I know exactly what went in to make Timesplitters and the job Free Radical did to make and I rewarded them by buying it. I liked it a lot myself.

However the game had no 60hz option or any type of flicker filter. Either of these would have improved the look no end as the US version was a lot nicer looking than the PAL game.

I'm not the one who bitches about the jaggies on the early games.

Quote from: "nakamura"I know exactly what went in to make Timesplitters and the job Free Radical did to make and I rewarded them by buying it. I liked it a lot myself.

However the game had no 60hz option or any type of flicker filter. Either of these would have improved the look no end as the US version was a lot nicer looking than the PAL game.

I'm not the one who bitches about the jaggies on the early games.

But then many high profile PS2 games were Pal 50 Hz only.You said in your earlier post Sony really should have pushed for 60 Hz much harder from day 1, but how? it was entirely up to the developer to include the option, were likes of Square really going to re-code say FFX just for those in UK etc with a 60 Hz TV?.

Sony were hardly in a position to be doing any pushing as at the time developers were screaming out for help from Sony just to get things like full screen Anti-Alising running on the hardware.Oddworld developer alone got so frustrated with sheer amount of resources they had to put in just to get basics like this running on PS2, they jumped ship to the Xbox.
Hideo K.was very public about how dissapointed he was with actual performance of PS2 compared to what Sony had promised, how he+team dreaded going into work each day, wondering just how they were going to achieve the quality they wanted.


Fact is, even the most talented PS2 developers like Konami+Team Ico were having to work with PS2 limitations, be it forcing the image into a lower res mode or getting the PS2 to upscale before out putting.

The PS2 did things the DC could never handle in games (Radial blur in Burnout 3 etc, Bloom in MGS 3, Shadow Of The Col.etc) which made it's games look better, but everything came at an expense.

Bizarre Creations 'maxed-out' the texture memory on DC MSR and still ended up with flickering textures and jaggies in places and they tried things like mip-mapping etc to cure it, but this made things worse, so if developers were having issues on a platform with the amount of Vram+main Ram the Dc had, the PS2 must have been a nightmare.

Without getting into techno-babble, it's really as simple as the Dreamcast with Power VR Card and lot of Ram VS Playstation 2 and Graphics Synth. and limited Ram.

The Dreamcast's Power VR card has hardwaretexture compression, which meant developers could take a 20-25 MB image, squeeze it down to 4-5MB, store it and unpack it on the fly when needed.

The PS2 GS simply did'nt have this ability, so developers had to limit an image to say 10 MB, keep it stored until called for then 'juggle it' onto the Graphics Chip's 4 MB, it's a reason many early PS2 games had repeated textures and why the buildings in things like RR5 look very similar.Sega encountered issues with Ram in early stages of Dreamcast development and increased Ram avaiable, IF Sony had done the same? PS2 games would have looked better.


Graphical data needs to be stored and sorted prior to being dumped on screen, Sony must have known 4 MB would have caused headaches, but i'd assuming they were reiant on the high data transfer speed to get around that-fine once developers are used to coding for a system that way, but a nightmare in the early days.

Early PS2 games also rendered internally at 640X240 then hardware upscaled them to 640X480, faking like this was fine to a degree but created jaggies.

As for Sony's claims of 75 Million Polys per sec, at peak performance, later down graded to 66 Million.

What they mean is:PS2 IS capable of rendering 66 Million polygons a sec, IF it's doing nothing else (no game logic etc) and said polygons are flat-shaded (no lighting or texture mapping) and all the same shape and size. 

So not game related at all.

Quote from: "nakamura"A PS2 via an LCD looks shit, as do ALL  of the other SD consoles but a bit less so.

you say that and I would normally be inclined to agree with you but whenever I connect my old console via RGB Scart to my LCD and now LED they look fine, I mean they don't look as horrible as people make out, I think I will do some investigation into this myself to see how the consoles do on my new LED in terms of colour bleed etc

I don't care about the jaggy polygons I think a console from 99-01 is gonna have them regardless, what bothers me is the clarity of the picture, the vibrancy of the colours and the refresh rate etc so I'll be interested to see how they all look, I might even do a comparison or special feature vid to see how they all look, be pretty interesting I think

Quote from: "dcultrapro"

Quote from: "nakamura"A PS2 via an LCD looks shit, as do ALL  of the other SD consoles but a bit less so.

you say that and I would normally be inclined to agree with you but whenever I connect my old console via RGB Scart to my LCD and now LED they look fine, I mean they don't look as horrible as people make out, I think I will do some investigation into this myself to see how the consoles do on my new LED in terms of colour bleed etc

I don't care about the jaggy polygons I think a console from 99-01 is gonna have them regardless, what bothers me is the clarity of the picture, the vibrancy of the colours and the refresh rate etc so I'll be interested to see how they all look, I might even do a comparison or special feature vid to see how they all look, be pretty interesting I think

Exactly! i expect low poly counts, jaggies etc compared to todays hardware, it's a given, but when my PS2 via component is giving a far WORSE picture for exactly the reasons you describe, despite using the highest quality output and in cases like The Getaway+Primal, in HD mode, yet my Dreamcast is giving a picture which is fine via SCART (ie i've no real need to buy a VGA box per say) and yet my Gamecube is displaying such a poor quality image via SCART, that i's rendered useless, i'm wondering just WTF is going on.

Looks like sega used higher quality components etc in terms of video out and encoding than Sony or Nintendo.Have heard people say there's more colour bleed on PS2 480P than 480i due to way PS2 hardware renders it's video and decent comparison video might help explain what's going on.

The Dc just plugs in, image is fine, PS2 tried altering TV settings, ensured hardware set up correctly at PS2 dash so it's outputting in correct Component etc, yet i cannot get a picture quality i want, the Xbox by comparison works fine, so it's def.related to the PS2 hardware and not poor coding.

Found the lower quality visuals (compared to the sharpness of the DC version) of PS2 Silent Scope to effect gameplay when i had my PS2 hooked up to a SD TV, it was a bloody nightmare trying to pick out the bad guys, so i had to wait until game highlighted them, thus loosing valuable time, plus the dual shock's were far too sensitive for this type of game.

Unreal Tournament ( a PC+DC fav.of mine) also suffered from murky visuals compared to the DC version (mind you DC version had smoother frame rate as well and impressed even in 4-player split screen mode).

Crazy Taxi suffered on PS2 as well, jaggies, lack of translucency on taxi windscreens etc.


On the flipside, Primal on PS2 (60 Hz, HD support etc) was a fantastic showcase for where the PS2 hardware really came into it's own:The light and shadow effects as your torchlight lit tunnel walls just blew me away.


On subject of launch games, word within the industry had it that developer 'Dreamfactor, who'd done Ehrgeiz and Tobal on PS1, was forced to severly cut back on it's ambitions for PS2 'The Bouncer' in order to hit PS2 launch, as early footage of the game showed a lot more promise than what the final version had.

On subject of 60 Hz support, Sega for all it's claims of Dreamcast being the start of 'A new dawn in European gaming' not only let us down with Pal VF3, but when ever you asked them about future Dreamcast releases getting 60 Hz option they'd reply with 'We cannot cannot speak for 3rd party developers' or 'That has not been decided at this point' if it were their own releases.

Sony seemed happy to follow suit with PS2 releases.

What I find odd about PS2 50Hz only games is that a PS2 doesn't output PAL60 with the games that offer 60Hz - it is NTSC - so how could it have been any effort to include 60Hz assuming it was already done for the NTSC regions?

Also re DC - some titles that are 50Hz only support VGA which if I am right makes that irrelevant?

Always found it hard to get my head around developers, looking at likes of Capcom, who were great supporters of the DC, they point blank refused to alter/improve Playstation board based arcade games to take advantage of DC's extra power in an interview with C+VG.

They also said in said interview:

'Even if Sony releases the Playstation 2 and it's more powerful than the dreamcast, it won't make any difference.The average player won't notice.'

Thing was though Capcom, all Sony needed to do was release some bizzare technical claims about Polygon count and emotions etc and average 'player' bought into that and waited for PS2 expecting Toy Story quality visuals etc and even when PS2 was having worse looking versions of DC games, PS2 still outsold it.

so I did some comparisons on my 42" LED tv between Dreamcast RGB Scart and the VGA connection as well as seeing how the PS2 looks on the big tv as well though I only have Scart (not sure if its RGB) and standard RCA/Svideo cable. They both actually look really good on my new tv, I was surprised by the quality of the picture for both.

here is my verdict on each of the setups I tested

Dreamcast VGA box to 42" LED:

not as great as I expected, upon close up inspection when playing Headhunter I could see a strange pattern when the screen had black graphics or colour on display, but all in all it looked ok. I may have to consider buying a different VGA box or its possible my DC is getting old. Has anyone seen this effect?

see it here:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ultrapro/IMAG1870_zpsff832103.jpg)

Dreamcast RGB Scart to 42" LED:

Fantastic, by far the best picture I've seen my Dreamcast display. The colours are crisp and the picture is crystal clear thanks to the 60hz

PS2 Scart to 42" LED:

doesn't look to bad, the colours don't bleed too badly but it is still pretty visible and it seems to me as though there is still a kind of film over the graphics, like they are softened or just not very sharp, I filmed some footage from both consoles and the DC just looks sharper overall no matter how I connect the devices. I'm sure if I had component or VGA or RGB (I think my scart IS RGB but I'm not 100% so I'm acting as though its not for now in case I'm wrong later) it would probably look better.

I will put together a comparison video of my findings soon, its not conclusive because I doubt I have seen the PS2 at its highest output but either way... the comments from Nakamura about old consoles looking terrible on new flatscreen tvs is a slight exageration, maybe its just his opinion based on his experiences which I is totally fair enough, but from what I've seen the picture is infinitely better on my 42" LED so I'd say its pretty much just a myth

Quote from: "dcultrapro"so I did some comparisons on my 42" LED tv between Dreamcast RGB Scart and the VGA connection as well as seeing how the PS2 looks on the big tv as well though I only have Scart (not sure if its RGB) and standard RCA/Svideo cable. They both actually look really good on my new tv, I was surprised by the quality of the picture for both.

here is my verdict on each of the setups I tested

Dreamcast VGA box to 42" LED:

not as great as I expected, upon close up inspection when playing Headhunter I could see a strange pattern when the screen had black graphics or colour on display, but all in all it looked ok. I may have to consider buying a different VGA box or its possible my DC is getting old. Has anyone seen this effect?

see it here:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ultrapro/IMAG1870_zpsff832103.jpg)

Dreamcast RGB Scart to 42" LED:

Fantastic, by far the best picture I've seen my Dreamcast display. The colours are crisp and the picture is crystal clear thanks to the 60hz

PS2 Scart to 42" LED:

doesn't look to bad, the colours don't bleed too badly but it is still pretty visible and it seems to me as though there is still a kind of film over the graphics, like they are softened or just not very sharp, I filmed some footage from both consoles and the DC just looks sharper overall no matter how I connect the devices. I'm sure if I had component or VGA or RGB (I think my scart IS RGB but I'm not 100% so I'm acting as though its not for now in case I'm wrong later) it would probably look better.

I will put together a comparison video of my findings soon, its not conclusive because I doubt I have seen the PS2 at its highest output but either way... the comments from Nakamura about old consoles looking terrible on new flatscreen tvs is a slight exageration, maybe its just his opinion based on his experiences which I is totally fair enough, but from what I've seen the picture is infinitely better on my 42" LED so I'd say its pretty much just a myth

The only last gen console i've found terrible on LCD out of PS2, G.C, Xbox and DC is the Game Cube.

Red's look awful, whites turn a sort of sour cream colour, rendering snow sections on Rogue squadron utterly unplayable.

Xbox via component, DC via Scart are great.PS2 via component workable if nothing else.

What PS2 games you trying? it might be a case of games rendering at 1 resolution, PS2 upscaling the image before outputting it to TV and then your TV upscaling it again.

yeah I was thinking it might be something to do with the games but wasn't sure. I have the following PS2 games:

sony playstation 2:
armored core 2 another age
armored core 3
auto modellista
chaos legion
cold fear
crimson sea 2
crimson tears
dragon ball z budokai 3
drakengard
drakengard 2
god of war
god of war 2
killzone
king of fighters maximum impact
king of fighters maximum impact 2
marc ecko's getting up: contents under pressure
shadow of the colossus
soul calibur 3
soul reaver 2
tekken 5
Tokyo Extreme Racer
transformers

sony playstation 1:
abes oddysee
armored core
Castlevania SOTN
Colin McRae Rally
driver
evil zone
final fantasy 8
ghost in the shell
Gran Turismo
medievil
metal gear solid
simpsons wrestling
spawn the eternal
street fighter ex plus alpha
tekken 3
tai fu: wrath of the tiger
tomb raider 2
wild 9

like I said they don't look too bad on my HDTV, I just ordered a cheap Component cable for the PS2 to see how it looks via that, something about putting the progressive mode on for some games that do support that option, but for those that don't WHAT IS the best way to display the picture? Is it still the component cable?

its sooo confusing lol, some of the ps2 games support progressive, some dont, I guess that means 480p as opposed to 480i... right? I just wanna find the best overall way to get a good/alright picture from it. Should I set my tv aspect ratio to just scan rather than 16:9?? I assume if the tv stretches the picture it won't look great either

What do you think about that picture from the DC VGA picture? is it my DC going down the toilet or a shitty VGA box or just my tv messing up the picture?

Quote from: "dcultrapro"yeah I was thinking it might be something to do with the games but wasn't sure. I have the following PS2 games:

sony playstation 2:
armored core 2 another age
armored core 3
auto modellista
chaos legion
cold fear
crimson sea 2
crimson tears
dragon ball z budokai 3
drakengard
drakengard 2
god of war
god of war 2
killzone
king of fighters maximum impact
king of fighters maximum impact 2
marc ecko's getting up: contents under pressure
shadow of the colossus
soul calibur 3
soul reaver 2
tekken 5
Tokyo Extreme Racer
transformers

sony playstation 1:
abes oddysee
armored core
Castlevania SOTN
Colin McRae Rally
driver
evil zone
final fantasy 8
ghost in the shell
Gran Turismo
medievil
metal gear solid
simpsons wrestling
spawn the eternal
street fighter ex plus alpha
tekken 3
tai fu: wrath of the tiger
tomb raider 2
wild 9

like I said they don't look too bad on my HDTV, I just ordered a cheap Component cable for the PS2 to see how it looks via that, something about putting the progressive mode on for some games that do support that option, but for those that don't WHAT IS the best way to display the picture? Is it still the component cable?

its sooo confusing lol, some of the ps2 games support progressive, some dont, I guess that means 480p as opposed to 480i... right? I just wanna find the best overall way to get a good/alright picture from it. Should I set my tv aspect ratio to just scan rather than 16:9?? I assume if the tv stretches the picture it won't look great either

What do you think about that picture from the DC VGA picture? is it my DC going down the toilet or a shitty VGA box or just my tv messing up the picture?

Component is still the best way to connect PS2 to HDTV (i'd be tad wary of cheaper cables, betting they are'nt triple-shielded like the more expensive ones) but even games which DO support Progressive scan are'nt going to look amazing, due to PS2 Native Resolution being so low, a feature made even worse on games like ICO where game forces PS2 into an even lower Res.or MGS 3 where image is already upscaled by PS2 hardware before it's pumped out to the tv.

All Progreesive scan is doing, is drawing the entire screen image in 1 hit or 'pass', where as interlaced draws every other line in the 1st pass, fills in missing lines on the 2nd pass.

Basically an HD ready TV has it's native resolution of 720P and PS2 has it's native resolution of games, so once your TV recives the lower quality image from the PS2, your at the mercy of your TV's upscaling hardware.

The HD Ready TV is trying to fool your eye by a form of Anti-Alising when it recives the PS2 video signal, it can either strech 2 existing pixels to assume the size 3 pixels would occupy or it'll generate a 3rd pixel, in between 2 existing ones, created by merging the colours of the 2 pixels (3DO hardware used this trick for it's '640X480' resolution).

Even with Component, odds are you'll be messing around with your tv's contrast and sharpness settings to get best ossible piccy.

PS2 games seem to vary in native resolution used, so i'd wager your going to find a lot of variation in results.

IF your looking to judge lag, i believe Guitar Hero 2 on PS2 has a built in video test (under the video options).

Re:the DC VGA box.Have heard the Blaze one has issues (piccy drops out), but the offical ones seem rare as hens teeth.What make is yours?.

this is the VGA box I have

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sega-Dreamcas ... 4170de7876 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sega-Dreamcast-VGA-Unit-Boxed-/281066502262?pt=UK_Video_Games_Cables_and_Adaptors&hash=item4170de7876)

it is either an unmarked brand or something VERY generic. I am tempted to buy a new one, so I was wondering, when you have your DC connected via VGA (if you do, obviously) do you see the effect I was getting when you use VGA on your HD tv? I am just trying to work out if its my box or DC or if its just the way it will look on LCD/LED screens and I just have to get used to it?

Quote from: "dcultrapro"this is the VGA box I have

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sega-Dreamcas ... 4170de7876 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sega-Dreamcast-VGA-Unit-Boxed-/281066502262?pt=UK_Video_Games_Cables_and_Adaptors&hash=item4170de7876)

it is either an unmarked brand or something VERY generic. I am tempted to buy a new one, so I was wondering, when you have your DC connected via VGA (if you do, obviously) do you see the effect I was getting when you use VGA on your HD tv? I am just trying to work out if its my box or DC or if its just the way it will look on LCD/LED screens and I just have to get used to it?

I'm not a VGA user myself, although friends are, so i'm just going on experiences they've had.

Apparently some models of Samsung TV's throw up issues when using VGA, colours seem off, etc.Your TV does'nt have anything like a game mode you can turn off to see if that helps?

EDIT:

Did a bit of digging on your behalf, lot of Samsung TV users and few Vizo users report image issues, but where as you get dots (artifacts?) they seem to  get faint  'patterns' on screen, white lines (horizontal in some cases, vertical in others, or both in worse case scenarios), no-one seems to know why and it seems more to be the brand of TV than brand of VGA adaptor.

ok cool, thanks for taking the time to do that mate! Though I actually have an LG, not sure if I mentioned Samsung before but if I did it was a mistake!

I don't use anything like a game mode normally, I know what you mean though as some people I know have Samsungs and they have mentioned this before but "Game Mode" on an LG effects nothing important, only contrast, brightness and sharpness and all those general settings, it doesn't effect frames or ratios or anything like that

Quote from: "dcultrapro"ok cool, thanks for taking the time to do that mate! Though I actually have an LG, not sure if I mentioned Samsung before but if I did it was a mistake!

I don't use anything like a game mode normally, I know what you mean though as some people I know have Samsungs and they have mentioned this before but "Game Mode" on an LG effects nothing important, only contrast, brightness and sharpness and all those general settings, it doesn't effect frames or ratios or anything like that

Thinking about it, 3rd party cables, whilst they might use cheaper components than the offical model, should'nt really be causing too much of an issue, as the 'grunt' work is being handled by the DC hardware.

It's doing RGB Natively and upscaling to VGA, all it's doing cable wise is detecting VGA, configuring the video out siginal appropriatley and sending it via the cable.

Have you chance to try the cable on a PC monitor, with Headhunter? and is Headhunter the ONLY game to give black dots?

yeah thats what I mean, I connected Headhunter to both of my monitors via the VGA box with a blue 15 pin VGA cable, I need to do further testing with other games but it is possible that Headhunter is not a particularly good example. I will try some other titles and see how I get on

:-( You don't think 'we' might be looking at the wrong end of the stick here (ie problem) by thinking it's the VGA box or TV/Monitor, hate to even suggest it it, but...have you chance to try same games with a different Dreamcast? might be something amiss with your video card?.

Hopefully i'm sooo wrong it makes me look like an even bigger fool, but my paranoia demands i cover all the bases, lol.

well yeah I did say that might be a possibility earlier on, I need to check it this weekend for all the possibilities

Quote from: "dcultrapro"well yeah I did say that might be a possibility earlier on, I need to check it this weekend for all the possibilities

Sorry, my bad there, think i got too wrapped up in looking at the cable or what monitor/TV was being used.

Let us know how you get on.

no need to apologise bud its all good... I'm gonna hopefully try it out Sunday though I just found out its double xp on Call Of Duty Black Ops 2.... so I may get SLIGHTLY distracted lol

Going back a few steps to the issue of PS2/GC/DC etc on HDTV's, been re-reading Edge magazines HD:Defined article (done when 360 launched).

They make some very good points, such as:  '....... HDTV provides a crystal-clear depiction of everything it recives, the amount of visual junk your existing CRT TV neatly sweeps under the carpet would and indeed will, surprise you'.

'..the inbuilt scaler (upscaler) of 1 HDTV will differ in quality from 1 to another'

'RGB SCART can reveal a surprising amount of colour bleed on HDTV-Something it's traditonally been known to avoid'.

'The problem is, not even the most expensive cables will eliminate the inherent blur of a badly delaced image'

Heres a KEY point:


'It's worth stressing that the only current generation system to which the interlacing issue significantly applies is PS2 (specifically the majority of games which don't output a progressive signal).The majority of GameCube titles, conversely, will output in Progressive via Component Cables, as of course will original Xbox games.Dreamcast futhermore, is capable of outputting a VGA signal via the appropriate lead'.


So yet again, it's clear PS2 DOES have the weakest video out of ALL the consoles from that generation.It's NOT due to poor or lazy coding, but a hardware short coming and thus why many of us are struggling to get a decent picture on HDTV these days via PS2.

fair points etc, but to be fair when I had my ps2 connected it looked alright, if I got close it looked pretty bad but as long as I was sat away from it a good distance it looked fine. The DC really pops off the screen though even just through RGB Scart

I'm 'close' well, reasonably so, to my TV, PS2 does look lot worse via Component than DC on SCART, but after reading up on so many articles etc, won't be wasting too much time trying to resolve it.

Silk purse out of a pigs ear etc :-), pity Sony scrimped so badly in this dept.

I'm waiting for a component to arrive before I bother with the PS2 again, I'm actually quite looking forward to playing God Of War 2 some more, I think I finished the first but never the second. And I wouldn't mind doing Shadow Of The colossus again this time on my lovely big new tely

Completed God Of War games in this order:Chains Of Olymp. (PSP), God Of War 3 (PS3), then God Of War 2, was stuck on that 'rotating tower'o death' near end of 1st game, did'nt try for months, went back to it, got past that 3rd time trying, now stuck on last Boss fight QTE's.

Had Original PS2 God Of War, but picked up 1st HD Collection on PS3 to play 2nd, probably will end up buying Vol.2, just for the 2nd PSP game.

Only on 3rd Creature on Shadow Of The Col. (bought PS3 HD Collection).

Next thing i need to try on PS2 is:'Killer 7'.

yes the PS2 had some amazing stuff on it didn't it...and I'm completely pissed why the Dreamcast didn't get stuff like this it deserved, and has to be one of the most hard done by console ever to exsist, it had all the making of true arcade and original experiences maybe more so than the ps2 did, but fan base, based on the ps1 made sure this was not to be..:)

Yep, much as developers moaned about how hard PS2 was to code for, how they had to spend resources developing basic tools etc, they'd made the decision to back it, rather than DC early on, as the Playstation brand was so strong.

Reading interviews with DC programming teams like Argonaut, you'd hear things like:

'Dreamcast is great for artists because of high res.textures and rich colours, the number of textures we could cram into a games level, would shame any other system bar an expensive top of the range PC'

Or Clockwork Games:

'Dreamcast is more than a match for PS2, technically  competive with the competition, but much easier to develop for'

Where as PS2 developers were saying things like:

Core: 'Video Ram is in short supply, meaning texture management becomes a factor, getting the Anti-Alising on PS2 is more tricky than it should be'.

And Free Radical finding the CPU 'A little slow', Oddworld's Lorrne Lanning got fed up with PS2 development 'you end up spending a lot of time+money in areas you expected to be avaiable in basic hardware functions+system tools', so he jumped over to XBOX, but most stayed with PS2, because they knew it'd have the huge user base.

As i mentioned in the fact/fiction thread, developers like Namco, Konami etc were often shy to use the PS2's Anti-Alising solution as it either did'nt deliver what they wanted, or it was a resource+system hog, with every polygon used, needing to be distance sorted and required using full hieght frame buffers, which took a huge chunk out of already very limited texture memory.

The software solution was a full screen blur,which suited some but not others.

Things like LE Mans of PS2 had lower quality textures, Quake 3 bots having weaker than PC or DC versions A.I etc, all there in various magazine interviews with the people making the games, yet people still seem to see the PS2 as this uber powerful beast compared to Dreamcast.

Yes it had lighting effects DC could'nt do and yep, pushed more Polys, but it was far from the 75 Million Polys oh sorry, 66 Million polys pushing beast Sony claimed.

The VRam limits on PS2, i 1st really noticed on Ace Combat 4, flying anything above 300 feet, lovely ground textures, giving 'impression' of detailed city below you, drop below that and textures blured, thus loosing all the detail.

Surprised to see slowdown in quite so many PS2 games, R-Type Final, Mark Of Kri, Sky Gunner, Super Trucks, S.O.S being the most recent i've found.

I was very much looking forward to EXO on PS2, said at the time, to be the PS2's Halo' and coming from Amiga/ST 'Powerdrome/Warhead' coder, Glyn Williams, i had very high hopes.

But sadly, it was abandoned as he+the team found it impossible to get a decent frame rate for the game on PS2, espically given the early, 'immature' development tools+documentation Sony supplied.

He went on to say the PS2's limited texture Ram, meant they had to aim for low texture, but high quality (good lighting and modelling) visuals, but even then system struggle in terms of frame rate.

Another Halo for PS2, developer, Guerilla, whilst very praise-worthy of PS2's flexibility on things like Vertex Shaders etc, hit a brick wall with frame rate issues again, as they found once you put in game logic like NPC character movement and enemy A.I, the frame rate took a big hit.Lowering graphical detail did little if anything to improve matters.

Whilst numerous coders found PS2 a techno-junkies dream to work with (allowing you to get closer to the metal, as they put it), the realisation that what it could do, compared to Sonys 'DC destroying' tech claims were 2 very different things, Hideo K.had planned for thousands of soliders on-screen after hearing the PS2 annoucement, he soon scaled that back soon as the 1st PS2 dev.kits arrived.

 

As for Suda-Very much enjoyed Shadows Of The Damned on 360, as i did Lollipop Chainsaw on PS3, have PS3 No More Heroes sat here to try as well, so looking forward to Killer 7, just need to finish Halo 4 1st.

hey guys

so I tried out my PS2 via component for the first time properly have to say I've been pleasantly surprised! I did some googling and apparently theres an issue with PAL games playing in progressive even if their NTSC counterpart does. Either way I happen to think all the games looked much better even just through the standard component settings. the usual suspects all looked much better than before and while I don't think its as crystal clear as the Dreamcast I am certainly going to retract my previous statements about how horrible the picture is. Drakengard, Tekken 5, Transformers, couple others I tried they all looked really lovely! I'm surprised that neither God Of War game on the PS2 has 60hz mode... that was pretty shocking. And in order to play ps1 games you have to go back to the rgb scart but hey ho, anyway bottom line, I'm very happy with my new and improved ps2 picture and I'm looking forward to trying Killzone on it again

Tried out a few PS2 games today to try and 'nail down' my beef with the picture quality, even via Component, hopefully the following will describe it best:

Started with SOS, 50 Hz only, not exactly a benchmark PS2 game, but does display the isues best.Whilst the character and building (models) look fine (jaaggies aside), things like:hedges, bushes, tree's and ground textures all look 'blurry' and out of focus when not moving and there's a 'shimmering effect' when in motion.

Next up:Wipeout Fusion, again only saw a Widescreen option, so turned that ON, 50 Hz only (and Dolby Pro Logic II but for intro only?), track+craft look fine, game runs nice and smoothly, but there it is again, that 'blurry' look, this time on the 'people' in the stadium stands.

Predator:Concrete Jungle next, another 50 Hz only game, seemed fine for little i played of it (game camera is horrendous no matter which type i selected).

Space Channel 5, 60 Hz option, selected, game looked fine (jaggies not counting).

War Of The Monsters, again 50 Hz only, majority of game looked great, but again, this low res/blur look to trees etc.

Primal will be next, 60 Hz+Progressive scan options.


So what i've found so far:

Seems very hit and miss to find a 60 Hz (or indeed a Widescreen) option on PS2 games, claims of Dolby 5.1 in games by Sony VERY miss-leading, it's cutscenes if that and even Dolby 2 support seems thin on the ground.

The 'blur' or shimmer, really is odd, looks like low res texture's being upscaled/streched.Possibly due to PS2's limited texture Ram?.

Will go through my games collection and report further.

Next couple:

Transformers-Something i've completed on SD TV, off to a grand start, W/S, 60 Hz options, Surround sound, sort of things i expect from a PS2 game as standard.

Bearing in mind 1st level is Aztec temple/jungle setting, thought it'd be idea game to check for that blury look to textures and shimmering when moving, yep there they both were, yet things like light beams looked great.

Followed that by Mark Of Kri, No 60 Hz or W/S options i could see, so had to endure small, but noticable borders.

Ground textures etc looked fine, shimmering came into effect on textures of stone walls, thatched roof etc when moving.

Tried a few more:

Freak Out, 50 Hz only and MASSIVE borders!, but other wise visually fine, but then has it's own graphical style.

Rygar, again, 50 Hz only, walls, pillars, floors etc (anything with a stone texture) had the shimmer when moving, as for the grass etc, bleegh, a green vomit look, blotchy, speckled mess.

Shinobi a 60 Hz option thank god, slight shimmer to ground texture when moving, chopper spotlight beams looked fine.

Kuri Kuri Mix, 50 Hz only (again) as well as MASSIVE fecking borders, shocking to see these on a PS2 title and as with Freak Out espically when restricted to 50 Hz only, but no shimmering issues as such.

Have to say, finding the PS2 as a gaming machine VERY similar to my exp.when owning an N64.

On paper, both promised an awful lot in terms of increases in power over their rivals (N64 VS PS1, PS2 VS DC), yet in reality, comprimises had to be made and the video out on both was very dissapointing.

In terms of audio, stero sound is far more common in PS2 games than Dolby Pro Logic II from games i've tried, let alone the claimed Dolby 5.1, would appear that just as in case of N64, sound requires processing power, so it's got to be a case of comprimising on 1 area so as you don't starve another.

Games like Fatal Frame (Project Zero) really did work far better on Xbox thanks to the wonderful atmosphere generated by audio being in 5.1 surround.

Visually? seeing a lot of low res textures, repeated textures, as i did on N64, but there you had cartridge limitations, here it appears to be texture Ram, as PS2 often streaming assests off DVD.The repeated textures issue is a nightmare in games with a strict time limit as, due to everything looking the same, it's so easy to get lost and you end up going in circles, just trying to find your way out of an area you've already cleared.

PS2 seems great at delivering lighting effects, huge bosses, but looking at things like the Devil May Cry or Onimusha series, your talking pre-rendered backdrops, something i thought more at home on PS1 era hardware.

Also surprised not see more advances made in A.I, things like Gran Turismo still using the same, weak A.I routines from the PS1 series, Quake 3 bots being dumber than DC versions.

In the right hands, with decent development tools, BOTH the N64 and PS2 played host to some stunning games, but found on both i'm having to scale back expectations and cut through more 'chaff' than expected, to get at the 'wheat'.

Good job PS2 games i want to try are, in the main, cheap to pick up. :-)

The PS2 'Visual Experiment' continues...

Tenchu:Wrath Of Heaven. Where do i start? Nightmare camera, 'murky' visuals (brown+grey seem very in), slowdown, poor A.I and only 50 Hz.


Socom:US Navy seals, decnt enough A.I, 50 Hz (and borders), buildings seem to dissapear into a 'Pea-Souper' when viewed close up.


The Red Star, 50 Hz, borders, Dolby Pro Logic II, no sign of the 'shimmering' via component.

Shadow Of Memories.50 Hz, borders textures 'blur' whe moving, the solidify once i stop moving.

Ratio of 50 Hz only games to that of having 60 Hz seems quite biased towards 50 Hz so far, not a good sign.

Even on CRT, the picture on my ps2 was crap. Mainly because I was using the standard leads. Once I upgraded to a gold scart the difference was huge. It was pin sharp in comparison, so much so that even my lovely wife passed comment. She doesn't usually notice things like that lol.

I've had it hooked up to my LCD a number of times, and now that I think of it, I was using a LCD set quite some time before having the likes of the 360 etc, so my PS2 would have featured heavily under it. I don't remember any disappointment back then, and I wasn't disappointed recently either. Of course, it looks weak compared to the newer stuff but that's a given.

Dare I suggest RT that maybe your PS2 might be a little jaded? I dunno, just seems strange that its so poor for you. I suppose you don't have a CRT lying around somewhere so you can play it the way god intended, and make sure it's not on the blink at the same time.

As for the DC, I never owned one...

Quote from: "Crusto"Even on CRT, the picture on my ps2 was crap. Mainly because I was using the standard leads. Once I upgraded to a gold scart the difference was huge. It was pin sharp in comparison, so much so that even my lovely wife passed comment. She doesn't usually notice things like that lol.

I've had it hooked up to my LCD a number of times, and now that I think of it, I was using a LCD set quite some time before having the likes of the 360 etc, so my PS2 would have featured heavily under it. I don't remember any disappointment back then, and I wasn't disappointed recently either. Of course, it looks weak compared to the newer stuff but that's a given.

Dare I suggest RT that maybe your PS2 might be a little jaded? I dunno, just seems strange that its so poor for you. I suppose you don't have a CRT lying around somewhere so you can play it the way god intended, and make sure it's not on the blink at the same time.

As for the DC, I never owned one...

As i mentioned earlier, a CRT does disguise an awful lot of picture blemishes, which HD will highlight.PS2 is working fine, it's just Sony's hardware has so many comprimises made to it, pushing polys is fine, but when it comes at cost of restricted texture Ram and poor video out, let alone 'faking' a games res, a la MGS3, where PS2 hardware upscales an image before putting it to TV screen (which my TV then upscales again) bound to be issues.

It's not just the video 'quality' that's a dissapointment, but Sony clearly over hyped the audio cabilities, Dolby Pro Logic is best i've seen for in-game, as for proclaimed 5.1? only seen it in 1 game, MGS 2 and that's cutscenes.


It's been an interesting experiment and like i said earlier PS2 will never be anything more than another N64 for myself, gulf between claimed power and actual power, some very decent games, but it'll never be a system i collect for or cherish the way i did my MD, PS1, DC etc.

So many of the games i've yet to try on it are avaiable on Xbox and i know that looks fine via component on my TV, so that's the version i'll be getting either that or the PSP version.

As a DC owner, hearing the hype that PS2 had grown up and middleware had solved the development difficulties etc, quite shocked by poor 60 Hz support and games that just ar'nt blowing the DC equiv.out of the water.

yeah I was shocked to see no option to turn either of the God Of War games into 60hz or widescreen, they are benchmarks of graphical quality on the PS2 and ok the standard picture looks ok on my LED with a component cable but I can tell the textures are pretty low res and the colours are not filtering through very well. Though it is far better than it ever was via scart or RCA and it does look nice by comparison. Still the DC picture just looks a lot clearer imo

The US versions of God of War 1 & 2 run at 480p/16:9 and might be the best looking games for the system. But, this article explains the lack of 480p for the PAL version:

http://spong.com/article/12309/God-of-W ... or-No-480p (http://spong.com/article/12309/God-of-War-II-The-Real-Reason-For-No-480p)

Quote from: "dcultrapro"yeah I was shocked to see no option to turn either of the God Of War games into 60hz or widescreen, they are benchmarks of graphical quality on the PS2 and ok the standard picture looks ok on my LED with a component cable but I can tell the textures are pretty low res and the colours are not filtering through very well. Though it is far better than it ever was via scart or RCA and it does look nice by comparison. Still the DC picture just looks a lot clearer imo

Good call there, i mean long and the short of it is, PS2 like ANY platform has had it's share of poor ports, poor optimised games etc, but when Sony themselves cannot be arsed to put something like a 60 Hz or at very least a bloody W/S display option in 2 of their flagship titles, the 2nd right towards the end of the PS's era as a key console, then to me it speaks volumes.

How could they put pressure on other developers to include features they themselves are'nt putting in?.

Packing up the PS2 tonight, just cannot be doing with a console which deals in such half measures on so many areas.It's NOT the console Sony sold to the world, nor many have claimed it to be, in my experience.

Quote from: "tomwaits"The US versions of God of War 1 & 2 run at 480p/16:9 and might be the best looking games for the system. But, this article explains the lack of 480p for the PAL version:

http://spong.com/article/12309/God-of-W ... or-No-480p (http://spong.com/article/12309/God-of-War-II-The-Real-Reason-For-No-480p)

'Funny' how Sony were'nt concerned about noticable picture quality on God Of war HD collection Vol 1 (not tried Vol 2) as the cutscenes are kept in original video image and look bloody awful when upscaled, yet entire game had a true HD make over....

that excuse was utter rubbish honestly. I mean the console either runs at 480p/60hz across the board or it doesn't. Dreamcast does 60hz in all regions and isn't restricted by resolution differences based on region etc, what a crock

To me, the PS2 often seems little more than a collection of excuses, 60 Hz support seems few and far between, it cannot do Dolby 5.1 in anything other than cut-scenes as the hardware cannot processs it in-game, so pointless Sony proclaiming it part of the hardware, from gaming point of view, it's not pushing the 66 Million Polys in game either.

The Getaway was not the 2nd coming Sony claimed it would be, the hardware is throttled by PS2's small, on-chip Ram, thus leading to 'murky' visuals, drab and flat  textures in so many games.

Seems a lot of games are rendering in around 640X240 and so look rough on HD TV's, so for Sony to say they were concerned about image quality in PS2 God Of War is laughable, where was the Ram the system so badly needed? the ability to render an image at 640X480, 60 Hz and send image to TV after flicker filtering, like DC had? why do games like Ico, MGS3 etc force hardware to cheat in terms of the resolution?.

Mines been packed away and very doubtful it'll have that status changed any time soon.

Miserable bastard 

Quote from: "Crusto"Miserable bastard 

Very true.

All that time, wated on pea-souper PS2 titles, looking for W/S and 60 Hz options that don't exist, pissing around with cables and TV settings trying to get decent picture, could have been spent GAMING on my Dreamcast.....

Why torture yourself? Have another stint at demons souls instead good sir.

Quote from: "Crusto"Why torture yourself? Have another stint at demons souls instead good sir.

Now that would be torturing myself.PS3 wi-fi with BT Home Hub 3? LOL, ohhh you'll connect, after about 5 attempts, to PSN, but online gaming? forget it, tried earlier with KZ3 online, server times out every time. :-(

Home plugs good sir, it's the way forward. Problem solved for around £80 or so, it's almost the same as a wired connection. An unnecessary expense maybe, but at least you can play online again.

Quote from: "Crusto"Home plugs good sir, it's the way forward. Problem solved for around £80 or so, it's almost the same as a wired connection. An unnecessary expense maybe, but at least you can play online again.

So...on top of what i paid for the PS3, what i'm paying BT per month another £80 to 'fix' an issue with my PS3 when my 360+iPad connect seamlessly as do my PSP's....and then you've PSN's 'weekly' (or so it seems) 'Unplanned Maintance' downtime.....

NOT going to happen.

Sony did'nt upgrade the Wi-Fi used in PS3's with the Slim model nor the model after.MS at least did with the 360 Slim

Hmmmn.

Might 1 reason DC games seem to boast more with 60 Hz options than PS2 titles in Europe, be that SEGA included the 'Option Code' in it's DC programming kit, for developers?.

Did SONY offer a similar option in PS2 dev.kits i wonder?.