Support NeoGAF

[Shogmaster]

The max res of the ps2 is 1280x1024 so wouldn't pics of the game in 1080i be 1280x1024?

According to a PS2 developer that posts here, PS2 can actually output true 1080i (19020x1080).

I know for a fact the 480p mode is legit. Now if you have been keeping up with all the info going on in the thread, you'll know 480p is used for menu screens so lets see how big a menu screen will look if you capture a direct feed
http://gallery.felixmcli.org/gallery/gt4/gt4_video_opt
omg, the res is 852x480.

I have little doubt of GT4 doing 853x480.

Now say if someone was to do a direct feed of gt4 in 1080i, the pic would have to be as big as 1280x1024 or something to that extent

That's not the issue. Obcourse the PS2 is outputting 1920x1080 signal since it's forcing people's HDTVs into that mode. The issue is whether all the pixels of 1920x1080 is being rendered as is, or just being stretched internally from 640x540 to 1920x1080i by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.

Ofcourse the res for 1080i is 1920 x 1080 but like I said, the ps2 can do 1280x1024 which can do upscaling 1080i. So what if it's not the real deal, it's still a hdtv res and it kills 480p judging by this
http://www.thrillinghill.com/gallery/album217/480p_versus_1080i_2

The thing is, it's not even remotely close to HDTV res before PS2 stretches the image internally. 640x540 only qualifies as DTV, not HDTV. It's like calling progressive scan DVD media as HDTV media. No fucking way it is. The differenc ebetween 720p WMV9 file and it's corresponding progressive DVD version is staggering (The best example of this I've seen is the Fifth Element WMV9 making the rounds. WMV9 version even shows you the textures of the fabric the costumes are made of. It's crazy difference.).

Now don't get me wrong. I really appreciate what polyphony has done for you GT fans. 640x1080i is a big improvement over 853x480p, especially since the vertical res improvement is far more important to racers than horizontal improvement. Just don't call it true 1080i, that's all (There is good reason why Polyphony bothered to come up with the "HiVision" moniker for this mode instead of just calling it a plain old 1080i by itself in the first place).

But I found something strange about all this 1080i stuff. On the offical gt4 site for japan, there are wallpapers which are in 1080i I assume because the res for them is 1280x1024 but when I click on the pic and check out the properties, it says 1280x960. So it is possible gt4 is doing 960p?
Here's gt4 in 1080i

Sadly, I can't even play *find the jag* because there aren't that many

With screenshots, all bets are off. All devs now employ rendering multiple frames and combine into a single frame high res screen cap, according to faffy (the PS2 dev I mentioned earlier).

 

[cobragt3]

I need some help. I have a 42" zenith widescreen hdtv. It has a build in tuner with dvi-hdtv with hdcp or something like that, forgot the letters and it supports all the res formats. I just wanted to know if I'll be able to get 1080i for gt4 with ease.

 

[Fafalada]

Nm, Shog already posted the same answer about supported resolutions

 

[Shogmaster]

I need some help. I have a 42" zenith widescreen hdtv. It has a build in tuner with dvi-hdtv with hdcp or something like that, forgot the letters and it supports all the res formats. I just wanted to know if I'll be able to get 1080i for gt4 with ease.

HDMI? It would depend on the TV.

Nm, Shog already posted the same answer about supported resolutions

Speak of the devil.

 

[cobragt3]

HDMI? It would depend on the TV.

HDCP

 

[Shogmaster]

HDCP

No idea man. You might just have to try it and see when you get your copy.

 

[pcostabel]

The thing is, it's not even remotely close to HDTV res before PS2 stretches the image internally. 640x540 only qualifies as DTV, not HDTV. It's like calling progressive scan DVD media as HDTV media. No fucking way it is. The differenc ebetween 720p WMV9 file and it's corresponding progressive DVD version is staggering (The best example of this I've seen is the Fifth Element WMV9 making the rounds. WMV9 version even shows you the textures of the fabric the costumes are made of. It's crazy difference.).

640x540 is not DTV. You forget that 540 is for one field. The vertical resolution is actually 1080. I give you that 640 is one third of the horizontal resolution of a real 1080i signal, but since most HDTV cannot resolve more that ~1000 horizontal lines, it is not too far from waht you would see with a full 1080 framebuffer. DTV is 640x480p, less than half the horizontal lines.

 

[cobragt3]

According to a PS2 developer that posts here, PS2 can actually output true 1080i (19020x1080).



I have little doubt of GT4 doing 853x480.



That's not the issue. Obcourse the PS2 is outputting 1920x1080 signal since it's forcing people's HDTVs into that mode. The issue is whether all the pixels of 1920x1080 is being rendered as is, or just being stretched internally from 640x540 to 1920x1080i by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.



The thing is, it's not even remotely close to HDTV res before PS2 stretches the image internally. 640x540 only qualifies as DTV, not HDTV. It's like calling progressive scan DVD media as HDTV media. No fucking way it is. The differenc ebetween 720p WMV9 file and it's corresponding progressive DVD version is staggering (The best example of this I've seen is the Fifth Element WMV9 making the rounds. WMV9 version even shows you the textures of the fabric the costumes are made of. It's crazy difference.).

Now don't get me wrong. I really appreciate what polyphony has done for you GT fans. 640x1080i is a big improvement over 853x480p, especially since the vertical res improvement is far more important to racers than horizontal improvement. Just don't call it true 1080i, that's all (There is good reason why Polyphony bothered to come up with the "HiVision" moniker for this mode instead of just calling it a plain old 1080i by itself in the first place).



With screenshots, all bets are off. All devs now employ rendering multiple frames and combine into a single frame high res screen cap, according to faffy (the PS2 dev I mentioned earlier).

those pics aren't by the dev's if that's what you saying. A individual took those with a digi cam

 

[Guns N' Poops]

http://i-bbs.sijex.net/imageBoard.jsp?id=gt4&count=0

A huge load of cool photo mode pics (wallpapers)

 

[Shogmaster]

640x540 is not DTV. You forget that 540 is for one field. The vertical resolution is actually 1080. I give you that 640 is one third of the horizontal resolution of a real 1080i signal, but since most HDTV cannot resolve more that ~1000 horizontal lines, it is not too far from waht you would see with a full 1080 framebuffer. DTV is 640x480p, less than half the horizontal lines.

Yes, I know that DTV is 64ox480p. That's why I said 640x540 only qualifies as DTV, not it is DTV. And I don't consider anything that doe snot do minimum of 1280x720 natively as "HDTV" either.

Either way, I agree that 640x1080i via rendering 540 alternating vertical lines per refreshis very good improvement over 480p.

those pics aren't by the dev's if that's what you saying. A individual took those with a digi cam

Huh? No no, what I'm saying is that what faf observed from the comparo pics someone else posted is that horizontal details are stretched.

 

[cobragt3]

Go here
http://www.thrillinghill.com/gallery/album213/IMGP1781edit
Notice it says hdtv Can someone explain?

 

[Fafalada]

or just being stretched internally from 640x540 to 1920x1080i by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.

Well if this weren't holliday season we'd get an answer sooner, right now noone is anywhere near devkits to check the exact figures
I'm actually curious about this myself - 640 is likely given how PS2s CRT horizontal magnify works.

For vertical, I'm not sure. 540 is minimal memory increase, and it gives full 1080I vertical resolution, but it also wastes some memory because of how GS memory is aligned. On the other hand, I'm not certain right now if a different Vertical res can be used without getting borders.

 

[cobragt3]

Yes, I know that DTV is 64ox480p. That's why I said 640x540 only qualifies as DTV, not it is DTV. And I don't consider anything that doe snot do minimum of 1280x720 natively as "HDTV" either.

Either way, I agree that 640x1080i via rendering 540 alternating vertical lines per refreshis very good improvement over 480p.




Huh? No no, what I'm saying is that what faf observed from the comparo pics someone else posted is that horizontal details are stretched.

How could anyone tell when the pic wasn't a direct feed?

 

[Shogmaster]

Well if this weren't holliday season we'd get an answer sooner, right now noone is anywhere near devkits to check the exact figures
I'm actually awfully curious about this myself - 640 is fairly likely given how PS2s CRT horizontal magnify works.
For vertical, I'm not sure. 540 is minimal memory increase, and it gives full 1080I vertical resolution, but it also wastes some memory because of how GS memory is aligned. On the other hand, I'm not certain right now if a different Vertical res can be used without getting borders.

Well, I guess you are the only one who can resolve this fully to everyone's satisfaction here. You got enough holiday rest already, didn't you?

 

[TTP]

http://i-bbs.sijex.net/imageBoard.jsp?id=gt4&count=0

A huge load of cool photo mode pics (wallpapers)

Cool. These are going straight into my PSP

 

[Gek54]

So..... there are no 30 fps PS2 games? Gimme a break, Polyphony is at the top of their game, they're talented people and being Sony first party has it's advantages. That doesn't mean suddenly all X-Box developers have to "learn from Polyphony" or that PS2 > X-Box. Tons of PS2, GC and X-Box developers could learn from Polyphony, why does it have to be X-Box developers specifically?

I dont know, ask modus why he brought up bungie. I brought up MS and Bizzare becuase they are suppose to be developers that should have the skill and means to get comparable graphics out of their more powerfull machine. Konami, Codemasters and DICE are pulling off very nice graphics at 60fps on both systems. I never said PS2 hardware is better sans TFF wheel.

 

[cobragt3]

What about software mode, think PD used it to get hd support? I have heard software mode can do wonders, like do bump mapping. We all know the ps2's hardware doesn't support b-mapping but with software mode, it can happen. Think PD used software mode, they had to because the ps2's hardware doesnt support hd, correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Fafalada]

You got enough holiday rest already, didn't you?

Not nearly
Anyway, I'm in Europe until January, so it'll be at least another week before I can do this.

 

[TTP]

nm

 

[cobragt3]

Yep

 

[Shogmaster]

Go here
http://www.thrillinghill.com/gallery/album213/IMGP1781edit
Notice it says hdtv Can someone explain?

Simple. It's saying that the output is HDTV, and indeed it is (1920x1080).

How could anyone tell when the pic wasn't a direct feed?

Again, you are confusing the issue. The issue isn't whether it's a "direct feed". The issue is whether the 1920x1080 output is natively rendered or stretched by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.

 

[Fafalada]

TTP, wet road reflected cars in GT3 too, just that in a night stage it wasn't obvious enough for everyone to notice.

 

[TTP]

tnx, cobra. Damn 2 GT4 threads is killing me

 

[TTP]

TTP, wet road reflected cars in GT3 too, just that in a night stage it wasn't obvious enough for everyone to notice.

Oh nice. I didn't recall it reflected the *whole* car.

 

[cobragt3]

Simple. It's saying that the output is HDTV, and indeed it is (1920x1080).




Again, you are confusing the issue. The issue isn't whether it's a "direct feed". The issue is whether the 1920x1080 output is natively rendered or stretched by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.

How are we going to find out what we need to know, it's killing me!

 

[maskrider]

Again, you are confusing the issue. The issue isn't whether it's a "direct feed". The issue is whether the 1920x1080 output is natively rendered or stretched by the PS2 before outputting to the monitor.

Not direct to you, Shogmaster. Just wonder why people are so obsessed on this issue, heh !

It should not be rendered at 1920 for sure (unless the GT4 DVD is a cursed item that adds memory to the GS without a trace), whether it is 640/720/960 is unknown yet (I had indeed posted that early in the thread but seems no one read my post, ha ha).

 

[Shogmaster]

How are we going to find out what we need to know, it's killing me!

Look man, if you want to know if the game is truly doing 1080i, the answer is pretty clear already. It's not. The math just doesn't pan out, and the visuals just don't look true 1080i. If anyone has a PC that can render a recent racing game @1920x1080 on their Apple Cinema display or something equivilent, it would look WAY crisper than what's being shown with GT4.

Not direct to you, Shogmaster. Just wonder why people are so obsessed on this issue, heh !

It should not be rendered at 1920 for sure (unless the GT4 DVD is a cursed item that adds memory to the GS without a trace), whether it is 640/720/960 is unknown yet (I had indeed posted that early in the thread but seems no one read my post, ha ha).

I think maybe some of the GT fans are taking the phrase "Polyphony are gods!" a little too literally, and they want confirmation of their deitihood (yeah, I made up the word).

 

[Gek54]

I'm with Alpha. Until there's a racer that delivers an authentic 1st person view, I'll stick with a chase view.

GT4's is authentic in regard to the position of the camera being as far back in the car and at the same height as the drivers head. WRC4's cockpit view should be a genre standard.

 

[Zaptruder]

Look man, if you want to know if the game is truly doing 1080i, the answer is pretty clear already. It's not. The math just doesn't pan out, and the visuals just don't look true 1080i. If anyone has a PC that can render a recent racing game @1920x1080 on their Apple Cinema display or something equivilent, it would look WAY crisper than what's being shown with GT4.




I think maybe some of the GT fans are taking the phrase "Polyphony are gods!" a little too literally, and they want confirmation of their deitihood (yeah, I made up the word).

You're just taking the position of cynical and faux-knowledgable consumer because you can't be like them!

 

[Lord Error]

(There is good reason why Polyphony bothered to come up with the "HiVision" moniker for this mode instead of just calling it a plain old 1080i by itself in the first place).

Actually, they are calling it 1080i, because it apparently is. As far as I understand, even by HDTV standard, horizontal resolution does not have to be the highest specced. What's needed to have that 1080i mark, is to have proper vertical resolution.

 

[mrklaw]

whats with the stretching thing? Is it being suggested that its internal buffer is 640x540, and its stretching *as its outputted to the display* i.e not using any more memory? Or is it supposedly creating the 1920x540 image internally by scaling *then* outputting it? Cause that last one doesn't sound like it saves memory and I didn't know the PS2 could do the first one.

As for forcing 16:9 in 1080 mode, that could mean 1920 wide, but it could also just mean that the TV recognises hivision and goes into stretch mode. Need to check up on HD resolutions (of source material)

I'd imagine they use the HiVision 'moniker' as thats what HD is called in Japan. BTW, I thought that was 1125i - has it settled down to 1080 now?

 

[Shogmaster]

You're just taking the position of cynical and faux-knowledgable consumer because you can't be like them!

My big brain just won't let me believe! OH HOW I WANT TO BELIEVE!!! :lol

 

[maskrider]

whats with the stretching thing? Is it being suggested that its internal buffer is 640x540, and its stretching *as its outputted to the display* i.e not using any more memory? Or is it supposedly creating the 1920x540 image internally by scaling *then* outputting it? Cause that last one doesn't sound like it saves memory and I didn't know the PS2 could do the first one.

You program the CRT controller (video encoder) to do that.

As for forcing 16:9 in 1080 mode, that could mean 1920 wide, but it could also just mean that the TV recognises hivision and goes into stretch mode. Need to check up on HD resolutions (of source material)

I'd imagine they use the HiVision 'moniker' as thats what HD is called in Japan. BTW, I thought that was 1125i - has it settled down to 1080 now?

Yes, Hi-Vision is a term used in Japan, just like the D-terminal and the D-conventions that are used in Japan.

1125i includes the invisible lines (non-displaying lines), 1080i specifies the visible lines.

 

[pcostabel]

whats with the stretching thing? Is it being suggested that its internal buffer is 640x540, and its stretching *as its outputted to the display* i.e not using any more memory? Or is it supposedly creating the 1920x540 image internally by scaling *then* outputting it? Cause that last one doesn't sound like it saves memory and I didn't know the PS2 could do the first one.

As for forcing 16:9 in 1080 mode, that could mean 1920 wide, but it could also just mean that the TV recognises hivision and goes into stretch mode. Need to check up on HD resolutions (of source material)

I'd imagine they use the HiVision 'moniker' as thats what HD is called in Japan. BTW, I thought that was 1125i - has it settled down to 1080 now?

A 640x540 buffer will output a 640x1080i signal (i.e. two 640x540 fileds interlaced). The horizontal resolution of a TV signal can be anything since the signal is analog, so the 640 pixels are 'stretched' by the TV to cover the full width of the screen. As far as the TV is concerned, a 640x1080i signal is no different that a 1920x1080i signal. Infact, most TV cannot display 1920 horizontal lines anyway, so part of that information would be thrown away.

 

[cobragt3]

question, is AA used in 480p and 1080i?

 

[mr2mike]

look at the 480p side:



It's a safe bet that no there isn't any significant anti aliasing going on, at least not beyond what GT3 was doing...

With that said, if their 480p is actually 480 lines and not the PS2's usual 448, it should still look better than GT3 IQ wise, even in plain 480i...

1080i wouldn't really need AA, IMO at least.

Oh and speaking of p and i, I finally got some prog scan racing acction going on last night, with a rallisport romp on a sony KP46WT520. fucking tight that was, I had tried PGR2 in prog scan before, but the difference really is for the 60 fps games. thinking of GT4 on that mofo is making me salivate, but it's not likely to be a frequent occurance

 

[cobragt3]

so you are suggesting high-res=less noticable jaggies? I dont know if that right

 

[cybamerc]

so you are suggesting high-res=less noticable jaggies? I dont know if that right

It is. However, GT4 still has noticable aliasing in hi-def because the horisontal resolution is quite low.

 

[mr2mike]

I'm suggesting that high resolution on a similarly sized display area implies smaller sized pixels, wich in turn, means that they are harder to discern on an individual level, so yes, that's what I'm suggesting

But I really just hope the game is running a full 480 buffer, because while GT3 looked great using the PS2's usual 448i, some tracks and enough flicker to make my eyes loose focus on the screen to the point I had to exert much effort to keep in focus. Tokyo R246 was the biggest culprit... I'm guessing that running a full 480 buffer would resolve that since I used to play a lot of Xbox racers, wich did, and th problem never surfaced.

 

[Fafalada]

With that said, if their 480p is actually 480 lines and not the PS2's usual 448

480P is always 480 - there's no way to set PS2s CRT timing in such a way that it would stretch 448 into 480 vertically.
While using 448lines for frontbuffer still works, you get a small black border on the bottom when using it.

 

[Deg]

That 480p pic is disgusting.

 

[cobragt3]

what's 480p without proper AA? Crap imo. forza has superb AA and only supports 480p. Imagine it in 1080i, that would be interesting indeed.

 

[mashoutposse]

I think Shog is on the right track. In the comparison pic, aliasing on vertical lines are almost identical between 480p and 1080i, which strongly suggests to me that the actual rendered horizontal resolution beforce conversion is also quite similar.

Since 480p is 852 lines of horizontal resolution, my best guess would be that GT4 is rendering a 960x540 image in 1080i (assuming that it has to divide evenly into 1920; if not, then 720x540 is more likely). 640x540 would show a much more noticeable difference with regards to vertical line aliasing.

One thing is for sure -- it's not doing true 1920x540.

Still, very clever work by PD.

 

[dark10x]

what's 480p without proper AA? Crap imo. forza has superb AA and only supports 480p. Imagine it in 1080i, that would be interesting indeed.

Wha? Most console games do not use anti-aliasing...

 

[DaCocoBrova]

^^

And the ones that do really shouldn't IMO cuz they're mostly, if not all 30fps because of that.

I ain't trippin'. I mean, we were supposed to only get 480i, so anything above that is good w/ me.

 

[Lord Error]

GT3 probably didn't even have a full front buffer - it definitely rendered in some interlaced mode, and it made some visible flickering in some tracks. GT4 now renders to full front buffer (thus 480p and the ability to do 1080i) so that's a nice improvement in itself.

One thing is for sure -- it's not doing true 1920x540.

I don't think any console game (advertised to do 1080i) is rendering in that resolution. It would be a waste anyways, as very few TVs can display such horizontal resolution.

 

[Fafalada]

GT3 probably didn't even have a full front buffer

It didn't, but the backbuffer was full height, which comes out the same on interlaced displays.
The advantage of full height front buffer is abiility to run progressive scan, and being able to run at less then 60fps, not any image quality difference per se.

But using the same interlacing trick, 2 full height buffers become half height 1080 buffers in this new mode - with no additional rendering cost.

Since 480p is 852 lines of horizontal resolution

It's not, it's 640x480.

852x480P wouldn't make any sense to VGA screens among other things. Even if it's "cheating" DTV standards a little, that's how consoles do it.

 

[mashoutposse]

It's not, it's 640x480.

852x480P wouldn't make any sense to VGA screens among other things. Even if it's "cheating" DTV standards a little, that's how consoles do it.

I thought 480p in 16:9 mode = 852 lines of horizontal resolution rendered. 640x1080i widescreen would equate to a much lesser horizontal resolution in a comparable 4:3 mode in comparison to 480p (only 480 versus standard 640).

720x1080i would offer a slightly lower horizontal resolution, and 960x1080i would be slightly higher.

 

[Fafalada]

Nope, 16:9 mode just changes the camera aspect ratio, not the resolution.
It's still rendered in 640x480.

 

[Lord Error]

It didn't, but the backbuffer was full height, which comes out the same on interlaced displays.

I'm... not so sure about that. I can definitely tell the difference between the image quality/flickering in games that render from full back buffer to half front buffer (such as GT3) from games that render full -> full (such as MGS2, Burnout 3, etc.)