Support NeoGAF

[maskrider]

maskrider, what's your setup like? I'd like to read impressions from someone in possession of an HDTV. I'd also like to correct those suggesting this is some quasi-1080i configuration. You're wrong -- this is the real deal, baby.

My LCD monitor takes the 1080i signal and display it in a 640x480 area if I use native mode, if I stretch (screen fill), the scaling on the monitor is really bad.

But even when displaying 480p and 1080i in a 640x480 window, 1080i is sharper and has more resolution than 480p. But for sure the track sides are now too clear that the (original) low resolution stuffs now stand out.

 

[isamu]

Is that a Sanyo PLV-Z1?
If so then it only has a native res of 964x544. It would be scaling the 1080i image to its native res."

yup - that's the one, and i think that's what it has to be doing.

"The Z3 should do a better job of resolving the 1080i image since it has a native res of 1280x720 (720p spec.)
I Look forward to reading your findings with the new projector."

Debating what to do - might hold off for a while.

A bit OT but DC have you considered upgrading your projector to a DLP unit like say the Infocus Screenplay 5700 or the better 7205 unit? If not, why not?

Oh and how much screendoor effect does the Z1 produce?

What size screen are you throwing?

 

[AlphaSnake]

I just can't stop laughing at the thought of 1080i. GT4 is doing it with 60fps. MS couldn't even get Forza running at 60fps...

 

[acklame]

the ign xbox board is hilarious
so many fanboys :lol

 

[MrSingh]

Is that a Sanyo PLV-Z1?
If so then it only has a native res of 964x544. It would be scaling the 1080i image to its native res."

yup - that's the one, and i think that's what it has to be doing.

"The Z3 should do a better job of resolving the 1080i image since it has a native res of 1280x720 (720p spec.)
I Look forward to reading your findings with the new projector."

Debating what to do - might hold off for a while.

C'mon Mr. Bonus, you can do it.

 

[BeOnEdge]

This thread really wants me to laugh in the face of whoever it was, all that time ago, that started trying to rag on GT4 and started the infamous background-photoshops because of a background bitmap in a screenshot. I'm sure at this point they're sitting in a corner, curled in the fetal position, vainly clutchin their S-controller, foaming at the mouth, and sucking on the USB connector trying to convince themselves that Forza is still the game to buy.

Stings don't it bitches??!!

you mean this isnt 1080i? :lol

i'm sorry. not trolling. this is just classic BoE.

 

[DCharlie]

"C'mon Mr. Bonus, you can do it."

I've already spent it all on cheap women and K-Tel records.

 

[cobragt3]

can someone explain something to me? Ok, gt4 is supporting 1080i so if someone was to make a direct feed pic with the right equipment to capture the game's res, would the pic's res be higher than 640x480? the ps2's max res is 1280x1024

 

[duckroll]

After viewing these screen shots, can we finally agree that PS2 is more powerful then the Xbox when coded properly?

After viewing these "screen shots" the only thing I think we can finally agree on is that your photobucket bandwidth has been exceeded. :lol :lol :lol

 

[doncale]

48 GB/sec eDRAM bandwidth on PS2's GS > 6.4 GB/sec Xbox (and NV2A doesnt even get all of that)


60fps > 30fps


GT4 > Forza

 

[mashoutposse]

you mean this isnt 1080i? :lol

:lol :lol :lol

That shit gets me every time.

 

[Gek54]

Bungie is alright, its Bizzare and whoever is developing Forza who should be ahamed for their wanting visual performance.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Shit...no gauge display? I don't like that digital bar thing for the RPMs. I need to see the actual gauge cluster. Someone please tell me you can change the HUD...please.

I capped this from a video posted at GTplanet:

 

[Gek54]

It's a microsoft internal team (bizzare did PGR, dude! get it right :lol .)

I said "and" in regards to both PGR2 and Forza succombing to 30fps.

 

[duckroll]

I said "and" in regards to both PGR2 and Forza succombing to 30fps.

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?

 

[DCharlie]

"Bungie is alright, its Bizzare and whoever is developing Forza who should be ahamed for their wanting visual performance."

perhaps they can do an exchange? Poly can fix Bizzares wanting visuals and Bizzare can fix Poly's wanting online mode ?

 

[duckroll]

Reflecting on this thread, it has all the worst habits of GAF all rolled into one. Tons of generalization, misinformed flaming, wannabe technical knowitalls that know jack shit, fanboyism and general rudeness.

Let's see first it's: "The PS2 cannot do 1080i, it is impossible, here are technical facts that I know that can prove this man is a LIAR!"

Then it's: "I bet it's only 1080i in photo mode, can't be anything else!"

After everyone got owned it becomes: "Wow awesome I knew it all along, Polyphony just proved PS2 > X-Box!"

With a bit of: "He had no proof anyway, just his smiley Taiwanese board I bet they're all pirates and liars that spread rumors! Why would anyone believe him!"

Which has now degenerated to: "Not only is PS2 > X-Box in technical specs (nya nya I DON'T WANT TO HEAR THE TRUTH!) but X-Box developers have a lot to learn! Because Polyphony is the ONLY DEVELOPER FOR PS2! (nya nya I DON'T WANT TO HEAR THE TRUTH!)"

Really fucking sad. Really.

P.S. I know none of these quotes are real but it was all implied and don't try to deny otherwise.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I capped this from a video posted at GTplanet:

But I don't like racing in 1st person. Dammit...

 

[Kabuki Waq]

But I don't like racing in 1st person. Dammit...

WTF? you being sarcastic?

 

[XS+]

WTF? you being sarcastic?

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

 

[AlphaSnake]

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

Exactly.

Edit: I also prefer to see the car I'm driving and prefer to see *how* I'm driving. I like to see just how close I'm cutting a corner, or how smooth my turns look. A barren 1st person mode just doesn't cut it for me.

 

[SolidSnakex]

These are all the driving angles:

 

[Project Midway]

Edit: I also prefer to see the car I'm driving and prefer to see *how* I'm driving. I like to see just how close I'm cutting a corner, or how smooth my turns look. A barren 1st person mode just doesn't cut it for me.

I feel exact opposite. I feel that I can drive corners much better from 1st person view. I'm always under or oversteering from 3d person views since I *can* see my car when in reality I shouldnt. =) and I consider 3rd person views as cheating since they gave you a much better view distance, in other word unrealistic. You can see corners way too early since to view is high above the car.

 

[Rainbow L33T]

I wouldn't say that 1st person view is realistic either.The bumper one anyway.Better sense of speed for sure.The second pic SS just posted looks to be the best in my case.

 

[TTP]

YES! DAMMIT YES!

 

[Socreges]

OK. I need a fucking HDTV.

:O

And for the record, first-person > *. Different, better experience.

 

[fobtastic]

Reflecting on this thread, it has all the worst habits of GAF all rolled into one. Tons of generalization, misinformed flaming, wannabe technical knowitalls that know jack shit, fanboyism and general rudeness.

LOL, so true, and they're still trying to save face. :lol Someone needs to make an Owned pic with all their quotes. cobragt3 never owed it to anyone to prove anything, especially after the way he was treated. Nothing wrong with skepticism, but have a little courtesy.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Pics of GT4's launch in Japan:

 

[Rainbow L33T]

I think they have a hit :lol

I wonder why they are pushing back the release this much for NA.Unless they want to make some improvement.


What was Sony first shipment supose to be?

 

[Rorschach]

Greenlight online for the US and then I'll make with the bjs. No sooner!

 

[mrklaw]

There are no 1080i projectors. I still have a panasonic AE100 which is only 854x480, but movies still look great. I'll probably upgrade eventually, but I'm hoping to skip 720p and go straight to a 1080 one, probably in a couple of years.

I don't see a problem in it rendering a 4:3 image and the TV stretching it. Thats what happens for 480p anyway.

 

[thorns]

does the game render at the full 1080i resolution (1080x1920) or just renders at 540x640 then showing it at three times the horizontal resolution? With scanline interleaving trick you can display 540 vertical lines on 1080i , which is basically equals to 540p. it's not much of a difference between 640x480 and 640x540, so my guess is that is how the game achieves that, thus there isn't a huge graphical difference between the two modes. I don't think it's as big of a technical feat as most of the people here seem to make it to be.

 

[Forsete]

Is the game really showing a true 1080i image, or have they blown up a 20x15 image to a 1080i compatible screen? Grabbing for straws, naah, no way!

*refuses to believe the game supports 1080i*

 

[thorns]

Is the game really showing a true 1080i image, or have they blown up a 20x15 image to a 1080i compatible screen? Grabbing for straws, naah, no way!

*refuses to believe the game supports 1080i*

:lol
you can continue to believe the game renders at 1080x1960, maybe the uber programmers at polyphony found a way to magically quadruple ps2's fillrate?
the game doesn't even support 720p, which would require it to render 720 lines properly, let alone 1080, which obviously it does not, and very very few games do support that since it's a huge jump from 640x480.

most of the skepticism about 1080i was towards ps2 rendering at 1080x1960 resolution, NOT at rendering at 540x640 and then upscaling.

 

[Shogmaster]

LOL, so true, and they're still trying to save face. :lol Someone needs to make an Owned pic with all their quotes. cobragt3 never owed it to anyone to prove anything, especially after the way he was treated. Nothing wrong with skepticism, but have a little courtesy.

Hold on a bit though. The fact of the situation is that gt3cobra was wrong to say GT4 does "1080i".

By looking at the evidence, it's clear that GT4 is not doing true 1080i, no matter what Sony is saying in their press material. It's doing what looks like 640x1080i internally and then stretching it horizontally x3 (basically showing the same pixel 3 times in a row horizonatlly). That's far from true 1080i (1920 horizonal pixels). It's not even rendering as many pixels as 720P (1280 pixels x 720 pixels vertically).

In a single frame (60th of a second), GT4's "Hivision" potentially has to crank out 345,600 new pixels (640x540), while a true 1080i 60FPS game would have to crank out 1,036,800 new pixels (1920x540), and 720P 60FPS game would have to crank out 921,600 new pixels (1280x720).

345,600 vs. 1,036,800. That's only a third of true 1080i. I think folks here were right to be skeptical, no?

 

[Kanbee-san]

Exactly.

Edit: I also prefer to see the car I'm driving and prefer to see *how* I'm driving. I like to see just how close I'm cutting a corner, or how smooth my turns look. A barren 1st person mode just doesn't cut it for me.

Really ? I think it shows you too much of the course and surroundings. FP view is always the way to go IMO. Especially when games like RSC2, Toca 2, CMR4/5, F1 Challenge + mods, GTR and Nascar do it so bloody well. I find third person almost like cheating.

 

[thorns]

that's a very nice view. The problem I usually have with the first person views such as bumper is the very low field of vision. I would like to see as far left and right of me as possible when racing (especially with other cars around). I wish they would have a view where you see about half of the car on the screen but you're not so close to the ground and still have a wide enough angle.

I don't like that floating in air without a cockpit view either, I prefer to see some part of the car on the screen. Cockpit view is the best of course but I understand that it takes a lot of resources to make authentic cockpits (probably modelling a cockpit well is at least as hard as a car, and takes as much polys..)

 

[mrklaw]

Hang on a minute.

Are we assuming that 1080i = 1920x1080 pixels? Isn't anamorphically squeezed 1080i just as valid? Can anyone with hivision in Japan check if the source is 4:3?

eg, a widescreen movie can be 480p, and technically needs to fill 848x480 pixels. But they are stored on DVD as 704x480, and the TV unsqueezes the image.

I don't know if any console is even capable of outputting a full widescreen image, or if any TV can accept one. I'm fully prepared to be corrected, but aren't all sources effectively 4:3 in nature, and then expanded by the TV?

The PS2 would have to output a 704x1080i image - 540 lines per refresh. Thats effectively not many more pixels than 480p, but you get much more detail (at the expense of framerate - see the 720p Vs 1080i debate on AVSforum etc for more)

So I think it might be unfair to blame the machine or the developer, and perhaps instead commend them on some lateral thinking to get significantly increased detail, resulting in much better distance vision - very important for a racing game.

 

[Kanbee-san]

Hang on a minute.

Are we assuming that 1080i = 1920x1080 pixels? Isn't anamorphically squeezed 1080i just as valid? Can anyone with hivision in Japan check if the source is 4:3?

eg, a widescreen movie can be 480p, and technically needs to fill 848x480 pixels. But they are stored on DVD as 704x480, and the TV unsqueezes the image.

I don't know if any console is even capable of outputting a full widescreen image, or if any TV can accept one. I'm fully prepared to be corrected, but aren't all sources effectively 4:3 in nature, and then expanded by the TV?

The PS2 would have to output a 704x1080i image - 540 lines per refresh. Thats effectively not many more pixels than 480p, but you get much more detail (at the expense of framerate - see the 720p Vs 1080i debate on AVSforum etc for more)

So I think it might be unfair to blame the machine or the developer, and perhaps instead commend them on some lateral thinking to get significantly increased detail, resulting in much better distance vision - very important for a racing game.

So does GT4 do true 1080i or just upscale ? This is making me fucking confused.

 

[Shogmaster]

Hang on a minute.

Are we assuming that 1080i = 1920x1080 pixels? Isn't anamorphically squeezed 1080i just as valid? Can anyone with hivision in Japan check if the source is 4:3?

For this to work, it has to be 640x540. Not really 4:3, right?

eg, a widescreen movie can be 480p, and technically needs to fill 848x480 pixels. But they are stored on DVD as 704x480, and the TV unsqueezes the image.

But most DVD movies are not even 480p, but just 480i so......

I don't know if any console is even capable of outputting a full widescreen image, or if any TV can accept one. I'm fully prepared to be corrected, but aren't all sources effectively 4:3 in nature, and then expanded by the TV?

AFAIK, static camera angle games like Syberia 2 for XBox was true 1280x720. I'm not sure about other more action oriented 720p titles though.... And now I actually think XBox Soul Calibur 2's 720p wasn't even 960x720. It might have been 720x720 or 704x720.

The PS2 would have to output a 704x1080i image - 540 lines per refresh.

704 does not divide evenly into 1920. It would be better to be 640 horizontal, no?

Thats effectively not many more pixels than 480p, but you get much more detail (at the expense of framerate - see the 720p Vs 1080i debate on AVSforum etc for more)

So it could for GT4 be something like 704x480p (4:3) or 853x480p (16:9) or 640x1080i. Per frame, 337,920 pixels or 409,440 or 345,600. If true, it would be ironic that the 16:9 480p mode is the most fillrate taxing!

So I think it might be unfair to blame the machine or the developer, and perhaps instead commend them on some lateral thinking to get significantly increased detail, resulting in much better distance vision - very important for a racing game.

I'm not blaming anyone! I think what polyphony has done is really ingenious. I just think we should look at it properly, and not as some kind of incredible magical feat.

 

[Izzy]

:lol
you can continue to believe the game renders at 1080x1960, maybe the uber programmers at polyphony found a way to magically quadruple ps2's fillrate?
the game doesn't even support 720p, which would require it to render 720 lines properly, let alone 1080, which obviously it does not, and very very few games do support that since it's a huge jump from 640x480.

most of the skepticism about 1080i was towards ps2 rendering at 1080x1960 resolution, NOT at rendering at 540x640 and then upscaling.

So it's rendering at 540x640 now? Where is your empirical evidence?

One more thing: A dose of scepticism is always healthy, but why is it that the most of the sceptics in this thread are also well know former SEGA/nowdays XBox fans? Food for thought.

 

[Shogmaster]

So it's rendering at 540x640 now? Where is your empirical evidence?

One more thing: A dose of scepticism is always healthy, but why is it that the most of the sceptics in this thread are also well know former SEGA/nowdays XBox fans? Food for thought.

Check out B3D thread. Faffy taffy waffy basically said that the game is doing 3X horizontal stretching by looking at the 480p vs 1080i comparo pics. As for emprical evidence against true 1080i, just the sheer math proves it (PS2's 4MB VRAM won't allow for true 1080i).

But then again, you didn't even notice that there isn't any empirical evidence for GT4 is doing true 1080i either. Funny that.

 

[Izzy]

Check out B3D thread. Faffy taffy waffy basically said that the game is doing 3X horizontal stretching by looking at the 480p vs 1080i comparo pics. As for emprical evidence against true 1080i, just the sheer math proves it (PS2's 4MB VRAM won't allow for true 1080i).

But then again, you didn't even notice that there isn't any empirical evidence for GT4 is doing true 1080i either. Funny that.

The presence of 1080i mode in the game is the evidence enough - all the talk about stretching is just a speculation, I'm afraid.

But, if it does stretching, isn't the native 640x960 the more likely res considering the size of the buffer?

 

[Shogmaster]

The presence of 1080i mode in the game is the evidence enough - all the talk about stretching is just a speculation, I'm afraid.

Now you are just refusing to use your brain.

Basically the question comes down to:

A). Do you believe in some wierd voodoo magic that Polyphony employs that would magically infuse few million more transistors to the GS to extend it's eDRAM beyond 4MB,

or

B). Do you believe that a clever trick was used to accomplish the task?

You are choosing option A apparently.

But, if it does stretching, isn't the native 640x960 the more likely res considering the size of the buffer?

Seeing as how there isn't any apparent texture quality drop between the modes, I think 640x540 is more likely than 640x960.

 

[mrklaw]

I'm curious to find out what options there are for 1080i - what does the TV expect as an input?

The 'exact multiples' isn't obvious, as 480p is 704 pixels wide, but stretched by your TV to 854 pixels - not a neat multiplier.

Just from sheer common sense, I'd expect it to be either 1920x1080i from the PS2 (hacked to acheive it however), or a 4:3 frame expanded on the TV. You'd get the same horizontal stretching if the TV is doing it.

 

[AndriaSang]

I just tried out GT4 on this:

http://av.hitachi.co.jp/tv/lcd/23v/hivision/index.html

Does anyone else notice that it doesn't run exactly full screen in 1080i or 480p modes? Normal interlaced mode runs full screen (although there's a little black strip on either the left or right side -- I can't get rid of it even if I use the game's screen adjustment feature). There are black bars on all four sides for the high def modes.

1080i or 480p, the game doesn't look to me to be that much better one way or the other, perhaps because my television isn't all that big. I was blown away by switching Soul Calibur on Xbox to 720p -- the difference was amazing. But switching GT4 to 1080i didn't have as much of an effect -- things look cleaner overall, but the game has the same dancing lines that Prologue had. Both high definition modes are definitely better than standard interlaced mode, though.

 

[Blimblim]

A lot of HDTV do not have overscan (or at least a lot less) in HD modes. That's probably why you have black bars.

 

[DCharlie]

"Are we assuming that 1080i = 1920x1080 pixels? Isn't anamorphically squeezed 1080i just as valid? Can anyone with hivision in Japan check if the source is 4:3?"

well, when i pick 1080i it FORCES 16:9 mode.

 

[cobragt3]

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

 

[cobragt3]

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