Support NeoGAF

[Ellis]

Although it looked worse, didn't the PS2 version of Black cruise through heavy particle effect like smoke, whilst the Xbox version shit the bed and tanked it's frame rate. Would have been interesting to see how well the other consoles handled something like SotC. Overworld performance would have no doubt been much higher, but it would be interesting to see how that would chang once colossi were in view.

 

[Trunx81]

69 is better just gotta be careful.

Could be ass if you go too far.

Anyway, PS2 was amazing. So was GC and DC.
Can´t we just all be friends <3

 

[CGNoire]

not exactly, I don't know how to explain it, maybe Fafalada knows, the PS2 graphics are sharp and stable when the characters are still but can be ugly in motion due to the way the GS writes the pixels on the screen, but the big difference is the mip mapping for various reasons the devs avoid using this on the PS2 and this is responsible for many graphics being ugly, there is also something wrong with the Z-buffer.

All these challenges can be overcome but only 1% of devs have managed to do so.

The irony is the lack of mip mapping makes ps2 look glorious in HD via emulators.

 

[CGNoire]

Although it looked worse, didn't the PS2 version of Black cruise through heavy particle effect like smoke, whilst the Xbox version shit the bed and tanked it's frame rate. Would have been interesting to see how well the other consoles handled something like SotC. Overworld performance would have no doubt been much higher, but it would be interesting to see how that would chang once colossi were in view.

Same with criterions other renderware title Burnout 3.

 

[TNT Sheep]

All of these games have better effects, lighting, and even character clothing on the PS2. However, there's an insistence that they look better on the GameCube simply because they have less confusing rendering.

One other thing you have to take into account is the framerate. It's not uncommon for Gamecube versions to miss some effects but to have a better framerate instead. Though it is sometimes hard to assess if an unlocked framerate on Gamecube is really better than a locked 30 fps on PS2.

 

[Karim]

yes it is true, only Shadow of the Colossus, MGS3 and Hitman made decent use of the console, all those 60fps games you know could have been even better at 25~30fps all them.

There are many factors, whether related to planning or causality.

The initial dev kits were broken, generating games that were noticeably below what we see in future games with the exception of Tekken Tag where the developer really defended the honor of the series his merit, not the dev kit's.

the causal reasons were strictly commercial, it was enough to make a functional game and sell it
an example was Sonic Heroes, a game completely made out of spite, it sold almost 3M more on the ps2 than the sum of the other versions and the examples only grow.
this was the central reason why the ps2 was almost unexplored.

Difficulty programming

Working with the PlayStation 2 required time and money, its texturing system required care that most devs were not willing to take, making proper use of VU's was not something that many devs did. Despite, the developer called ERP said that there was a positive point, updated dev kits gave the developer a fabulous range of activities, almost everything could be done, so we return to the initial question again , reasons strictly commercial.

Conspiracy theory

There is a theory that Sony vetoed the use of techniques that imitated shaders and bump mapping in order to present such techniques as new on the PS3.
Yes, the PS2 didn't have dot3 but due to the fill rate the PS2 could implement this technique, completely modifying any game but Sony vetoed.
Another supposedly vetoed technique concerns texturing. The technique was developed in 2005 and would be a game changer, but at the end of 2006 Sony would launch the PS3.


PS2 (contrary to popular belief) was the console that had the least correctly used hardware in history.

PS2 had a terrible terrible terrible tiny RAM; I don't know how it could even handle shaders and bump mapping with 4MB if I'm not wrong. And some developers did some miracles later in the generation.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

One other thing you have to take into account is the framerate. It's not uncommon for Gamecube versions to miss some effects but to have a better framerate instead. Though it is sometimes hard to assess if an unlocked framerate on Gamecube is really better than a locked 30 fps on PS2.

in which games? Crash, BGDA, V Rally 3 and other games have cuts but run at 30fps, Spongebob has no cuts and runs in the 50fps range

 

[TNT Sheep]

in which games? Crash, BGDA, V Rally 3 and other games have cuts but run at 30fps, Spongebob has no cuts and runs in the 50fps range

One game which I see mentioned often is Lord of the Rings Return of the King. I believe the first Splinter Cell and definitely Beyond Good and Evil run at a higher average framerate.

One game that has some missing/broken effects (reflections, raindrops) in the PS2 and I believe even the Xbox version is Rayman 3. Most videos just cover the first level so it's easy to miss. The Xbox version has the best lighting though.

 

[Fafalada]

This capture doesn't show it, but the GC version doesn't have a strong motion blur during replay and the car is matte with less specular (a very common trade off in ports for the system). However, the excess aliasing makes the PS2 version the worst, obviously these things were fixed in Burnout 2.

Ok now that you mention it - I see the missing reflections on GC, and I'll take your word on replay (it's not in the capture for GC version but other two have motion blur).
Anyway as I pointed out - the aliasing difference is all caused by absence of mipmaps on PS2. GC does use them but it's more restricted and missing trilinear, hence why XBox looks smoothest overall.

This game, same story more effects vs better rendering.

This one is a lot more subtle - I don't see any real rendering differences - maybe dark-capture makes those effects hard to see - but quality wise, even XBox floor textures are quite pixelated at a distance, looks like they all handle mipmapping the same way.
GC has more blur that softens the whole image, but the most noticeable difference is that both GC/PS2 run at a lower resolution than XBox (I didn't pixel count but it looks roughly like 512 horizontal vs. 640 on XBox). You can see the resolution clearly below (PS2/GC are an exact match pixel wise, textures look like a match too across all of them).

 

[TGO]

That shouldn't be a problem for developers, they are not your slaves.

It's not our problem either, it's the publishers and if they feel the need to cut jobs because of it then yes it's the Developers problem which is caused by management.

The company can lower the scope of the project and improving the priorities. For example making better games for less money like Expedition 33. Making expensive games don't translate in better games. Persona 5 is better than Refantazio, despite the last one was more expensive to make.

Completely agree, you should of just posted this.

 

[Drew1440]

Another underused feature of the PS2 was the i.Link port, only a handful of games used it for network play as an equivalent to the PS1 link cable. Sony killed it off completely in 2003 after the latest major fat revision to the PS2. It was a pretty fast interface for it's time (400Mbps) and Sony did envision using the interface for DV camera and external HDD's (The original models of the PS2 lacked the HDD expansion interface and instead featured a PCMCIA interface), but instead they amended the design to use the PCMCIA interface instead (Expansion Bay on later models).
The HDD feature was also underused, some games could use it to cache data to speed up load times. At least you could archive your memory card saves to it.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

This one is a lot more subtle - I don't see any real rendering differences - maybe dark-capture makes those effects hard to see - but quality wise, even XBox floor textures are quite pixelated at a distance, looks like they all handle mipmapping the same way.
GC has more blur that softens the whole image, but the most noticeable difference is that both GC/PS2 run at a lower resolution than XBox (I didn't pixel count but it looks roughly like 512 horizontal vs. 640 on XBox). You can see the resolution clearly below (PS2/GC are an exact match pixel wise, textures look like a match too across all of them).

This blur present in the GC version is the reason people prefer this version. On the PS2 there is no good flicker filter applied, so we can see greater sharpness in the buckle and in the details of the pants. However, in motion, the aliasing combined with the greater amount of snow particles and fog becomes a mess. The PS2 version has a specular effect on the vest, and in other stages there are more lighting and explosion effects. It would have been better to at least remove the snow smoke. Of course, the game was made for the CRT, but this is still an example of a game where less is more.

see how the gun looks misshapen even with some reflection applied

 

[Sintoid]

Sony Poo
Nintendo Yee

 

[SomeGit]

Although it looked worse, didn't the PS2 version of Black cruise through heavy particle effect like smoke, whilst the Xbox version shit the bed and tanked it's frame rate. Would have been interesting to see how well the other consoles handled something like SotC. Overworld performance would have no doubt been much higher, but it would be interesting to see how that would chang once colossi were in view.

I don't remember big fps drops in Black on Xbox from memory they we either very small or a really consistent 30fps, through it have downgraded a few particle effects like Burnout 3.

 

[Fafalada]

This blur present in the GC version is the reason people prefer this version.

Yea I'm aware - just saying the difference is actually more subtle than the Burnout comparison.

see how the gun looks misshapen even with some reflection applied

Yea this is a common problem of putting 'too many things' on screen and indeed 'less is more' applies. But this has been a thing in every console gen, hell when HD twins arrived, lots of games had significantly less temporally stable / visually appealing shadows than SD counterparts, first few years genuinenly felt like a downgrade in that respect - just in services of 'full scene dynamic shadows'.
Perhaps the most egregious example of it is Silent Hill HD collection that downgrades shadows across the board compared to original versions - but there were many others.

I don't remember big fps drops in Black on Xbox from memory they we either very small or a really consistent 30fps, through it have downgraded a few particle effects like Burnout 3.

Was it only 30? I never played it but somehow I imagined Black was a 60fps game. Anyway - XBox version was one of the few titles on the system that actually used MSAA, so it had that going for it over PS2 version.

 

[Kataploom]

yes it is true, only Shadow of the Colossus, MGS3 and Hitman made decent use of the console, all those 60fps games you know could have been even better at 25~30fps all them.

 

[SomeGit]

Was it only 30? I never played it but somehow I imagined Black was a 60fps game. Anyway - XBox version was one of the few titles on the system that actually used MSAA, so it had that going for it over PS2 version.

Yeah, it's 30 on Xbox, maybe it's 60 on PS2? I honestly never played that version on real hardware

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

The Xbox is very powerful console, but using its exclusive features made games very complex, so the target was 30fps. I think that of the AAA games, only 45 are 60fps on the Xbox, 34 on the GC, and about 60 on the PS2. Although only 45, games like Tomb Raider Legend show the power of the console.

 

[SomeGit]

The Xbox is very powerful console, but using its exclusive features made games very complex, so the target was 30fps. I think that of the AAA games, only 45 are 60fps on the Xbox, 34 on the GC, and about 60 on the PS2. Although only 45, games like Tomb Raider Legend show the power of the console.

Exclusive wise seems like it was mainly Japanese devs that tried to push 60 on Xbox, Team Ninja games like Ninja Gaiden and Dead or Alive, Sega with Outrun 2, Panzer Dragon, Crazy Taxi 3 etc.

 

[hussar16]

The ps2 had this look every game there had. It looked like it lacked proper shading like xbox and gamecube games had. I have a feeling the big difrence between the two was because it was just easier to make games and not bother with beter graphics. But the game clearly could do next gen lighting as evident on the bouncer game

 

[BiohazardX95]

The jump was very significant from ps1 to ps2, and the amounts of quality games released was impressive.

 

[phant0m]

60 is better than 30.

What inspired you to make such a brave and bold take?!

 

[squidilix]

I've only played BO1 of the games above and never really saw GC version of that native - but I found this

At a quick glance - the 3 versions are largely identical, with the differences being entirely what I mentioned above (PS2 has more texture aliasing, and we're looking at 480P capture for the other 2). Notable that XBox is the only one using trilinear and proper mipmaps though (so smoothest image), but has arguably worse geometry stability (though I'm pretty sure that's a physics bug, not rendering).


As noted - aside for above I'm not aware of anything else.
Software matters too when it comes to 'effects' as PS2 gen was no longer doing most of that in hardware (motion blurs, lens effects, bloom, shadows etc. is all software driven for most part when it comes to how it looks).


Not sure what you mean here? Games that offer 16:9 support all did it rendering 4:3 and stretch out - we didn't move to square pixels until HD era (And even today, that remains - optional).
And yes some games did wide-screen by keeping zoomed-in view, but the only 'hw' related thing there could be performance related (wider views could be more costly). Not sure which platform had more of those honestly.

This is by far the worst guy for comparing IQ games. This guys doing capture with potato captur card with shit composant cable.

Component is crisp, then for PS2, especially game using field rendering, you need to deinterlaced properly.. Interlaced video is by far the most hardest video issue to resolve

 

[T-0800]

What inspired you to make such a brave and bold take?!