Printable View
Is there any special reason why most Genesis games use 320x224 (even thought it also supports 256x224) and why Nintendo choosed to use only 256x224 (and not 320x224, even thought the SNES is technically superior) ?
Also, why most PC Engine games also use 256x224, even considering it's capable of 320x224, and having the same amount of video ram of Genesis ?
So, what's the technical reason for Genesis to support 320x224, unlike other systems ?
Sega's arcade games support pretty much only that resolution.
The SNES does not have a 320x224 mode. Neither does the PC Engine/TurboGrafx. The PC Engine has a 352x224 mode, though. The reason those systems rarely use those higher resolutions is likely that the sprite/pixel capacity per line does not increase as the resolution increases, so it you would see more flicker with seemingly less stuff onscreen. And for the SNES, well it has trouble running games at the lowest resolution as it is.
Yes. I know that SNES does not have a 320x224 mode - but obviously for a reason, and I was wondering why. But I'm almost sure that PC Engine have a 320x224 mode (Military Madness, for example, use it).
You'll have to ask the designers of each respective system (they don't hang here). Nintendo doesn't have arcade games that aren't older than this planet itself, so they just had to go with what they knew. The 256x224 resolution gives you square pixels so it is easier to draw stuff on (circles are circles and not ovals). Plus sprites can seem bigger when they're really not (see Blackthorne). The PC Engine can do 512x240 I believe, and the Genesis can do 320x448 when it interlaces. The SNES might be able to do 512x448.
That's exactly the opposite. When displaying 256x224 on a 4:3 TV, if you originally have a square pixel, it will be stretched. So, for example, a circle will be oval. You can see that in a lot of SNES games. Actually, few developers created their graphics with this in mind (even games made by Nintendo itself seems to ignore it - for example: Samus's ball is oval in Super Metroid).Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
You dont have the same problem with 320x224.
Maybe you've answered your own question, then.
SNES supports up to 512x478...
I don't think any game ever ran in that mode. I've never seen the SNES interlace.
Not really. What I was saying means that working with 320x224 is easier (and also looks much better).Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
Only text screens and maps 'n shit used those high resolutions. Nothing more.
I hated when those low resolution modes were used in Genesis games. Made the games look so chunky and ugly i.e Takara's Fatal Fury ports, Capcom's Street Fighter II ports. Even the Sega intro logo was stretched-out, fat and ugly looking. 320X224 was bad-ass though, and I always liked how Sonic 2 split-screen looked so sharp and semi "hi-res".
Nintendo knew what they were doing by keeping the SNES's resolution that low. The SNES couldn't rock at 320X224 yo!!! Word to your moms!
In a discussion about Genesis vs SNES, people usually says the only disadvantage of SNES is the CPU, completely ignoring the difference in the resolution, which is very significantily - mainly considering most games are horizontal side-scrolling, so the extra horizontal lines always have a great impact.
Not only that, but a lot of SNES games have that "squashed" look. It looks pretty on the picture you see on internet - but run the game on a real SNES and you will see.
Example...
http://neogeobr.iespana.es/neogeobr/...etroid_ss2.gif
and how it looks on a TV
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1936/metroidvf3.jpg
256x224 res isn't so bad on the Genesis. The real kicker is that the 320x224 mode on the Genesis has a better sprite per scanline setup (20sprite/320pixels vs 16sprites/256pixels) then its 256 res mode. The lower res mode on the Genesis saves precious VRAM space and bandwidth, so it has its uses.
I often wondered why the SNES didn't have a mid res mode. I mean, it has all kinds of other fancy tricks and modes between its two PPUs. It's 256 res mode is nothing to snuff at though (it can dp 34 sprites per scanline or 272 sprite pixels before flicker) and the colors or more importantly the huge palette overrides any negative side effects of the 256x224 res.
Also, interlaced modes are kind of lame (with an exception of Sonic split screen mode) as they only run at 30fps. Though good for RPG battle screens and digital comics, all else I'd take 60fps mode any day.
The PCE has a *hacked* 512x480 mode (no emulators currently run it), though almost totally useless IMO. The SGX could have made good use of the 352x224 or 512x244 modes of the PCE chips without the sprite flicker issue... that's too bad.
Is the PCE's "hacked" mode the one used to simulate "scaling" on the Arcade Card port of "Ryuuko no Ken" ("Art of Fighting")?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exPJbtSlxUc
Notice how the opponent's sprite is often unviewable on-screen.........the emulator probably doesn't support that res quite well or is it like that on real life hardware?
EDIT: Here's a video of the same port captured from real hardware:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paTzGclGk9Y
Well then there you go. That's the answer to the question. You seem to know the answers before you even ask the questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by tisurame
EDIT: I have Art of Fighting on the PCE. It just changes resolution between the "near" and "far" modes. That's it.
Sherlock Holmes 1 and 2 both run in 512 x224 (or is it 240?)
There's no reason why interlace can only run at 30fps. Look how many PS2 games run at 60fps. Like I said, I've never seen any games from that generation except Sonic 2 and Ys 3 run in interlace.
That's cause it was high-res mode. 320x448..Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarzak
I bet this mode only works for stills, for title screens etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by evildragon
Some civil ingeneer/master programmer over at Digitpress assumed it was used in all games, all time and that it was a point why the SNES was so much better.
512x478... MDs highest res is 320x480(only for PAL units) and MD can make much more use of it than SNES... have you ever seen a SNES game in its highest res doing something like Sonic2 2P ? nope.... have you ever seen other MD games doing it ? nope ..... now thinking of making some use of full res of MD in my own WiP game....
How much resolution is Wiz 'n' Liz 2p in?
Sounds British, so probably 320x240.
You mean 60 fields per second? Just as bad as 30frame per second, if not worst. 60 frames per second is where it's at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
No. That game is switching between mid and low res modes, then switches between two sprite and tile sets to give it a 3 stage/frame scaling effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarzak
The 512x448/480 mode is only used by demos. It wasn't discovered until recently (by Charles MacDonald) and also used in Chris Covell's Megaman screen res demo. The reason I say it's a hacked mode, is because it only works on standard definition TV sets, not HD TV sets. HD sets don't know how to interpret the interlaced signal.
You can use it for whatever, but it doesn't scale the sprite/scanline ratio and requires much more VRAM unless you like repetitive tiles/sprites. RPGs come to mind. The SNES should have had 128k of VRAM instead of just 64k given its' graphic processor abilities. I do know they bumped the work ram from 32k to 128k last minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by 108 Stars
There are a few games that use the interlaced mode (256x448) in some parts, but I don't remember what game that used 512x448/478 mode or what it was for.
I agree that frames are better than fields, but it's still 60 independent images per second either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
List them.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
Not independent images per second, partial images per second.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
I don't keep the list on me :p You can ask some of the EMU authors though (couple hang out over at RHDN forums). I was given a list a while back when I asked. I wanted to test the interlace signal to see if it was the same as the PCE hacked interlaced signal since one document mentioned it the same way (262 scanlines for the odd frame, 263 scanlines for the even frame). I didn't own any of the games on the list so I never both to test the signal and Charles MacDonald tested/confirmed the doc was wrong.Quote:
List them.
Regardless, they are independent and provide 60 different moments in time for increased fluidity vs 30 frames per second. Most Genesis games run at 60fps, even though each image is a single field. Look at a PS2 game that scrolls at 60fps (interlaced) and tell me that the motion looks worse than a Genesis game doing the same thing. Odin Sphere is a good example.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
A field is *only* a field if they overlap to create a frame. Most Genesis games run at 60 frames per second, not fields per second.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
When a PS2 game *does* run at 60fps in interlaced mode, I can see the combing on a SDTV. Not as smooth as the 240p 60fps mode of older consoles. They soften the image in frame buffer before outputting the signal to help hide the comb effect, but I can still see it. If it looked so great, then why do HD sets try to recreate a variable 60p signal from that interlaced source?Quote:
Look at a PS2 game that scrolls at 60fps (interlaced) and tell me that the motion looks worse than a Genesis game doing the same thing. Odin Sphere is a good example.
Because they have to. Most HDTVs are progressive. To display both fields at the same time onscreen would be stupid. Some upscalers used in TV stations are bad enough to see combing.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
My HDTV does something interesting, maybe you Joe, can tell me if this is any good or not. Salesman said it was the best I could get (in '05)..
It does both Weaving, and Bobbing, and instead of per-frame choices, it does per pixel. Meaning, if something on the picture is still, it's weaved, if it's moving, it's bobbed. But only the pixel, not the whole frame.
It's hard to describe.
for example, on CNN, the ticker is bobbed (if that 60fps, but weaved if 30fps). And any stationary image is weaved, but the people onscreen are bobbed.
That doesn't really make any sense. The best way would be to interpolate each individual field to the TV's native resolution and call it a day. Other post-processing will only cause more artifacts and delay.
this is the type of deinterlacer my TV has:Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
"Adaptive Per-Pixel De-interlacing"
http://ati.amd.com/products/pdf/Imag...WhitePaper.pdfQuote:
......de-interlacing hardware searches for motion by
looking for artifacts such as feathering. It then
optimally selects bob or weave on a per-pixel basis,
depending on whether or not motion is detected for a
given pixel. This algorithm eliminates both the twitter
and feathering artifact while maintaining high-quality
vertical resolution.
It works VERY well.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6459454-claims.html
And there is no artifacts, surprisingly. non, whatsoever.
I'd have to see it. Still, it likely adds AT LEAST a 1/60 of a second delay.Quote:
Originally Posted by evildragon
well, surprisingly, the nintendo zapper works with it (sometimes, depends on the lighting in the room).Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
i'll tell you what, if your in florida, you can hook up anything to my HDTV to try it out yourself.
I'll I can say is, it does a faithful reproduction, and when it comes to deinterlacing, I'm VERY critical, because I want a perfect frame.
You'll need to prove that your HDTV works with the Zapper.
as said, depends on the lighting condition. i'll try tomorrow, if i can put my NES back together..
(doing the PPU RGB mod)
EDIT: Oh my bad. The zapper never did work on this TV. I was thinking of my older SD "Apex" TV, that one always acted weird with the Zapper.
I can run a test if you'd like, play a DVD that shows a fast timer, this one: http://www.mediacollege.com/downloads/video/timecode/
and snap a picture with both an old commodore video monitor (nothing more than a TV with only NTSC inputs), and the HD.
EDIT 2: Joe, my math is flakey, but I think your spot on, 1/60th of a delay.
http://blackevilweredragon.spymac.com/tv6.jpg
Still, it doesn't ever really annoy me, I can still beat video games, and you really don't see a lip sync..
That picture there shows 1/30 of a delay (though could be 1/60), though those numbers on the HDTV look really, really bad... as if they were improperly scaled.
I can't believe you own Sonic Spinball. Ug.
they also look scaled badly on the SDTV too. Because Toast 7 automatically upscaled it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
http://blackevilweredragon.spymac.com/dvdc.jpg
The color effect is a moire effect from the phosphors.
Load the video from the link I provided. I used the 29.97 one, with drop frames.
Yeah, those videos are pretty bad. I'd probably just do it in Final Cut Pro if I were do do it, but I don't feel like carrying a 13 inch TV to my HDTV room and hooking it up just for this. I don't imagine the lag would be much, though.
ok, but with the fact i used the 29.97Hz video with drop frames, on mine, how would you rate it, delay wise, with all the deinterlacing work it does?
while capturing on a photo how good of a job it is, is hard, i'll try my fathers DSLR tomorrow, which should capture everything.
Still pictures are hard, so I can only say it is 1/30 delay. Interlaced camera video showing both screens would show how much delay there was, truly.
Hey Joe, just made a video doing duck hunt on that HDTV. While the results sucked, I got about 4 hits!
Making a video right now. Too bad the refresh of the TV really got the video camera.
EDIT:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0Z1Lbz96Jg
Is it like, lagging? do you have to aim where the duck is going to be?