It's the only way to explain my point. It's 60 frames in a second versus 30 frames in a second. 30 frames is the effective swapping capability of interlaced, no matter how they spread it across a 1 second time frame. It could hypothetically be 30 frames of full switch, 60 frames of half switch, 120 frames of quarter switch, 240 frames of eighth switching. It doesn't matter how you divide it up, it's the same amount of information being pumped in within that second.
You want to say that swapping half the frame and doubling the frames per second is better, then your complaint is that the interlaced signal is half compressed and the progressive isn't half compressed to do 120 half frames per second? The point is that progressive is a smoother motion, twice as smooth, no matter how you dice it, compress it, arrange it or apologize for it. If you want to show twice as much movement you have to transmit twice as much data, hence 1080P is called, "True HD." 1080P is the new standard being adopted by the entertainment industry. It's what Blu-ray does, it's what the newest HD DVDs do. It's what PS3 does. It's what the new standard of HDMI does. It's what you can get off some of the better TV broadcasts off a 35mm source. It's called "future proofing," being that it's where we're heading towards.
Of course if you don't want a high def signal, don't want a high def tv, don't want high def movies, don't want high def games, it's a fairly useless feature for you. Luckily PS3 games still look better than DS and PS2 ports anyday. A real question I've got is... even with 460p capable out of RGB cables for the wii, are there any actual wii games that pass standard def? I certainly know that if smash bros brawl was in progressive I'd want the cables to play it, afterall, extremely fast motion where every frame can potentially count really does benefit from a progressive display.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 3,666
- Age
- 40
- Location
- FL
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- NoizyTribe~!
- FFXI
- Tagrineth
It's 480p, smart guy, and yes, all Wii games currently support 480p just fine. Many of them even support 480p Widescreen - Zelda is one of them, and incidentally it only supports it on the Wii version, NOT the GameCube version (and yes, the GameCube supported progressive scan too, oh shock horror).
By the way, GO STRAWMAN GO, I'm not making any reference to resolution at all. You keep on arguing about 1080p vs 480 anything, I'll keep telling you that interlaced vs. progressive isn't the total blowout by which you seem quite intoxicated. Yes, progressive scan is better, but yes, 60fps is entirely possible and happens on a regular basis on interlaced displays.
Calling it 30fps is a ridiculous oversimplification. Your point is exaggerated and useless.
30fps progressive, I'm sorry to say, would not convey motion as well as 60fps interlaced - which is what your argument and wording would state 100%.
By the way, GO STRAWMAN GO, I'm not making any reference to resolution at all. You keep on arguing about 1080p vs 480 anything, I'll keep telling you that interlaced vs. progressive isn't the total blowout by which you seem quite intoxicated. Yes, progressive scan is better, but yes, 60fps is entirely possible and happens on a regular basis on interlaced displays.
Calling it 30fps is a ridiculous oversimplification. Your point is exaggerated and useless.
30fps progressive, I'm sorry to say, would not convey motion as well as 60fps interlaced - which is what your argument and wording would state 100%.
Well, there was like a 5-10 page stretch were it was a pretty clean discussion without -TOO- much fanboyism (obviously it's Fire/Mara vs. Various Wii fanboys, but no one really actively displayed that). Ah well, it was fun for a while! D:
I still maintain you're all douchebags.
It's not oversimplification, it's just reality. In terms of signal quality there are 2 factors. There's the resolution of the image and there's the frame speed. If you try and take a 480 signal and run it through a big screen 1080 set, you get a 480 signal, stretched to fill the big screen. If you take 30 full frames per second and stretch it over 60 frames, what do you get? I don't even know why you aren't accepting this basic concept, considering your wii will do your 460 in progressive. Is the signal being passed out somehow beefed up with more information than a regular 30 frame per second source? Where is the extra information coming from that doubles the frames to make it change every 1/60th of a second?
The fact that you understand the basics of how interlaced works yet are unwilling to admit that with half the information being sent out, half the information is received is baffling. How many times do I have to explain this? Half the frame information = half the frame. That means if you have a P and I TV next to each other and watch the same movie, if you pause them at any given point, half of the pixels on the interlaced TV will be from last frame, and all the pixels on the progressive TV will be from the current frame.
If that's perfectly acceptable to you, fine. Those are your preferences. There's nothing wrong with accepting a last gen standard of media. However when you say there's only a slight improvement, when the frame rate is effectively doubled, you're just wrong.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 2,097
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Midgardsormr
- FFXIV
- Jadey
Gotta love software backwards compat
Out of the following 12 games:
# God of War
# MGS 2: Sons of Liberty
# MGS 3: Snake Eater
# Shadow of the Colossus
# Guitar Hero 2
# Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones
# Okami
# GTA: Liberty City Stories
# Eragon
# Final Fantasy X-2
# Ratchet & Clank 3
# Lumines Plus
ONE worked. Eragon. Better hope for some early/often firmware updates.
Out of the following 12 games:
# God of War
# MGS 2: Sons of Liberty
# MGS 3: Snake Eater
# Shadow of the Colossus
# Guitar Hero 2
# Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones
# Okami
# GTA: Liberty City Stories
# Eragon
# Final Fantasy X-2
# Ratchet & Clank 3
# Lumines Plus
ONE worked. Eragon. Better hope for some early/often firmware updates.
That's without the emulation firmware added. It's in console version 1.5. I've been running 1.54 since Feb.
It's a fucking stupid article testing emulation ability without the emulation software added and then claiming it means something.
It's a fucking stupid article testing emulation ability without the emulation software added and then claiming it means something.
European onry.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 8,957
- Age
- 42
- Location
- ...In America
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Linkshell
- Kaizen
- FFXIV
- Bajaratt
The backwards compatability software is in firmware version 1.5?
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 8,957
- Age
- 42
- Location
- ...In America
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Linkshell
- Kaizen
- FFXIV
- Bajaratt
What was the point of quoting it so many times?
No version 1.5 is from like January, they probably only had emulation to support what the emotionchip didn't do. Even if they'd had software back then to make more games run, why would they put it on a patch to PS3s running with emotionchip?
Mistake, I don't know what the fuck happened.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 4,368
- Age
- 39
- Location
- Winnipeg, MB, Canada
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- Perseverance
- FFXI
- Marajade
- FFXIV
- Mara Jade
yeah. V1.2 had the emulation software to compensate for the 1% of games that the chip didn't run. I would bet that if you bought a NA PS3 that hasn't ben updated yet, eragon would be the only one that doesn't run out of that group, because it doesn't work on the Chip.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 3,666
- Age
- 40
- Location
- FL
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- NoizyTribe~!
- FFXI
- Tagrineth
Wii does 480p widescreen, not some imaginary 460 format you seem to be trying hard to pull out of your ass.
The image IS changing every 60th of a second, it just isn't the entire image. TVs have integrated circuitry that filters the input to compensate for the blended scanlines, and traditional tube sets have large phosphors that fade more slowly than normal to mitigate the two-frames-combined effect on top of that (one of the many reasons why 60Hz is normal and acceptable to everyone on a TV, yet 60Hz is the bane of many PC users, myself included).
There's definitely a lot more to it, and claiming that 60Hz Interlaced is 30fps, period, no more, is a gross oversimplification. You are definitely seeing more variation in data than you would in a 30fps progressive scanned display. You are seeing 60 discrete images per second, not 30. You're completely ignoring the fact that TVs are designed to handle interlaced signals.
I don't just understand the basics, man. I understand the technology behind it and the reasons for its existence. I could probably go into TV technology and engineering if I really wanted to.
The thing is, this isn't even a "last gen standard" - this is a "two gens ago standard". PS2 was the backline laggard on progressive scan support. Nearly all Xbox games, and a rather large number of GameCube games support progressive scan (the majority of my personal GCN game library supports progressive).
The thing is, I GET MY PROGRESSIVE SCAN on the Wii, which is funny because you still can't seem to comprehend that simple detail. The difference, though, isn't exactly night and day. Yes, it's noticeable. It isn't nearly as noticeable as changing between 480, 720, and 1080 definitions on larger TV sets, which is the more pressing concern for the Wii - though rumour has it Wii will get some kind of mystery upgrade soon. No details are known, but Lanien hinted at it earlier in this very thread. My guess is Nintendo might unlock 720p for some limited usage. Probably not for 3D games, I'm guessing, but maybe for the menus/channels. Hopefully for the web browser - that would rock.
Anyway, enough on that tangent.
Fire, have you ever actually compared the same game in progressive scan and interlaced scan at the same resolution? I have, many times, on both my GameCube and my Wii. There IS a noticeable difference, but the difference lies in FLICKER much more than in motion. I could be biased, because Nintendo does have a rather legendary deflicker / interlace compensation filter... while Sony has legendary scaling issues, rofl. At least Sony did finally get rid of those with an update. Pretty funny though.
All I have to say is, don't hold your breath on Wii getting 720p. I think if it was theoretically capable they wouldn't be getting PS2 ports, rather dumbed down 360/PS3 ports with latent 720p capability to be unlocked.
PS3, by the way, is getting upscaling capability, and is going to be upscaling DVDs for sure and PS2 games maybe, at least once they deactivate the emotion chip. Too bad they didn't start off with emulation in the first place, could have sped up the eventual price cut.
PS3, by the way, is getting upscaling capability, and is going to be upscaling DVDs for sure and PS2 games maybe, at least once they deactivate the emotion chip. Too bad they didn't start off with emulation in the first place, could have sped up the eventual price cut.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 3,666
- Age
- 40
- Location
- FL
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- NoizyTribe~!
- FFXI
- Tagrineth
Oh, I'm not. But, you're making a fallacious argument here. 360/PS3 games won't work on Wii not because of resolution but because of polygon pushing power. Pixel fillrate is nearly independant from polygon output.
Wii would still get "PS2 ports" (another bad generalisation you keep making), but it'd be able to run them in 720p if it gets unlocked somehow.
By the way, Wii IS more powerful than PS2, GC, and Xbox... just wait. The first wave of games was dominated by Ubisoft rush jobs. Check out some of the new promotional videos of Mario Galaxy. Assuming those are target renders, Nintendo has historically been closer to the mark with nearly all of their target renders than any of the other companies, it has the potential to look very good (and they probably aren't targets, considering earlier builds were running on dev kits, aka retooled gamecubes). Metroid Prime 3 also looked great way back at like E3 2006, I'm really looking forward to seeing how much it's improved (assuming it has) since then. And yes, Mara, MP3 has very nice looking physics in the demo videos too.
Oh and one other thing, lol @ DVD upscaling. PS3 will get it but it will look more or less the same as any DVD upscale - bad. =)
If PS2 ports could run in 720P by Wii unlocking them, then they'd run in 1080P by sticking them in my PS3, or they'd simply be upscaled. The point being, if this was a coming feature the devs would know about it because it's useless to increase the capabilities without giving developers the information to capitalize. Hence, as long as the PS2 ports are coming, the devs aren't aware of any graphics update on its way, which tells me one isn't coming.
As far as expecting more, I'm somewhat skeptical. The problem is that as long as PS2 is still dominating the market, all multiplatforms are going to get PS2 ports if they're getting Wii ports. As long as that is going on, the devs are going to give Wii the PS2 version with a control scheme thrown on. Wii games sell well enough even when they're low quality that the devs have no incentive to utilize its graphical ability, considering the "graphic whores" like myself are going to get it for 360 or PS3.
Once the PS2 dies, yeah, the devs are going to be making a specific version for the Wii, of course, it's got a lot of life left in it. Now some first party exclusives built for the Wii only may showcase that Wii can in fact, render better than a super nintendo, but that's only if devs think the extra money spent and extra time spent will actually net it better sales. You've got some perfectionists working for Nintendo who will try to push the Mario title and super smash bros to its max, but I'm sure "mario party 8-20" are going to be built purely to make a quick buck.
Of course, PS3 multiplatforms are going to get the xbox 360 version most of the time, so the little extra juice the PS3 is capable of isn't going to come out on exclusives or until there's a larger install base. However a 360 port is still a good looking game, a PS2 port is last gen and weaker than Xbox last gen.
As far as expecting more, I'm somewhat skeptical. The problem is that as long as PS2 is still dominating the market, all multiplatforms are going to get PS2 ports if they're getting Wii ports. As long as that is going on, the devs are going to give Wii the PS2 version with a control scheme thrown on. Wii games sell well enough even when they're low quality that the devs have no incentive to utilize its graphical ability, considering the "graphic whores" like myself are going to get it for 360 or PS3.
Once the PS2 dies, yeah, the devs are going to be making a specific version for the Wii, of course, it's got a lot of life left in it. Now some first party exclusives built for the Wii only may showcase that Wii can in fact, render better than a super nintendo, but that's only if devs think the extra money spent and extra time spent will actually net it better sales. You've got some perfectionists working for Nintendo who will try to push the Mario title and super smash bros to its max, but I'm sure "mario party 8-20" are going to be built purely to make a quick buck.
Of course, PS3 multiplatforms are going to get the xbox 360 version most of the time, so the little extra juice the PS3 is capable of isn't going to come out on exclusives or until there's a larger install base. However a 360 port is still a good looking game, a PS2 port is last gen and weaker than Xbox last gen.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 8,957
- Age
- 42
- Location
- ...In America
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Linkshell
- Kaizen
- FFXIV
- Bajaratt
Some companies will do this, yes, but others actually make separate builds for the Wii; as has already happened. Call of Duty 3 and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance both had separate teams designing the Wii version, it wasn't just a port with the wiimote controls tacked on at the last minute, it was designed specifically for the Wii. Now that the full development kit is out for the wiimote controls, more and more companies will start making use of the wiimote's features and you'll see less games with thrown-on controls.
Also, by the same token, until the PS2 is completely dead, the PS3 won't be making much headway in terms of capturing market share. If everyone already has a PS2, there's less reason to upgrade when you can get the same games.
Haha... wow this thread got big, I haven't read a single thing since I posted it =P