PAL/50hz optimized PS1 games?

Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#1
  • Z..

    Z..

Decide to seriously start collecting for PS1 (only have like 12 or so games at this point) since it turns out a huge chunk of stuff I have on my PS3/Vita from PSN is 50hz, can anybody point me in the right direction regarding which games were PAL optimized and which weren't so I know when I need to import and when it's okay not to import?
 
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#4
  • Z..

    Z..

Most PAL ps1 games were not optimised, I would halt your collecting of them right here. Even the boxes and art are terrible, it is not a good region to collect from. (source, I live here).

PS2 is where they got slightly better:

http://www.benoitren.be/60hz-palps2.html
I live here too. I only really have a handfull of games I couldn't buy on PSN so far (like the original Ape Escape, Omega Boost, Incredible Crisis, Tekken 3 and R-Type Delta) or which have faulty or impractical versions on PSN (like Crash Bandicoot 2 which lacks analog support on PSN or Bushido Blade which I use too often to stick with the Japanese version I initially had) since the bulk of my PS1 collection is digital. It has come to my attention alot of the titles on there are the 50hz versions (which means the bulk of my collection since I only bought stuff from US or JP PSN when it wasn't available on my EU account).
I am aware I will have to resort to importing frequently, however... I would like a source to check for optimized games so I can be aware which are okay to purchase the PAL versions of and which aren't, though. No luck?

Some of PS1 games were only released in a PAL region e.g. Firebugs, Earthworm Jim 2 or their NTSC versions were only available in Japan.

If I were you I would go through this list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_games_(A–L)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_games_(M–Z)
Thanks but these lists do not help me determine which games are optimized. I don't want a list of all releases, I want to know which PAL releases are optimized for 50hz.
 
Last edited:
Jun 20, 2018
86
65
170
#5
Thanks but these lists do not help me determine which games are optimized. I don't want a list of all releases, I want to know which PAL releases are optimized for 50hz.
It depends what do you consider as an optimization for 50Hz. Is it a version of the game compatible in PAL regions or a version/port developed from a scratch especially with 50Hz in mind? If latter I do not believe that there is one. Generally I would go for 60Hz over 50Hz unless you prefer differences in assets e.g. music tracks in Omega Boost.
 
Last edited:
Nov 6, 2016
165
78
200
#6
I would like a source to check for optimized games so I can be aware which are okay to purchase the PAL versions of and which aren't, though. No luck?.
No such thing I'm afraid. I personally just went "fuck it" and started buying only NTSC-U/C games which thankfully isn't too bad as I'm only going to get ~30 games or so, 19 to go.
 
Likes: Z..
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#7
I may be wrong but I think the ps1 pal 60hz amount is really poor, I can't remember a single one personally...but then I ditched PAL by that point because theyre so bad.

Honestly, if you want the best physical PS1 experience...NTSC US versions of everything.
 
Jun 1, 2014
3,948
498
330
#8
Meanwhile, almost all first party Saturn titles were PAL optimized (speed and resolution), and 95% of Dreamcast games had the option between 50Hz and 60Hz.

If games are not optimized on PS1, can't you simply switch the console in frequency ? It is something trivial to do on Saturn. Don't know about PS1 however.
 
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#9
  • Z..

    Z..

It depends what do you consider as an optimization for 50Hz. Is it a version of the game compatible in PAL regions or a version/port developed from a scratch especially with 50Hz in mind? If latter I do not believe that there is one. Generally I would go for 60Hz over 50Hz unless you prefer differences in assets e.g. music tracks in Omega Boost.
It's a version of the game which has been optimized to run at the correct speed and aspect ratio on PAL systems. Are you not aware of this? It's been around at the very least since the 8bit days!
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#10
Sega did a better job but the Saturn still had a load of terrible ports, and the first party optimised ones like Sega Rally never ran at 60hz, they were stretched and sped up 50hz. I'm not aware of any 60hz PS1 switch, but I might be wrong.

Dreamcast wasnt 95% 60hz optioned up either, for example my fave game on it (Hydro Thunder) wasn't. PAL gaming was a total minefield until HD, no one did it well.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#11
It's a version of the game which has been optimized to run at the correct speed and aspect ratio on PAL systems. Are you not aware of this? It's been around at the very least since the 8bit days!
Not really, there are barely any "pal optimised" games, they would only be stuff like Rare's N64 output, Sega's stuff. For 20 plus years there was zero optimisation, they just dumped the game onto the tv and it ran at 50hz instead of 60. No input from devs was required.

You really need to not collect PAL stuff, it's 99% total shit.
 
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#12
  • Z..

    Z..

Meanwhile, almost all first party Saturn titles were PAL optimized (speed and resolution), and 95% of Dreamcast games had the option between 50Hz and 60Hz.

If games are not optimized on PS1, can't you simply switch the console in frequency ? It is something trivial to do on Saturn. Don't know about PS1 however.
Yeah I have no idea, truth be told. Saturn I'm well aware of, it's probably my most prized collection (my only collections worth any serious € are the Sega ones, Dreamcast, Saturn and Mega Drive are by far my most complete collections... PS2 and Gamecube ones aren't anything to sneeze at either, though) and that's one of my favorite things about it (same for DC or MD, really), just flip the switch and it's all good!
I don't really know much about the PS1 one, though.


Sega did a better job but the Saturn still had a load of terrible ports, and the first party optimised ones like Sega Rally never ran at 60hz, they were stretched and sped up 50hz. I'm not aware of any 60hz PS1 switch, but I might be wrong.

Dreamcast wasnt 95% 60hz optioned up either, for example my fave game on it (Hydro Thunder) wasn't. PAL gaming was a total minefield until HD, no one did it well.
He's referring to the fact that if your Saturn is set to 60hz mode, it'll run all games at 60hz regardless of version!

As for lack of optimized stuff, I was a Sega kid so for me it was a fairly common ocurrence. Didn't know it was that scarce an event on PS1, to be honest...
 
Last edited:
Likes: cireza
Jun 1, 2014
3,948
498
330
#13
Dreamcast wasnt 95% 60hz optioned up either
Ok, maybe 90% and not 95%, but the vast majority of the games had the option.

Sega did a better job but the Saturn still had a load of terrible ports, and the first party optimised ones like Sega Rally never ran at 60hz
I am a huge Saturn fan, I play mainly PAL games, and most of the first party games had proper 50Hz support. They don't look like they run faster to me. All three Lobotomy games have proper optimization. Sega fighting games too. Sega Touring Car as well. Guardian Heroes... Other games (Nights, Burning Rangers), and third party games, can be switched to 60Hz and you are good to go.

I might be mistaken for some games, sure.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Cranberrys
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#14
Oh yeah I know the Saturn does that, mine's 60hz switched too (Raven Games). Yup the PS1 is honestly diabolical in PAL land, I can barely think of any decent optimisation. I know Wipeout 2097 ran at full speed but it was 25fps instesd of 30, that's the sort of stuff they pulled.

Personally, I just use a mix of original discs, burned ISOs and emulation. A definitive PAL ps1 collection is impossible really, they'll all be terrible versions. Makes me laugh seeing people pay £400 for PAL SOTN, the worst version ever with the worst box.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#16
Ok, maybe 90% and not 95%, but the vast majority of the games had the option.


I am a huge Saturn fan, I play mainly PAL games, and most of the first party games had proper 50Hz support. They don't look like they run faster to me. All three Lobotomy games have proper optimization. Sega fighting games too. Sega Touring Car as well. Guardian Heroes... Other games (Nights, Burning Rangers), and third party games, can be switched to 60Hz and you are good to go.

I might be mistaken for some games, sure.
You absolutely have taste, and know your stuff, just bare in mind pal optimisation doesnt really exist. You always lose something, if you get full speed you'll be at 25fps not 30, the screen stretching messes up HUDs, aspect ratios, isnt as the original dev intended and never is true full screen...its just less bordered. Even RARE's stuff, probably the most cared for PAL optimisations ever, were inferior. Drawing the extra PAL lines costs processing, adds slowdown etc. Nothing, nothing is equal to a 60hz original. I was a big Lobotomy fan too, but even their work is inferior on PAL. It's impossible not to be.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#17
Did not even know it existed.
It's horrid, it has that awful double opening box that Doom PAL started, great artwork ruined by logos and poor composure, and the purest, least optimised version possible. Oh, it has slightly less slowdown because it drops less frames running at 50hz, but it's like playing in treacle.

 
Jun 1, 2014
3,948
498
330
#18
if you get full speed you'll be at 25fps not 30
When playing these games on CRT, I am going to tell you that 25 fps is good enough. It is not a huge difference, and back then having 3D games running at a stable 30fps was already quite rare. I don't remember PAL optimized Saturn games having their HUD butchered.

When you are optimizing for 3D, there is no reason to alter the ratio. Characters/objects should not be longer are wider, and I don't think that this is what happens in my Saturn games (the ones I know the most). I need to make some more verifications I guess.

And we kind of derailed the thread, sorry about that.
 
Last edited:
Jul 8, 2016
760
458
230
#20
It's horrid, it has that awful double opening box that Doom PAL started, great artwork ruined by logos and poor composure, and the purest, least optimised version possible. Oh, it has slightly less slowdown because it drops less frames running at 50hz, but it's like playing in treacle.

Playing both the 360 port and the pal ps1 port side by side a few months back. Your statement about playing through treacle is inaccurate. The difference in speed is barely noticible. The borders on top and bottom of the ps1 image though, that is an issue.

Edit: Doom didn’t start the double box trend, that was there from launch with Ridge Racer.
 
Last edited:
Nov 6, 2016
165
78
200
#21
Only thing I miss a bit is the artwork of PAL Resident Evil 2, I like it more than what the NTSC version has.



But that's really the only thing I miss about PAL, for all the already mentioned benefits of NTSC they also take less space than the PAL fat cases which was something I didn't know when I started collecting, I thought they used those bigger cases globally.
 
Jun 20, 2018
86
65
170
#22
It's a version of the game which has been optimized to run at the correct speed and aspect ratio on PAL systems. Are you not aware of this? It's been around at the very least since the 8bit days!
Yes, I am aware of this. Just took it for granted that PAL versions of PS1 games were already in someway optimized. Do you know any game which went through this optimization and is the best example done right as a reference?
 
Nov 30, 2012
12,064
823
690
#23
Yeah, it's best to avoid PAL games altogether. I say this as a European who grew up with that crap. Wouldn't want to go back to that.

For completion sake, sure. But only if you already own the proper versions.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#24
Playing both the 360 port and the pal ps1 port side by side a few months back. Your statement about playing through treacle is inaccurate. The difference in speed is barely noticible. The borders on top and bottom of the ps1 image though, that is an issue.
Incorrect I'm afraid, PAL SOTN is 20% slower running, feel free to press play on this video to see. Richter looks like he's underwater.

 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#26
When playing these games on CRT, I am going to tell you that 25 fps is good enough. It is not a huge difference, and back then having 3D games running at a stable 30fps was already quite rare. I don't remember PAL optimized Saturn games having their HUD butchered.

When you are optimizing for 3D, there is no reason to alter the ratio. Characters/objects should not be longer are wider, and I don't think that this is what happens in my Saturn games (the ones I know the most). I need to make some more verifications I guess.

And we kind of derailed the thread, sorry about that.
CRT or no CRT, 25fps or 30fps is a big difference, and yes, when you start screen stretching to optimise, you mess up the original vision of the developer. We can agree to disagree of course, but 5 frames drop is significant.

When you can make an informed choice and go for NTSC, there is zero reason to pick up a PAL copy of anything. Even the 60hz stuff on PS2, gamecube and Xbox usually had the prog scan ripped out.

Incidentally, I use a facebook gaming collector group that is predominantly people 20 years younger than me, and they collect PAL games almost exclusively. Barely a single one of them, in this massive group, has a clue about the inferiority of PAL old games, and they will defend them to the hilt.

Meanwhile, 30 years ago I was paying £50 for my NTSC copy of Super Mario Kart, and running it on my parma violet US snes via RGB on my Sony Trinitron TV. When I see these actively hostile young folks running their PAL Sneses through an RF lead on an LCD TV, in 50hz, incorrect aspect ratio, input lag off the charts, it's like witnessing the cycle of life..as in seeing people dismissing older wisdom because they know best. You have to let them get on with it, but it is quite funny to watch. I solved these problems for myself aged 14 or so, poring through old game mags, sending off to importers, making my own RGB lead with a wiring guide. Now here I am all these years on, ranting against shitty PAL conversions.
 
Jul 8, 2016
760
458
230
#27
Incorrect I'm afraid, PAL SOTN is 20% slower running, feel free to press play on this video to see. Richter looks like he's underwater.

I don’t doubt for a second it’s slower, of course it is. What I’m saying is that in this game it’s barely noticeable to me even when comparing side by side, being like treacle is a bit of an exaggeration. Richter moves slow in general when you don’t sprint so this is the extreme case you are showing. When it comes to racing games though 10hz makes a lot more difference to me. Platformers, not so much.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2018
5
7
70
#28
IIRC the PAL Suikoden games didn't have the garbled text the US versions had.

Aaand that's about all I have.

As an Australian, I echo the sentiment to just collect US copies of games. If the software isn't bad enough, the hardware is usually crippled too (though this applies moreso to Nintendo than Sony).

Just about every Trinitron CRT will do NTSC60 no problem.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#30
I don’t doubt for a second it’s slower, of course it is. What I’m saying is that in this game it’s barely noticeable to me even when comparing side by side, being like treacle is a bit of an exaggeration. Richter moves slow in general when you don’t sprint so this is the extreme case you are showing. When it comes to racing games though 10hz makes a lot more difference to me. Platformers, not so much.
I couldnt disagree more, and theres no need for us to argue, I'll just state my opposing point. 20% slower is the same no matter the game...in Final Fantasy it adds 20% to your being stuck in random battles..as the slooww animations play out. Anyone who looks at that video can see that Richter looks as if he's floating through the air...50hz destroys the "weight" of platform characters, the responsiveness of controls, it ruins everything. Im not exaggerating anything, im showing the evidence as-is in a video. Sorry but PAL SOTN is an abomination, literally the most expensive and worst way to play the game it's possible to pick. I don't even believe it being "barely noticable" to you, if you played them back to back, there is literally only your pride and ego keeping you from accepting that the PAL version is terrible.

Anyway!
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#31
As someone who lives in the UK growing up in the 80s and 90s I’ve never come across a CRT that didn’t support 60hz. It’s a pity we got fucked for so long.
Im really not picking on you, please don't feel I am, but there were millions of CRTs that didnt support 60hz, only had RF inputs, and so on. PAL is a better system for TV, just not videogames.

I agree it was terrible having these compromised consoles for 25 years or so, just no company would take the risk of releasing an RGB scart 60hz only console...once again the lowest common denominator drags everyone down.
 
Jul 8, 2016
760
458
230
#32
Im really not picking on you, please don't feel I am, but there were millions of CRTs that didnt support 60hz, only had RF inputs, and so on. PAL is a better system for TV, just not videogames.
In the late 80s and 90s? I never seen any. Every tv I had from the portables growing up to bigger TVs from Sony, Phillips, Goodman, Alba, Bush, Nokia, Samsung all supported 60hz, not all supported 60hz and rgb. It was either/or. You would get 60hz in black and white if you tried.
 
Last edited:
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#33
In the late 80s and 90s? I never seen any. Every tv I had from the portables growing up to bigger TVs from Sony, Phillips, Goodman, Alba, Bush, Nokia, Samsung all supported 60hz, not all supported 60hz and rgb. It was either/or. You would get 60hz in black and white if you tried.
80s and 90s yep, I had 2 of them personally. My 1st portable as a kid for my acorn electron, and then when I moved into my late fathers house at age 20, his telly was RF only. None of my imported consoles worked on it as they were all RGB scart. I agree it was bullshit, but there were loads of tvs that wouldnt do it. There are still something like 5000 people in the UK who pay for a black and white TV license, never underestimate the old tech still being used.
 
Likes: Noboru Wataya
Jun 1, 2014
3,948
498
330
#34
I surely hope that you are not including me in the bunch of young people that don't respect the wisdom of the elders (this could be a song from Rhapsody of Fire). Mario Kart was not yet released in 1989 by the way. Maybe you were playing Phantasy Star II instead ? ;)

5 fps is not a lot to me, let's disagree. What is huge to me is the awful motion blur we have been doomed with on LCD panels. That's an awful issue. Also, you might choose to collect PAL games because you prefer the PAL boxes. Especially when you are a collector, you usually don't play your games, you put them on shelves.
 
Last edited:
Likes: angelic
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#35
  • Z..

    Z..

When you can make an informed choice and go for NTSC, there is zero reason to pick up a PAL copy of anything.
Well, there is ONE reason... Avoiding customs charges. I import alot of stuff from Japan and nothing ever gets stuck in customs, has never happened once in hundreds of purchases. Whenever I import something from the US or Canada, though (have done so quite alot as well, especially for Dreamcast and Sega CD stuff)... 8 times out of 10 it'll get slapped with inflated charges for no apparent reason. That right there is reason enough to stick to PAL versions on some particularly expensive games which require understanding of the language. Thank the lords I happen to collect for mostly arcade centric systems since language is usually a non issue for a sizeable portion of the libraries!
 
Dec 20, 2018
62
30
200
#36
I live in Europe, but these days I was thinking a lot about PAL/NTSC, especially because of frame rate for PS1, and PS2 games...

Considering I'm interested only in certain games, not to collect as much as possible, it's very likely that I will try to order everything I need from USA, consoles, CRT (probably even PVM), and games.
I actually have NTSC Tomb Raider, and Tekken from PS1, and could just play them on emulator, but since nowadays playing on proper hardware interests me more than emulator, I guess I'll need NTSC monitor for those.
 
Jun 25, 2015
2,707
863
275
Finland
#37
Even the boxes and art are terrible
What, the PAL PS1 boxes are god tier. The US boxes are terribly boring regular slim jewel cases (not counting the long boxes). PAL boxes have tons of charm and they look way better on shelf.

Here's my NTSC Chocobo Racing and PAL Armored Core (and PAL games on the background):


Those PAL boxes in their chunkiness are way more enjoyable to have in collection.
 
Likes: Mokus
Feb 2, 2009
8,227
1,009
800
#38
Drawing the extra PAL lines costs processing, adds slowdown etc. Nothing, nothing is equal to a 60hz original. I was a big Lobotomy fan too, but even their work is inferior on PAL. It's impossible not to be.
No it doesn't.

Frame size is irrelevent because thanks to PAL's native 50hz there's more time between vsync intervals to rasterize the extra lines, and the hardware itself runs at the same clock frequencies.

The thing people also forget is that PAL is an analog encoding standard, not a frequency declaration. PAL50 and PAL60 output were supported by the hardware and available on certain titles. The reason it wasn't more widely adopted was simply down to the unpredictable circumstance of displays that could only handle PAL50 on their end.

50hz was always fine, and in its day PAL was a far superior encoding standard to NTSC.

Don't fault the technology for suffering due to bad standards conversions (because that cuts both ways) and most of all don't disregard the thousands of titles created in Europe in the 80's and 90's, because if they were intended to work on domestic TV's, they'd be PAL/SECAM 50hz native, and later (and frequently sloppily) converted to support NTSC/60hz.
 
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#39
  • Z..

    Z..

What, the PAL PS1 boxes are god tier. The US boxes are terribly boring regular slim jewel cases (not counting the long boxes). PAL boxes have tons of charm and they look way better on shelf.

Here's my NTSC Chocobo Racing and PAL Armored Core (and PAL games on the background):


Those PAL boxes in their chunkiness are way more enjoyable to have in collection.
I vehemently disagree. For PS1 or Dreamcast games, PAL chunky boxes are much worse. Take up twice the space for nothing. I'm a weird collector, though... all my game cases are stored away, I keep all my game discs is CD wallets, all my games are stored in one single drawer underneath the TV. I don't really get the appeal of displaying one's collection, I suppose.
 
Jun 25, 2015
2,707
863
275
Finland
#40
I vehemently disagree. For PS1 or Dreamcast games, PAL chunky boxes are much worse. Take up twice the space for nothing. I'm a weird collector, though... all my game cases are stored away, I keep all my game discs is CD wallets, all my games are stored in one single drawer underneath the TV. I don't really get the appeal of displaying one's collection, I suppose.
For me having a visible collection is about two things:
1) When I'm thinking of playing some game (or watch a movie or listen a CD etc) it's much better to eye through the collection instead of having them hidden somewhere and having to go through some cd wallet thing.
2) When I was a kid I loved spending time at a local VHS rental store (the place had NES games too) and just look at the boxes. Went through the horror section and imagined what those movies might be like, and even after seeing some of the movies I enjoyed just looking at the boxes there. I like to have that experience on my home too. Ever since I was a teenager and started to collect movies and games I have occasionally just browsed through my shelves without even having an intention to watch the movies or play the games. Just going through the names and cover art. Good times.

While I get that they take up twice the space I don't agree that they take up that space for nothing. I wouldn't want some regular cd's all be in some cardboard sleeves either (which ironically kinda is what vinyl records are, but at least the artworks on the covers are huge). I wouldn't like to have, say, Sega Master System boxes that are exactly the size of the carts either. Or 3DS game boxes that only take a bit more space than what the game cards are. It's a wonderful thing to have special types of boxes for games.
 
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#41
No it doesn't.

Frame size is irrelevent because thanks to PAL's native 50hz there's more time between vsync intervals to rasterize the extra lines, and the hardware itself runs at the same clock frequencies.

The thing people also forget is that PAL is an analog encoding standard, not a frequency declaration. PAL50 and PAL60 output were supported by the hardware and available on certain titles. The reason it wasn't more widely adopted was simply down to the unpredictable circumstance of displays that could only handle PAL50 on their end.

50hz was always fine, and in its day PAL was a far superior encoding standard to NTSC.

Don't fault the technology for suffering due to bad standards conversions (because that cuts both ways) and most of all don't disregard the thousands of titles created in Europe in the 80's and 90's, because if they were intended to work on domestic TV's, they'd be PAL/SECAM 50hz native, and later (and frequently sloppily) converted to support NTSC/60hz.
You're wrong, and you misunderstood entirely. I'm talking about RAREs optimised N64 PAL games, which had to draw the extra lines from 480i to 576i, as well as the speed increase to (almost) NTSC speed. That takes processing power. Conversely, PAL SOTN has less slowdown than the NTSC version because it's running slower. These are both facts, not up for debate, and well covered.
 
Jun 1, 2014
3,948
498
330
#42
You're wrong, and you misunderstood entirely. I'm talking about RAREs optimised N64 PAL games, which had to draw the extra lines from 480i to 576i, as well as the speed increase to (almost) NTSC speed. That takes processing power. Conversely, PAL SOTN has less slowdown than the NTSC version because it's running slower. These are both facts, not up for debate, and well covered.
Actually this will depend on the game. Going from 480@60 to 576@50 you are actually displaying the exact same number of pixels each second.

However, what is true, is that you have to compensate for the speed of the game, and this is probably not a linear/predictable thing. It will depend on the game engine, how heavily it uses the hardware etc... The fact that you are refreshing the screen 50 times instead of 60 does not mean that you will be able to easily get the speed boost you need.
 
Feb 2, 2009
8,227
1,009
800
#44
You're wrong, and you misunderstood entirely. I'm talking about RAREs optimised N64 PAL games, which had to draw the extra lines from 480i to 576i, as well as the speed increase to (almost) NTSC speed. That takes processing power. Conversely, PAL SOTN has less slowdown than the NTSC version because it's running slower. These are both facts, not up for debate, and well covered.
No it doesn't work like that. I was a coder for years and I know what I'm talking about.

The hardware always runs at the same speed regardless of region, all that changes is the period between vertical synchronization pulses. 50hz gives 20ms between vsyncs, 60 gives 16.6ms. That's the window (or multiple thereof) you have to get the work done, and its obviously bigger when there's more time between frames.

Generally speaking the biggest issue was that if you had a static asset, like a static bitmapped image for a splash screen, that would have to fit both frame sizes. The choice being to either crop it when going from PAL to NTSC, or simply use the smaller (less memory) image for both and leave black space on lower/upper edges on the PAL build letterbox-style.

In the case of vector assets/rasterized imagery, then you could simply stretch it, safe in the knowlege that although the AR was somewhat fudged it would simply render as normal.

Where things got sticky with NTSC to PAL conversions gameplay-wise was when events were specifically timed with delays defined by n-number of frames, like moves within fighting games. Because obviously the game was tuned for a certain "feel" with a specific base time-unit in mind, and re-timing everything (including animation frames) to match, would be a huge job. In such instances, offering PAL60 output was the correct solution.
 
Likes: cireza
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#45
Actually this will depend on the game. Going from 480@60 to 576@50 you are actually displaying the exact same number of pixels each second.

However, what is true, is that you have to compensate for the speed of the game, and this is probably not a linear/predictable thing. It will depend on the game engine, how heavily it uses the hardware etc... The fact that you are refreshing the screen 50 times instead of 60 does not mean that you will be able to easily get the speed boost you need.
That is a good point about the lines + frames, but I remember reading an article years ago where a Rare programmer said the PAL versions require more code optimisation and processing power to bring up to NTSC speeds and screen size. It makes logical sense, that stuff isn't free.
 
Likes: cireza
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#46
No it doesn't work like that. I was a coder for years and I know what I'm talking about.

The hardware always runs at the same speed regardless of region, all that changes is the period between vertical synchronization pulses. 50hz gives 20ms between vsyncs, 60 gives 16.6ms. That's the window (or multiple thereof) you have to get the work done, and its obviously bigger when there's more time between frames.

Generally speaking the biggest issue was that if you had a static asset, like a static bitmapped image for a splash screen, that would have to fit both frame sizes. The choice being to either crop it when going from PAL to NTSC, or simply use the smaller (less memory) image for both and leave black space on lower/upper edges on the PAL build letterbox-style.

In the case of vector assets/rasterized imagery, then you could simply stretch it, safe in the knowlege that although the AR was somewhat fudged it would simply render as normal.

Where things got sticky with NTSC to PAL conversions gameplay-wise was when events were specifically timed with delays defined by n-number of frames, like moves within fighting games. Because obviously the game was tuned for a certain "feel" with a specific base time-unit in mind, and re-timing everything (including animation frames) to match, would be a huge job. In such instances, offering PAL60 output was the correct solution.
I know the hardware runs at the same speed every region, but you cant deny that a RARE title, lets say Banjo, drawing 576 lines instead of 480, and running at the same actual play speed, doesnt need more processing grunt. Obviously you have a good background in this, but I don't see how it's possible to say that there is zero extra performance required for the system to do more work. As I say, RARE have gone on record (in the dim and distant past, like 20 years ago so I can't name a source, somewhere like an n64 mag maybe) in saying their PAL games took extra optimisation and were more cpu intensive.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2, 2009
8,227
1,009
800
#47
I know the hardware runs at the same speed every region, but you cant deny that a RARE title, lets say Banjo, drawing 576 lines instead of 480, and running at the same actual play speed, doesnt need more processing grunt. Obviously you have a good background in this, but I don't see how it's possible to say that there is zero extra performance required for the system to do more work. As I say, RARE have gone on record (in the dim and distant past, like 20 years ago so I can't name a source, somewhere like an n64 mag maybe) in saying their PAL games took extra optimisation and were more cpu intensive.
Look at it this way: If an object is travelling at a constant speed of 1m/sec its going to move further over 20 seconds than 16.6 seconds. That's a precise analogy of how processing power works with frame-rate.

The only dimension that gets affected is memory as you need a larger frame-buffer for the extra lines, and for pre-rendered imagery to snugly fit the same space. Drawing it however is unaffected because processing speed remains constant per rasterized line.

People forget that back in the day the model was single-threaded code, which is very different to how things work today.
 
Last edited:
Apr 18, 2013
2,168
312
380
#48
Look at it this way: If an object is travelling at a constant speed of 1m/sec its going to move further over 20 seconds than 16.6 seconds. That's a precise analogy of how processing power works with frame-rate.

The only dimension that gets affected is memory as you need a larger frame-buffer for the extra lines, and for pre-rendered imagery to snugly fit the same space. Drawing it however is unaffected because processing speed remains constant per rasterized line.

People forget that back in the day the model was single-threaded code, which is very different to how things work today.
I dont see how any of your metaphors prove your point, almost the opposite. Plus you then say you do actually need extra memory, so it does require more resource to do. Especially as you say on older hardware with single CPUs, which I think we all know was the case. The N64 didnt even have a dedicated sound chip and audio cost CPU time.

Not that you have to do so, but I remain unconvinced, especially as Rare literally said it was difficult, as they were already pushing the hardware to the limits they barely had any extra resources to optimise for PAL.
 
Jun 5, 2013
4,577
135
500
#49
  • Z..

    Z..

Yes, I am aware of this. Just took it for granted that PAL versions of PS1 games were already in someway optimized. Do you know any game which went through this optimization and is the best example done right as a reference?
On PS1? No idea... but there's plenty of examples elsewhere, the first time I can remember encountering such a thing is probably Sonic 2, if I recall correctly.

For me having a visible collection is about two things:
1) When I'm thinking of playing some game (or watch a movie or listen a CD etc) it's much better to eye through the collection instead of having them hidden somewhere and having to go through some cd wallet thing.
2) When I was a kid I loved spending time at a local VHS rental store (the place had NES games too) and just look at the boxes. Went through the horror section and imagined what those movies might be like, and even after seeing some of the movies I enjoyed just looking at the boxes there. I like to have that experience on my home too. Ever since I was a teenager and started to collect movies and games I have occasionally just browsed through my shelves without even having an intention to watch the movies or play the games. Just going through the names and cover art. Good times.

While I get that they take up twice the space I don't agree that they take up that space for nothing. I wouldn't want some regular cd's all be in some cardboard sleeves either (which ironically kinda is what vinyl records are, but at least the artworks on the covers are huge). I wouldn't like to have, say, Sega Master System boxes that are exactly the size of the carts either. Or 3DS game boxes that only take a bit more space than what the game cards are. It's a wonderful thing to have special types of boxes for games.
1 - I understand your point regarding film but it doesn't resonate when it comes to games in my personal experience. I already know what I want to play, can't really think of any situation where I'll be browsing through games looking for something to play.... however, my brothers who live with me do do that so I'm aware that is definitely a thing, it just doesn't work that way for me for some reason.

2 - Can't relate either. Going to the video store was rarely about browsing, most times I'd just ask my mom to pick up something specific I'd already be interested in. My dad always had his VHS collection organized as you seem to mention at home growing up, though.

As for the rest, I get where you're coming from but for me boxes are something I keep only because they allow the games to keep their value in case I ever resell them. All my boxes are hidden away out of sight and the main reason for that is that I'd have to get some sort of gigantic dedicated shelf monster just to keep all that stuff around when right now I can fit my whole collection in one single drawer. There's just too many games, they would take up a ridiculous amount of space! I preffer to occupy that same space with objects that actually justify the space they take up (such as board games).
 
Oct 6, 2018
420
440
245
#50
I have a PS3 Slim and would be more than happy to buy lots of PS1 and PS2 games, but I'm not willing to put up with the whole 50hz,/letterboxing thing. I'm hoping Sony will sort this out with the PS5 (maybe it will be BC with all previous Playstations, with the best versions (ie not-PAL) of each game available via PSN). If not, then I will go the emulation route.