seismologist
Banned
Is GT4 the only one?
That would be 640x1080i.They both are 640x540 games.
Wanna bet?PS2 just cannot do a true 1080i game.
i guess his point was it's frame buffer is 540 lines and just using field rendering. It's a good hack when you think about it. But since you're using more lines you don't see the nasty jaggy steps like you did with field rendering with 240 lines.That would be 640x1080i.
Well, it's the same kind of 'hack' interlaced TV broadcasts useMoonwalker said:It's a good hack when you think about it.
The interlace-stepping is reduced by blurring two fields together, which does work better when you have access to fullframe data, but HDTVs can do their own filters on interlace inputs fairly well.But since you're using more lines you don't see the nasty jaggy steps like you did with field rendering with 240 lines.
1080i on PS2, 640x576 on GC, no idea on XBox (probably 1080).Lazy8 said:What are the maximum resolutions supported by each console?
Lazy8s said:What are the maximum resolutions supported by each console?
I think Dreamcast might be 1600x1200.
Oh I most vehemently disagree. The Dreamcast could easily render any game in existence at 1600x1200 resolution without dropping below 60fps. You forget this, dark10x. Ignore. :bdark10x said:I doubt it could possibly render at a decent speed while using a resolution that high.
Gattsu25 said:Oh I most vehemently disagree. The Dreamcast could easily render any game in existence at 1600x1200 resolution without dropping below 60fps. You forget this, dark10x. Ignore. :b
Fafalada said:That would be 640x1080i.
Wanna bet?
no idea on XBox (probably 1080).
I thought b/c of the Dreamcast technology it wasn't bandwidth limited? Therefore wouldn't he be right? Resolution shouldn't affect it afaik. Well, memory wise, yeah... but bandwidth wise I mean.dark10x said:You're right. I forgot that the Dreamcast was actually more powerful than the next generation consoles currently on the horizon. It can run circles around the 360 and PS3...it's just that developers were never able to utilize it due to an early death.
shpankey said:P.S. I dunno why, but GT4's '1080i' is not very impressive at all. Not even remotely comparable to 1080i HDTV broadcasts quality.
shpankey said:P.S. I dunno why, but GT4's '1080i' is not very impressive at all. Not even remotely comparable to 1080i HDTV broadcasts quality, which on my TV is breathtaking.
Gattsu25 said:Oh I most vehemently disagree. The Dreamcast could easily render any game in existence at 1600x1200 resolution without dropping below 60fps. You forget this, dark10x. Ignore. :b
seismologist said:Of course broadcast HDTV is going to look better than a videogame.
When I play PC games at true 1080i, they look similar to GT4
dark10x said:They shouldn't...
PC games at 720p or 1080i look VERY VERY clear and are far superior to GT4's image quality.
Well just imagine the bliss of Namco releasing their museums remastered for 1080ShogMaster said:Yeah, you can get 2D games running at 1920x1080.
Is running <5fps allowed?Can you get your racing game to run at 1920x1080?
Well I'm certain proper 1080 can be displayed(nevermind running games for now), just dunno if that's the max resolution it can display or not.I think there were a couple of 1080i "advanture" games (static background with 3D characters) on Xbox. I think Cyberia was one. I don't know if it was 1920x1080i, or Stretched out 640x1080i like GT4.
Sony HS510 36" Direct View HDTV. Professionally ISF Calibrated. I'm big on image quality.seismologist said:What kind of HDTV do you have Shpanky?
seismologist said:The image is more stable but this is more due to lack of filtering on the PS2's part. resolution looks about the same. It looks very close.
Yeah i play Hal-Life and Doom on my PC which is hooked up to my HDTV and the best i can do, resolution wise is 1024x768 but it looks smooth as butter. No 16:9 which is a bummerdark10x said:Man, I really don't agree. Half-Life 2 is absolutely breath taking at 720p. The clarity blew me away. There are very few traces of any sort of "stair stepping" on edges and the overall picture was just so vibrant and crisp. I much prefer playing PC games on my TV, actually (though, it's a problem if the games do not support 16:9).
The difference is rather massive. GT4's 1080i mode really does not look a whole lot sharper than 480p in some other games. XBOX 720p games also look much much clearer than GT4.
The difference between native and field rendered is still quite noticeable, though, even on good HDTVs.The interlace-stepping is reduced by blurring two fields together, which does work better when you have access to fullframe data, but HDTVs can do their own filters on interlace inputs fairly well.
Higher resolutions can be useful for supersampling, yet outputting that high would require other areas of the graphics to still be scaled accordingly, of course. The situation is like using a PC graphics card at maximum resolution: framerates drop, and it's mostly useful for getting more out of running the older games.I doubt it could possibly render at a decent speed while using a resolution that high.
Recognition of the DC's hardware is not given to imply that it has some limitless power. Its design gets attention for the capabilities it could perform per die area, power consumption, heat, process size, release date, etc. The DC had to define a new generation on a low price point only two years after the N64 while even the earliest system next generation gets four years after Xbox and a high price tag to do it.You're right. I forgot that the Dreamcast was actually more powerful than the next generation consoles currently on the horizon. It can run circles around the 360 and PS3...it's just that developers were never able to utilize it due to an early death.
The Xbox also ran a full 3D cel-shaded game with simple graphics, Dragons Lair, at 1080i.I think there were a couple of 1080i "advanture" games (static background with 3D characters) on Xbox.
Right, bandwidth wouldn't be the limiting factor, and the memory space limit, which wouldn't take any extra space at all for just supersampling with a tile accelerated display list renderer, could be avoided to some extent while raising resolution by trading off image quality and room for textures. The DC's 100M-pix/sec actual fillrate would eventually be hit.I thought b/c of the Dreamcast technology it wasn't bandwidth limited? Therefore wouldn't he be right? Resolution shouldn't affect it afaik. Well, memory wise, yeah... but bandwidth wise I mean.
Professionally ISF
shpankey said:hell, PC games at 1024x768 looks a lot clearer to me than GT4's 1080i mode. let alone a HDTV resolution on a monitor.
Err, no. That's most certainly not true.Becuase games in 480i on a TV look cleaner than 1024x768 from a PC monitor