Dominic_Shade
Member
Guess it's time for me to pick up the HD Collection then, haha. Good to hear about the patch. Thanks for posting this, TC.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PSA: Zone of the Enders HD patch out in Europe. [Up: Now up in the US]
- Thread starter Peff
- Start date
I know right! I couldn't find it cheaper if I tried
Got to get used to buying digital but I just love the boxarts
Prooobably HD, if only for HUD/FMV corrections and most likely less input lag (if you care about that sort of thing).
Definitely HD version. No comparison.
Dragon1893
Member
When I said both consoles I was talking PS3 and 360.
All you need to know is that the PS3 version is the one to get and that both games are perfectly playable now. ZoE1 isn't quite as smooth as on PS2 but it runs well so it's not surprising that they didn't patch it though of course it would've been nice.
paolo11
Member
How frequent are the dips? Is it all the time?
SkylineRKR
Member
ZoE1 HD always ran decent enough. Felt a lot like the Ps2 version to me. Miles better than pre-patch ZoE2 HD felt.
ZoE2 HD is ridiculously good now. Ofcourse it should've been like this right away and even then it wouldn't be a top tier HD conversion like MGS or ICO was, probably. But seeing where it comes from, the depths of almost Silent Hill, its an amazing feat by HexaDrive.
Sadly they didn't do this conversion right away. Damage has already been done by HV.
ZoE2 HD is ridiculously good now. Ofcourse it should've been like this right away and even then it wouldn't be a top tier HD conversion like MGS or ICO was, probably. But seeing where it comes from, the depths of almost Silent Hill, its an amazing feat by HexaDrive.
Sadly they didn't do this conversion right away. Damage has already been done by HV.
I'm slightly pissed here, I bought the 360 version right off the bat because of the better framerate in ZoE2. I'm going to double dip now (probably on ebay) and grab the ps3 version.
The dips occur whenever your character is in close proximity to any and all alpha effects (such as explosions). The dips feel like small skips and stutters to the framerate and do impact fluidity. Technically speaking, it runs smoother than something like, say, Call of Duty but it still doesn't feel as smooth as it should.
The game originally operated at 60 fps without slowdown on PS2. It really was virtually flawless in that regard.
On PS3 it is more than playable but it isn't as polished an experience as one would hope.
It really wasn't. Not that it was unplayable, but the game would have frequent FPS hits. It was especially jarring when you'd get the camera just right in a 1v1 situation and the game would clearly run perfectly smooth (which never happens otherwise)--60 FPS or close to it. And it really stood out.
None the less, ZoE1 is still perfectly playable and enjoyable.
Didn't ZoE1 on the PS2 chug every time the environment was destroyed?
Krusenstern
Banned
Bought my copy and just started playing the first game. Haven't played it on PS2 or before patch. I got the same impression others already told in regards to performance. It's pretty playable and controlls are responsive. But framerate dips noticable when effects like fire or explosions are covering the screen. Looks like it's falling to >30fps in situations. Nevertheless, it plays well in my opinion. Worth it for the now definite version of ZOE2 in my opinion.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
I thought it was an intentional effect. Like, the screen would blur and slow down a bit. I'm not saying there was no slowdown, but yeah.
But anyway, I'm starting to get curious as to which the better version of ZOE1 is now. It might end up being that one needs to have both the 360 and PS3 HD collections if they want the best versions.
I'll have to load it up again to be sure, but I feel that was intentional.
I only say that because ZOE1 used field rendering (unlike the rest of KCEJ's output on PS2). You gain speed at the expense of image quality but you have to maintain 60 fps else you start losing half of the image data and the game will run in slow motion. So, if ZOE1 were to chug, the entire screen would become a pixelated mess (half resolution) during those moments. I don't seem to recall the game running into that issue, however.
Maybe I'm mistaken then. I just remember during the rescue mission in the town with the huge valley in the center, Id get a one on one fight against a cyclops or something, and the game would clearly run better than any other time.
Krusenstern
Banned
Hexadrive also did the Okami HD port, and that was a good one apparently. They seem like a competent studio. Wouldn't mind to see their potential PC output.
They're ex-Capcom guys, apparently.
They also did Rez HD on 360, which was fantastic.
Dragon1893
Member
I would be too, really sucks.
As for ZoE1, like I said on the previous page, if ZoE2 can run at a mostly solid 60fps at 720p with post process AA, 1080p with 4MSAA would definitely have been possible, it's such a rudimentary engine in comparison. They probably had a tight budget for this patch though and let's be honest, people don't really care much about the first game.
Sorry, can I get some clarification on what you mean by "field rendering"? I don't think I understand it.
Is that somehow different than plain old interlaced rendering that you see with any 480i console game? Does it refer to the difference between a game that renders internally at 480p with 480i output (not field rendering, I'd assume most/all Dreamcast and Xbox games) and a game that renders in 480i internally in the first place (field rendering, PS1, N64, Saturn "high resolution" games)?
I also don't understand how it could be directly related to the game entering slow motion instead of dropping frames when it can't maintain speed, since any game can be written to be framerate independent.
Exactly this, haha.
I can see the value of the Limited Editions for the PS3 rising in-cost, now. I have mine, though, so I am not worried.
Nice to actually be able to sit and play this thing.
SkylineRKR
Member
I would start with 1, because ZoE2 is so much better that its hard to go back to ZoE1 once you've started ZoE2.
The games are not that big, I think you can beat ZoE 1 within 6 hours or so.
Not that I had asked the question, but I am now patching and I was going to ask same question. Thanks.
Dragon1893
Member
It's really short so might as well play it, it's not bad, it's just that after playing 2 it's hard to go back. 6 hours is overselling its lenght, 4 is more like it.
It says a lot about ZoE1 vs ZoE2 when I recalled ZoE2 being double the length of ZoE1, but nope, it's either the same or shorter. It's just that ZoE2's THAT much more dense.
Anyways gave it a spin for awhile and it's definitely smoother than before. Tutorials seem to be a perfect 60 FPS now, whereas I don't think they were even 30 FPS beforehand. I love that this went from one of the crappier HD ports to one of the best.
Also, I think M2 ported some Genesis games again that Backbone had done previously, I think a Streets of Rage collection went up in place of the stand alone games for instance.
Anyways gave it a spin for awhile and it's definitely smoother than before. Tutorials seem to be a perfect 60 FPS now, whereas I don't think they were even 30 FPS beforehand. I love that this went from one of the crappier HD ports to one of the best.
Also, I think M2 ported some Genesis games again that Backbone had done previously, I think a Streets of Rage collection went up in place of the stand alone games for instance.
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
Does the HD version of ZoE 2 come with zoradius as an unlockable as well?
It's an alternate method for drawing an image which was used in many (usually early) PS2 titles. It's designed for interlaced displays. Essentially, you'd be rendering out to a 640x224 buffer (though the 640 could vary) and nudging each field by half a line every 1/60th of a second. It basically alternates rapidly between odd and even lines and gives the impression of a full 640x448 image. The benefits of this are simply that you can achieve an image that looks roughly equivlanet to 640x448 at 60 frames per second with less of a demand placed on the hardware.
The most significant limitation when using this method, however, is that you MUST always hit your framerate target or you will literally lose half of the visual information. If the system fails to maintain performance half of the lines are tossed out and game speed is impacted as it will still attempt to draw each and every frame. It does not seem possible to separate game speed from framerate when using field rendering as every game employing this technique drops to half speed and half resolution when slowdown occurs. It was an interesting trick that allowed for an incredible number of 60 fps titles on PS2. As developers became more accostomed to working with the system, however, you started seeing more games render the full frame buffer. Metal Gear Solid 2, for instance, uses a full 448 lines rather than alternating ala ZOE. There was a disc that could force such games to run in 480p, in fact, as they are basically doing that already.
There were actually some games that used this sort of rendering in a different fashion. ICO, for instance, actually sticks with 512x224 as its primary resolution. This allows SDTVs to engage the lower resolution modes which eliminates scanline flicker and can produce a much softer image. The game speed was designed with this target in mind.
Field rendering is perhaps the mode which specifically resulted in people calling out "the jaggies" as high motion scenes produced more artifacts than what you'd get while using a full frame buffer. I think it was worth it, however, as it allowed for a more larger selection of games operating at a higher apparent framerate.
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
That is seriously one of the coolest things I've ever heard of, I love hearing about awesome work arounds like this for maximum performance
It's a shame the original Zone of the Enders didnt' receive the same patch treatment as ZOE2.
As someone who played the original game a lot, I can notice the constant and dramatic framerate drops, especially during the boss battles (Hell, even the opening FMV shows the slowdown on the HD Collection, while the PS2 version looks very smooth and fast).
As someone who played the original game a lot, I can notice the constant and dramatic framerate drops, especially during the boss battles (Hell, even the opening FMV shows the slowdown on the HD Collection, while the PS2 version looks very smooth and fast).
Bill Rizer
Member
Yeah, Ridge Racer V was the major offender back then due to the high speed of the game producing a lot of jaggies every time you drifted around a corner. This thing, at Ps2 launch, even contributed for some time to the idea that "Dreamcast is more powerful than Ps2!!!".
I imagine GT3 shut people up in the end. I couldn't get into it, but I can't deny that is the most impressed I've ever been with a racing game's visuals, and I'm not sure I CAN be as impressed again: GT5 and Forza Horizon look pretty nice and I'm sure leagues ahead of GT3, but relative to when I first played them GT3 was just on another level altogether.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
GT3 - Night/Wet track. Game over.
Nothing in GT4 could match that either.
Nothing in GT4 could match that either.
CamHostage
Member
Sorry, my phrasing is a jumble. I meant that I was wishing that Hexadrive was hired for both the PS3 patch and the PS Vita finish (if HVG even got started on the portable version.) But there's no update to be had on the lost-in-limbo Vita release plans.
Dragon1893
Member
That's not true, 1 took me around 4 hours and 2 over 7 hours.
Die Squirrel Die
Member
Dammit, I think ZoE HD might have lost me 8gigs of my PS3 HDD. I started downloading the game but paused it to go to work, I resumed when I got home but the when installing the data kept corrupting. So I deleted it and redownloaded the whole thing in one go, but looking at my system info I went from 43 gigs to 27 despite the game only being around 8.
So moral of the story for people now considering buying it is make sure to download the whole thing in one go.
So moral of the story for people now considering buying it is make sure to download the whole thing in one go.
Auron_Kale
Member
Fantastic news, now I can actually play my copy of the game.
Sadly, I only opened it in the first place for the MGR demo and was going to play it until reading how unplayable ZoE2 was. Will patch once I get home.
Sadly, I only opened it in the first place for the MGR demo and was going to play it until reading how unplayable ZoE2 was. Will patch once I get home.
I need to check my time for ZoE2 again but it was around 4 hours, though admittedly I was playing on Easy as Normal pounded the crap out of me. I think what I said is still true though, ZoE2's a denser experience, whereas ZoE1 was kind of jut fetch quests until you beat the game.
Not even a day before I get avatar quoted. And ZoE2 even had some designs by Kazuma Kaneko!
Still, the game kind of is crazy hard on Normal, though I'm definitely going to give it another shot on this second patched run.