The MagicBox Forums  

Go Back   The MagicBox Forums > General Topics > General Gaming Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-31-2004, 02:40 AM   #76
Reality
Sin and Punishment
 
Reality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 14,616
Yeah please. It's from Rogue Leader, the launch game. The level is called..umm..ah I don't know, but you'll recognize it with the little back ground preview.
__________________
Outpostnine is that 1%.
Reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 03:13 AM   #77
Joe Redifer
Olé!
 
Joe Redifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 20,105
OK here are some screen caps I just grabbed from S-Video. I don't have that particular stage unlocked due to the quick onset of boredom that this game caused, but this should do:


Notice that this has an extra black border around the screen, which is typical on many games. But the amount of detail is roughly the same I'd say (aside from the general "blah" quality of the video capture). There is a bit of interlacing motion artifacts though:


This is caused by me not being able to have a perfectly still screen to get the screen grab like I could on Out Run 2 and Ninja Gaiden. So this is what happens. You can also see this in the yellow glow of the larger ship's thrusters. That's 1/60th of a difference in time right there. 480p fixes this, but I have no way to do a 480p screen capture without taking a picture of the screen with my digital camera.

So it is obvious that the screenshot you originally provided was not from the Gamecube itself, but rather it's development system. They got rid of the black border but that seems to be about it. Otherwise it does not look like they enhanced the resolution, textures, anti-aliasing or any other graphics feature in any way.


OK this is a shot from 480p 4:3 (the game is not in widescreen) with a digital camera from my TV screen. Not as good as a true video capture as has been mentioned previously in this thread, but oh well. It's good for getting in close and pointing out jaggies, which every game at a 640x480 resolution will have! But progressive made it look a little better as I played.

Last edited by Joe Redifer; 10-31-2004 at 03:30 AM.
Joe Redifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 11:23 AM   #78
littlepest429
How very Kafkaesque.
 
littlepest429's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Iowa.
Posts: 400
Games from Nintendo, or created solely for the Gamecube rarely are renders. They're 9/10's of the time screens like that, including the HUD, jaggies, and everything else. Some good examples are Resident Evil 4 (Jaggies like hell) and Mario Sunshine had jaggies in the screenshots also.
littlepest429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 12:19 PM   #79
bluebomber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2
Apologies for the lateness of this reply

Ok, I've registered on this forum purely to answer this issue (^_^)

Its highly likely that the "high quality" imagery you guys are talking about are in-game screenshots captured at high resolution with development kits.

Playstation 2 and Xbox development kits are slightly higher spec than regular consoles for development and debug purposes.

Regular playstation 2 and xbox machines (and a lot of consoles actually) are capable of outputting to tv at resolutions far higher than what people expect - developers dont do it because it has a massive hit on memory and framerate, 2 things that aren't an issue when the plan is to take a static screenshot using a development kit.

This technique is not uncommon and is used constantly by all manner of developers, and its not even a recent thing - this has been going on for years.

Tecmo regularly do this - as pointed out they did it with DOAX and now Ultimate - they also did it with DOA3. Theres all sorts of high res tecmo imagery - I've seen those DOA girls appear on all manner of merchandise -what your always seeing is in-game artwork rendered at a higher crisper resolution.

Polyphony do it with Gran Turismo, Konami have done it with MGS3 and Namco recently did it with Ace Combat 5.

The most common giveaway when this technique is being used is by usually geometry and textures, outputting at higher res only gives you a sharper image - the number of polygons and the resolution of textures you see is the same.

Because of the aging hardware the technique is much more obvious these days with PS2 - if you look for high res screen shots of MGS3 that have been released in the past few months there are some with hideously low res jungle textures on the floor and trees (because they're the real in-game ones) - ironically images captured at true resolution on PS2 often cover up these things. More often than not it takes a brave developer with a brilliant looking game to do this on PS2, because if your not careful the increased resolution can make your game look worse as it can now be analysed under such close and clear scrutiny. MGS3 and Gran Turismo 4 are 2 examples of great looking PS2 games that can still stand up when output at high res.

A couple of other things, when these images are captured - they are fed straight to a PC from the development kit - from here the images are often scaled down (from 1024 x768 or whatever) to something like 640x480 or maybe even lower (for the web) ... this process will naturally anti alias an image regardless of the what the original hardware was doing.

I appreciate that the end user would "think" this is cheating.. but in a way this process gives you an image thats actually suprisingly close to how the game will look on a real TV in front of your eyes, as someone here already pointed out - monitors are so pixel perfect - putting a "true res" screenshot of a game out on to the net can actually make a game look WORSE than it does. People who play a gamecube or dreamcast through a vga cable might notice pixelations along diagonal lines alot more.. and in particular HUD graphics wont look as nice as they do on a TV.

I've seen what a PS2 game looks like when a true resolution image is digitally captured from hardware to a pc and it believe me it looks terrible.. detail is hard to notice - pixels are too clear and colours become washed out.

On another note - going back to the point I was making about consoles having the ability to output at suprisingly high res - any of you guys seen the photo mode in GT4? I think I read that the images it will take are displayed back on screen (or fed to a printer) at way above 1024x768 - this is one of the first examples i've seen of a developer using the high res potential of the PS2 for an in-game use - you can bet your arse that images captured will be anti aliased - ironically i bet the quality of the in-game visuals (as your moving the camera around to take the shot) is far worse than the final render it generates.

A quick note about anti aliasing, dont believe what you read with regards to what consoles "can and cant" do - its a common belief the PS2 cant do full screen anti aliasing - this is completely untrue - unlike the xbox, dreamcast etc the PS2 dosent have it built in the hardware, but theres nothing to stop developers from including routines in their game code that perform the same job (of course it dosent come cheap) - but when done by professionals the results are amazing, GT3 and 4 both use it on PS2 - another great game to look at for this on PS2 is Tekken 4. If you need a reminder of what a fully aliased PS2 game looks like pop in Ridge Racer V.

On a final note - someone made a comment about a DOAX screenshot looking like it was at a "different angle" from the how the same scene looks "in-game" - this is very simple.. developers often have a "free cam" in their game during development - this often lets them move and position a camera (in real time) to anywhere they want in the game environment while the game runs - this is specifically used to take screen shots for publishing - this shouldn't be anything suprising to the average gamer - look at how many MGS3 shots show snake aiming his gun AT the camera - the game has no replays and you can tell its not a cutscene because there are often in-game elements (such as exclamation marks appearing over baddies heads) visible - this is the game actually running (being played by someone) but being viewed from a development camera. Similarly think about how many screenshots you've seen which dont feature the game HUD.

Believe it or not - you can produce your own versions of these "in-game" renders yourself - using console emulators on your PC. Most 3d console emulators give you the option to run the game at a much higher resolution than the original games would. Just run your favourite game at high res - take a screenshot - take it into photoshop - and shrink it down to the resolution the original game WOULD have run at (or just make it smaller mimicking the size of screen shots that often get released on the net) - and voila, there you have it.. a real in-game shot.. at realistic resolution - but much crisper and smoother looking than the original.

One last comment I'll make - I can understand the confusion with Tecmo's xbox products.. mainly because they are a very talented bunch - and their games look absolutely spectacular when running on a TV - if you were to take high res development captures from the average Acclaim or EA PS2 title - you'd spot what was going on instantly.
bluebomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 06:00 PM   #80
Joe Redifer
Olé!
 
Joe Redifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 20,105
I think the free camera renders are deceptive because you will never see that shot or angle in the game. Why do I need to see that angle in a magazine or on the internet? It is indeed false advertising. I want to see what the game will look like as I play, that way I can truly judge the graphics. If they want to use a little bit of aliasing for the RGB caps, then that's cool.

But still, look at the DOAXBV comparison. The render shot is only 800x600, not a huge leap above the real game by any means. But look how different everything looks. The water looks thirty to forty times better in the fake shot, and everything has a ton more detail as well. Why did they change the water so that it was much crappier looking in the real game? Because they are deceptive!
Joe Redifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 10:51 PM   #81
bemanisuperstar
Banned
 
bemanisuperstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In HP Lovecraft's world
Posts: 2,461
Well I think I agree with Blue Bomber well at least on the XBOX thing.

The PS2 Stuff I dunno if the footage used is ingame or something else all togehter (IE CG Intro)

Last edited by bemanisuperstar; 10-31-2004 at 11:02 PM.
bemanisuperstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2004, 11:45 PM   #82
Reality
Sin and Punishment
 
Reality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 14,616
Well, in that Starwar pic, you can create that angle yourself in the game using the C stick. Justing to let everyone know..XD
__________________
Outpostnine is that 1%.
Reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2004, 05:03 AM   #83
bluebomber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2
If you feel different camera angles are deceptive then fine, I wont argue - Im merely explaining what they do - again though... this is something thats been happening since the dawn of 3D games, its not new - I'd be suprised if this is something that you only recently noticed.

Funnily enough a lot of games (take MGS3 for example) have quite a lot of detailed facial animations that you dont see at all from most of the gameplay angles, I think sometimes they use new cameras to show this stuff off - and make a point, although arguably its pointless because its not noticable.

Reality made a good point about some games having good camera control - Ace Combat 5 is another game that lets you position the camera almost anywhere (in-game) to get a good shot.. so I doubt any fake cameras were set up during development to get a lot of those screenshots.

I was looking at the DOAX screenshots and i see what your saying about the water - it does indeed look very different, I prefer the water in the "fake" image too (even if its just a flat transparent polygon), but ironically it looks as if the in-game water looks more detailed.. there seems to be waves and ripples modelled into the geometry - also the reflections look more detailed and realistic too.

All I can say about this is that the first shot was taken during development, so what you saw wasn't the final game - and the new water was added in at a later date.. seriously its not that unbelievable.. things change during development all the time. You'll notice that in the first DOAX shot the sky also looks completely different, again another example of someothing that was most likely changed.
bluebomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2004, 05:22 AM   #84
Joe Redifer
Olé!
 
Joe Redifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 20,105
I have noticed this for a long time and for the most part, I did not care. But then people started harping about how great the graphics are in Gran Turismo 4 while looking at 1600x1200 screens, which is well over TWICE the resolution of the real game. They actually thought that they'd use those same high-resolution textures all the way into the background in the real game. Rendering on a development station allows all textures, near and far, to be of high of quality as possible. I got a little annoyed that people would actually think that was representive of what the actual game would look like. Before this I was just annoyed by the camera angles of the renders. If they want to show of the detail of a car or an in-game model, that's cool, but I still want lots of actual shots from the angle I'll be seeing them in the real game itself. I also want shots with the HUD onscreen. If a game lets you roam around with the camera, then shots like that are cool by me.

Differences in development are to be expected. I remember seeing screens of Sonic the hedgehog and the graphics I saw never even made it into any version of a Sonic game ever. But the screenshot was still representive of actual work in progress. They didn't try to dress it up. Ninja Gaiden was the biggest deception for me. The game looks good in real life, but nothing like the gigantic super-clear renders they advertised with.
Joe Redifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2019, 08:48 AM   #85
jenifferleio12
Banned
 
jenifferleio12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 4
Pleasant stuff! I like to peruse the data that you have imparted to us. I need to get more updates to expand my insight.
I must say that this is a great post.Really I am impressed from this post.
lexmark Printer Support| Epson Printer Support | Canon Printer Support | Dell Printer Support | Brother Printer Support | HP Printer Support
jenifferleio12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.