1. Thats a good point but unfortunately I sold my GC/XBOX/PS2 for the next gen as they were backward compatible. I did however play some PS2/XBOX games on PS3/360 and they dont suffer this problem. Do they do that good a job of upscaling the old games? Also on the flip side does that mean No More Heroes wouldn't have jaggies on a CRT TV?
2. I understand your point here but that doesn't change the fact that N64 used anti-aliasing and the Wii (on some games at least) doesn't.
Sorry to go on about this but I do find this issue very frustrating especially seeing as its not noticable in images on the net and in mags. My jaw dropped when I saw how bad No More Heroes looked when I first booted it up.
The Wii DOES have anti-aliasing, but developers often choose to turn it off in order to free up more processing power for other things.
This is kind of true though the way anti-aliasing works on the Wii is that it has to be manually programmed just like advanced texture effects. Most devs do not have the knowledge or skill to do so even though documentation on how to do it is freely available...
The aliasing in Wii games was more an issue of dev laziness and cheapness. The Wii can produce every texture effect that the PS3 and 360 can assuming the dev knows how to program TEV properly. The fact is that most devs only know how to use game engines that simplified everything for them. The Wii had few of those and most of them were far from optimal.
The best I saw was the Lair engine followed by the Mario Galaxy Engine, then the Unleashed Engine that was used in Sonic Colors and the Quatum 3 engine. Most of these were proprietery, however, so they were of no benefit to other devs.
One of the devs of Conduit 2 who used to post on gamefaqs told me that the game didn't use AA because it would be too much of a performance hit with so many effects already running.
I'm pretty sure Red Steel 2, FAST Racing League, and Monster Hunter Tri use AA though, they're the least jaggy 3D Wii games I can think of.
There was that too. If I rememver corectly, the fill rate gets cut in half if you use AA or something like that and it needs to use a TEV unit. Though, it also depends on the quality of the textures being used in the games.
I believe that higher res textures produce less AA. It may be the other way around though. I can't remember.
Another fact is that the Wii is an HD system. It could run games at HD but it would take a huge performance hit. You would only be able to use like 1/8 of the assets you could normaly at HD resolutions if you wanted to achieve 30 FPS at 1080p. That and Nintendo had the HD capabilities firmware locked. They could remove them with an update but that obviously won't happen.
If it's that big a hit, I'm now extra impressed by the Rogue Squadron games, since they used AA while also doing high res textures and tons of effects.
So if you wanted to do, say 720p at 30fps on Wii we'd be talking, say, PSP quality textures/geometry/effects, or more like PS1 level?
There was that too. If I rememver corectly, the fill rate gets cut in half if you use AA or something like that and it needs to use a TEV unit. Though, it also depends on the quality of the textures being used in the games.
I believe that higher res textures produce less AA. It may be the other way around though. I can't remember.
Another fact is that the Wii is an HD system. It could run games at HD but it would take a huge performance hit. You would only be able to use like 1/8 of the assets you could normaly at HD resolutions if you wanted to achieve 30 FPS at 1080p. That and Nintendo had the HD capabilities firmware locked. They could remove them with an update but that obviously won't happen.
If it's that big a hit, I'm now extra impressed by the Rogue Squadron games, since they used AA while also doing high res textures and tons of effects.
So if you wanted to do, say 720p at 30fps on Wii we'd be talking, say, PSP quality textures/geometry/effects, or more like PS1 level?
It will mostly effect the polygon count. It would be limited to around the scale of the PS2 which could also output at 1080i in a few games with a special T.V. It coudln't do 720p or 1080p though. I never quite understood why that was or how it did it.
Texture size is mainly a RAM issue which would be the other limiting facter. HD textures are HUGE. The Wii has 88 MB of RAM with a 3 MB cache to hold texture and programming instruction data as compared to the 256x256 in the PS3 and 512 MB with a 10 MB cache in the 360. Even they choke at true 720p. Overall, unless it is someting small scale like a versus fighting game or puzzle game, there wouldn't be any benefit to running the Wii in HD. It would require some exeptional design and programming skills to make it worth it. We are talking N64 type programming techniques here.
One of the devs of Conduit 2 who used to post on gamefaqs told me that the game didn't use AA because it would be too much of a performance hit with so many effects already running.
I'm pretty sure Red Steel 2, FAST Racing League, and Monster Hunter Tri use AA though, they're the least jaggy 3D Wii games I can think of.
It's mostly because of the limited framebuffer, the Wii has the same 3MB frambuffer/texture cache as the Gamecube, but the Wii uses a higher resolution for widescreen rendering. While the GPU is capable of 3-sample AA, doing so requires more memory for the framebuffer which means devs ether have to lower the resolution, or use a tile bassed solution where the game renders a section of the screen, moves it into VRAM, and then renders another section and then when all the tiles are rendered they are moved back into the framebuffer. The extra time it takes to move the tiles too and from VRAM means you have a lot less time to actually render each frame for the same framerate.
One of the devs of Conduit 2 who used to post on gamefaqs told me that the game didn't use AA because it would be too much of a performance hit with so many effects already running.
I'm pretty sure Red Steel 2, FAST Racing League, and Monster Hunter Tri use AA though, they're the least jaggy 3D Wii games I can think of.
It's mostly because of the limited framebuffer, the Wii has the same 3MB frambuffer/texture cache as the Gamecube, but the Wii uses a higher resolution for widescreen rendering. While the GPU is capable of 3-sample AA, doing so requires more memory for the framebuffer which means devs ether have to lower the resolution, or use a tile bassed solution where the game renders a section of the screen, moves it into VRAM, and then renders another section and then when all the tiles are rendered they are moved back into the framebuffer. The extra time it takes to move the tiles too and from VRAM means you have a lot less time to actually render each frame for the same framerate.
Ah, yeah, thats what it was. It splits the texture cache in half and has to use one of the 8 TEV units.
PS3/360 upscale the games by itselves so the TV doesn't have have to do it. That improves things.
HDMI and HD component cable improves things as well. I connected my cousin's X360 with an SCART cable and I couldn't believe how bad Fifa Soccer looked. Then I used a HD component cable (still at 480i) and the game looked much better.
The original Xbox was an HD console, XBOX games can't be used to do a fair comparison.
Sony have improved the quality of the backwards compatibility of PS3 since the beginning of the gen (old video before 1.5 firmware update):
I have a PS2 connected to a CRT and the games have jaggies. They are highly noticeable in the wings you can buy for your cars in GT4, for example. In 480i jaggies are always noticeable.
Remember that the Wii is backwards compatible. It can do what the GC (which had anti-aliasing) was able to do and more.
If only some games have the problem, then it is a devs thing. Most third parties don't put much effort in Wii games.
I have noticed this even with the Wii. Mario 64 and Wave Race 64 on the Virtual Console for example look amazing and much clearer and sharper than on the N64. I would also like to point out they dont have jaggies
I just find this very frustrating. Im not a graphics whore at all (hell I spent last saturday having an Atari 2660 night with a few mates) but the 2 things I hate are jaggies and pop-up and I think that they have no right to still be popping up in modern games.
R: Racing had the worst aliasing i have seen in a game, it absolutely ruined the fantastic grafix it had
jaggies pop up and framerate slowdowns are things that should have been eliminated in the previous gen, but devs...you know....are fucking lazy and always choose the cheap path...
One of the devs of Conduit 2 who used to post on gamefaqs told me that the game didn't use AA because it would be too much of a performance hit with so many effects already running.
I'm pretty sure Red Steel 2, FAST Racing League, and Monster Hunter Tri use AA though, they're the least jaggy 3D Wii games I can think of.
It's mostly because of the limited framebuffer, the Wii has the same 3MB frambuffer/texture cache as the Gamecube, but the Wii uses a higher resolution for widescreen rendering. While the GPU is capable of 3-sample AA, doing so requires more memory for the framebuffer which means devs ether have to lower the resolution, or use a tile bassed solution where the game renders a section of the screen, moves it into VRAM, and then renders another section and then when all the tiles are rendered they are moved back into the framebuffer. The extra time it takes to move the tiles too and from VRAM means you have a lot less time to actually render each frame for the same framerate.
That seems an odd oversight in the system's design. Did they just go cheap on eDRAM, or did they not think AA would be used much?
And was I right about those games using AA? What other Wii games use it? I'm actually curious now if it requires such a performance hit.
DieAppleDie said: R: Racing had the worst aliasing i have seen in a game, it absolutely ruined the fantastic grafix it had
jaggies pop up and framerate slowdowns are things that should have been eliminated in the previous gen, but devs...you know....are fucking lazy and always choose the cheap path...
DieAppleDie said: R: Racing had the worst aliasing i have seen in a game, it absolutely ruined the fantastic grafix it had
jaggies pop up and framerate slowdowns are things that should have been eliminated in the previous gen, but devs...you know....are fucking lazy and always choose the cheap path...
Actually, there is a lot to it. And the fact you don't understand that explains a lot of your posts. You don't understand video game development as well as you lead on.
Do you really think Infinity Blade on iOS would have looked that good if it were not on rails?
That doesn't matter. We are not talking about the IOS or Infinity Blade. Its a completely different type of game that works in a completely different way.
Do you stare at a point when you walk around it or just act like it's not even there?
There are several gameplay tricks that can open up resources that would be consumed in a fully open world game environment. Ever wonder why God Of War looks so incredible?
Did you know that on rails game play mechanic was developed originally with the sole purpose being that it allowed the developers to graphically do things they wouldn't ordinarily be able to do?
Its not relevent. What you are doing is a fallacy called "red herring" as well as the fallacy of composition. You're trying to make a point out of something unrelated based on a simple similarity while omitting all other facts. Your fallaciously making the assumption that because rail shooters were done a certain way at one point that it is done in this situation as well without comparing any points.
God of War only looks incredible to people who don't know what they are looking at and Sony fans. I'm well aware of what it does. Yes I know why the on rails mechanic was made and was much similar to why FPS games were made, turn based games, CG based games, games with long load screens, games with , games with fast load screens, games no loads screens, games with a large array of colors, games with a small array of colors, games with a shifting array of colors etc... There are many such techniques and methodologies.
Most FPS games only showed the guns and "maybe" the characters hands and arms, but you see nothing when you look down. There are many now that also shows the character legs and feet when you look down. There is a reason why most of the first 3d PC games were first person. Making a game simply first person was actually the easier and less technically/graphically intensive than rail shooters back then. Rail shooter's were a step up.
Most of all, I already explained the Extraction/Darkside Chronicles vs rail component in the post at the top of the page before you even started this pointless argument. Why would I bother repeating myself?
>User was moderated for this post [RH]
Your God of War thing is totally valid because it wouldnt look that good with a fully controlable camera and if it wouldn't be constantly zoomed out. (I wonder why mods dont get banned for trolling lol)
There is another thing ALOT (NOT ALL!!!) PS fans dont want to realize which is alot of games use prerendered videos that run in 1080p because the PS3 can utilize its bluray player. They are faking in game cutscenes with prerendered highres, high poly etc videos... And alot of things like the close up faces in heavy rain or the (loading/install? screen) of metal gear4 put all the hardware power into 1 face/ 1 character. The real game models look far worse.
People you dont believe me? Go back to the N64 and Look at super mario 64. Intro floating Mario face SUPER COOL VS ingame mario face ugly with texture eyes not even really modelled etc. Reason? Intro face was a closeup model with nothing else just the face. The only purpose of stuff like this is to show of and create a fake image of the whole package. This is also why devs use bullshots to manipulate the reception of the games. Think about it.
Other than that I have to agree that the Wii was crippled by lazy devs. I mean even Splinter Cell on Gamecube looks better than COD etc on Wii because instead of trying to make the best of it devs just crippled the 360/ps3 version and removed everything the Wii couldnt handle instead of coming up with replacement effects etc.
Reginleiv really looks awesome I have to give it a try I hope It deosnt need to much knowledge of the japanese language.
Im a SOny fan and i agree with what you're saying...except for the bold, there are quite are few games that are not simply watered down ports. Games like SW Force Unleashed, that game was made by a completly different dev team using a different engine, so how do you explain when that doesnt look too hot
Actually, there is a lot to it. And the fact you don't understand that explains a lot of your posts. You don't understand video game development as well as you lead on.
Do you really think Infinity Blade on iOS would have looked that good if it were not on rails?
That doesn't matter. We are not talking about the IOS or Infinity Blade. Its a completely different type of game that works in a completely different way.
Do you stare at a point when you walk around it or just act like it's not even there?
There are several gameplay tricks that can open up resources that would be consumed in a fully open world game environment. Ever wonder why God Of War looks so incredible?
Did you know that on rails game play mechanic was developed originally with the sole purpose being that it allowed the developers to graphically do things they wouldn't ordinarily be able to do?
Its not relevent. What you are doing is a fallacy called "red herring" as well as the fallacy of composition. You're trying to make a point out of something unrelated based on a simple similarity while omitting all other facts. Your fallaciously making the assumption that because rail shooters were done a certain way at one point that it is done in this situation as well without comparing any points.
God of War only looks incredible to people who don't know what they are looking at and Sony fans. I'm well aware of what it does. Yes I know why the on rails mechanic was made and was much similar to why FPS games were made, turn based games, CG based games, games with long load screens, games with , games with fast load screens, games no loads screens, games with a large array of colors, games with a small array of colors, games with a shifting array of colors etc... There are many such techniques and methodologies.
Most FPS games only showed the guns and "maybe" the characters hands and arms, but you see nothing when you look down. There are many now that also shows the character legs and feet when you look down. There is a reason why most of the first 3d PC games were first person. Making a game simply first person was actually the easier and less technically/graphically intensive than rail shooters back then. Rail shooter's were a step up.
Most of all, I already explained the Extraction/Darkside Chronicles vs rail component in the post at the top of the page before you even started this pointless argument. Why would I bother repeating myself?
>User was moderated for this post [RH]
Your God of War thing is totally valid because it wouldnt look that good with a fully controlable camera and if it wouldn't be constantly zoomed out. (I wonder why mods dont get banned for trolling lol)
There is another thing ALOT (NOT ALL!!!) PS fans dont want to realize which is alot of games use prerendered videos that run in 1080p because the PS3 can utilize its bluray player. They are faking in game cutscenes with prerendered highres, high poly etc videos... And alot of things like the close up faces in heavy rain or the (loading/install? screen) of metal gear4 put all the hardware power into 1 face/ 1 character. The real game models look far worse.
People you dont believe me? Go back to the N64 and Look at super mario 64. Intro floating Mario face SUPER COOL VS ingame mario face ugly with texture eyes not even really modelled etc. Reason? Intro face was a closeup model with nothing else just the face. The only purpose of stuff like this is to show of and create a fake image of the whole package. This is also why devs use bullshots to manipulate the reception of the games. Think about it.
Other than that I have to agree that the Wii was crippled by lazy devs. I mean even Splinter Cell on Gamecube looks better than COD etc on Wii because instead of trying to make the best of it devs just crippled the 360/ps3 version and removed everything the Wii couldnt handle instead of coming up with replacement effects etc.
Reginleiv really looks awesome I have to give it a try I hope It deosnt need to much knowledge of the japanese language.
Im a SOny fan and i agree with what you're saying...except for the bold, there are quite are few games that are not simply watered down ports. Games like SW Force Unleashed, that game was made by a completly different dev team using a different engine, so how do you explain when that doesnt look too hot
Using a different dev team and engine doesn't mean the team was particularly good at Wii development or the engine made good use of the hardware.
