NJ5 said: Smidlee said: (...) It's the same with 60 fps looks better than 30 fps yet 30 fps wouldn't make the game less playable than 60 fps.   Now that's where you're wrong. 60 fps makes the action much more responsive and fluid on fast games like this one. Ever tried playing Mario Kart Wii on online splitscreen? That's the best way to realize how important framerate is.

You talking about the difference of respond around 12ms. (online gaming at best you get a 50ms delay) I have race a track ( on GT2 I think) with both 30 fps and 60fps which my tracks time were basicly the same. Again 30fps+ makes the game runs (looks) smoother but I have yet to tell a real difference in gameplay.

 

All this really says about NG2 is that it is fill rate bound. Meaning lots of cool pixel shaders, and lots of overdraw (which might be cool FX, or possibly just badly designed art resources).

Usually a game that's fill bound looks pretty dang good, even if the resolution isn't crazy. Go back and play some old PC games at uber resolution on your PC, and then compare them to modern games which use modern pixel shaders and much more detailed texturing.

The modern games look better, IMO. Resolution is less important than framerate, and less important than the detail that good shaders and FX provide.

This, btw, is why the Wii's graphics are subpar -- lack of modern shader tech, not resolution. Also... the Wii's menu appears to use anamorphic widescreen on a HDTV (it stretches a 640x480 image to psuedo-848x480 by stretching the pixels to be wider than they are tall) -- I'm not sure there are any Wii games that actually render at > 640x480 anamorphic.

Perhaps we should make clear WHAT you say. Of course there is a fuzziness with Upsampling. You cannot create details that do not exist. But the image doesn't get worse when you upsample it compared with a lower res image of the same resolution (for example on a SD TV) thats "fuzzy" as well. So WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU SAYING.




Sorry but these teachers are absolutely correct. For Stereo CD quality is everything anybody will ever hear. It has a higher signal to noise ratio and can create a wider frequency band than the human ear can hear. Your sound system is much much much more important.

[quoteJust because 99% of screens are, you assume I do?[/quote]

Nobody said that I only said that 99% of all TV screens do an upsampling anyway without anyone who uses them seeing a fuzziness. I really do not care what you see anymore. Your posting gets annoying.

Kyros said: . If you can't notice the fuzziness that comes with upsampling, Perhaps we should make clear WHAT you say. Of course there is a fuzziness with Upsampling. You cannot create details that do not exist. But the image doesn't get worse when you upsample it compared with a lower res image of the same resolution (for example on a SD TV) thats "fuzzy" as well. So WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU SAYING. I had teachers too in psycho acoustics claiming the human ear can't hear past what a CD contains and that's a bull load as well. Sorry but these teachers are absolutely correct. For Stereo CD quality is everything anybody will ever hear. It has a higher signal to noise ratio and can create a wider frequency band than the human ear can hear. Your sound system is much much much more important. [quoteJust because 99% of screens are, you assume I do?[/quote] Nobody said that I only said that 99% of all TV screens do an upsampling anyway without anyone who uses them seeing a fuzziness. I really do not care what you see anymore. Your posting gets annoying.

Well, you did now bother to read and understand the post! Wonders!

The whole point of the discussion has been that upsampling blurres the image, thank you again for acknowledging the point. I hope soon you join the club against the degradation of image quality brought over by the digital miracles of uprezzing, extreme chroma sampling, compressed dynamic range and tiny bandwith.

SD TV's arent fuzzy because the original image is fuzzy nor because displaying an image in its original resolution and aspect ratio makes it fuzzy, they are fuzzy because of interlacing - most SD TV's are built in with a blur mechanism to hide the interlacing. If you watch progressive content on a tube TV that supports it, you'll notice the fuzzyness is gone.

The point is, upsampling kills the crispness and precision of the images and ninja gaiden's visuals suffer because of it - the interpolating required to fill up the extra lines hurts the visual presentation of the game.

Also, concerning psycho acoustics, test groups have shown people do notice a difference between CD audio and the "high res" sound formats, that's the reason why improved audio formats were launched. Unfortunately for the manufacturers, it wasn't enough to motivate the consumer base to transition from the CD amongst other reasons because you need some finely tuned gear to extract the most out of the recordings. 

I don't get it: Either you state for the hundredth time something totally banal :native 720p images look better than upscaled 720p images from a native 640p source. I can assure you nobody is disputing that and if you should be a Captain Obvious who argues for this statement for half a thread I would advise you to make more precise statements.
OR
you say that upscaling makes an image worse than a native 640p image of the same size. (for example on a TV with lower resolution or in native resolution nearer to the TV) And this just isn't correct (at least not in a meaningful way). Any display of a digital image does a scaling in some way after all. Good upscaling doesn't add but it also doesn't reduce details.




I believe it when I see it. The SNR of any normal sound system is so much worse that I really doubt that this has been consistently shown with good studies and large usergroups. Sounds more like an audiophil dream. Tests by big computer magazins have shown that people do not even hear a difference between 256 mbit mp3s and CD.

Kyros said: The point is, upsampling kills the crispness and precision of the images and ninja gaiden's visuals suffer because of it - the interpolating required to fill up the extra lines hurts the visual presentation of the game. I don't get it: Either you state for the hundredth time something totally banal :native 720p images look better than upscaled 720p images from a native 640p source. I can assure you nobody is disputing that and if you should be a Captain Obvious who argues for this statement for half a thread I would advise you to make more precise statements. OR you say that upscaling makes an image worse than a native 640p image of the same size. (for example on a TV with lower resolution or in native resolution nearer to the TV) And this just isn't correct (at least not in a meaningful way). Any display of a digital image does a scaling in some way after all. Good upscaling doesn't add but it also doesn't reduce details. test groups have shown people do notice a difference between CD audio and the "high res" sound formats I believe it when I see it. The SNR of any normal sound system is so much worse that I really doubt that this has been consistently shown with good studies and large usergroups. Sounds more like an audiophil dream. Tests by big computer magazins have shown that people do not even hear a difference between 256 mbit mp3s and CD.

 It's true that there's a lot of superstition involved in the whole audiophile business, but those test group reports were enough to make manufacturers invest millions in launching improved audio formats. It does require well crafted gear and even proper room acoustics (which was ultimately the demise of the whole endeavour), but the difference is there. I personally can notice the difference you mention - usually my pmp is loaded with 256mbit mp3s but the other day I picked up some tracks I had stored in PCM and oh god, I almost forgot how good a CD sounds compared with mp3 or ATRAC tracks. 

I feel like we are trying to convince the Catholic church that the earth is not the center of the universe.

JaggedSac said: I feel like we are trying to convince the Catholic church that the earth is not the center of the universe.

 

In a universe where the earth was the centre of the universe you'd feel like that, yes.

Why it does trouble you so much that I prefer how games look when rendered at 720 lines instead of being upsampled to get there? 

@halil23: Wow, that image is pure cherry picking... If you search around for Ninja Gaiden 2 screenshots you'll see it's not that simple. Even if it was like that, it could be a simple change in art style between the two games.

I also like it how they focused on the character and ignored scenarios and enemies. Not that I expected more from a fan made graphical comparison.

(right click + view image for full resolution)

Look at the costume and lighting in this NG2 screenshot, totally different from that "comparison" you quoted.

 

I didn't say it's your image. In what way does it look worse?

Several of the complaints presented in the image you quoted are disproved by the screenshot I posted, especially regarding effects and lighting. That other image must have been the result of choosing the "poorest" looking image possible.