The PS3 doesn't seem to do much other than add AA. Because other than that, it's blatantly displaying a lower resolution, comparable to when running on a stock PS2.
This is just pissing me off. Why call it upscaling when it's not doing it at all?! Misleading as fuck, man.
Considering the output is at a higher resolution they feel justified calling it upscalling, but the native resolution of the image is not really impacted.
I have so many titles for the PS2 and looked forward to seeing them at a higher resolution output so that I didn't have to farm for emulators on my PC any longer. As of right now, there's barely anything worth playing for the PS3 and this would've held me satisfied for quite a long while.
If this is the case, it's the second time Sony has half-assed the "upgrades" for backwards compatibility. Jeezus, even the Dreamcast's Bleem was able to upscale PSOne games properly.
I'm guessing that most of the pics online displaying GOW at 1280x720 resolution are actually taken from PC emulators and not the PS3 at all.
If I'm not mistaken, running a game in a new and higher resolution is not the same as upscaling a game?
For example, upscaling a DVD to 1080p is not the same as a video with a source quality of 1080p?
Laguna: "Chill man, it's cool." -- Youtube
Five Things We Won't See in the Final Fantasy VII Remake
upscaling is more difficult for ps2 games as ps2 gpu was 2560 bit, and ps3 gpu is 512 bit. I believe in reference to xbox we have a 64bit gpu l2 cache in the original, ofcourse upgraded to 256+256bit in the 360. not 100% on the xbox though... so don't be too critical on sony, they are exceeding expectations already with their compatibility.
Killing Moon you seem to fail to understand what the word "upscaling" truly means. Sony have not lied. Your PS3 is upscaling PS2 games and your TV is correctly reporting a 720p/1080i input signal.
The PS3 upscales the majority PS1 and PS2 games. This essentially means it takes every frame rendered (through software/hardware emulation at 480p) and then spreads the pixels from them them evenly apart into either a 1280x720 or a 1920x1080 pixel image (depending on TV resolution). Obviously there are gaps between the pixels because the original signal was only 640x480 pixels. This means the PS3 has to then fill in these gaps (using an algorithm) with something that makes the new higher resolution image look ok.
On the other hand you have the XBOX360. This renders a minority of the original XBOX games at higher resolutions (720p max through component). With both the original XBOX and XBOX360 being quite similar in architecture this is relatively easy to achieve however the PS2 had some pretty unique stuff in it so making the PS3 render PS2 games at a higher resolution is harder. This coupled with the fact that Sony makes hardware and Microsoft software you can see why Sony might be inclined to take the easier option to upscale rather than render at a higher resolution.
At the end of the day its up to you, lots of games without a substantial increase in visual quality or a few select games with a substantial increase in visual quality.
You are correct. Consider two pictures taken with a digital camera one at 2 megapixel and one at 4 megapixel. If each is displayed at 100% size the 4 megapixel one will fill more of the screen because there are more pixels. However if you wanted you could upscale the 2 megapixel one to 4 megapixels to make it take up the same amount on the screen. However the original 4 megapixel picture would look a lot better. To upscale the 2 megapixel picture the computer has generated pixels that it 'thinks' will fill in the gaps between the pixels from the original image. It is only guessing what may colour each pixel may be by looking at the ones surrounding it. It might be wrong when you look at the 4 megapixel image, but given the size of each pixel it probably won't be a huge difference.Originally Posted by curryking1
This may help if anyone is still unclear.
Hmmn, okay, gotcha.
So upscaling the image to fit the screen size and increasing the original resolution are two completely different things.
Guess it's back to emulators. Still disappointing, still sucks ass, but I guess it is what it is, really.
Glad that helped.
Just to clarify; upscaling the original game output resolution to fit the screen and rendering the game at a resolution to fit the screen are two different things. I'm sure you know what you meant, just me being annoying.
As far as the end result goes, I agree it does suck. I doubt Sony will ever go down the rendering root. I find that if anything PS2 games actually look worse on the PS3 than they did on the original PS2. To add to that, when you do decide to run them on the PS3 the frame rate is often dodgy or the game glitches. If you then turn on smoothing and upscaling you might as well not bother (anyone tried Ratchet and Clank or Tekken Tag...terrible). I just let my TV do the upscaling. Hopefully with time Sony will iron these problems out.
And that's a wrap. This was very constructive and added to my own edification as well, thanks Killing Moon and co.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)