> Lots of good advice on front projectors, but I take issue with this one. Higher resolution is in general better. The problem of not matching dvd resolution is not an issue if you have an htpc, which it sounds like you do.
No, it's a problem with the bilinear filtering in plasmas, that ironically make the lower resolution better for watching movies.
> Oh, and I really don't think the PS2 uses a 512-pixel wide resolution. Some games might, but it's certainly not the only resolution handled by the PS2, and I'd actually be surprised if it's the default, or even the most common
One of the popular PS2 games actually uses 512 resolution. I forget which one: Metal Gear Solid, GT3, or ICO. I'll boot them up on the Dev TOOL and see if I can find anything out. I believe the most popular is an interlaced 640x224 for a 640x448 res. (PS2 can't do a true 480 res.)
There is no 'default' resolution on the PS2. You just set the registers directly (or just use one of the Sony sceGs*() calls. I can't give the exact func name, NDA and all.) Since you only have 4 megs of VRAM total for framebuffer(s), z-buffer, and textures, you're resolution is limited. Width has to be a multiple of 16, and other restrictions don't help.
> Seriously, why would anybody spend that much money on a display that can't handle HDTV?
Because I don't watch TV (at all) so I could care less about HDTV. I watch movies (mpeg2 = 720x480 MAX), and play games (PS2 = 512x448, and PC ~ 1024x768 res)
What's DLP stand for? And what DLP projectors would you recommend?
You can compare plasma screen resolutions Note: NO plasmas have a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 (HDTV) yet. Currently they apply a bilinear filter when showing non-native resolutions.
The cool part, is if you save $175 for 2 years ($4200), you can afford the 42" Panasonic! ($3900 + $169 shipping, from DTVCity - which are reported to be good vendor.
> Post Anonymously" is a beautiful thing, isn't it? I don't know. I have an account, so I don't hide behide some unknown name when I post, even if I *do* disagree with the moderators.
> while still preserving that all-important karma. Who cares. I've been maxed for almost 2 years.
> we should have been ready to set up a base on Mars already!
I know! I remember reading Sci-Fi [stories] about the Moon / Mars being colonized and thinking "WOW - What would it take to do that kind of terraforming?!" Its a shame that that noble goal [of living on other planets] gradually fall by the way side. Maybe in the next entury...
Speaking of terraforming, has anyone (scientists,etc) actually thought about how to [realistically/practically] terraform one of the planets, say Venus, Mars, or the Moon?
I think it's great that Europe is working on manned space flight, however that "blowing up" snide comment was a little rude. (And NO, this ISN'T offtopic you dumb moderators.)
Why isn't NASA interested in sending people to Mars?
Cheers
Was it just me, or was that comment ...
on
To the Moon and Beyond
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
... about it blowing up, just a tad rude. I don't see the point in critizing someone when they are trying. *shrugs*
I am NOT saying a "Leveling" mechanic is are GOOD or BAD. What I *am* saying is that if that mechanic works for that particular style of game, why does it need to be changed? You change the mechanic, you change the game style.
Let me put it this way. The wheel is few thousand years old, but I don't hear everyone complaining about it. Just because something is old, and does the job, doesn't mean a replacement is automatically better.
Levels, and skill based systems BOTH have problems. When to use one or the other, depends on your play style, and game play problems that you wish to adress.
> In online games, keeping skills seperate and increasing them based on learning them makes for a more realistic and fun game.
Ah, I see you haven't worked on any games, else you would know about that red herring called "realism." Realism and fun are orthogonal. Just because your game has realism in it, does NOT mean your game is guaranteed to be more fun.
The next time your critize a game mechanic, put it in context of what it is trying to solve. They were invented for a reason - to calling something outdated because it doesn't agree with your gaming style is arrogant and ignorant of game design.
As the article points out, RNA and DNA both are constructed of 4 amino acids *: A, C, G, T/U. Is there a reason for why nature used four instead of 2 ? I'm curious as to the scientific answer why we have 10 fingers as well. Both 4 and 10 seem arbritary, or are they?
* "Escher, Bach, Godel" shows an interesting link between Biology, Music, Philosophy, and Computer Science.
Cheers
-- Political speeches are like steer horns. A point here, a point there, and a lot of bull inbetween.
~ Alfred E. Neuman
> It has done more to ruin the state of game playing than any game in history.
And what have *you* done to improve it? What games have you worked on that makes gamers think different?? (And yes, I'm a game developer, so I'm doing my [little] part.)
Blaming Doom for *all* of the problem that publishers (and developers) want to maximize profits at the expense of gameplay shows an extremely ignorant view of gaming history. The obsession with presentation over substance has been going on for the past 10+ years!
While I agree that many developers/publishers have "sequelitis" (I feel the same as you but in the movie industry - I don't go to theaters anymore to see the same plot/explosions retold), and also agree that by and large, more games are just last years games repackaged with better graphics & sound without much thought to improving gameplay - there *are* developers/publishers trying to be innovative - both commercial games (Sims, GTA3, Morrowind, Majesty, Halo, Animal Crossing, etc), and indie games (TreadMarks, etc) There are gems out there, you just have to look.
AC> yeah the old one is 33MHz, new one is several hundred," etc. Yes, the PS2 (EE) runs at 294.912 Mhz. It was ~250 Mhz, but got bumped up before (public) release.
AC> in every PS2, the "PS1" portion is not even another chip, let along anything they had to work hard for: there was no signal routing on the circuit board, no data passed between the new and the old (gfx proc, new cpu), and I don't even think it usued the memory Yeah, the IOP has its own 2 Megs, seperate from the other 38 Megs (32 Megs Main + 4 Megs GS + 2 Megs SPU)
AC> The PS1 portion is but a corner of the I/O processor. Are you sure about that? I was always under the impression that the IOP *was* the PS1 chip. I'll have to take another look at the manuals, once I'm at work.
AC> while that's not possible for the PS2 to be integrated into a dusty corner of a new-gen console for now - by the time P2 retires, I would not be surprised if they can pull the trick again
I disagree slightly - someone said in a previous/. post that the 7 PS2's CPUs *could* be thrown together on one chip. However, that wouldn't be practical, or the most efficient use of die space. From what I've read & seen, it seems like the PS3 is going to be a massively parallel computer, but we'll have to wait and see until ~2005.
Funny thing, D2 also has a 3rd party show map util called, coincidently, 'maphack'. There was a big uproar in the community last year when it got released, since it would let you do meph runs faster. (Killing a boos monster Mephisto over and over again with high magic find gear, would let you "win" the item lottery easier.) Lots of people were complaing about how it was wrecking the game. I never follwed that logic since if you're in a different game then the person using it, how is it spoiling your enjoyment of the game?
What I did agree on, was that technically it's a cheat, since you are not playing the game the same way the designers intendend. Muddying the issue was that it had an one long-term advantage: - Players would find their uber gear, and quite playing on bnet. Good riddance as that's one less person taking up bandwidth. Sounds a little impersonal, but the reality is that everyone gets bored of the game eventually. Knowing how laggy bnet has been lately, having fewer players would mean less disconnects for everyone.
Nowadays, everyone is arguing over 'pindlebot' - an 3rd party util that will play the game for you, repeatedly killing PindleSkin, since he can drop any item in the game. Is it cheating, when you're using another program to play the game for you?
Will be intersting to see what Blizzard and Sony do...
> What 3D library does, say the PS2 and the Nintendo console use?
PS2 - (sarcasm) What! PS2 uses a 3D library?! (sarcasm off) You write your *own*, or use a middleware solution: RenderWare, NetImmerse, etc. Sony only provides a bares bones library with basic functionality that sometimes the samples use. GameCube - I forget the name of the API. It is OpenGL like, but not the same. I'll post a follow up when I get into the office, since I'm not the Gamecube programmer at work. X-Box: A bastardized version of DirectX 8.0/8.1
> Their own in-house one? Only if you got 6 to 12 months to write & optimize T&L code, Clipping, Stripping, Smart Batching, Advanced Filters, and a Mesh/Bone animation system!
> I'd guess OpenGL, because it's available on many platforms, and it's portable. Guess again. I don't know of ANYONE shipping titles using OpenGL on the consoles.
X-Box - Why would you waste time trying to get OpenGL to work, when DirectX 8+ allows for your PC (DX) engine to be ported over in *days*. You can use OpenGL for testing, but you have to go thru some hoops to get it to work (when I heard last year)
GameCube - No need, since the existing API works just fine.
PS2 - While there is PSGL (OpenGL clone), OpenGL will NEVER run at full speed on the PS2 - due to missing *hardware* functionality: i.e. no stencil buffer, limited (some say broken) blending modes, etc. You need to go straight-to-the-metal to get optimal performance out the machine.
> It's a wise choice if you do console development on a workstation and if you can just cross-compile so it'll work on the console. Ha! If it only were that easy. Sorry, I don't mean to sound pesimestic but I've seen way too many "the bug only happens on the PS2, but not the GameCube, X-Box, or PC. Argh" this year.
PS2 - The hardest parts are making efficient use of the 7 cpus, managing the 4 Megs of Video Memory (4-bit and 8-bit palletized textures help), managing a couple hundred megs of audio on disc thru the 2 Megs SPU (Audio Chip), smart streaming on the 2 Meg IOP, and keeping the VU's and GS well fed. GameCube - making good use of A-RAM on the GameCube, etc. Again, not the gamecube programmer.
But yes, you're right. If you write your own middleware, the game code doesn't have change (much) for the various consoles.
I really hope OpenGL 2.0 revitalizes OpenGL, because it's a real pleasure to use, but I don't see OpenGL support on consoles at least until PS3, X-Box2. (Haven't heard anything on GameCube2)
US> 30 -> 60, you will be hard pressed to notice the difference (but it IS possible) U>I would disagree with this assertion, though it does depend on the application.
For people who have been trained to look for it, yes, they will be able to notice it. I was talking about the general populous.;-)
U> I'm particularly aware of this because the PS2 game I'm working on tends to run at 30 fps in the game shell, but occasionally hits 60. There's such a profound qualitative change that we might have to clamp the rate at 30 to prevent the bursts of 60 from making 30 look bad.:)
Yeap, as a fellow PS2 developer I fully agree. I first noticed the 30 vs 60 difference back on the PS1.
Sounds like you've also discovered that it's better to minimize the difference between the lowest and highest frame rate as it will appear smoother. I believe Carmack mentioned that was his findings as well in one of his Quake plans. i.e. minimize the frame rate drops.
> Incidentally, I can tell the difference between a 60Hz refresh rate and a 70Hz refresh rate, 60Hz seems to flicker for me, especially in my peripheral vision. For CRTs, I also concur. 60 Hz flickers way too much! I don't have your visual perception quality (lucky b@$tard;-) so I had to crank my CRT up to 100 Hz before I stopped noticing the flicker. Interestingly enough my LCD is only at 60 Hz and is rock solid (especially for text.)
Slashdot Mirror
Citizens ALREADY have the right to travel. Proof? Check here for documented cases.
--
prairies, n.: Vast plains covered by treeless forests.
- Anonymous
> Lots of good advice on front projectors, but I take issue with this one. Higher resolution is in general better. The problem of not matching dvd resolution is not an issue if you have an htpc, which it sounds like you do.
No, it's a problem with the bilinear filtering in plasmas, that ironically make the lower resolution better for watching movies.
See Resolution Explained
Although that Mac OS X is starting to look pretty sweet ...
> Oh, and I really don't think the PS2 uses a 512-pixel wide resolution. Some games might, but it's certainly not the only resolution handled by the PS2, and I'd actually be surprised if it's the default, or even the most common
One of the popular PS2 games actually uses 512 resolution. I forget which one: Metal Gear Solid, GT3, or ICO. I'll boot them up on the Dev TOOL and see if I can find anything out. I believe the most popular is an interlaced 640x224 for a 640x448 res. (PS2 can't do a true 480 res.)
There is no 'default' resolution on the PS2. You just set the registers directly (or just use one of the Sony sceGs*() calls. I can't give the exact func name, NDA and all.) Since you only have 4 megs of VRAM total for framebuffer(s), z-buffer, and textures, you're resolution is limited. Width has to be a multiple of 16, and other restrictions don't help.
Cheers
> but NTSC pixels are not square. They are 1:1.33 rectangles
Yeah, Jukka Aho's A Quick Guide to Digital Video Resolution and Aspect Ratio Conversions page goes into this.
And then there is this gem, which shows what anamorphic really looks like.
Cheers
> Seriously, why would anybody spend that much money on a display that can't handle HDTV?
Because I don't watch TV (at all) so I could care less about HDTV. I watch movies (mpeg2 = 720x480 MAX), and play games (PS2 = 512x448, and PC ~ 1024x768 res)
What's DLP stand for? And what DLP projectors would you recommend?
Cheers
Since I was just looking at them last week... ;-)
Scroll down to the bottom for the Plasma Buying Guide
You can compare plasma screen resolutions
Note: NO plasmas have a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 (HDTV) yet. Currently they apply a bilinear filter when showing non-native resolutions.
And check the most popular (Panasonic) choices.
As well as prices and description of said popular models.
The cool part, is if you save $175 for 2 years ($4200), you can afford the 42" Panasonic! ($3900 + $169 shipping, from DTVCity - which are reported to be good vendor.
Cheers
> recently the dell 2000fp (1600x1200 native 20" dvi/analog/svideo lcd) ], was going for $800
Yeap. Tweaktown had a coupon 2 weeks back. I managed to snag one for just shy of $800.
It's a beautifull monitor. 1600x1200 *will* change the way you work.
Still can't get the darn GeForce 3 to recognize the DVI output though. Argh.
Guess the moderator's funny bone is broken or something.
> Post Anonymously" is a beautiful thing, isn't it?
I don't know. I have an account, so I don't hide behide some unknown name when I post, even if I *do* disagree with the moderators.
> while still preserving that all-important karma.
Who cares. I've been maxed for almost 2 years.
> WhoTF is so stupid that they moderated this as offtopic?
;-)
Yeah, that's what I thought too. Guess someone didn't read the article. Oh well, MetaMod will get them
> we should have been ready to set up a base on Mars already!
I know! I remember reading Sci-Fi [stories] about the Moon / Mars being colonized and thinking "WOW - What would it take to do that kind of terraforming?!" Its a shame that that noble goal [of living on other planets] gradually fall by the way side. Maybe in the next entury...
Speaking of terraforming, has anyone (scientists,etc) actually thought about how to [realistically/practically] terraform one of the planets, say Venus, Mars, or the Moon?
Cheers
I think it's great that Europe is working on manned space flight, however that "blowing up" snide comment was a little rude. (And NO, this ISN'T offtopic you dumb moderators.)
Why isn't NASA interested in sending people to Mars?
Cheers
... about it blowing up, just a tad rude. I don't see the point in critizing someone when they are trying. *shrugs*
> Levels are outdated.
Says who?? How many RPGs have you desgined?
I am NOT saying a "Leveling" mechanic is are GOOD or BAD. What I *am* saying is that if that mechanic works for that particular style of game, why does it need to be changed? You change the mechanic, you change the game style.
Let me put it this way. The wheel is few thousand years old, but I don't hear everyone complaining about it. Just because something is old, and does the job, doesn't mean a replacement is automatically better.
Levels, and skill based systems BOTH have problems. When to use one or the other, depends on your play style, and game play problems that you wish to adress.
> In online games, keeping skills seperate and increasing them based on learning them makes for a more realistic and fun game.
Ah, I see you haven't worked on any games, else you would know about that red herring called "realism." Realism and fun are orthogonal. Just because your game has realism in it, does NOT mean your game is guaranteed to be more fun.
The next time your critize a game mechanic, put it in context of what it is trying to solve. They were invented for a reason - to calling something outdated because it doesn't agree with your gaming style is arrogant and ignorant of game design.
Cheers
As the article points out, RNA and DNA both are constructed of 4 amino acids *: A, C, G, T/U. Is there a reason for why nature used four instead of 2 ? I'm curious as to the scientific answer why we have 10 fingers as well. Both 4 and 10 seem arbritary, or are they?
* "Escher, Bach, Godel" shows an interesting link between Biology, Music, Philosophy, and Computer Science.
Cheers
--
Political speeches are like steer horns. A point here, a point there, and a lot of bull inbetween.
~ Alfred E. Neuman
> What are some good speakers for a home computer/stereo system? Say I'm willing to spend $200 on the speakers.
1 &c at=15&scat=23
I spent the extra $100 and got the NS-AP480SW model, but you can't go wrong with this 5.1 speakers for the price.
http://www.bestbuy.com/detail.asp?e=11056899&m=
> It has done more to ruin the state of game playing than any game in history.
And what have *you* done to improve it? What games have you worked on that makes gamers think different?? (And yes, I'm a game developer, so I'm doing my [little] part.)
Blaming Doom for *all* of the problem that publishers (and developers) want to maximize profits at the expense of gameplay shows an extremely ignorant view of gaming history. The obsession with presentation over substance has been going on for the past 10+ years!
While I agree that many developers/publishers have "sequelitis" (I feel the same as you but in the movie industry - I don't go to theaters anymore to see the same plot/explosions retold), and also agree that by and large, more games are just last years games repackaged with better graphics & sound without much thought to improving gameplay - there *are* developers/publishers trying to be innovative - both commercial games (Sims, GTA3, Morrowind, Majesty, Halo, Animal Crossing, etc), and indie games (TreadMarks, etc) There are gems out there, you just have to look.
AC> yeah the old one is 33MHz, new one is several hundred," etc.
/. post that the 7 PS2's CPUs *could* be thrown together on one chip. However, that wouldn't be practical, or the most efficient use of die space. From what I've read & seen, it seems like the PS3 is going to be a massively parallel computer, but we'll have to wait and see until ~2005.
Yes, the PS2 (EE) runs at 294.912 Mhz. It was ~250 Mhz, but got bumped up before (public) release.
AC> in every PS2, the "PS1" portion is not even another chip, let along anything they had to work hard for: there was no signal routing on the circuit board, no data passed between the new and the old (gfx proc, new cpu), and I don't even think it usued the memory
Yeah, the IOP has its own 2 Megs, seperate from the other 38 Megs (32 Megs Main + 4 Megs GS + 2 Megs SPU)
AC> The PS1 portion is but a corner of the I/O processor.
Are you sure about that? I was always under the impression that the IOP *was* the PS1 chip. I'll have to take another look at the manuals, once I'm at work.
AC> while that's not possible for the PS2 to be integrated into a dusty corner of a new-gen console for now - by the time P2 retires, I would not be surprised if they can pull the trick again
I disagree slightly - someone said in a previous
Cheers
Funny thing, D2 also has a 3rd party show map util called, coincidently, 'maphack'. There was a big uproar in the community last year when it got released, since it would let you do meph runs faster. (Killing a boos monster Mephisto over and over again with high magic find gear, would let you "win" the item lottery easier.) Lots of people were complaing about how it was wrecking the game. I never follwed that logic since if you're in a different game then the person using it, how is it spoiling your enjoyment of the game?
...
What I did agree on, was that technically it's a cheat, since you are not playing the game the same way the designers intendend. Muddying the issue was that it had an one long-term advantage:
- Players would find their uber gear, and quite playing on bnet. Good riddance as that's one less person taking up bandwidth.
Sounds a little impersonal, but the reality is that everyone gets bored of the game eventually. Knowing how laggy bnet has been lately, having fewer players would mean less disconnects for everyone.
Nowadays, everyone is arguing over 'pindlebot' - an 3rd party util that will play the game for you, repeatedly killing PindleSkin, since he can drop any item in the game. Is it cheating, when you're using another program to play the game for you?
Will be intersting to see what Blizzard and Sony do
> I took a course in cosmology 3 years ago and we covered the following:
> 1st dimension: Length
> 2nd dimension: Width
> 3rd dimension: Depth
> 4th dimension: Time
I would argue that time is only half a dimension. It only goes one way.
There are 10 types of people in the world.
Those that can count in binary and those that can't.
- Unknown
> What 3D library does, say the PS2 and the Nintendo console use?
PS2 - (sarcasm) What! PS2 uses a 3D library?! (sarcasm off)
You write your *own*, or use a middleware solution: RenderWare, NetImmerse, etc. Sony only provides a bares bones library with basic functionality that sometimes the samples use.
GameCube - I forget the name of the API. It is OpenGL like, but not the same. I'll post a follow up when I get into the office, since I'm not the Gamecube programmer at work.
X-Box: A bastardized version of DirectX 8.0/8.1
> Their own in-house one?
Only if you got 6 to 12 months to write & optimize T&L code, Clipping, Stripping, Smart Batching, Advanced Filters, and a Mesh/Bone animation system!
> I'd guess OpenGL, because it's available on many platforms, and it's portable.
Guess again. I don't know of ANYONE shipping titles using OpenGL on the consoles.
X-Box - Why would you waste time trying to get OpenGL to work, when DirectX 8+ allows for your PC (DX) engine to be ported over in *days*. You can use OpenGL for testing, but you have to go thru some hoops to get it to work (when I heard last year)
GameCube - No need, since the existing API works just fine.
PS2 - While there is PSGL (OpenGL clone), OpenGL will NEVER run at full speed on the PS2 - due to missing *hardware* functionality: i.e. no stencil buffer, limited (some say broken) blending modes, etc. You need to go straight-to-the-metal to get optimal performance out the machine.
> It's a wise choice if you do console development on a workstation and if you can just cross-compile so it'll work on the console.
Ha! If it only were that easy. Sorry, I don't mean to sound pesimestic but I've seen way too many "the bug only happens on the PS2, but not the GameCube, X-Box, or PC. Argh" this year.
PS2 - The hardest parts are making efficient use of the 7 cpus, managing the 4 Megs of Video Memory (4-bit and 8-bit palletized textures help), managing a couple hundred megs of audio on disc thru the 2 Megs SPU (Audio Chip), smart streaming on the 2 Meg IOP, and keeping the VU's and GS well fed.
GameCube - making good use of A-RAM on the GameCube, etc. Again, not the gamecube programmer.
But yes, you're right. If you write your own middleware, the game code doesn't have change (much) for the various consoles.
I really hope OpenGL 2.0 revitalizes OpenGL, because it's a real pleasure to use, but I don't see OpenGL support on consoles at least until PS3, X-Box2. (Haven't heard anything on GameCube2)
Cheers
> Religion requires faith in some big things, ideas like God, the second coming, Shiva, etc. Science asks that you accept certain axioms like 1+1=2,
Science requires you to have faith in logic. Remember Philosophy *started* Science.
US> 30 -> 60, you will be hard pressed to notice the difference (but it IS possible)
;-)
:)
;-) so I had to crank my CRT up to 100 Hz before I stopped noticing the flicker. Interestingly enough my LCD is only at 60 Hz and is rock solid (especially for text.)
U>I would disagree with this assertion, though it does depend on the application.
For people who have been trained to look for it, yes, they will be able to notice it. I was talking about the general populous.
U> I'm particularly aware of this because the PS2 game I'm working on tends to run at 30 fps in the game shell, but occasionally hits 60. There's such a profound qualitative change that we might have to clamp the rate at 30 to prevent the bursts of 60 from making 30 look bad.
Yeap, as a fellow PS2 developer I fully agree. I first noticed the 30 vs 60 difference back on the PS1.
Sounds like you've also discovered that it's better to minimize the difference between the lowest and highest frame rate as it will appear smoother. I believe Carmack mentioned that was his findings as well in one of his Quake plans. i.e. minimize the frame rate drops.
> Incidentally, I can tell the difference between a 60Hz refresh rate and a 70Hz refresh rate, 60Hz seems to flicker for me, especially in my peripheral vision.
For CRTs, I also concur. 60 Hz flickers way too much! I don't have your visual perception quality (lucky b@$tard
Cheers
--
Mathematics is queen of the sciences, but
Number Theory is the queen of mathematics
- Gauss - "Prince of Mathematics"