Quantcast

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 138

Thread: "SNES has a more powerful CPU and higher resolution in games than the Genesis"

  1. #76
    Raging in the Streets Sik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,692
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    It definitely can't replicate it with the performance the SNES does though, you're not going to beat dedicated hardware, and even if you could somehow infinitely overclock it the color limitation would still be a problem.

    If the SNES was forced to do it in software though it'd definitely struggle just as much if not more. This was also a problem with 3D graphics (though I don't think many games tried it without a SuperFX ó there's a good reason)Ö really, seems to have been a problem with anything that involved blasting around a lot of data, the 65816 is not that great for software rendering (and that's considering the 68000 already struggles a lot for starters). It's just that the average game wasn't supposed to do software rendering anyway.

  2. #77
    The Future Is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingRaging in the Streets Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    My Chair
    Posts
    4,482
    Rep Power
    54

    Default

    That's pretty cool thanks. Now I wish SEGA tried a something similar. Tho I always admire the wireframe effect in Ranger X

    Life!? ... What console is that on?



    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  3. #78
    Blast processor Melf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cabo Rojo, PR
    Posts
    9,522
    Rep Power
    134

    Default

    This whole debate is dumb. "System that came out later is more advanced!"

  4. #79
    Underground Sega Nut BonusKun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Age
    48
    Posts
    1,657
    Rep Power
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melf View Post
    This whole debate is dumb. "System that came out later is more advanced!"
    lol I was wondering when you'd chime in!
    05/05/15

  5. #80
    WCPO Agent
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    863
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by turboxray View Post
    You're probably thinking of the early Sega System-16 boards? I've ripped graphics from CPS1 roms, and they definitely weren't 3bit. And if you check MAME source code, it's not one of the 3bit color cell systems. But even then, the System-16 3bit background tiles has hundreds of palettes to use haha. Sprites were 4bit but only 14 colors (other values were control codes for run length encoding).

    Yeah, some of the early SNES titles did the whole 3bit compression thing too (it's a fast planar trick). But 3bits paired with a decent palette list, paired with a really fat master palette gets more mileage (Amiga is a close example). 25% compression doesn't get you much though. SNES has the ram for handling more complex compression schemes (like LZ based ones). PCE with its 8k of system ram just for hucards, does not (you only see LZ used in later SuperCD games, and even then). I've adapted some LZ based decompressors to use a ring buffer, make it possible to get much better compression ratios on the PCE with just 512 or 1024 ring buffer, but it needs a pre-pare of linear pixels before conversion to get good results - so it's pretty slow to decompress. Almost useless nowadays when you can just throw mappers and megs of rom at a game on these retro systems. Look at the two ports of Parodius for SNES and PCE. Both are the same size rom (8meg). Both systems have planar graphics for cells. SNES one has all the levels, while the PCE is missing two (and uses 3bit compression).
    Yeah you are right I must be thinking of some other board that does something like that. I just looked at cps1.cpp in MAME and there's nothing like that. The reason I was thinking the CPS1 has that ability is because of cases where you see sprites move in front of and behind a background layer, like stage 1 in G&G: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOAi3-jYw_M. I guess it must just use extra sprites to get that effect.

    And yes going from 4 to 3 bits is not a great trade-off so far as compression goes but if your game is just over 8 mb and you need to squeeze it onto ROM quickly I can see why it would get used on launch titles.

  6. #81
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingWildside Expert
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by axel View Post
    Yeah you are right I must be thinking of some other board that does something like that. I just looked at cps1.cpp in MAME and there's nothing like that. The reason I was thinking the CPS1 has that ability is because of cases where you see sprites move in front of and behind a background layer, like stage 1 in G&G: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOAi3-jYw_M. I guess it must just use extra sprites to get that effect.

    And yes going from 4 to 3 bits is not a great trade-off so far as compression goes but if your game is just over 8 mb and you need to squeeze it onto ROM quickly I can see why it would get used on launch titles.
    I mean, for PCE at least with limited system ram for hucards, it does have the advantages of decompressing directly to VRAM in realtime (not as fast as its block move instructions, but still fast enough since PCE has unlimited vram read/write access during active display). It's just that snes can buffer, or decompress a head of time because of that nice chunk of 128k ram haha so better decompression scheme makes sense.

    Also this, from CPS1.cpp in MAME
    Code:
    0x68-0x69   Priority mask \   Tiles in the layer just below sprites can have
    0x6a-0x6b   Priority mask |   four priority levels, each one associated with one
    0x6c-0x6d   Priority mask |   of these masks. The masks indicate pens in the tile
    0x6e-0x6f   Priority mask /   that have priority over sprites.
    Pens in the tile are the pixels. Gives you per pixel priority settings.


    Quote Originally Posted by SegataS View Post
    I truly have no idea so I am not arguing. Genuinely curious. Like many, I have always been under the assumption that Mode-7 was unique of the 2 systems to SNES. Was Genesis able to replicate it in some way or completely? Which games did and do you have visual examples? I'd be very curious and thankful.
    It took gasega68k a bit to work it out, and top of that we're in an age where a lot of the tricks are already known (there are plenty of write ups of how to do fast scaling/rotation, even on the 68k). That, and almost all Japanese game companies, honestly, weren't optimal coders. Great with game development/design, not so great with optimizations IMO. Euro developers had crazy optimization techniques, but crappy games IMO haha. Even with demoscene nowadays for retro systems; there really isn't anything new out there - just improvements/variations on old stuff that's known now. A single homebrewer/coder today doesn't have deadlines like developers BITD. And there's also the size. The G-Zero demo is almost 4megabits. No enemies, one map? You're gonna need a pretty big rom for a production game.

    I absolutely LOVE the tech gasega68k has pulled off. But honestly, 1/4 the resolution of SNES mode 7? At less than half the frame rate? With 16 colors vs 256 colors + color math (transparency, fading, etc) on the SNES? Impressive as it is, and it definitely is, it would have give SNES fans and magazines all the more to harp on the Genesis/MD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sik View Post
    It definitely can't replicate it with the performance the SNES does though, you're not going to beat dedicated hardware, and even if you could somehow infinitely overclock it the color limitation would still be a problem.

    If the SNES was forced to do it in software though it'd definitely struggle just as much if not more. This was also a problem with 3D graphics (though I don't think many games tried it without a SuperFX ó there's a good reason)Ö really, seems to have been a problem with anything that involved blasting around a lot of data, the 65816 is not that great for software rendering (and that's considering the 68000 already struggles a lot for starters). It's just that the average game wasn't supposed to do software rendering anyway.
    Honestly, if it weren't for the linear pixel mode none of this stuff from gasega68k would be running on the MD. It was just a happy fluke that the 16bitter uses that pixel mode, even if the tile segments hinder it somewhat.

    The snes pulled off Wolf 3D on a stock snes. That's really impressive! I mean yeah, it's using Mode 7 byte pixel mode and scaling it up, but it's still impressive. Not only because the 3.57mhz on the snes is like 3mhz with wait-state ram and dram refresh cycles, but memory layout they added on top of the '816 is horrendous. At least for stuff like this. LoRom and most HiRom banks are pretty much just a standard NES mapper layout (upper 32 swappable, lower 32 fixed with ram and some ports).

    But given the 128x48 rendered resolution he's outputting for the lower half of the screen (G-Zero demo), snes could handle that in a single frame DMA as well as double buffer. Mode 7 gives you 256 colors and there's no need for an HDMA to fix the lines (like what gasega68k) is doing. The issue is going to be memory access; you'd want fast near mapped data for use with faster opcodes on the '816. But the added memory layout is funky (byte pixels are fast, but also eats up memory). That's going to be the tricky part.

  7. #82
    Nameless One
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    37
    Posts
    67
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    @EPSYLON EAGLE

    The TG-16 and SNES are using more colors, which will require more video memory. The trade-off is using a slightly lower resolution, to save some VRAM space.
    So, it was a conscious decision to reduce the colors capabilities of the system to allow more resolution?

    In that case, I'm glad they did it. Unlike the colors, the resolution really impact the gameplay and it also looks much better. I hate that stretched look of NES/SNES games, reason why I only play using 8:7 aspect ratio, even on a real CRT.
    Last edited by tisurame; 01-09-2020 at 08:41 AM.

  8. #83
    Death Bringer Raging in the Streets Black_Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,733
    Rep Power
    105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tisurame View Post
    So, it was a conscious decision to reduce the colors capabilities of the system to allow more resolution?

    In that case, I'm glad they did it. Unlike the colors, the resolution really impact the gameplay and it also looks much better. I hate that stretched look of NES/SNES games, reason why I only play using 8:7 aspect ratio, even on a real CRT.
    As turboxray pointed out that's not how the PC Engine works and even if it did the "trade-off" claim is obviously not true as the PC Engine is a resolution monster and loses none of its color capabilities when running at 512 x 240 non-interlaced.
    Quote Originally Posted by year2kill06
    everyone knows nintendo is far way cooler than sega just face it nintendo has more better games and originals

  9. #84
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    8,646
    Rep Power
    123

    Default

    Yeah, but I do believe their are trade offs for using more colors. CGA could do a lot more than 4 colors using lower resolutions. Itís crazy to see what a world of difference screen resolution has on that graphics interface, reducing the available video RAM needed to produce more colors.,


    Last edited by gamevet; 01-09-2020 at 12:06 PM.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  10. #85
    Nameless One
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    37
    Posts
    67
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Black_Tiger View Post
    As turboxray pointed out that's not how the PC Engine works and even if it did the "trade-off" claim is obviously not true as the PC Engine is a resolution monster and loses none of its color capabilities when running at 512 x 240 non-interlaced.
    The majority (90%) of games on the PC Engine run at 256x240. If there wasn't any "trade-off", most games would be using a horizontal resolution of 320 or higher.

    256x240 is objectively worse. Can't imagine someone choosing this resolution for any other reason other than a technical limitation.

  11. #86
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    8,646
    Rep Power
    123

    Default

    Iíll take more colors. The screen resolution never bothered me.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  12. #87
    Nameless One
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    37
    Posts
    67
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    Iíll take more colors. The screen resolution never bothered me.
    Anyhow, the lower resolution is detrimental to the game play, mainly for side-scrolling games since you view 20% less screen horizontally.

    A lower resolution will also be stretched to fill the screen, reducing the graphical quality, mainly for games not adjusted for the stretching (which was the large majority).

  13. #88
    Death Bringer Raging in the Streets Black_Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,733
    Rep Power
    105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tisurame View Post
    The majority (90%) of games on the PC Engine run at 256x240. If there wasn't any "trade-off", most games would be using a horizontal resolution of 320 or higher.

    256x240 is objectively worse. Can't imagine someone choosing this resolution for any other reason other than a technical limitation.
    Their is no trade off for color use as gamevet theorized.

    Hundreds of PC Engine games use resolutions higher than the Mega Drive can do (more like 30%) and some also run at "only" 320 x 224+. Someone on here checked the resolutions of the Genesis/Sega-CD library and found that around 30% ran at 256 x 224.

    The number one reason games use lower resolutions is the same as why Mega Drive SFII ports are lowest resolution: games have budgets. Why make the same game require twice as big a rom when all you have to lose is your profit margin.

    The other reason exclusive for PC Engine is that most of its library is on CD, which only allows you a tiny space to run content out of. When the Arcade Card finally arrived games that supported it were of two extremes: not making much use of the extra space at all or games so huge that the space was still not enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by year2kill06
    everyone knows nintendo is far way cooler than sega just face it nintendo has more better games and originals

  14. #89
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    8,646
    Rep Power
    123

    Default

    So, memory was a factor, itís just not VRAM memory.


    Quote Originally Posted by tisurame View Post
    Anyhow, the lower resolution is detrimental to the game play, mainly for side-scrolling games since you view 20% less screen horizontally.

    A lower resolution will also be stretched to fill the screen, reducing the graphical quality, mainly for games not adjusted for the stretching (which was the large majority).
    Itís not something that ruined a game experience for me. It not like Gradius III was going to be easier, because I got an extra inch of view on each side of the screen. It certainly didnít make Dragonís Revenge (that music sound track is sick though) a better gaming experience than Devilís Crush, because the play field still looked pretty much the same, including a round ball.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  15. #90
    Nameless One
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    37
    Posts
    67
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Black_Tiger View Post
    Their is no trade off for color use as gamevet theorized.
    Of course there is a trade off. More colors = more memory = less resources for other things, like screen resolution.

    Hundreds of PC Engine games use resolutions higher than the Mega Drive can do (more like 30%) and some also run at "only" 320 x 224+. Someone on here checked the resolutions of the Genesis/Sega-CD library and found that around 30% ran at 256 x 224.
    I don't believe these numbers. I know the Genesis library very well and it's absurd to think about 30% of games running at 256x224. More like 5% or less, if I have to guess.

    I also doubt that "hundreds of PC Engine games use resolutions higher than the Mega Drive". I would be surprised if more than a dozen runs at a resolution higher than 320.

    The number one reason games use lower resolutions is the same as why Mega Drive SFII ports are lowest resolution: games have budgets. Why make the same game require twice as big a rom when all you have to lose is your profit margin.

    The other reason exclusive for PC Engine is that most of its library is on CD, which only allows you a tiny space to run content out of. When the Arcade Card finally arrived games that supported it were of two extremes: not making much use of the extra space at all or games so huge that the space was still not enough.
    So, since the budge for the memory was a concern for every company at that time, using a lower resolution was a trade off...

    Even so, are you saying that PC Engine games could be using 320 (or higher), if there was enough ROM memory, without impacting any other aspect of the game?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •