PS3 BC Quality vs. PS2

[schild]

So, if some of you have been wondering what I was talking about, someone else was kind enough to upload images.


PS2 over component w/ 480p turned on. (1080p LCD)

-


PS3 over HDMI (LCD again)

-


PS3 over component (38" CRT)

-


PS3 over component (LCD)

-

Yea, the PS2 scaling is fucking horrible. Yea, it's great I can play all but 200 games. Nearly every game I own (the vast majority of What's Worth Playing On the PS2) works just fine as far as I'm concerned. Other than this bit. It's my biggest complaint about the PS3. Ironically, this is also how bad I think the Wii looks over composite as well.

[Trippy]

Umm...okay. I'm going to assume, perhaps incorrectly, that the PS2 games that can output 480p are still in fact internally rendering at 480i and that the PS2 has some sort of deinterlacer to create the 480p output.

I don't know of any deinterlacing algorithm that would give that weird "spikey" effect but the "ghosting" effect looks like some of the letters in each field are shifting sideways even on a supposedly stable (i.e. non-moving) image which would really be bizarre, like there was some sort of rounding error going on in the hardware/software where it was calculating pixel positions slightly differently if it was rendering even or odd fields. Combine that with some simplistic deinterlacing algorithm and it's possible you might get that sort of effect.

[schild]

You see how the jaggies are always in the same places on the PS3 versions? It's rendering everything at 480i and doing none of the post-processing that the PS2 did. Basically, it's gimped.

Edit: It's not just a static image problem either. The difference between the exact same action in any game on the PS2 and the PS3 is just obscene.

[Trippy]

You see how the jaggies are always in the same places on the PS3 versions? It's rendering everything at 480i and doing none of the post-processing that the PS2 did. Basically, it's gimped.

Edit: It's not just a static image problem either. The difference between the exact same action in any game on the PS2 and the PS3 is just obscene.

The static image stuff was in reference to the ghosting problem. The exaggerated square/rectangular "jaggies" is presumably some sort of deinterlacing issue. I don't know where those HDMI triangular "spikes" that are coming off the exaggerated jaggies are coming from.

[Miasma]

That's horrible.  With all the quirks and caveats of some HDTVs I would have blamed your TV except the good old CRT image is also terrible.  They all have that bizarre triangle sticking out of the S.

Luckily I tend not to replay my games so it won't be an issue for me once I eventually buy a PS3, and maybe by then there will be a hardware revision.

[Jeff Kelly]

If the scaler in the ps3 is as bad as the screenshots show watching DVDs or even BlueRay discs will be a real pleasure. :-(

[Trippy]

I'm now leaning against it being a deinterlacing problem. Even if the deinterlacing was so basic that it was just doubling the lines of each field you wouldn't get the "rotated block look" on the diagonals (actually more like trapezoids than rectangular blocks) -- the blocks would be straight up and down. I'm now thinking it's a problem with the anti-aliasing hardware, the other likely possibility I mentioned in the other thread.

[Miasma]

Maybe yours is busted?  Skip ahead 45 seconds, the opening of FFXII looks normal from whatever this guy is doing.

[HaemishM]

Ironically, this is also how bad I think the Wii looks over composite as well.

Then there's something wrong with your TV, because my Wii over composite on an cheap-ass 27" SDTV doesn't look like that.

[Trippy]

Maybe yours is busted?  Skip ahead 45 seconds, the opening of FFXII looks normal from whatever this guy is doing.

Very difficult to tell at that size and resolution. E.g. here's the PS3 component on LCD from above scaled down to the approximate size in the video:




YouTube screencap in comparison:

[Kitsune]

Then there's something wrong with your TV, because my Wii over composite on an cheap-ass 27" SDTV doesn't look like that.

There's not necessarily anything wrong with schild's TV.  I've heard from a few other people that the Wii looks worse on HDTVs than on older SDTVs.  Some said that the sharper picture made the Wii's graphics look jaggy and pixelized, others complained that their HDTVs weren't doing a good job of upscaling the 480 resolution.  Wiis are only displaying their native resolution on SDTVs and EDTVs, anything more and there's some conversion involved.  Wish I could find a cheap 27-inch EDTV, I'd be willing to pay a couple hundred for progressive scan for my games and DVDs.

[Yegolev]

SDTVs have an awesome antialiasing function built into them.

Schild, is this something you have tested yourself?  Those aren't your shots, I assume.  I would do this test myself except for the not-having-a-PS3 issue.  I would like to see shots from a variety of games, such as San Andreas since I know it will do prog-scan, maybe some God of War as well since it might have some banding to look at.

I am mostly interested in Vagrant Story, though I already know it will look far better on a PS2.

[HaemishM]

Then there's something wrong with your TV, because my Wii over composite on an cheap-ass 27" SDTV doesn't look like that.

There's not necessarily anything wrong with schild's TV.  I've heard from a few other people that the Wii looks worse on HDTVs than on older SDTVs. 

And so why would I want to buy an HDTV for double the price again?

[Sky]

Oh give it a rest already.

Or I'll post another pic of Planetside on George :P

[Bunk]

Then there's something wrong with your TV, because my Wii over composite on an cheap-ass 27" SDTV doesn't look like that.

There's not necessarily anything wrong with schild's TV.  I've heard from a few other people that the Wii looks worse on HDTVs than on older SDTVs. 

And so why would I want to buy an HDTV for double the price again?

Dude, if you were a hockey fan, and ever watched a hockey game in hi-def just once, you'd never ask that question again.

[Riggswolfe]

Then there's something wrong with your TV, because my Wii over composite on an cheap-ass 27" SDTV doesn't look like that.

There's not necessarily anything wrong with schild's TV.  I've heard from a few other people that the Wii looks worse on HDTVs than on older SDTVs. 

And so why would I want to buy an HDTV for double the price again?

I was an HDTV skeptic until I got one. So were my friends. One friend got one after I did, the others want one badly but can't afford it. We were watching some DvD and my friend who hadn't seen the TV yet (he'd just returned from the army) said something akin to "holy shit, that's so fucking clear, HDTV really looks this good?"

And that was on a DvD, then of course I showed him the 360 and a true HD TV broadcast. The difference is undescribable, and perhaps the only bad thing is it makes it hard to go back to regular TV. The last time I saw this big of a difference was when I went from VHS to DVD.

[Strazos]

Dude, if you were a hockey fan, and ever watched a hockey game in hi-def just once, you'd never ask that question again.

Oh, I love hockey, and it generally looks great on HD...

Still costs a lot.



As an aside, we get Shitty Shit Shit hockey coverage beyond the local teams in the US right now.

[HaemishM]

I've seen HD. I've seen the 360 on HD. Yes it's purty.

But let's examine my situation with regards to HD. I am a Directv subscriber and quite happy with the service. To get HD programming, I'd have to pay extra per month (something small like $5-$10). For that extra money, I get less than 10 channels in HD, with only ESPN 1 and 2 being anything I'd give a shit about. I cannot get my local channels in HD because of where I live. To purchase an HD DVR, I have to put myself on a waiting a list and I still don't know how much that would actually cost me because they won't tell me the price, and I'm sure I'd have to pay more for the Tivo service. None of my current components (DVD player, receiver, etc.) have HDMI or component outputs (maybe the Tivo does I'm not sure).

So not only would I be looking at buying a TV for double the price of a similarly sized TV, I'd be doing it for less than 10 channels with up to $20 more a month, PLUS having to buy all new components for my AV system. IT ISN'T WORTH IT. Even if I had a 360, there are all of about 3-4 games on the 360 I'd want to play.

Again, HDTV looks great, but it isn't worth it to me. In a year's time, maybe two, it probably will be, as there will be more programming, the TV will cost less and I'll be ready to replace some gear. Now? The purtiness ain't enough to outweigh the cost.

[Strazos]

Ok Haemish, we get it...


Ok, maybe only I get it. /shrug

[Yegolev]

DirecTV is coming around with the HD.  I don't have the HD package even though, last I bothered to look, it's just $10 a month.  However for as long as I can remember HBO HD has been available to me.  Yeah, I have the HD receiver and dish, you will need that shit, plus the TV but I'm just providing info here.  Just recently Showtime HD is available to people who aren't willing to shuck out the extra cash, and there are a few "local" channels that are available in HD, like NBC from New York which gives me The Office in HD.  It seems that they are realizing people want HD in the regular packages without having to go through the real cost and hassle of the HD pack.

Of course if I were really into HDTV, I'd pay the $10 so I could see Battlestar Galactica in HD.  Fortunately, the show's strengths are in the writing and acting.  Michael Hogan needs a handful of Oscars, a couple Emmys and a Grammy.

[geldonyetich]

Just hurry up and release the 3D stereographic hologram displays.  I know we've got the tech, I don't need to waste 10 years of my life so they can milk more money out of the tech savvy consumer by going through this protracted HDTV revolution first.

[Furiously]

I've seen HD. I've seen the 360 on HD. Yes it's purty.

But let's examine my situation with regards to HD. I am a Directv subscriber and quite happy with the service. To get HD programming, I'd have to pay extra per month (something small like $5-$10). For that extra money, I get less than 10 channels in HD, with only ESPN 1 and 2 being anything I'd give a shit about. I cannot get my local channels in HD because of where I live. To purchase an HD DVR, I have to put myself on a waiting a list and I still don't know how much that would actually cost me because they won't tell me the price, and I'm sure I'd have to pay more for the Tivo service. None of my current components (DVD player, receiver, etc.) have HDMI or component outputs (maybe the Tivo does I'm not sure).

So not only would I be looking at buying a TV for double the price of a similarly sized TV, I'd be doing it for less than 10 channels with up to $20 more a month, PLUS having to buy all new components for my AV system. IT ISN'T WORTH IT. Even if I had a 360, there are all of about 3-4 games on the 360 I'd want to play.

Again, HDTV looks great, but it isn't worth it to me. In a year's time, maybe two, it probably will be, as there will be more programming, the TV will cost less and I'll be ready to replace some gear. Now? The purtiness ain't enough to outweigh the cost.

That's because Direct-tv is horrid, and the NFL package is the only reason they are still in business. Move over to Dish network and enjoy the HD ride!

[HaemishM]

I love me some Directv. I've had nothing but good results with them. Other than HD, what is it Dish is supposed to have that is better?

EDIT: MEH. Now that I've looked, they have up to 27 HD channels, which is fine. But they lack Setanta Sports on any of their packages, which means I'd lose over half my football. I'd watch more football than HD programming.

[MrHat]

I love me some Directv. I've had nothing but good results with them. Other than HD, what is it Dish is supposed to have that is better?

EDIT: MEH. Now that I've looked, they have up to 27 HD channels, which is fine. But they lack Setanta Sports on any of their packages, which means I'd lose over half my football. I'd watch more football than HD programming.

If this is the case, DO NOT switch to HDTV.  You'll be unable to watch games that aren't HD after spending a few weeks watching the few in HD.

[Morfiend]

I hate DirectTV with a passion. They are a horrible service. For the longest time in my area we had two choices for cable Cox Cable or DirectTV. Cox Cable was offering Broadband cable modem service for over 10 years here (Just to show they are on the front end of the technology curve).

My best friend had DirectTV, and his dish stopped working. DirectTV told him he could have a tech come repair it for $350, or he could buy a new dish for $325, or to get out of his contract early it would be $275. He ended up getting Cox Cable, and just letting his DirectTV contract expire for the next 4 months.
On the other hand, I had a major problem with Cox, where I was getting a week signal. They sent techs out to my house every 3 days for a month until the problem was fixed, and instead of charging me for it, they credited me 3 months of service.
Cox is not always great, but overall I am impressed with them. I have a HD-DVR + HD channels for a total of like $8 more a month, than if I just had a normal receiver box. Also, if anything happends, they just come and replace the box for free.

[WindupAtheist]

They just need to find a way to port WoW to the Wii.  (Wowee!)  When it sells a million copies, Schild will probably shoot himself.