PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
Non-NEC Console Related Discussion => Console Chat => Topic started by: Tatsujin on March 12, 2008, 02:32:20 PM
Title: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Tatsujin on March 12, 2008, 02:32:20 PM
why the heck all Street Fighter II ports on any consoles used a lover vertical resolution? since they all where completely re-drawed from the original arcade, i can't see any reasons why they used a lower resolution and put in those ugly black bars on top and bottom of the screen?
even when different teams/developers ported the game on a very different platform (e.g. SFC -> Capcom, PCE -> NEC Ave...), the result was nearly the same:
I'm always amazed at how good a port Forgotten Worlds on the TurboGrafx is.
A while ago I ran that arcade screenshot of Forgotten Worlds (among other games) to see how well the Turbo port really turned out. The result is almost identical to the actual Turbo port's colors.
The developer swapped one of the bg shades for black to add contrast, even though that arcade faithful shade appears elsewhere in the same shot. I think it looks better that way.
The only other noticible difference in color is the floor/ceiling, which as you can see could've been shading arcade faithful. But once again I think that the change is an improvement.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Tatsujin on March 12, 2008, 03:06:41 PM
why those capcom arcade "emu captured" pix always looking so stretched? there was no screen which such dimensions at that time, and just watch the circles in the BG, they're very distorted!! the PCE screen actually looks very accurate in that res. mode!!
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Kitsunexus on March 12, 2008, 04:23:56 PM
why those capcom arcade "emu captured" pix always looking so stretched? there was no screen which such dimensions at that time, and just watch the circles in the BG, they're very distorted!!
Doesn't MAME automatically capture a pic at certain dimensions? If said dimesnions didn't match the aspect ratio of the game, then it would be distorted.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Bonknuts on March 12, 2008, 04:29:12 PM
why those capcom arcade "emu captured" pix always looking so stretched? there was no screen which such dimensions at that time, and just watch the circles in the BG, they're very distorted!! the PCE screen actually looks very accurate in that res. mode!!
That's called pixel aspect ratio. You'd have to scale it in different rations for X and Y to get them to look correct on a PC/MAC/whatever system. Those pics aren't adjusted for it. The Arcade didn't use square pixels :wink:
I'm sure the letter box on the SFC port (and Genesis too) was more to increase vblank time and vram updates. They can't update sprites during active display, so they have to wait for non-active display (vblank). The PCE version doesn't need this as it can update sprites frames at anytime, but it's still there by previous game design.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Keranu on March 12, 2008, 05:00:00 PM
Very interesting Forgotten Worlds comparison, Black_Tiger! I still can't decide whether I like the shade change or not (and I wonder if the designer thought it looked better that way too).
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: SignOfZeta on March 12, 2008, 08:51:39 PM
As for the weird aspect ratio of the arcade SFII, that comes from a very strange resolution that the Capcom's CPS boards use (384 x 224). You don't notice it on a CRT of course because it looks normal, but in MAME or whatever things look fuct because the pixels aren't supposed to be square like they are in this pic. There is no upscalled compatible mode for this resolution most of the time so things have to be interpolated. On a standard arcade RGB CRT this is done transparently, but while running under emulation its hard to get it right.
As for the letterboxing on consoles, I always assumed this was because sprite size was limited for various reasons, and if the BGs were full sized it would look even more noticeable. SFII was a very high-end game back then, even for the arcade, so the fact that something sucks about the console ports is no surprise. I'm amazed the console versions turned out so well, honestly. One of the reasons why Fatal Fury Special is so good on PCE is that it has no letterboxing, and that really stood out at the time.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Joe Redifer on March 13, 2008, 12:46:25 PM
I don't think SF2 was very high end on the arcade scene (hardware/graphics wise), seeing how it came after the likes of Space Harrier, Out Run, After Burner, Thunder Blade, Galaxy Force, etc.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: SignOfZeta on March 13, 2008, 02:20:18 PM
It had the largest number of the biggest and most well animated sprites ever. The hardware wasn't high-end, the game was.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: ceti alpha on March 13, 2008, 02:26:16 PM
I just noticed on the PCE version of SFII that the elephants' horns aren't shaded white, but are gray like their skin. Just a nitpick, but I was playing "what is different in these picks" with myself and that popped out at me. :mrgreen:
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: TR0N on March 13, 2008, 06:24:34 PM
I don't supose any body watch this epsiode of retroware reviewing,SFII for the pce.
The person does show screen shots to compare the versions.
Btw keep in mind the reviewer voice is rather whiney :P
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: nodtveidt on March 13, 2008, 08:38:21 PM
I just noticed on the PCE version of SFII that the elephants' horns aren't shaded white, but are gray like their skin. Just a nitpick, but I was playing "what is different in these picks" with myself and that popped out at me. :mrgreen:
I noticed that too. :D Also, take a look at the MD version's floor...dither hell where there isn't in the other two ports. The lack of colors really hurts its presentation overall.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Keranu on March 13, 2008, 10:23:27 PM
I just noticed on the PCE version of SFII that the elephants' horns aren't shaded white, but are gray like their skin. Just a nitpick, but I was playing "what is different in these picks" with myself and that popped out at me. :mrgreen:
I noticed that too. :D Also, take a look at the MD version's floor...dither hell where there isn't in the other two ports. The lack of colors really hurts its presentation overall.
The one thing I noticed from the Genesis version was an entirely missing shade shade of blue on the background wall. I actually kinda like the vibrant elephant wall painting in the Genesis version more though.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Black Tiger on March 14, 2008, 01:46:07 AM
The PCE version's painting uses different art than the rest. The lower right corner is noticibly different.
The PCE port's diamond wall sections are colored red like the arcade.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Joe Redifer on March 14, 2008, 06:08:18 AM
Hey now, remember that "dither adds texture" and thus it cannot be argued against EVER. The Neo Geo is also dither hell.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Keranu on March 14, 2008, 10:32:25 AM
Hey now, remember that "dither adds texture" and thus it cannot be argued against EVER. The Neo Geo is also dither hell.
There is a difference between nice texturized dithering and flat out checkered board dithering :P .
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Bonknuts on March 14, 2008, 12:51:15 PM
That PCE SF2 review reminded me of some other PCE SF2 youtube videos. It's really funny to read the responses for SF2 3-way comparisons. Just look at Black Tiger's video comments. Fools completely ignore the PCE version and start arguing about which version is better between the SNES and Genesis. Hello!? There are three versions being compared here? Fools :P
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Black Tiger on March 14, 2008, 01:10:44 PM
That PCE SF2 review reminded me of some other PCE SF2 youtube videos. It's really funny to read the responses for SF2 3-way comparisons. Just look at Black Tiger's video comments. Fools completely ignore the PCE version and start arguing about which version is better between the SNES and Genesis. Hello!? There are three versions being compared here? Fools :P
There really aren't three versions though. The only console version (from that period) of SFII' is the PCE one. Capcom skipped straight from SFII to SFII'Turbo on the SFC, and the MD went straight to Turbo.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Tatsujin on March 14, 2008, 06:17:26 PM
Quote from: dsgitlinlink
After watching that video, I'm convinced that the Genesis version is far superior to the PC Engine version. The music is superior, the graphics are brighter, it includes the Turbo version of the game, and you don't need to tear apart controllers to play it.
Quote from: downsouth420
The guy totally forgot to mention that you needed the PC-Engine arcade card. Plus finding a 6-button PC-Engine controller on eBay costs an arm and a leg.
Quote from: circuitwrecklink
that's where your wrong. SF2 for the SNES wasn't a perfect port but sfx and graphics were well balanced. the Genesis version was great, but pixels' just way too dark and sound is worse beyond mono. I won't even discuss about PCE, just the same as genesis
etc..
rolf..what a shitload of crap!! especially concerned, that most of the dumb posters over there never played PCE SFII in real and just make their judgements out of this crappy youtube vid in mono!!
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: nodtveidt on March 14, 2008, 06:24:08 PM
You need an arcade card to play a hucard? That's a new one!
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: ceti alpha on March 14, 2008, 08:09:45 PM
Wow! I'm officially a troll, I guess. I'm no longer able to see that SFII clip on youtube, only hours after making a comment..... :-k
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Black Tiger on March 15, 2008, 04:12:45 AM
That PCE SF2 review reminded me of some other PCE SF2 youtube videos. It's really funny to read the responses for SF2 3-way comparisons. Just look at Black Tiger's video comments. Fools completely ignore the PCE version and start arguing about which version is better between the SNES and Genesis. Hello!? There are three versions being compared here? Fools :P
There really aren't three versions though. The only console version (from that period) of SFII' is the PCE one. Capcom skipped straight from SFII to SFII'Turbo on the SFC, and the MD went straight to Turbo.
The Genesis and SNES versions give you the option of playing Champion Edition, just like Side Arms Special lets you play the arcade version or Before Christ.
If someone were to do a SFII Turbo comparison, or SSFII, then there wouldn't be a PCE version to compare to directly.
But even Snerds and Genesis fanboys seem to care more about CE than Turbo.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: nodtveidt on March 15, 2008, 08:40:35 AM
Hey now, remember that "dither adds texture" and thus it cannot be argued against EVER. The Neo Geo is also dither hell.
Sure it can. When dithering is used to artistic effect, it's cool beans. That's the case with Neo Geo games. But that isn't the case here...it's used here because there simply aren't enough color indexes to represent the scene properly. Therefore, it can be argued against in totality.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Black Tiger on March 15, 2008, 08:54:00 AM
Hey now, remember that "dither adds texture" and thus it cannot be argued against EVER. The Neo Geo is also dither hell.
Sure it can. When dithering is used to artistic effect, it's cool beans.
Genesis games like Ristar a good example of this.
Quote
But that isn't the case here...it's used here because there simply aren't enough color indexes to represent the scene properly. Therefore, it can be argued against in totality.
If they were going to use dithering for that carpet, they should've dithered each color all the way down. That single stripe in the middle sticks out like a sore thumb.
As good a job as Capcom did with the visuals of the final Genesis port, the little unnecessary flaws stand out all the more.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Bonknuts on March 15, 2008, 09:01:36 AM
The audio in the SF2 review for PCE sounds a bit off (lil' scratchy/rough?). It doesn't sound like that on my copy, or B_T's audio comparison videos. Maybe he used an emulator :roll:
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Black Tiger on March 15, 2008, 09:14:36 AM
The audio in the SF2 review for PCE sounds a bit off (lil' scratchy/rough?). It doesn't sound like that on my copy, or B_T's audio comparison videos. Maybe he used an emulator :roll:
Youtube butchers audio and they might not have rendered the final video with full sound quality in the first place.
So even if it was originally recorded off of real hardware, unless they jacked the audio bitrate all the way up like I did, it shouldn't sound the same.
If anyone finds any of my videos on youtube, always check the description for a link to download the full quality video. Even if a video isn't on my site, I usually have a link for it on the youtube page.
EDIT: I just watched that comparison video again and it sounds like they used a kisado to play the game while recording. Using a converter, or at least the kisado, the game has some feedback kind of noise that seems to get worse the more that is happening in the game.
Its kinda like that buzz that often happens with PSG music in HuCards that doesn't clear until a new song is played(like in the Ninja Spirit sound test), only much worse. For years I had hoped that it was only the converter and not the actual game and I was happy to find I was right once I got my first PC Engine system.
When the guy in that video shows you how to play a PCE HuCard, he only has a white PC Engine and a Turbo CD combo with a kisado. If he used either of those to record from, the audio wouldn't be clear.
It was funny how he said the PCE sfx(kicks/punches) are noticibly worse than the SNES version, since I find that the sfx to be the PCE's greatest leg up on the SNES port. I even prefer the Genesis version's full sfx over the muffled, short/looped SNES sfx.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: nat on March 15, 2008, 10:15:55 AM
Using a converter, or at least the kisado, the game has some feedback kind of noise that seems to get worse the more that is happening in the game.
That's odd- I play the game on my US systems with a Kisado and I don't have that problem, unless I've never noticed it (which seems unlikely).
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Turbo D on March 15, 2008, 11:45:15 AM
black tiger's kisado is defective :P
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Bonknuts on March 17, 2008, 10:19:56 AM
Some hacking to improve the palette on the PCE version for Ryu's stage (not my palette work).
Original (http://pcedev.net/sf2_hack/original.png)
New (http://pcedev.net/sf2_hack/new.png)
Not that you would find the game if you went directly into the directory in those links.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: nat on March 17, 2008, 11:08:04 AM
Was that the only change that was made? Just that level?
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Bonknuts on March 17, 2008, 12:06:08 PM
Yeah, so far that's the only change. But after a little work, I found the compressed backgrounds, palettes, pointer,etc. I've documented the compression scheme... now to write a decompresser.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Tatsujin on March 17, 2008, 02:27:32 PM
damn mal..you're rad!! :clap:
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: SignOfZeta on March 17, 2008, 04:59:52 PM
Quote from: Black Tiger link
But even Snerds and Genesis fanboys seem to care more about CE than Turbo.
I guess I've never met one of these people. Of the five versions of SFII that exist, Turbo, and Super Turbo are, from what I've seen, vastly preferred and the other three being pretty much ignored completely.
Title: Re: SF II resolution question?
Post by: Keranu on March 17, 2008, 06:47:00 PM
But even Snerds and Genesis fanboys seem to care more about CE than Turbo.
I guess I've never met one of these people. Of the five versions of SFII that exist, Turbo, and Super Turbo are, from what I've seen, vastly preferred and the other three being pretty much ignored completely.