Sonic and Sega Retro Message Board: Yalecsa - Viewing Profile - Sonic and Sega Retro Message Board

Oh you guys, that answers everything I needed to know, and gives me a whole bunch of interesting reading to do, too! It sounds like a lot of the things I want to do would technically be possible on a Mega Drive. But, maybe not for a simpleton like me. Maybe in the future, when I'm a bit better versed on the tech aspects, I might give some of it a go. In the meanwhile, I'll stick to soundfonts and VOPM, and pretend I'm going for an "authentic to the time" sound rather than showcasing what the Mega Drive is theoretically capable of audio wise. :3

Oh, but I would so love to try and use FM synth drums, the DAC, Master System PCM/PWM, and the noise channel all together to create a fake drumset for some Mega Drive style heavy metal, ahaha. Maybe one day.

Thanks again guys, super informative! />

Polish Pete, on 07 December 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:

Specifically, it is an emulation of the PS2 version. Any PS2 or PS1 game you can buy on PSN (with the exception of HD ports like Ico HD or Shadow of the Colossus HD) is emulated, much like Nintendo's range of virtual console games. Much cheaper to throw an ISO and emulator into a package together than to port said game to a new architecture.

GeneHF, on 07 December 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

I actually completely forgot that the PS3 version of Unleashed ran with an unlocked frame-rate! I remember thinking at the time that I should hold on to it, as the then rumours about the PS4 suggested it would still use the same processor, albeit massively more powerful. I thought if so, it might be able to run the game via backward compatibility, but with something approaching a good frame-rate, ahaha. Those turned out completely false of course, and thankfully the trade in value on the game was, at the time, the same price as the 360 version, so I wandered in to my local CeX and handed over one and took the other. :|

JansenM, on 07 December 2014 - 01:15 PM, said:

It's been so long since I've touched the game, I completely forgot this! I mean, I was never sure of it, but always kind of suspected it... but soon got an HD monitor and left that thought behind me. How bizzare. I always assumed the 50hz frame-skipping was done by the console itself. Maybe it is, but Sega forgot to set a flag to enable it? Thinking about it, there is one other game that behaves abnormally on PS3 when in 50hz, that being Dynasty Warriors 7. It runs at 480p60, something that PAL PS3s ordinarily refuses to do. So maybe there is a little more to this than I thought.

Sir_mihael, on 28 November 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

Indeed, the 360 most definitely was the target console for Sonic games last gen. (Last gen? Feels wrong to say that somehow.) Sonic '06 has very rough performance on both machines due to being very rushed, mishandled, and Sega's first real attempt at making a 360 game. Everything Irixion mentioned about the game is true, although I would personally claim that the 360 version's loading times are still unbearable, even installed to hard drive. A brief analysis and screenshot comparison of the two versions can be found here (scroll down past the Splinter Cell comparison): http://www.eurogamer...-article?page=3

There is an additional issue with the game that I rarely see mentioned, mainly because it only manifests in the PAL PS3 version, and only when running in SD. For reasons that I cannot comprehend, PAL PS3s cannot be put into 60hz when running in SD, meaning that all games run in 50hz. Most use a form of frame-skipping (much like the Gamecube in 50hz) to compensate for this, including Sonic '06. However, something goes very wrong with the FMVs of the game. They skip, they stutter, they're near unwatchable. They play as if the disc were scratched. And yet they work fine in 720p. Which is annoying, as there is another issue with the game! One can make the game have a more steady frame-rate if one sets one's PS3 to be in SD. In the case of Sonic '06, setting the PS3 to 480p does actually cause it to only render at 640x480, rather than usual method of dealing with 480p, being to render full 720p and then scale down. Meaning that if you have the PAL version, you're stuck either playing with an acceptable frame-rate but broken FMVs, or working FMVs with a near unplayable frame-rate! As rushed as the game was, the PAL PS3 version doesn't even appear to have had quality control testing performed. :|

Sonic Unleashed faired a bit better tech wise, thankfully. Again, the 360 was the lead platform, and the PS3 version suffers, but nowhere near to the same extent. The visual effects are a near match, albeit with the PS3 version having lower resolution soft shadows, with worse filtering. I recall the water in the Adabat daytime level, which was absolutely beautiful on 360, being a little less impressive on PS3. Both versions run at a resolution of 880x720, scaled horizontally to 1280x720, which due to how the human eye seems to work, doesn't look nearly as bad as one may expect. The frame-rate has trouble keeping a rock solid 30fps on 360 during the more intense levels, especially when playing as the werehog, while the PS3 version has trouble keeping 30fps at more or less every part of the game. The final level, Eggmanland, is a technical mess on both systems, but is near unplayable on PS3. The PS3 version also has some quite long loading times, though nothing like as bad as Sonic '06. Though speaking of loading, when one transitions between day and night, 360 owners are treated to an animation of Sonic transforming into the werehog, and vice versa for night to day. These are completely absent for the PS3 version, instead showing a spinning day/night emblem.

Sonic Unleashed also had a PS2 and Wii version, but that's an entirely different game, sharing no assets or engine code whatsoever. It would be unfair to compare those versions to the PS3/360 versions, as they don't even have the same levels. Instead, have a brief video comparison of the PS3 and 360 versions, again courtesy of Eurogamer's Digital Foundry (scroll past the Need for Speed segment): http://www.eurogamer...-article?page=3

As a side note, I can't help but think they were a little unfair with their assessment of the game. I remember finding it incredibly pretty at the time, with the lighting, water, and pixar-style humans being particularly gorgeous. But hey, opinions.

By the time Sonic Generations came about, Sega had seemingly optimised the Hedgehog Engine a hell of a lot more. I've played the game a great deal on 360, and it holds a 30fps refresh very well indeed, only dropping when there's too much Havok physics going on. I can't speak for the PS3 version this time, as I've only played the demo, but it certainly held up a lot, lot better than PS3 Unleashed.

Did Sumo really favour the PS3? I've not really touched the original All Stars Racing, but the Transformed sequel I've played a great deal of, and I much prefer the 360 version of it to the PS3 version. The PS3 version runs at a higher resolution (1280x720, as opposed to the 360's 1152x554), but has real trouble maintaining 30fps. I only played the demo, but it was rare that the game hit its target frame-rate. The 360 version meanwhile uses some very impressive anti-aliasing to mitigate the low resolution, and does a wonderful job of hitting 30fps. I'd be very surprised to hear that Sumo preferred the PS3, especially with it being well renowned as more difficult to make games for. There were also versions of the game for the Wii U, Vita, and 3DS, but I've barely touched those. Digital Foundry assures me that the Wii U version runs at 1024x576, but my memory of playing this version at a friend's house has the game with a frame-rate not dissimilar from the PS3 version. The Vita version has downgraded visuals, but still manages to look very nice, especially on the Vita's OLED screen, albeit again with frame-rate issues. The 3DS version meanwhile runs on a completely different engine, with different assets, so a comparison would be unfair.

I've gone back to the PS2 version of Sonic Heroes, incidently, and thanks to PCXS2 can confirm that it does actually run at a resolution of 640x447, NOT the 512x448 I assumed. I am quite unsure as to why my eyes assume it to be a lower resolution than the other versions, but oh well. PS2 Shadow the Hedgehog also appears to run at this resolution.

I think it's fair to say that I, too, would love to see more comparisons of older games. I've always loved seeing the differences between versions. Had I the means to capture lossless footage from my older consoles, I would surely produce such comparisons myself, creating a sort of retro Digital Foundry. Alas, emulation of those systems simply isn't good enough to perform a proper comparison, and I can't justify spending money on a retro capture device, ahaha. Maybe one day, however. One day.

I'm 99% sure the PS2 version isn't running in 320x240, as my HDTV is actually unable to display games of this resolution when using component cables. I have to switch over to RGB SCART for PS1 games, and Ico, as a result of this. Either that or use the homebrew program GSM to force another resolution.

If I had to guess, I'd wager the PS2 version runs at 512x448, which is a surprisingly common resolution for PS2 games. It blanks the top 16 and bottom 16 lines of the screen (which is covered by the overscan of most TVs), and lets the TV scale the 512 horizontal pixels to the correct size, something which CRT TVs of the time were very happy to do. Many of the better looking PS2 games ran at this resolution as a way of clawing back some render time, including Metal Gear Solid Three, Shadow of the Colossus, and Final Fantasy Twelve. I'd not be at all surprised if more than one multi-platform title also utilised this resolution on the PS2. I'll check for sure later when at my gaming PC using PCSX2, as that tells the user what resolution the selected game is internally rendering at.