Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 29, 2014, 06:56:01 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
RPGFan Community Quiz
Next Quiz Date: January 11, 2014
Subject: 999 (Nintendo DS)
For more information click HERE!
327633 Posts in 13412 Topics by 2169 Members
Latest Member: KopeAcetic
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  Media
| |-+  Single-Player RPGs
| | |-+  FFT PSP slowdown "not that bad," says S-E
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Author Topic: FFT PSP slowdown "not that bad," says S-E  (Read 8764 times)
MeshGearFox
Posts: 8359


HERE ON RUM ISLAND WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN RUM!

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2007, 01:28:08 AM »

Quote
Still with porting, I would think that with today's technology one could port a game to a equally or more powerful platform without slowdown, glitching, and all that.


Depends entirely how they're doing it. It's less a matter of "today's technology" as it is a matter of how similar the architecture is. Of course, we're talking PSX to PSP architecture here, and I can't imagine them being that different.

Shoddy software engineering seems common nowadays. I don't mean bug-free coding or software. I mean using hardware in a way that's efficient. Maybe the extra power is making people lazy.

Quote
Odin Sphere is pushing the PS2 to it's absolute limits in regards to 2D animation.


Not really. It's, what, some traditional, hand-animated, cell-based sprite work, with a lot of rotation and mutation/motion and shape tween effects a la flash? With some polygonal stuffs for some of the magic effects? If they used Flash, I wouldn't be surprised. Anyway, there's absolutely no reason for the game to have that much slowdown. Also, the things that seem to cause the slowdown are the lighting effects (on the combo attacks and on those enemies that carry lanterns being the two biggest offenders), so it's probably more a matter of poorly optimized code for lighting effects more than anything else.
Logged

o/` I do not feel joy o/`
o/` I do not dream o/`
o/` I only stare at the door and smoke o/`

Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5040


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2007, 01:53:50 AM »

Dude - do you know what programming a game is like? 2D sprites take much up more space than 3D models, and the PS2's hardware isn't built to run 2D very efficiently, so when you have something that's hugely detailed, all in 2D... it's pretty obvious the PS2 will have slowdown.
Logged

Eusis
Administrator
Posts: 11792


Member
*


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2007, 03:46:26 AM »

We really don't have any way of knowing one way or the other unless we either had actual experience coding the PS2 or at least more great looking 2D games as a benchmark. As is, I'll just have to assume that each character being composed of a bunch of smaller sprites, kinda like flash I guess, with that much animation combined with the fact the PS2 wasn't built for 2D probably means it was pushing the system quite a bit.

Edit: In fact, could it be that something like animating the lighting stuff could be tied with pumping out sprites?
Logged
Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5040


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2007, 04:06:55 AM »

As near as I can figure from what little programming experience I have, with 3D models, everything is contained with that model for every possible angle the model can have. However, with 2D sprites, each different pose/angle has to be individually drawn and loaded each time it is used.

Basically, when you swing a sword with a 3D model, the model already has the motion for it incorporated within the model coding, so it comes out rather easily. With 2D it has to load the individual sword swinging animation.
Logged

Ramza
Enjoying Retirement
Editor Emeritus
Posts: 9288


Member
*

TSDPatGann
View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 15, 2007, 11:14:13 AM »

Quote from: "Thoren"
How the flying **** can you blame sony for a shitty Square-Enix remake?

If anything it really shows how Square Enix doesn't give a shit these days. I'm not going to support their products until they put actual effort into them.


I think it has to do with the hardware, and probably the dev kit. The way it's designed makes it difficult to port something and have the proper coding. I don't think the demo of the emulated version of the PS1 game gives enough evidence that this is just S-E being lazy.

But w/e.
Logged

Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5040


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: June 15, 2007, 12:39:13 PM »

I played the PSX version on the PSP. It ran perfectly.

There is no excuse.
Logged

John
Administrator
Posts: 7174


Member
*

DeceptiJohn
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #21 on: June 15, 2007, 02:10:10 PM »

Quote from: "Leyviur"
I played the PSX version on the PSP. It ran perfectly.

There is no excuse.


You played it from a medium that doesn't require a spinning disc to load.  UMDs are slow.  Look at Ys 6.  You play it from the UMD, it's unbearably slow.  You play it from the memory stick, it's got almost nothing in the way of load times.  Totally different things here.
Logged

THROW PICKLE IN BURGER TO SPEED UP COMMERCIAL
MeshGearFox
Posts: 8359


HERE ON RUM ISLAND WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN RUM!

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #22 on: June 15, 2007, 03:28:23 PM »

Quote
You play it from the UMD, it's unbearably slow. You play it from the memory stick, it's got almost nothing in the way of load times. Totally different things here.


I'm guessing it's the sound files loading that does it.

Anyway Leyviur, you're mostly right, but a little off, on how sprites work. While it's true that each frame you need to access the file, it's not so much a matter of constantly loading an unloading different files, as it is a matter of loading a single file with all of the frames in it, and then changing which frame in said file you're looking at. Anyway, this shouldn't be particularly slow, since the sprite sheet SHOULD be in ram and not actually reloaded every time you access it.

Also, saying that the PS2 isn't built for 2D and thus would be slow with sprite heavy games makes absolutely no sense. That's just something Sony made up to discourage people from making sprite-based games or something. It's possible they're forcing people to use an API solely made for 3D games and making it impossible to use or write other APIs, but I doubt that. The idea that the PS2 can't handle 2D is complete nonsense.

Anyway, Odin Sphere's sprites work differenlt. The characters are made up of many static and non-static sprites. In and of itself, this isn't slow at all. However, there are tons of rotation and mutations effects going on, which IS going to have slowdown just because you're calculating a lot of things.

---edit---

Looking back, I guess the PSX had issues with sprites because of the complete lack of RAM or something, but the PS2 should have no problems with sprites.
Logged

o/` I do not feel joy o/`
o/` I do not dream o/`
o/` I only stare at the door and smoke o/`

Eusis
Administrator
Posts: 11792


Member
*


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: June 15, 2007, 04:42:38 PM »

Quote from: "Ramza"
think it has to do with the hardware, and probably the dev kit. The way it's designed makes it difficult to port something and have the proper coding. I don't think the demo of the emulated version of the PS1 game gives enough evidence that this is just S-E being lazy.

... How about most other ports they've done? IV-VI had issues on the PSX as did CT, VP:L had some issues, FFIV-VI had issues on the GBA when other companies had no issue porting their SNES games over. It feels like straws are being grasped at just to blame Sony yet again. :P
Logged
Prime Mover
Posts: 2791


All's fair in love, war, and the recording studio

Member
*

Shattre
View Profile WWW Email

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: June 15, 2007, 08:36:24 PM »

Quote from: "Eusis"
Come on, Nintendo ported all their Mario games and Zelda with zero issues, WITH added stuff like the voice clips, shouldn't FFV run fine on it?

I've seriously come to believe that Nintendo is the only company out there that realizes that we aren't going to endlessly forgive them for every noticable flaw in their games. I mean, their games may not be the most technically advanced, but they're FLAWLESS in terms of reliability and overall polish. Meanwhile, the vibe I get from Sony is along the lines of, "well, yeah, the game may have long wait times, and there might be some polygon clipping and sound glitches... but just LOOK AT THOSE BADASS GRAPHICS!"

I don't even think that Nintendo ALLOWS flawed games on their systems. I've never played a bad GC port. Every double port I can think of was better on the GC than the PS2, even with added content. Even on their handhelds; as much as people scruitinized over the FF remakes, as far as I'm concerned, they were pretty damned clean.

I'm sorry, as a TV producer, I have a rule: "if you can't do it well, don't do it." That means that if I don't think I can pull off some cool looking effect, and make it look professional and clean, I don't do it. I put it in my "things to work on" bin, and work on it until I'm confident to use it as a part of my bag of tricks.

Sony (and S-E) need to realize that we're not going to forgive them, time after time, for major problems with games on their systems, just because they might be pretty. I think people would much rather software that feels polished, professionally produced, where it feels like someone actually gave a shit about it, than see snazzy graphics done at the expense of everything else.

This is why I'm a Nintendo "fanboy" these days, it feels like they actually give a shit, and their software and hardware speaks for itself
Logged


eelhouse.net
- order the new album

Currently Playing: Metroid Prime 2, Trails in the Sky, Bioshock: Infinite
Currently Listening to: Devin Townsend, Dream Theater
Watching: Star Trek: TOS, Slayers, Doctor Who (as usual)
Morwan
Posts: 134


Herniated Dick

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2007, 10:20:00 PM »

Quote from: "MeshGearFox"
Anyway Leyviur, you're mostly right, but a little off, on how sprites work. While it's true that each frame you need to access the file, it's not so much a matter of constantly loading an unloading different files, as it is a matter of loading a single file with all of the frames in it, and then changing which frame in said file you're looking at. Anyway, this shouldn't be particularly slow, since the sprite sheet SHOULD be in ram and not actually reloaded every time you access it.


Right, and that's why the PS2 sucks at 2D games, 32 megabytes simply isn't enough RAM when you're trying to load dozens of complex sprites on the screen. It's not the calculations that are causing slowdown, it's the memory bottleneck, so when the PS2 tries to allocate the memory for drawing lighting effects, you run into slowdown.
Logged
Eusis
Administrator
Posts: 11792


Member
*


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: June 15, 2007, 10:33:36 PM »

... Actually, 32 MB was probably plenty, and it had more than that. Thing is, there's only 4 MBs dedicated to video ram, rather than 8 like the DC. It can share the system ram, but that's not as effective of a solution I believe.
Logged
Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5040


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2007, 12:19:41 AM »

Quote from: "KeeperX"
Quote from: "Leyviur"
I played the PSX version on the PSP. It ran perfectly.

There is no excuse.


You played it from a medium that doesn't require a spinning disc to load.  UMDs are slow.  Look at Ys 6.  You play it from the UMD, it's unbearably slow.  You play it from the memory stick, it's got almost nothing in the way of load times.  Totally different things here.

I'm playing FFT PSP from the memory stick. The lag is not from the load times, it's just piss poor optimization; I have my PSP a 333 MHz, so any load times frm games I play from my memory stick is practically nil, so the lag isn't because of the load times (which are nonexistant when I play FFT PSP), it's just the porting job fucking up.
Logged

Hidoshi
RPGFan's Open Source Field Agent
Posts: 2901


Built This House

Member
*

clothothespinner@hotmail.com BrandingRune
View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #28 on: June 16, 2007, 01:41:21 AM »

I can't believe people are actually trying to rationalise the whys and wherefores.

It's a game meant for a 32-bit system called the PlayStation, which is deeply inferior to the PSP in most of its capabilities.

Square-Enix fucked up and didn't port it properly. End of story.

Ashton is right (wow, I actually shuddered), S-E is wrong.
Logged
Eusis
Administrator
Posts: 11792


Member
*


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2007, 02:04:04 AM »

Well, let's be fair here. Sometimes there ARE technical problems that make a port not go well. I don't think it can really apply to this case, not unless the PSX emulator is the technical marvel of the millennium, but it DOES get in the way of cases like the X360 emulating the Xbox properly, and a change of storage medium did fuck up FFV,  VI, and CT.

... If IV was any indicator though, they probably could've avoided trouble there by just streaming the damn audio.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!