PDA

View Full Version : Tomb Raider AOD differences from 8 to 6/7.


kevJ420
03-05-07, 06:40 PM
I'd like to revisit TR AOD, even though I'm the only person that doesn't thnk it sucks.

However I have some questions that I should know the answer to, but don't:

1. this is the dumbest question: what does the query box do if you tick it/untick it?

2. Why are ps 1.0 and 1.4 checked when ps2.0 is? When I tried the game on my 6800 GT (now deceased), it wouldn't start w/ only ps 2.0 checked.

3. w/ the v52 patch should I expect a lot of graphical corruption/artifacts?

4. will the videos be better on the 8800 GTX than on the 6 series? (they were horrible on the 6 series.) I had the AGP ver. of the 6800GT so I didn't have hardware video accelleration. How much of a difference would that make?

kevJ420
03-06-07, 11:30 AM
Remember, not all questions have to be answered if someone can only answer one of them, that's better than nothing=) All help will be appreciated=)

Athena
03-06-07, 11:44 AM
I can address the video's question. You will see almost no change in video quality, why? because they encoded the video at a low bitrate, they often do that on PC games, do not ask me why.

kevJ420
03-06-07, 12:34 PM
I can address the video's question. You will see almost no change in video quality, why? because they encoded the video at a low bitrate, they often do that on PC games, do not ask me why.

Thanks, Athena. That's the only technical aspect of PCs that's worse than consoles is the damn overcompressed videos (Ubi Soft games just need to move on to 13 or more GB hard drive space, b/c even the GameCube makes the PC Bink videos look like grainy-ass Sega CD FMV (metaphorically speaking.)

The hardware accelleration for videos is not more powerful than less compression, I guess.

Just like they're putting RE4 on 3 CDs. This is 2007, not the 80s.

duralisis
03-07-07, 02:31 PM
The quality of compressed videos will vary greatly, but is most dependent on your display device and not necessarily the difference between a console and a PC.

First, a LOT of people have only ever used LCD's or have never had a decent CRT, so they take for granted the failings of their display. Cheap LCD's have very poor black levels and are well known to "amplify" visual artifacts from compression (MPEG block artifacts, blurring, color banding). Contrast this with the most common display for a PS2/Xbox, a standard definition TV, which has only a fraction of the resolution your PC does, but produces maybe more vibrant colors or a smoother image because of its shortfalls (low chroma resolution, colorspace, gamma, black levels, apature grill, etc).

Keep in mind that console games are developed on regular old PC workstations w/ dev hardware; so the video hasn't changed, and hardware acceleration only helps speed up DCT transforms or post processing algorithms. It doesn't radically change the picture itself.

One can even extract the original MPEG's off a PS2 disc for example, then playback the original unaltered stream on a PC. Notice how crappy they look? Far too often console-to-PC ports neglect re-encoding their cutscenes from source videos and instead just take whatever was on the original disc -- or even worse, recompress it even more.

kevJ420
03-07-07, 03:19 PM
Thanks. Although when I tried it a long time ago, I was using a CRT. P95f+ by Viewsonic. I was actually hoping the high-end LCD I'm about to get will look a lot better than Viewsonic CRT, or really any CRT. Of course this high-end LCD could very well be an idea of mine that makes sense, but will never be executed.

That idea is a NEC OptiClear 1920x1200 AS-IPS, but unfortunately for me, 1680x1050 is good enough for everyone else, apparently.

duralisis
03-07-07, 06:48 PM
Newer LCD's are very sharp and have excellent color saturation; honestly latency is not a problem for most people at this point; but the real test of many LCD's continues to be DVD playback (oddly enough). How rich black levels are mostly. The 8-bit PVA/SPVA and IPS panels tend to do much better than regular TN film "low latency" (sub $250) in this area. Less expensive panels may do just fine, but many require tweaking via color calibration.