Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!news From: Mark Green Newsgroups: scee.yaroze.freetalk.english Subject: Re: Import Gaming Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:16:00 +0000 Organization: PlayStation Net Yaroze (SCEE) Lines: 48 Message-ID: <36EF8EF0.D4CF5BF0@reading.ac.uk> References: <01be6f35$d91f2780$0a3ddec2@sonia> <7ckb4r$fu96@chuka.playstation.co.uk> <01be6ff8$6ec48ce0$0a3ddec2@sonia> NNTP-Posting-Host: ssfmse3.rdg.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en Miles Buzzing wrote: > This raises another interesting point. I read your loonygames article Nick > and of course you're right, there is a noticable difference in speed > between NTSC and PAL. But I must admit that I can't quite figure out why. > Since most games currently run ar nearer 30 frames per second than 60, > surely as long as the display system refreshes at more than 30 frames a > second there should be no noticable difference in update speed. > OK, I understand that increasing the vertical display size will take its > toll on the performance but why then do terrible conversions such as Wave > Race manage to achieve slow down and retain huge boarders? I believe there's a very good article on this in the Playstation FAQ. Basically, the problem isn't with the rate frames are refreshed but with the times at which they're refreshed. With 60fps refreshes, for the game to run at 30fps, it needs to use one in two of those refreshes. This means that, for each frame, it can spend one blanking period computing and then have the data ready for the next refresh. No problem. Now, with 50fps refreshes, we have a problem. For the game to run at 30fps, it needs to use one in 1.66667 of those refreshes. It evidently can't do that. It could only do it by drawing on refreshes 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10. But it can't do that, because the code we're converting takes at least one NTSC blanking period computing each frame; doing refreshes 2 and 4 is no problem, but we won't have enough time to compute before 5. That means we have to round up to the nearest even value, which is one in two PAL refreshes - which is 25fps. 25 PAL fps against 30 NTSC fps - bingo, 20% speed loss. That was why Tekken 3 appeared as a bad conversion. In order to sort out that refresh problem, they'd have to modify the animations so they contained less frames... and you can't do that with Tekken 3, because the animations and the way the characters fight is critical (remember that some Tekken 3 FAQs had move timing information down to the frame level). Unfortunately, understanding why it had to be that way does not stop it being a bad conversion. I wonder a lot why Sony can't include an NTSC/PAL switch on their European releases. For those games that have borders, the data doesn't need to change (that I know of). I think a PSX disk so full that the executable couldn't be duplicated twice - one NTSC and one PAL version - would be a rarity (although possible with big FMV games or similar), and that's assuming that a complete replacement EXE is necessary. I have the feeling that it's just because they worry that younger players won't understand what it's for. So why not make it a DIP switch or something that can be set up and left without confusion? I have a horrid feeling that the real answer is that they keep NTSC and PAL versions distinct to act as an extra layer of regional lockout, and don't get me started on that.. (on the other hand, Sony also manufacturer NTSC/PAL switchable televisions for the UK, so perhaps not..)