Can you force 240p or 480p on the PS2?

[Classicgamer]

Out of curiosity, I just tried Capcom vs SNK 2 and Street Fighter anniversary collection on the PS2 and to my horror, shock, disgust and shame, I found that it plays in 480i instead of their native resolutions.

From memory, Capcom vs SNK 2 on the Naomi arcade offers a choice of 240p and 480p so it's a weird decision on Capcom's part to make the PS2 version offer neither native res... The PS2 is capable of both 240p and 480p....

So is there any way to fix this abomination without additional hardware?

[Galgomite]

I have no experience with this stuff but I believe most games can be forced into 480p with mcboot. Check that out.

[Thomago]

Yeah, that works, but tone down your expectations. The majority of games doesn't like being forced to 480p.

[Johnpv]

I think some games can also be hex edited to display in 240p. I don't remember if CvS2 is one of those. There is a topic on this board though about which games work and how to do it.

[rama]

This thread explains how it can be done.
https://forums.pcsx2.net/Thread-No-interlacing-codes

[Classicgamer]

Yeah, that works, but tone down your expectations. The majority of games doesn't like being forced to 480p.

I tried changing the output to 480I non interlaced and 480p in the GSM tab on my free mcboot menu and it produces results that range from a totally black screen to just half the screen missing. So, free mcboot is either useless for this purpose or I am doing something wrong.

How does one hex edit a PS2 game? Do I need to download a hex editor or something like that?

I guess it doesn't matter. Most of the old 240p games can be played in Groovymame and the few that can't can be output in 480p on my PS3 and then downscaled to 240p or 368p using my ultracade UVC.

[Galgomite]

Best option may be emulation or the Xbox version. At least it's not a ps2 exclusive game.

[Classicgamer]

Best option may be emulation or the Xbox version. At least it's not a ps2 exclusive game.

That's true for games that are well emulated in Groovymame like everything on the Capcom classics disc but for games like Time Crisis 2 and 3, there are no good options for emulation. Where possible, I want to make them run in their native res and refresh rate.

So, while I would never play street Fighter 2 on the PS2 (at least not from a disc), I would still like to know how to fix games using hex code changes.

[Thomago]

I tried changing the output to 480I non interlaced and 480p in the GSM tab on my free mcboot menu and it produces results that range from a totally black screen to just half the screen missing. So, free mcboot is either useless for this purpose or I am doing something wrong.

You are probably doing everything right. Here's a list for reference (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... Rm/pubhtml) - general compatibility is low and even stuff that works usually only works half-way.

[Classicgamer]

Yeah compatability is so low that it is none-existent for all intents and purposes.

I just tried do the hex code change on Capcom Classics and it didn't work. The games loaded but still in 480i.

What a shame that Sony screwed up the PS2. It could have been a great little vintage gaming machine but I would rather not play at all than play in 480i.

[nmalinoski]

Do these PS2 games render in 480i and sent to the GSM/encoder chip as 480i, or are they rendered in 480p and then converted to 480i later?

[Classicgamer]

Do these PS2 games render in 480i and sent to the GSM/encoder chip as 480i, or are they rendered in 480p and then converted to 480i later?

I believe that they are coded to output 480i in software as there are a small number that output 240p natively.

[DoomsDave]

240p tutorial - viewtopic.php?f=6&t=61532

[Classicgamer]

I tried that method (hex edit) with Capcom classics last week and it doesn't work.

It made the menu screen 240p but the actual games were still blurry 480i.

I think that the only real option would be to output in 480p (where possible) and then use my Ultracade UVC to downscale to 240p or 368p.

For games that don't offer a 480p option, I could probably try the ddsp trick on my RGB interface but that only half solves the issue -I.e. It would look like 240p but still run at half the frame rate.

It's all a lot of hassle. I am greatful that I have Groovymame to play most classic games at native res and refresh.

[orange808]

It's my understanding that the Extron RGB unit accidenatally manipulates the field offset. So, frame rate shouldn't be an issue.

[Classicgamer]

It's my understanding that the Extron RGB unit accidenatally manipulates the field offset. So, frame rate shouldn't be an issue.

That is correct but it is not real 240p. 480i is 30fps. Real 240p is 60fps.

[Fudoh]

480i has 60 fields per second. One field has 240 lines.
240p has 60 frames per second. One frame has 240 lines.

Of course you get real 240p once you have the Extron alter the field offset. After all there's no actual difference between 480i and 240p, except for half a line on top which tells your CRT how to display it.

[DoomsDave]

Yeah really curious where you heard that 480i was 30fps only...

[Classicgamer]

Yeah really curious where you heard that 480i was 30fps only...

It's a fact. 60 updates per second. Each update draws half a frame. Half of 60 = 30. 30 full frames per second.

With 240p. 60 updates per second. Each update draws one whole frame. 60fps. It's the whole point of using 240p instead of 480i for computer graphics.

This is the reason why 480i looks blurry and mushy compared to 240p, even though it has twice the number of lines.

The frame rate makes at least as much difference to clarity and the amount of detail as the resolution.

[Classicgamer]

480i has 60 fields per second. One field has 240 lines.
240p has 60 frames per second. One frame has 240 lines.

Of course you get real 240p once you have the Extron alter the field offset. After all there's no actual difference between 480i and 240p, except for half a line on top which tells your CRT how to display it.

Now that I think about it, I have only tried the RGB interface 240p method with 480i from Windows. I was never able to make it look like real 240p. But... Windows has a weird way of treating 480i. It seems to try and output it as 480p / 30hz which comes out as a flickering mess.

Perhaps the line offset didn't help because the original signal was 30hz (producing 240p / 30hz instead of 60). . I am going to try it with the PS2 to see if it makes a difference. I believe the PS2 outputs a real interlaced 480 line 60hz.

I struggle to understand what the interface is actually doing with the line offset. With 480i, the computer is outputting 30 full frames per second and 480 lines. The device has no buffer. Can it really double the FPS and halve the res with a timing delay?

I understand how the double strike method of 240p works. It's thinking about how the same method can be used to convert 480i to 240p that makes my head hurt.... I guess that I would need to understand how they converted the 240p game to 480i before I understand how the interface undoes their mistake.

[orange808]

Here's an experiment if you have the gear to do it.

When you line double 240p to 480p, use a scan converter to interlace the 480p to 480i, and use the Extron RGB trick to eliminate the field offset: you get proper 240p.

That's because you started out with 240p and line doubled it first.

1
2
..
240
240p

1
1
2
2
...
480p (240px2)


1
blank
2
blank
...
240 alternatiing scanlines aka 480i interlaced "State A"

blank
1
blank
2
...
240 alternating scanlines aka 480i interlaced "State B"

Eliminate the offset and the numbered alternating scanlines from State A and State B will be the original 240p.

1
2
...
240

------------

The Extron RGB only works when the fields are interlaced line doubled 240p.


240p -> OSSC -> 480p -> Extron VSC unit -> 480i -> Extron RGB -> CRT (240p)

[Fudoh]

It's a fact. 60 updates per second. Each update draws half a frame. Half of 60 = 30. 30 full frames per second.

you have to see the temporal side. 480i can also update 60 times a second if each field is different. On classic interlaced VIDEO material (not film sources), each field represents a phase of motion and two field technically DO NOT form a frame.
For many many many (MANY!) years there was general misconception of what deinterlacing meant. For more than a decade almost all deinterlacing solutions on the PC did output a 30fps video when fed with a 480i60 source. This created the misconception that two fields of interlaced video always form one frame, when in fact you SHOULD end up with 60 frames after PROPERLY deinterlacing 60 fields of interlaced video.

Now that I think about it, I have only tried the RGB interface 240p method with 480i from Windows.

I never tied that but I could imagine that Windows updates just 30 times a second with a 480i output setting (in order to reduce interlacing artefacts). Last time I used an interlaced mode on windows was in the very early 90s, when XGA interlaced was still a thing on lower end CRTs.

I struggle to understand what the interface is actually doing with the line offset. With 480i, the computer is outputting 30 full frames per second and 480 lines. The device has no buffer. Can it really double the FPS and halve the res with a timing delay?

the interface does nothing like that. If windows does indeed output 30 frames, it still segmented into 60 fields (otherwise it would be 480p30 and not 480i60). The interface can't tell if that's true 60Hz interlaced or if the fields match to create 30 full frames (PAL video sourced from movies works like this: 50 fields from 25 frames created using a 2:2 cadence). The RGB interface does output the exactly same fields or frames it receives. Interlaced video starts in the middle of the first line, while progressive video starts at the beginning of the first line. Usually the line is blanked. Sometimes you can see this after (improper) deinterlacing. The interface somehow shifts the active image part by half a line and as result most CRTs will interpretate the signal as 240p instead.

I guess that I would need to understand how they converted the 240p game to 480i before I understand how the interface undoes their mistake.

this unfortunately can't be generalized. Too many methods. Good ones and MANY bad ones. The good ones are when the actual 240p frames are simply used as 480i fields instead. No filtering, nothing else. From conversions like these, an Extron interface can create a 100% perfect 240p image (Dragon Blaze PS2, Sengoku Ace PS2 are examples for that).

[Fudoh]

240p -> OSSC -> 480p -> Extron VSC unit -> 480i -> Extron RGB -> CRT (240p)

dangerous, since the VSC can actually half the motion phases from 60 to 30 if set correctly (or incorrectly). That's a "feature" of its anti flicker filtering, where the VSC makes sure that two adjacent fields actually match.

[orange808]

240p -> OSSC -> 480p -> Extron VSC unit -> 480i -> Extron RGB -> CRT (240p)

dangerous, since the VSC can actually half the motion phases from 60 to 30 if set correctly (or incorrectly). That's a "feature" of its anti flicker filtering, where the VSC makes sure that two adjacent fields actually match.

I don't remember the necessary flicker filter settings.

You'll also have to get the image sized just right.

Although, .my example was more about making a point. For instance, when you switch to a proper scaler instead of initially line doubling, the output turns into a hot mess.

----
Since we're being honest:

Most of these PS2 games don't output a true line doubled 240p, so the fields don't perfectly match. I'm pretty sure there's some kind of filter being applied on Street Fighter Anniversary--and the PS2 does that with the full buffered frame before it gets interlaced. So, the Extron RGB will always look bad.

What OP wants and needs is a proper ROM hack. That's the only real solution here. Need to disable the filtering and output 240p natively.

[Classicgamer]

Here's an experiment if you have the gear to do it.

When you line double 240p to 480p, use a scan converter to interlace the 480p to 480i, and use the Extron RGB trick to eliminate the field offset: you get proper 240p.

That's because you started out with 240p and line doubled it first.

1
2
..
240
240p

1
1
2
2
...
480p (240px2)


1
blank
2
blank
...
240 alternatiing scanlines aka 480i interlaced "State A"

blank
1
blank
2
...
240 alternating scanlines aka 480i interlaced "State B"

Eliminate the offset and the numbered alternating scanlines from State A and State B will be the original 240p.

1
2
...
240

------------

The Extron RGB only works when the fields are interlaced line doubled 240p.


240p -> OSSC -> 480p -> Extron VSC unit -> 480i -> Extron RGB -> CRT (240p)

That makes sense based on what I have see to date. I.e. Why it doesn't work with standard Windows 480i setting because it is really 480p / 30hz. I believe that CRT EMU now has a correct 480i / 60hz mode

It also makes it easier to understand how and when the RGB interface is able to work for 480i to 240p. I.e. It can only work properly if 480i is created by delaying the line offset and not for material created to be 480i originally. Or, in other words, the interface is not performing any scaling, or line halving.

[Classicgamer]

It's a fact. 60 updates per second. Each update draws half a frame. Half of 60 = 30. 30 full frames per second.

you have to see the temporal side. 480i can also update 60 times a second if each field is different. On classic interlaced VIDEO material (not film sources), each field represents a phase of motion and two field technically DO NOT form a frame.
For many many many (MANY!) years there was general misconception of what deinterlacing meant. For more than a decade almost all deinterlacing solutions on the PC did output a 30fps video when fed with a 480i60 source. This created the misconception that two fields of interlaced video always form one frame, when in fact you SHOULD end up with 60 frames after PROPERLY deinterlacing 60 fields of interlaced video.

Now that I think about it, I have only tried the RGB interface 240p method with 480i from Windows.

I never tied that but I could imagine that Windows updates just 30 times a second with a 480i output setting (in order to reduce interlacing artefacts). Last time I used an interlaced mode on windows was in the very early 90s, when XGA interlaced was still a thing on lower end CRTs.

I struggle to understand what the interface is actually doing with the line offset. With 480i, the computer is outputting 30 full frames per second and 480 lines. The device has no buffer. Can it really double the FPS and halve the res with a timing delay?

the interface does nothing like that. If windows does indeed output 30 frames, it still segmented into 60 fields (otherwise it would be 480p30 and not 480i60). The interface can't tell if that's true 60Hz interlaced or if the fields match to create 30 full frames (PAL video sourced from movies works like this: 50 fields from 25 frames created using a 2:2 cadence). The RGB interface does output the exactly same fields or frames it receives. Interlaced video starts in the middle of the first line, while progressive video starts at the beginning of the first line. Usually the line is blanked. Sometimes you can see this after (improper) deinterlacing. The interface somehow shifts the active image part by half a line and as result most CRTs will interpretate the signal as 240p instead.

I guess that I would need to understand how they converted the 240p game to 480i before I understand how the interface undoes their mistake.

this unfortunately can't be generalized. Too many methods. Good ones and MANY bad ones. The good ones are when the actual 240p frames are simply used as 480i fields instead. No filtering, nothing else. From conversions like these, an Extron interface can create a 100% perfect 240p image (Dragon Blaze PS2, Sengoku Ace PS2 are examples for that).

I think I understand what you are saying although I have never heard of 480i being described as real 480i vs film source 480i.

It's been a while since I read up on it but as far as I remember, the 480i and 576i standards were designed to roughly match the frame rate of film material (and the respective electrical standards).

Are you saying that, with 480i computer sources that originated from 240p material, they continue to move as though there were 60fps but still drawing half a frame at a time? I.e. Field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 2 etc. vs film based 480i where field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 1 etc?

So 480i computer sources share the same reduction in clarity as you would expect from halving the frame rate but not the reduction in speed.

If I understood that correctly, it makes it a lot easier to understand how the interface achieves 240p from 480i with a timing offset and why it doesn't work for material designed to be 480i natively.

[Classicgamer]

How does the PS2 output 480p from 480i games that originated as 240p?

In the Capcom Classics disc, for example, which outputs 480i for 240p games but with a code that can be input when loading to switch to 480p?

With a disc like that, am I better off outputting in 480p and using my ultracade UVC to downscale to 240p, or leaving it in 480i and using the Extron interface?

[Fudoh]

I have never heard of 480i being described as real 480i vs film source 480i.

really ? You need completely different deinterlacing algorithms depending on the content. Film deinterlacing became pretty good in the late 90s when Faroudja patented its IVTC (inverse telecine) formula, which reconstructs the full frames from telecined material. It took a decade longer to bring good video deinterlacing to the market.

Are you saying that, with 480i computer sources that originated from 240p material, they continue to move as though there were 60fps but still drawing half a frame at a time? I.e. Field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 2 etc.

if you generate 480i from a 480p source then that's the case (e.g. when you run a Dreamcast game that's internally rendered in 480p, but output it in 480i s-video or RGBs). If you have a 240p source, then there are no half frames, since each 240p FRAME is identical to its 480i FIELD (e.g. Street Fighter III 3rd Strike in DC. You can run it in 240p or in 480i. The fields/frames in both modes are identical).

vs film based 480i where field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 1 etc?

that's not the case, since film is based on 24 frames, not on 30 frames. There this thing called telecine which converts 24 progressive frames into 60 interlaced fields using a 3:2 pulldown.

A, B, C, D, E are the film frames. 1 = upper field, 2 = bottom field. Using a telecine you get:

A1 A2 B1 B2 B1 C2 C1 D2 D1 D2 E1 E2 F1 F2 F1

This is why you get combing artefacts on scene transitions when watching interlaced video sourced from progressive film.
If you use a stupid deinterlacer that converts 480i60 to 480p30 you get many good frames (e.g. when combing A1 and A2), but you also get a lot of bad ones (e.g. when you combine B1 and C2).

[Fudoh]

With a disc like that, am I better off outputting in 480p and using my ultracade UVC to downscale to 240p, or leaving it in 480i and using the Extron interface?

I never played the compilation. If really depends on whether the 480i output is filtered or not. I guess it is and if it is, then running 480p and converting to 240p externally will likely give you better results.

[Classicgamer]

I have never heard of 480i being described as real 480i vs film source 480i.

really ? You need completely different deinterlacing algorithms depending on the content. Film deinterlacing became pretty good in the late 90s when Faroudja patented its IVTC (inverse telecine) formula, which reconstructs the full frames from telecined material. It took a decade longer to bring good video deinterlacing to the market.

Are you saying that, with 480i computer sources that originated from 240p material, they continue to move as though there were 60fps but still drawing half a frame at a time? I.e. Field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 2 etc.

if you generate 480i from a 480p source then that's the case (e.g. when you run a Dreamcast game that's internally rendered in 480p, but output it in 480i s-video or RGBs). If you have a 240p source, then there are no half frames, since each 240p FRAME is identical to its 480i FIELD (e.g. Street Fighter III 3rd Strike in DC. You can run it in 240p or in 480i. The fields/frames in both modes are identical).

vs film based 480i where field 1 shows half of frame 1, field 2 shows the other half of frame 1 etc?

that's not the case, since film is based on 24 frames, not on 30 frames. There this thing called telecine which converts 24 progressive frames into 60 interlaced fields using a 3:2 pulldown.

A, B, C, D, E are the film frames. 1 = upper field, 2 = bottom field. Using a telecine you get:

A1 A2 B1 B2 B1 C2 C1 D2 D1 D2 E1 E2 F1 F2 F1

This is why you get combing artefacts on scene transitions when watching interlaced video sourced from progressive film.
If you use a stupid deinterlacer that converts 480i60 to 480p30 you get many good frames (e.g. when combing A1 and A2), but you also get a lot of bad ones (e.g. when you combine B1 and C2).

When TVs were first invented the technology was limited by the available electrical supply. In America this meant it had to be a multiple of 60 and in Europe a multiple of 50. Naturally, both markets chose the closest possible standard to film given that 24 or 48 fps was not an option. So, 525 lines at 30fps in America (split into 60 fields) and 576 line / 25fps in Europe with the extra lines in the Pal system to make up for the loss in clarity from the reduced frame rate.

That was what I read anyway. Who knows what was really on their minds at the time...

Believe it or not, I have never used a stand-alone deinterlacer. When I was a kid, everything (not on a PC) was 480i and the only people who bought that sort of thing were people with CRT projectors in high end home theater set-ups. I could never afford that kind of thing until I started working and that was at the end of CRT projector use. My first projector was a DLP.

Is there such a thing as a deintelacer that is not a line doubler (or upscaler) and that can convert 480i 60hz into anything except 480p 30hz? I don't understand how that could be possible as 480p 60hz is twice the frequency and twice the lines per frame. Do they frame double if they can't line double (like modern frame interpolation)?

Would a deinterlacer be of any help for PS2 480i? I.e. For games that output 480i natively that do not have a 480p option.