marurun wrote:One would expect video shrinkage on the DS, but there's no reason the animation and sound shouldn't be there. Shrunk graphics take up less space on ROM and ROM access times are generally pretty fast (the original Neo Geo had very little working and video RAM and mostly just streamed data from the cart). Sounds like a botched port.
There is a reason. The DS doesn't have a power to render the animations on par with the neogeo. The PS1 couldn't. The Saturn even with the 4MB ram cart couldnt, without slowdown, as I demonstrate here:
(Skip to about 1:20 when it gets bad.)
So what makes you think the DS is stronger than those machines?
Doesn't have the "power", huh? Animation is simply about managing graphics data efficiently. The reason the Neo Geo does animation well is because the games are on huge ROM cartridges and the system has a fast (fast enough, anyway) cartridge data bus.
I'll draw much of this stuff from Wikipedia but I'll make sure to verify against my own working knowledge of the systems and other sources as well. I am almost a librarian, so I can't simply assume WP is right, even though for the following data it pretty much is.
The Neo Geo has 64 KB of main RAM and 74 KB total video RAM across 3 caches (the largest being 64 KB). That's a lot for a console at the time, but these days that's piddling nonsense. The system is constantly pulling data from the cartridge. The Neo Geo has powerful 2D hardware, but that's more about keeping billions of sprites on-screen and coordinated. The actual animation frame cycling will be handled by the CPU, provided it can be fed with sprite data effectively enough to display the necessary animation. Now, considering the Neo Geo's standard resolution is 320 x 240 and the cartridges can be up to almost 90 MB (theoretical max is listed as 716 Mbit). That's a lot of data.
There's a reason the Neo Geo CD had 7 MB (56 Mbits) of memory in it. And some of the largest Neo Geo games had to be stripped down in their Neo Geo CD versions, with frames of animation removed. The Neo Geo CD is the same hardware, just without the high-speed pathway to a huge pool of ROM data. Amazing the limitation a single change will put on you. That's the primary reason why the Saturn Metal Slug had difficulty. It was all about memory management with ported code. The original Metal Slug did slow down a little, but not as much as the Saturn port, which leads me to believe they didn't optimize the Saturn version of the engine very much. You wanna see sprites thrown around like mad on the Saturn just play Battle Garegga or Princess Crown.
Now, the Nintendo DS is powered by an ARM 9 and an ARM 7. Even without the 2D-focused dedicated 2D sprite-handling hardware, this system can, on a computational level, kick the living shit out of the M68000 and the Z80 in the Neo Geo. DS cartridges can be up to 128 MB (that's 1024 Mbits). The DS can address 32 MB (256 Mbits) of cartridge storage at a time without bank switching. The DS has 4 MB of working RAM and the ARM 7 has a dedicated 64 KB of faster program RAM. The DS also has 656 KB of VRAM across 9 RAM banks. 4 of those banks are 128 KB, 3 are 16 KB, and the remaining 2 are 64 KB and 32 KB. I didn't read far enough into the dev docs to know what distinguishes how they are used.
The bottom line here is that the DS should, barring the resolution limitation of 256 x 192, be able to push just as much visual data as the Neo Geo. Because of a lack of dedicated complex sprite handling hardware and the lower resolution it would not be practical to push as many sprites around the screen, but the DS could technically do it comfortably, it would just be cramped looking on the screen. Further, DS cartridges are definitely large enough to hold all the data which even the larger Neo Geo games could consume, though bank switching might be required for the largest games. Assuming all the graphics are shrunk to match the smaller screen resolution instead of having the play area restricted, those graphics would take up less space in ROM and in memory.
So the DS has more than enough system and video memory, a fast ROM pathway to cartridges which can definitely hold enough data, and easily fast enough CPUs, fast enough to do all the sprite blitting in software without hardware assistance. The problem then has to be the quality of the port. Now, it might not completely be the developer's fault. Many GBA and DS developers simply use Nintendo's dev tools. I understand they're supposed to be friendly and easy to use, but knowing Nintendo they probably do not give good access to the hardware where performance optimization is concerned. So in this case it might have been the case of a relatively quick and dirty code port/reprogram job. In fact, lots of DS and GBA games are quick and dirty ports or rapidly developed titles using the supplied dev tools. I have no doubt, however, that in the right hands the DS could be a 2D monstrosity. But nobody would appreciate it because the screen is so damn small and the resolution limited.
I'm not going to read that because I know for a fact that there are no games on DS that can compare with the finest 2D and 3D titles on the 32 bit consoles. No amount of specs can change that. Unless you're suggesting that every single game on DS has failed to utilize the specs, then let's move along.
I would argue that every single GBA and DS game, just about, has indeed failed to take advantage of the technical 2D capacity of the system. I can only think that Nintendo either buried a couple killer 2D hurdles in the system or simply has delivered very poor 2D dev tools. I can't see delivering good 2D sprite performance as being high on Nintendo's To Do List. Besides, the form factor and screen size of the console isn't really conducive to fast-action 2D games. Nintendo probably realizes this and simply neglects to address it as a result.
But gee, I'm glad you respect me enough to even bother reading what I post... Especially considering in a couple areas I tried to specifically address some of the concerns you brought up.
marurun wrote:But gee, I'm glad you respect me enough to even bother reading what I post... Especially considering in a couple areas I tried to specifically address some of the concerns you brought up.
Sorry. I made it through a sentence, skimmed a couple more, eyes drifted away, I spied a peanut butter sammich cookie, and just didn't have the willpower to go on.
I've always been a huge NDS fan gameplay wise but wondered why the 2D graphics weren't light years ahead. Without researching to the level you did it seemed the NDS should be as capable as the 24-32bit systems. Considering the specs and experience you'd figure developers would doing more not less.
I did think Bleach looks very nice, but seeing thats Treasure it should.
There is a decent Neo Geo emulator for DS, NeoDS. Does that matter to the discussion at all?
I think it is proof that the DS is quite more powerful than the Neo Geo. The screen, however, won't do much justice to squeezing and maximizing the graphical prowess the hardware may be capable of.
