VF4 PS2 Release

Don't knock it till you tried it.

The thing I find amusing is that many people have forgotten the TGS 2001 movie, While it wasn't greeted with euphoria most people saw it as a step in the right direction, and it had hit lighting then. I specifically remember being impressed by the opening scenes of Jacky verses Vanessa in Sarah's stage, the colour was a little faint but the character models and stage looked good and I gave further restraint because it was on a crappy monitor. My worries came when it showed the close up of the Jacky and Vanessa models again while showing the VFnet items but I reasoned that I was watching a very early version (It's been what, four months now since the event).

Besides, as westerners we have the best deal. Unlike other game companies cough <font color=white>Temco</font color=white> cough</font color=white> Sega usually fine tune their titles in-between releases rather than ignore total regions and release virtually the same game with more features when they could of done so in the first place. Like PAL Sega Rally for the Saturn (Sega Rally2 for the Dreamcast I might add) , Europe ended up with the best conversion (virtually no bugs and improved landscapes/ cars in SR2).

So what I'm getting at is if there are some quirks in the game come the 31st I'm sure they'll be sorted by March (US) and April (EUR). Now that AM2 confirmed EUR VF4 will definitely get a 60htz option I'm going to wait.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

God where is the roll eyes when I need one.

Rugal: Nice of you to take second hand information and try to interpolate them with pictures to make an assumption about a game you've never seen or played in person. For the longest time I heard complaints how the spotlight wasn't in Wolf's caged arena stage or that there was a lack of fish and whale shark in the aquarium stage. All that based on pictures. Yet anyone who played it on motion would have seen them.

Also your technical understanding of the system is a bit off with the resolution. The game is not half resolution. That's a common misconception. Just like the lack of VRAM which hopefully by now is no longer an issue among complainers since people started understanding how the VRAM works on the PS2.

Simple fact is any 60 fps game displayed on a NTSC screen is going to be displayed at 640 x 240. No two ways around that. This is not simply limited to the PS2 and this is how it always has been. It's because NTSC is an interlaced display. As a result you have two fields making up a frame. Each field either displays all the even scan lines or all the odd scan lines. What the PS2 does, as an option by the way and not a limitation, is simply displays the even lines on the screen when the even scan lines are being shown and then the odd scan lines when the odd scan lines are shown. This allows the developer to save on memory without a theoretical difference in display. The problem with this method is that if you don't sync the output to the display properly, it will look more aliased. So in theory when done right, it won't look any different than if you output a 640 x 480 image to the screen because you never see half the scan lines anyways. So stop blaming the PS2 for having the game at so called half resolution when it's not.

Having played the 80% beta, I can say with confidence that the conversion overall is about 95%. There are differences but the differences are pretty small. I think anyone complaining about them is simply nitpicking and heck Jason can vouch I've been anal about conversions before. The discrepencies in the conversion are no where near as bad as say what happened with VF3tb. Plus look, even with those of us that have played it, we've only had so much time on it that we have to go by memory to make comparisons and we are grasping for things that are different. Most things are not glaring at all. Chris (FeixaQ) said the sand and snow isn't as deep as it is in the arcade, well I checked and I don't think I can agree with that. They look pretty much the same. Plus none of us knew about the hit flashes until recently. They were simply defaulted as off.

So it's insane for people who haven't even seen or played the PS2 version to be criticizing it for what it is and what it isn't based off of second hand information when I'll admit those of us who have played it aren't exactly correct either since we're going by memory. I think that in itself says that the differences are so small that we're not even sure if it's different or not and it's just our perception that makes us think it is. When I first played it, I thought it played just a tad faster than version B, but FeixaQ disagrees.

So why don't we wait until at least next week when it's released and then you can complain all you want about there being only 87 leaves instead of 93 while we sit back and have fun actually playing the game (gee what a concept).

 

Re: /me gets out violin

The bottomline is, the VF4 we all look at is still the 80% beta so there is no point comparing just yet.

I agree with you Darknight

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Come to think of it, i don't think Sega would do a 100% conversion even if they could with the PS2 hardware. For business standpoint, Sega still sells arcade boards. Namco has 1 too, based on PS2, which Tekken 4 runs. If VF4 gets a perfect conversion on PS2, it doesn't looks good on Naomi2 (I mean you don't get that technology edge anymore). Besides, Sega still wants us to go to the arcades (if u got what i mean /versus/images/icons/smile.gif ) I wouldn't be surprise that a some diehard VF players has arcades cabinets at home... and that a lot of money for Sega...

Beauty is only skin deep, mah /versus/images/icons/wink.gif

 

Re: /me gets out violin

lol, so you're saying sega would intentionally make the port just a little crappier than the arcade to ensure arcade sales?!

You may wanna rethink that? I can see an argument that they just don't take all the time and effort needed to make it perfect because they have a deadline or want to ride the popularity wave or whatever, but ..

 

Re: /me gets out violin

CreeD,

I don't think riding a popularity wave applies to VF4. If you states meeting deadline, you should also agree that Sega is still running a business and they do have business interest. Making sure their hardware sells is one of them...

What i am saying is just a possibility... But at the end of the day, it's still easier to blame it all on PS2 /versus/images/icons/wink.gif

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Nice of you to take second hand information and try to interpolate them with pictures to make an assumption about a game you've never seen or played in person.
I dont see that as being a problem because
a) The images shown of the PS2 version clearly demonstrate is shortfalls in comparison with the aracde, and
b) I've probably played the arcade version a hell of a lot more than you.
My statements about is shortfalls as a comparison are spot on as far as I am concerned

Also your technical understanding of the system is a bit off with the resolution. The game is not half resolution
That's funny, you go on to tell me that it is half the resolution. You state that it is 640 by 240. Way to go.

Simple fact is any 60 fps game displayed on a NTSC screen is going to be displayed at 640 x 240. No two ways around that
Well, actually, there is a way around it. One way is to do a CRTC filter of 480 lines down to 240, like what the Dreamcast and Xbox do, or another is to do it internally on a accumulation buffer, like the PS2 does.
But, the problem is that the PS2 needs to be rendering at 640 by 480 to enable this filtering, which it isn't with VF4.

Having played the 80% beta, I can say with confidence that the conversion overall is about 95%
Well, you must be a poor judge by what is clearly shown in the screenshots distributed by sega. Lower poly count, lower texture detail, less lighting and missing details are some of the points that are easy to pic up from the screens alone. Are you suggesting that they magically appear when the game is in motion?

The discrepencies in the conversion are no where near as bad as say what happened with VF3tb
Well, see this is where your opinion falls into a huge pile of crap. The shortfalls of the DC conversion were limited to slight loss in poly detail, slight texture detail and background detail.
VF4 for PS2 has, as mentioned, Lower poly count, lower texture detail, less lighting and missing details. Not to mention that it is HALF the res of the arcade. VF3 on DC was a higher res than the arcade.

I will wait for the final to lay any judgements on the line, but so far it isn't looking bright.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

rugal: Nice of you to omit a lot of my text and highlight whatever fits your view.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


I dont see that as being a problem because
a) The images shown of the PS2 version clearly demonstrate is shortfalls in comparison with the aracde, and
b) I've probably played the arcade version a hell of a lot more than you.
My statements about is shortfalls as a comparison are spot on as far as I am concerned


<hr></blockquote>
a) Well let us not forget when people were looking at Naomi 2 pictures of VF4 and crying foul that Naomi 2 couldn't even handle VF4. I saw that argument way too many times. If people got confused about Naomi 2 pictures being spot on with the arcade, why should PS2 screenshots be as good of an indicator? People alone from screenshots were saying certain aspects weren't in it like Wolf's stage and the spotlight or the lack of fish in the Aquarium. Not visible in pictures, but there. Plus I never said it was a perfect port. There are some things that have been reduced. I don't think anyone here is saying that it is a perfect port, but these differences are coming to the point of nitpicking.
b) Again, you assume. How are you to know how much I played the arcade? All you do is assume here. First about the PS2 version and now about me. But hell if it's going to be "as far as your concerned", it sounds like nothing will change your mind no matter how off base you are.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


That's funny, you go on to tell me that it is half the resolution. You state that it is 640 by 240. Way to go.

Well, actually, there is a way around it. One way is to do a CRTC filter of 480 lines down to 240, like what the Dreamcast and Xbox do, or another is to do it internally on a accumulation buffer, like the PS2 does.
But, the problem is that the PS2 needs to be rendering at 640 by 480 to enable this filtering, which it isn't with VF4.


<hr></blockquote>

Do you have an attention or reading disability? I explain how the 640 x 240 works. The game still is not half resolution. Just because it stores the odd data or the even data in the frame buffer does not make it half resolution because when you put those together, you get a full 640 x 480 resolution image which is EXACTLY what NTSC is doing. There is no two ways about it. Sure there is the method of a CRTC filter like on the DC, but that doesn't change the fact that you still only show 640 x 240 images in every field. It's a technical limitation of NTSC. So either you be consistant and admit that it's full resolution, or you be consistant and you say all systems only display at half resolution because of NTSC technology limitation. There are no two ways about it. The problem, as I stated before is when you try to use the field rendering method and are not in sync with the NTSC field. That is where rendering a full image can be an advantage because if you're off, you still display the right lines since you've rendered them all in the frame buffer. When working properly, and this is usually something that is tweaked in the end, rendering in field method should give you the exact same result and you shouldn't see a difference. When in sync, you would never be able to tell which game is rendering in full frame and which is rendering in field method. These are all facts. Just because it renders the odd lines and then the even lines does not make it half resolution ever.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


Well, you must be a poor judge by what is clearly shown in the screenshots distributed by sega. Lower poly count, lower texture detail, less lighting and missing details are some of the points that are easy to pic up from the screens alone. Are you suggesting that they magically appear when the game is in motion?


<hr></blockquote>
The simple fact that you're judging lighting from screenshots says plenty. A lot of VF4's lighting is based on location. It's hard to tell exactly how the lighting overall without seeing it in motion. How can you even claim I'm a poor judge when I've played the game and you haven't? How can you quantify how bad it is? Screenshots only say so much as has been proven in the past. I've been picky about conversions in the past, and I can't believe you would justify the DC version over this especially considering that the DC version wasn't even perfect gameplay wise. The missing polygons in the DC characters were blatant. Nothing in the PS2 conversion of VF4 comes close to being that bad. Of course I've noticed differences and I've never denied that some things were scaled back. But when you put it in the overall picture, a lot of those things are really minor and nitpicks and don't take away much unless you are nitpicking. Some lighting is missing or is different. I don't deny that. Some detail loss in the backgrounds, again I don't deny that. But something so terrible that it's worse than the character models of VF3tb or the DC version? That I will disagree with.

But why do I bother with this as you'll just ignore most of what I say, and then twist whatever is remaining.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Just to add my 2 cents as someone who's actually had a chance to play the thing at SOA (and an even earlier version at that).

I tend to agree with Darknight here, the game looks pretty good, and I'd also put it at about 95%, considering everything that's there appearance wise (including animation). I also think it's a better conversion than the DC VF3tb, where a lot of the limbs of characters suffered from poly loss.

People keep mentioning the lighting, but it's been confirmed that the Hit Effects ARE there, so I'm not sure what's missing that people are getting from screens. Chris said that the helicopter lights were toned down, I can believe that.

Anyway, people who want to say it looks like shit seem to have their minds made up; even though no one who has played it shares that opinion, so this is probably pointless, as Darknight pointed out.

Spotlite

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Well IMO, i think it looks pretty good. I will buy the PS2 version just to practice on, then prolly go to arcades and play against people or in Tourney's. We'll ive never played the arcade version of VF4, but from looking at the VF4 match movies at TBZone(Directfeed) look damn good, the PS2 pics i see do look good also, but as long as the game moves like the arcade i really shouldnt complain about anything else?
(Just as long as the game physics are intact im cool)

Some of u might think otherwise

 

Re: /me gets out violin

This is IMO only, but unless arcades update to Ver. C, I'm going to stick to the PS2 here in the U.S. The differences between the two seem quite significant.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Is Version C that much different?

 

ummm

Well think about it, version b vs version a, version b to me was the addition of a new character (Vanessa) and some minor gameplay tweaks. I had only played version a for about 2 weeks but it was easy to decipher the small differences in gameplay. I find version c to be what ver b was to ver a. I am not sure of the exact changes but there has been some talk about it on other parts of the posts. Check it out. : P

 

Re: ummm

Um, Marcel, I know you're trying to help, but your information is completely off.

Vanessa was in ver.A. ver.A never made its way to the US, and was released in Japan only for 3 weeks back in August before ver.B came out. ver.B took away a lot of the cheapness that was in ver.A... most notably Kage's db+K, and Jacky's P+KPK, PPu+P combo.

Looking at your profile, if you're in Ohio, you might have been referring to the beta version at Chicago's Harlem & Irving plaza. Which is *not* ver.A or B.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Well let us not forget when people were looking at Naomi 2 pictures of VF4 and crying foul that Naomi 2 couldn't even handle VF4. I saw that argument way too many times. If people got confused about Naomi 2 pictures being spot on with the arcade, why should PS2 screenshots be as good of an indicator?
Firstly, I don't really understand this statement. what I think you're trying to say is that the screenshots shouldn't be used to judge the game. Well, I think that's wrong. All the problems that I have stated are clearly visible in the screenshots that have been posted on the net. You look at them, and then you look at the arcade - there is a very notable difference. Quite simple.
People alone from screenshots were saying certain aspects weren't in it like Wolf's stage and the spotlight or the lack of fish in the Aquarium. Not visible in pictures, but there.
People were saying that because they weren't visible in the screenshots, which were probably of an earlier version of the game than the one you played. The reduction of lighting is a given, there's no way the PS2 can compete with Naomi on this, and the other details (textures, resolution, BG detail) are again clearly visible from the shots.

Do you have an attention or reading disability? I explain how the 640 x 240 works. The game still is not half resolution
No, but it does seem as though you have a learning disability. I have no questions about your explanation of NTSC playback. What you don't seem to understand is that it is HALF the resolution of the arcade. Each field on the PS2 version is 640 by 240. Each field of the arcade version is 640 by 480. Now, using simple math, that's HALF the res.

Just because it stores the odd data or the even data in the frame buffer does not make it half resolution because when you put those together, you get a full 640 x 480 resolution image which is EXACTLY what NTSC is doing.
Again, you don't seem to understand the fact that the arcade runs a 60 frames. If it ran at 30, like NTSC film, it wouldn't be an issue, but it does. So, as the PS2 version is not using supersample filtering, it is displaying HALF the detail of the arcade. That's right, HALF.

Sure there is the method of a CRTC filter like on the DC, but that doesn't change the fact that you still only show 640 x 240 images in every field. It's a technical limitation of NTSC.
That's incorrect. If the PS2 used CRTC it would be sampling 640 by 480 to 640 by 240, which would eliminated a lot of the aliasing, jaggies and errors in the games visuals, but it isn't.
The issue here is that the PS2 version has more jaggies, aliasing and flickering than the arcade. This is due to it not using any form of filtering, as it is only using a 640 by 240 framebuffer. Even the shots that have been distributed show this.

When working properly, and this is usually something that is tweaked in the end, rendering in field method should give you the exact same result and you shouldn't see a difference
There would be no difference between two signals where one is field rendered and the other isn't (using 480 lines) but NO filtering is applied. My point is that no filtering is used, because the game is using a 240 line framebuffer. You can filter 240 lines down because you need 480 to enable CRTC.
Compare TTT Jap version to the US were CRTC filter is used and you will understand the difference between the two.

The simple fact that you're judging lighting from screenshots says plenty. A lot of VF4's lighting is based on location
Vf4's lighting is either vertex or lightmap and both are easily visible in screenshots. Motion has nothing to do with lighting. Lighting has to do with lightsources and the hue effects that they have on textures or polygons.

Some lighting is missing or is different. I don't deny that. Some detail loss in the backgrounds, again I don't deny that. But something so terrible that it's worse than the character models of VF3tb or the DC version?
Fine. that's your opinion, but it doesn't make correct. VF3 doesnt have jaggies, shit textures or poor lighting in comparison with the arcade. Vf4 does. It's quite easy to determine which is the better conversion

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Oh, please, stop.

I think we should trust the wisdom of people who have actually played this game, make peace with the fact that the home version of VF4 will not be "arcade perfect," and give it a rest. If anybody still thinks that any videogame made today looks terrible, I recommend you spend some time with an Atari 2600.

You know, I enjoy reading through VFDC's message boards as much as anyone, but this is just a waste of time.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


Firstly, I don't really understand this statement. what I think you're trying to say is that the screenshots shouldn't be used to judge the game. Well, I think that's wrong. All the problems that I have stated are clearly visible in the screenshots that have been posted on the net. You look at them, and then you look at the arcade - there is a very notable difference. Quite simple.


<hr></blockquote>

I'm referring to when shots would get released, people thought they were PS2, then they began saying how it looked different than the arcade and then shortly after it would be discovered that the shots were the arcade. Thus people were really claiming that Naomi 2 couldn't even handle VF4. Screenshots only show so much and you can only judge by so much. They give you a general idea, but they often can expose things you wouldn't normally see or vice versa hide things that you would see.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


People were saying that because they weren't visible in the screenshots, which were probably of an earlier version of the game than the one you played. The reduction of lighting is a given, there's no way the PS2 can compete with Naomi on this, and the other details (textures, resolution, BG detail) are again clearly visible from the shots.


<hr></blockquote>

See while I agree with this, your reasoning is flawed. You look at Naomi 2 as a piece of hardware and assume VF4 is pushing that hardware to its full potential. Assuming that it can't be done based on hardware discrepency is a faulty argument. You don't know to what extent VF4 makes use of Naomi 2. I will agree that there are differences, but to say that you knew it couldn't happen because the PS2 can't show as many light sources at once as Naomi can is poor reasoning.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


No, but it does seem as though you have a learning disability. I have no questions about your explanation of NTSC playback. What you don't seem to understand is that it is HALF the resolution of the arcade. Each field on the PS2 version is 640 by 240. Each field of the arcade version is 640 by 480. Now, using simple math, that's HALF the res.

Again, you don't seem to understand the fact that the arcade runs a 60 frames. If it ran at 30, like NTSC film, it wouldn't be an issue, but it does. So, as the PS2 version is not using supersample filtering, it is displaying HALF the detail of the arcade. That's right, HALF.


<hr></blockquote>

Fine, under each frame, it is half the horizontal resolution. But so is every other high resolution game on any video game console that runs at 60 fields a second. Why make an issue out of it like it's a problem with the PS2 when this issue applies to every video game console in existance. You first come down on it saying it's half resolution then later you make it sound like it's something that only applies to the PS2. The net effect of the game is what generally is accepted as a 640 x 480 game since there is no way to get a non-interlaced 640 x 480 display in NTSC. People just accept that an interlaced display at 640 x 480 at 60 hz is still a 640 x 480 game. So why pin this on the PS2 when it will apply virtually to every other console out there?

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


Sure there is the method of a CRTC filter like on the DC, but that doesn't change the fact that you still only show 640 x 240 images in every field. It's a technical limitation of NTSC.
That's incorrect. If the PS2 used CRTC it would be sampling 640 by 480 to 640 by 240, which would eliminated a lot of the aliasing, jaggies and errors in the games visuals, but it isn't.
The issue here is that the PS2 version has more jaggies, aliasing and flickering than the arcade. This is due to it not using any form of filtering, as it is only using a 640 by 240 framebuffer. Even the shots that have been distributed show this.


<hr></blockquote>

See this is what I'm talking about. You say it's incorrect, but it's not because it's a fact. CRTC filtering or not, you're still displaying on the TV a 640 x 240 image because of NTSC limitation.

CRTC filtering isn't a godly form of anti-aliasing like you're implying. It does have a beneficial net effect by interpolating between the odd and even scan lines, but you're not going to reduce the aliasing by all that much. Look at Dead or Alive 2 on the DC for an example of that. Again the problem is having the frame buffer in sync with the display. If you don't have it in sync, that's when the aliasing issues occur.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


Vf4's lighting is either vertex or lightmap and both are easily visible in screenshots. Motion has nothing to do with lighting. Lighting has to do with lightsources and the hue effects that they have on textures or polygons.


<hr></blockquote>

Motion can easily be a key factor in telling how many light sources there are as well as some that are based on specific areas. You can see a general sense of the lighting in pictures, but you have a much harder time telling how many there are and how much of it there is without seeing motion.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>


Fine. that's your opinion, but it doesn't make correct. VF3 doesnt have jaggies, shit textures or poor lighting in comparison with the arcade. Vf4 does. It's quite easy to determine which is the better conversion


<hr></blockquote>

The aliasing isn't as bad as it appears in pictures when you see it on a good display. You've already said you're judging it on screenshots which I've said before can either hide or show things that you wouldn't see normally. Sega's TVs were awful and made the game look worse than when I saw it on a decent TV with s-video later on. It wasn't even really an issue by then. A direct screen grab from the buffer isn't always telling of what you are going to see on the screen. I honestly don't think VF4 has any more aliasing than VF3. It's not like VF3 was anti-aliased. It's funny how aliasing was never a huge deal until the PS2 came out and now only the PS2 has aliasing when all the systems still have issues with it. Shit textures is a far cry from a reduction in some textures. Key word there is some. A lot of the textures are the same. A few have been reduced to a slightly lower quality but that's still a far cry from being absolute crap. Poor lighting too? Again you base this on a screenshot? You can't even see all the lighting in the screenshots. You're easily making mountains out of ant hills. From what I've seen, the small differences certainly don't amount to anything glaring like a huge gap in the arms and legs of characters. That's a glaring difference right there. Give me a few reduced textures for better character models anyday. Give me spot on gameplay over slightly altered gameplay any day. I honestly can't believe you're side stepping things like the awful shadows and huge gaps in Shun's legs.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Graphics are not important. It is 2002 and as far as videogames go I am happiest whenever someone will play me in Vf3 on the shitty Dramcast. And I have PS2 and a gamecube. Gameplay is ten times more imortant so let's not worry whether or not Jacky's nuts jiggle in realtime with full on 100 way light sourcing on the new, ps2 version, and instead let's just hope that the simplicity that that is gained by getting rid of the evade button can override the loss of depth. Either way the graphics will add fun, but it is the gameplay that is infinitely more important. Please pardon my writing because I am loaded right now.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

Like I've said before...Sega is zero for four in the gameplay conversion dept. 2/2.1 were the worst, just some really horrendous mistakes. tb was a fair bit off kilter in some really irritating ways. VF1 came the closest, but floats were harder to do on the Saturn version. The shitty thing is that these mistakes are harder to spot.

..But then those that start with and stay with the PS2 version and never play the arcade will probably never see these things as flaws, just as the way things are.

I do hold out hope for the PS2 version, but from experience, owning the arcade units, there just is no comparison. Arcade looks better, plays better, and it just feels better - is so much more "solid", for lack of a better description.

 

Re: /me gets out violin

I'm referring to when shots would get released, people thought they were PS2, then they began saying how it looked different than the arcade and then shortly after it would be discovered that the shots were the arcade.
Firstly, I don't know why you're telling me this because I wasn't one of them.
Secondly, the images are grabs from the PS2's framebuffer so are a clear indication of what the game looks like.

See while I agree with this, your reasoning is flawed.
Rubbish. It's clear that Vf4 is pushing the Naomi 2 in many respects. Its textures, lighting and effects are far superior to Dreamcast, which has similar hardware, and the other Naomi 2 games. Furthermore, none of the current crop of PS2 games come anywhere *near* VF4. Jacky's stage chucks around 6 lights in hardware as well as all the rest of the detail in the game.

Fine, under each frame, it is half the horizontal resolution. But so is every other high resolution game on any video game console that runs at 60 fields a second. Why make an issue out of it like it's a problem with the PS2 when this issue applies to every video game console in existance.
Well, for starters the DC version ran at 640 by 480, which is higher than the arcade NOT half its resolution.
Secondly, all consoles do render 640 by 240 pixels, but they can also sample down lines from the framebuffer into those 240 lines to reduce aliasing and sync errors. PS2 *can* do this, it just costs VRAM, and some games are forced not to use it because the system doesn't have enough VRAM. The system limitation has effected the conversion.

You first come down on it saying it's half resolution then later you make it sound like it's something that only applies to the PS2
I actually said that TTT (which is on PS2) uses filtering. A great many games do now, but it costs the system in one way or another.

People just accept that an interlaced display at 640 x 480 at 60 hz is still a 640 x 480 game.
Doesn't matter what people accept, that doesn't make it true.

See this is what I'm talking about. You say it's incorrect, but it's not because it's a fact. CRTC filtering or not, you're still displaying on the TV a 640 x 240 image because of NTSC limitation
There are ways to get around it as mentioned. Filtering is one of them. Some TV cards allow you to display 1024 by 768 images on a TV from a PC, and they do this through filtering, so the effective resolution is higher. Vf4 doesn't do this in anyway (from what I've seen in shots and heard from people who have played the game), so aliasing and jaggies become a part of the game.
CRTC filtering isn't a godly form of anti-aliasing like you're implying
I didn't say it was. But, it's substantially better than nothing, and nothing is what VF4 on the PS2 does.

Look at Dead or Alive 2 on the DC for an example of that. Again the problem is having the frame buffer in sync with the display
For an example of what? Why don't you compare the PS2 version to the DC version. The PS2 version has 10X the aliasing problems because it uses NO filtering. The DC version uses the consoles standard 5 pixel filter for excellent results. The DC is widely known for having a FAR superior AV image than the PS2.

You can see a general sense of the lighting in pictures, but you have a much harder time telling how many there are and how much of it there is without seeing motion.
Sure, I agree, but the lack of motion doesn't stop you from detecting an abscense of lighting. It's quite easy to do so when comparing the shots to the arcade as well.

The aliasing isn't as bad as it appears in pictures when you see it on a good display
That's correct. Using a higher quality AV connection (Y/C, Component, RGB) will yield better results, but the fact is that it's still aliased and flickering - much moreso than a game that uses filtering or draws a full 480 lines.

I honestly don't think VF4 has any more aliasing than VF3
This one is great. You clearly have some bias against VF3, DC or something, or you are just plain incapable of determining what is what.
PS2 VF4 uses no filtering. DC version (on TV ) uses 5 to 1 pixel filtering (both horizontal and vertical samples to reduce flickering and aliasing hence the DC's awesome AV image) or just draws 480 lines through VGA, and YOU think that the PS2 version has the same amount of aliasing. Dear God.

It's funny how aliasing was never a huge deal until the PS2 came out and now only the PS2 has aliasing when all the systems still have issues with it
The only funny thing is that the console is stuck with a shitty 4MB of VRAM which forced developers to NOT use CRTC filtering. DC set the standard for this when it was release (moving the level of visuals up from PS1 and Saturn, both of which did not use filtering), and PS2 takes it down a notch...
Also, GameCube and Xbox feature it in hardware.

A lot of the textures are the same.
Really, I'd be willing to bet that none of them are the same. They are all 8-bit palletised textures no doubt.

From what I've seen, the small differences certainly don't amount to anything glaring like a huge gap in the arms and legs of characters. That's a glaring difference right there. Give me a few reduced textures for better character models anyday. Give me spot on gameplay over slightly altered gameplay any day. I honestly can't believe you're side stepping things like the awful shadows and huge gaps in Shun's legs.
It's quite clear that you are just ranting here. It's obvious that the PS2 version has poor textures, poor lighting and reduced details in comparison with the arcade, yet you think its a better conversion that Vf3 for the DC (which has some model problems). In short, you're Dreaming. Were you won of the many fools who baged the DC when VF3 was first released?
I can say that I was one of the many happy people who couldn't believe the level of detail in a game that was playable on a home system.