Questions about Sega Saturn

Some more videos and some comparison videos...

Fighting Vipers (The number of background layers, the destructible cage and armour, the lightning, gouraud shading, the intensity of the color etc.)

Virtua Fighter 2 - (Arcade vs Sega Saturn)

VF2 vs Tekken 2 (Console versions)

Tekken 3 Arcade vs PS1 (Look at the backgrounds, the number of layers, notice the short draw distance on the ground on the console version etc.).

Thunder Force 5 - PS1

PS - I don't want this to escalate to some sort of fanboy war. So please keep the discussion civil :)

/ Ken
Virtua Fighter 2 was a disappointment visually compared to the arcades. VF2 did one thing great though. The animation was top notch, a next gen leap. Thats something Tekken 2 could not compete with.
But Tekken 2 had nice lighting effects, totally absent from VF2, and maybe even in polycounts too. Can't really say I was a fan of the floating stages in VF2. But yeah what the VDP2 could do with the infinite floor was great.
Now regarding Tekken 3 arcade vs PS1, you can't really judge it.The arcade board was stronger than both the Saturn and the PS1 and it wasnt able to do infinite floors either as it lacked completely anything remorely similar to VDP2. Actualy the draw distance of the floors are very similar (between arcade and console). The PS1 version still looked better than anything on the Saturn and it was running at 60fps with lighting effects, high polygon characters and the res was above average. Since Tekken 3 had 3D backgrounds on the arcades Namco used an altenrative solution for PS1. The backgrounds aren't a flat image like in Tekken 2 but a wrapped around texture which I think it was achieved by a textured polygon room. Maybe someone can shed some light on this, but really you can't talk about layers for the backgrounds since it was a different approach. Its like comparing an apple to a ham.
Megamix and Fighting Vipers I think were quite impressive
 
Last edited:
Virtua Fighter 2 was a disappointment visually compared to the arcades. VF2 did one thing great though. The animation was top notch, a next gen leap. Thats something Tekken 2 could not compete with.
But Tekken 2 had nice lighting effects, totally absent from VF2, and maybe even in polycounts too. Can't really say I was a fan of the floating stages in VF2. But yeah what the VDP2 could do with the infinite floor was great.
Now regarding Tekken 3 arcade vs PS1, you can't really judge it.The arcade board was stronger than both the Saturn and the PS1 and it wasnt able to do infinite floors either as it lacked completely anything remorely similar to VDP2. Actualy the draw distance of the floors are very similar (between arcade and console). The PS1 version still looked better than anything on the Saturn and it was running at 60fps with lighting effects, high polygon characters and the res was above average. Since Tekken 3 had 3D backgrounds on the arcades Namco used an altenrative solution for PS1. The backgrounds aren't a flat image like in Tekken 2 but a wrapped around texture which I think it was achieved by a textured polygon room. Maybe someone can shed some light on this, but really you can't talk about layers for the backgrounds since it was a different approach. Its like comparing an apple to a ham.
Megamix and Fighting Vipers I think were quite impressive

So Virtua Fighter 2 on Sega Saturn was a disappointment? According to who? And why was it a disappointment? Is it because it doesn't have 3D-backgrounds (nor does Tekken 1, 2 and 3 on the PS1 hardware, right?)? Doesn't use gouraud shading or doesn't have the different color lightning effects that we can see on for example on Fighters Megamix?

The arcade version of Virtua Fighter 2 doesn't use gouraud shading or doesn't have any particular lightning either. So it must mean that Tekken 2 (due to the lighting effects) on PS1 shows that the PS1 is more powerful then the Model 2 hardware, right? But we we all know that the Model 2 hardware is more powerful even when compared to the Namco System 12 hardware (the arcade board that Tekken 3 is running on). Virtua Fighter 2 on Sega Saturn is running in a resolution that is higher then the arcade version, that doesn't make the Sega Saturn to be more powerful then the Model 2 hardware. The resolution that VF2 on Sega Saturn runs in is not even supported by the PS1 hardware. Come on Tekken 2 is not running with a higher polycount on PS1 compared to VF2 on Sega Saturn. Look at the characters arms and legs and the even if you don't like the "floating" stages they still has to be constructed with polygons with 3D-edges (and where is this geometric polygon area visible in Tekken 1,2 and 3 on the PS1 versions, nowhere as it just is a flat ground with no edges).

You seem to misinterpreted me why I'm talking about the multilayered planes in the background. I'm not comparing the Sega Saturn hardware VDP2 chip against the Namco System 12 (or the Model 2) as those two arcade hardware is much more powerful to render 3D-graphics compared to either consoles. If you take a look at Tekken 1 and Tekken 2 on PS1 there is only one low resolution 2D-plane in the background compared to the multilayered planes that you can see on VF2, Fighting Vipers, Fighters Megamix on the Sega Saturn. And YES the reason why Tekken 3 on PS1 have choosen a wrapped texture background around a polygon room is just because the PS1 cannot replicate the layered planes in the background, and the PS1 just as the Sega Saturn is to weak to render those backgrounds in fully 3D. According to you Tekken 3 on the PS1 version still looks better than anything showed on the Saturn due too it was running at 60fps with lighting effects, high polygon characters and a resolution that is above average, that's nice but that is only your opinion. VF2 on Sega Saturn still is running with a higher resolution, animated faces, high resolution textures on the characters and just take a look at the ground (the "floating" plane with different textures on the ground and the edge), the animated backgrounds like the floating river on Shuns stage and so on.

By the way take a look at Tekken 3 on PS1 during the real time intro and you can clearly see that the draw distance on the floor is shorter then compared to the arcade version (look at the floor when you see Hwoarang). Every stages looks like you are fighting in a "box" kind of..

PS - You still haven't provided us or anyone else for that matter a game on PS1 that shows a replicated 3D distortion effect as we can see on Tomb Raider on the Sega Saturn version. A free roaming 3D-adventure game where you can jump into the water, swim around, see the characters body distorts, when looking up in the water it distorts the view above, when looking down it distorts the content in the water, when lookin at the transparent surface it has waves (looks a little bit like jelly, but hey it still at least is not just a flat transparent plane).

/ Ken
 
So Virtua Fighter 2 on Sega Saturn was a disappointment? According to who? And why was it a disappointment? Is it because it doesn't have 3D-backgrounds (nor does Tekken 1, 2 and 3 on the PS1 hardware, right?)? Doesn't use gouraud shading or doesn't have the different color lightning effects that we can see on for example on Fighters Megamix?
I said compared to the arcade version and according to anyone who obviously isn't a Sega fanboy. The arcade version DOES have a form of shading/lighting effects.


The arcade version of Virtua Fighter 2 doesn't use gouraud shading or doesn't have any particular lightning either.
It does. I played the thing in the arcades. The difference in shading you see between these two images isnt a difference in texture color.
View attachment 2629

So it must mean that Tekken 2 (due to the lighting effects) on PS1 shows that the PS1 is more powerful then the Model 2 hardware, right?
Nobody implied as such quit the nonsense. Obviously the arcade version has texture filtering, higher polycuonts, a light source, 3D backgrounds that destroy Tekken 2 and the Saturn version. I compared the Saturn version to the arcade version and with Tekken 2.
But we we all know that the Model 2 hardware is more powerful even when compared to the Namco System 12 hardware (the arcade board that Tekken 3 is running on). Virtua Fighter 2 on Sega Saturn is running in a resolution that is higher then the arcade version, that doesn't make the Sega Saturn to be more powerful then the Model 2 hardware. The resolution that VF2 on Sega Saturn runs in is not even supported by the PS1 hardware. Come on Tekken 2 is not running with a higher polycount on PS1 compared to VF2 on Sega Saturn. Look at the characters arms and legs and the even if you don't like the "floating" stages they still has to be constructed with polygons with 3D-edges (and where is this geometric polygon area visible in Tekken 1,2 and 3 on the PS1 versions, nowhere as it just is a flat ground with no edges).
You can't deny that it lacked severely compared to the arcade version in its totality, and it also lacked in areas compared to Tekken 2. I didnt say Tekken characters are high poly. I said they might have higher polycounts and that's not something I stated as a fact. Its my suspicion. The polygons were obvious in Tekken because of the lighting effects. The ground in VF2 is a very simple shape regardles. The floor on Tekken still had to be a larger surface area made out of multiple polygons.

You seem to misinterpreted me why I'm talking about the multilayered planes in the background. I'm not comparing the Sega Saturn hardware VDP2 chip against the Namco System 12 (or the Model 2) as those two arcade hardware is much more powerful to render 3D-graphics compared to either consoles. If you take a look at Tekken 1 and Tekken 2 on PS1 there is only one low resolution 2D-plane in the background compared to the multilayered planes that you can see on VF2, Fighting Vipers, Fighters Megamix on the Sega Saturn.
Nobody argued about the multilayered backgrounds in Saturn games against Tekken 1 and Tekken 2. The argument was about Tekken 3.

And YES the reason why Tekken 3 on PS1 have choosen a wrapped texture background around a polygon room is just because the PS1 cannot replicate the layered planes in the background, and the PS1 just as the Sega Saturn is to weak to render those backgrounds in fully 3D. According to you Tekken 3 on the PS1 version still looks better than anything showed on the Saturn due too it was running at 60fps with lighting effects, high polygon characters and a resolution that is above average, that's nice but that is only your opinion. VF2 on Sega Saturn still is running with a higher resolution, animated faces, high resolution textures on the characters and just take a look at the ground (the "floating" plane with different textures on the ground and the edge), the animated backgrounds like the floating river on Shuns stage and so on.
By the way take a look at Tekken 3 on PS1 during the real time intro and you can clearly see that the draw distance on the floor is shorter then compared to the arcade version (look at the floor when you see Hwoarang). Every stages looks like you are fighting in a "box" kind of..
So then, I guess VF2 on the Saturn is better looking than Tekken 3 overall according to you because of some 2D backgrounds and some 2D animated faces.
It's not my opinion that Tekken 3 looks better overall. Tekken 3 had more obvious advantages in it's representation of 3D graphics. The PS1 could not replicate what the Saturn did with 2D planes, but it was an age where 3D mattered and Namco exploited the PS1's 3D capabilities with a solution that worked better.

As for he draw distance it is negligible:
View attachment 2623
View attachment 2624
View attachment 2625
View attachment 2627

Maybe you saw this bug. This is due to the fact that since the aracde version was 3D, Namco added an additional layer of floor on that specific angle because the stage has more depth on that specific angle. That extra layer clipped in by error.
The depth of the basic floor where characters are standing is very close
View attachment 2628

PS - You still haven't provided us or anyone else for that matter a game on PS1 that shows a replicated 3D distortion effect as we can see on Tomb Raider on the Sega Saturn version. A free roaming 3D-adventure game where you can jump into the water, swim around, see the characters body distorts, when looking up in the water it distorts the view above, when looking down it distorts the content in the water, when lookin at the transparent surface it has waves (looks a little bit like jelly, but hey it still at least is not just a flat transparent plane).

/ Ken
My Quote

Well one thing the Saturn could do was to keep some elements of the screen unafected from the ripple distortion effect and keep other elements affected. There is no game on the PS1 that did that except Bass Rise which in some scenes of the video I posted you can see portions of geometry showing the ripple distortion while others not.
Panzer Dragoon Saga and Zwei and Tomb Rider are nice high quality examples for their time, of 3D fames where you could see nice ripple effects only on the necessary areas.

edit: Oh crap something went wrong with the image attachments
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-11_17-57-38.png
    upload_2018-7-11_17-57-38.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 23
Something went wrong with my post

How do I delete?
Posters aren't trusted with such power. I think you just need edit your post to replace content with *please delete* and our tingly Mod-sense kicks in and one of us scurries along and hoovers it up. You could also try shining the Mod-Signal off the clouds but I doubt I'd see it at the moment as it's very bright.
 
Last edited:
Model 2 in the arcades was so, so far ahead of anything else anywhere in the world that comparisons to home consoles are never going to be fair.

I bought my Saturn with VF2 and was absolutely blown away. I could not believe something so comparable to the arcade was in my home. 1995/6 was not like it is now. Modern youtube vids showing side by side comparisons can't get over the fact that console are now faster than arcade systems.

I don't know anyone, of any fanboy variety, who was disappointed with Saturn VF2 in 1996.
 
Model 2 in the arcades was so, so far ahead of anything else anywhere in the world that comparisons to home consoles are never going to be fair.

I bought my Saturn with VF2 and was absolutely blown away. I could not believe something so comparable to the arcade was in my home. 1995/6 was not like it is now. Modern youtube vids showing side by side comparisons can't get over the fact that console are now faster than arcade systems.

I don't know anyone, of any fanboy variety, who was disappointed with Saturn VF2 in 1996.
Well back in the day when people did not understand framerates and resolution believe me they were more impressed with Toshinden than VF2 or Tekken on consoles.
I now rate VF2>Tekken2>Toshinden now in terms of quality. But in the eyes of a youngster as I was back i 1996 it was the opposite. Toshinden had huge 3D backgrounds, lighting effects, ability to sidestep and throw your opponents out of the ring. And in those eyes VF2 looked like a cartoony looking game with 2D backgrounds and a floating arena played like a 2D game. Tekken 2 looked blocky with a 2D image as a background also played in a 2D manner.

I saw VF2 in 1996 at a friends who owned a Saturn and although he was mindblown by it I was not as I was expecting the crazy 3D backdrops, effects and lighting seen in Toshinden. I also disliked Tekken by comparison. Saturn magazines described VF2 as an arcade perfect experience. I saw the arcade version of VF2 for the first time in 1997 and then I noticed it was far more advanced visually.

Many youngsters back then that did not own a Saturn did not understand what all the fuss was about.

VF2 was technically a masterpiece that wasnt understood by the average joe.

Its been years after that I begun understanding how much ahead it was for its time
 
I was reading the book The Rise and Fall of Sega and I find it ironic how Sega partly created the Playstation.
Both Sony and Sega were developing a 2D powerhouse with 3D capabilities as the additional feature. The reason? 3D hardware was expensive to produce and didnt want to take the risk of selling something that was not affordable or was sold at a loss.
They didnt want to become another 3DO.
According to the book, Kalinske noticed that Sega's Virtua Fighter created super high expectations for advanced dedicated 3D graphics for the next gen console.
Even model 1 was too expensive back when they were planning their next gen console. So he came up with tha amazing idea to approach one specific company for a joint product to halve the risk.
That company was Sony. Their proposal was brilliant for Sony. Kaliniske proposed that they would share the hardware costs but Sony would get 100% of the profit from their games and Sega would get 100% from theirs. Sony wanted to be able to license games themselves since the inception of the Playstation as a SNES CD Drive. It was a win win situation for both.
Sega of Japan rejected Kalinske's idea. But the meeting gave also Sony the hint that the next gen should be all about 3D. Ken and his team designed the console around the initial discussions with Sega of America.
So Sega shot their foot multiple times:

They indirectly created the design foundations for the Playstation that would have otherwise benefited them, since the PS ended up being a 3D powerhouse.
They took full responsibility of hardware costs.
They did not anticipate that Playstation would have been so powerful that they would have to redesign their own 2D dedicated console in a short period of time to make it comparable to the PS.
They did not aknowledge Sony's expertise and financial power from which they would have benefited from in marketing and R&D.

And they kept shooting theirselves on the foot. When Sega of Japan saw the specs of the PS they went in panic mode. Kalinske went to the SGI company that designed the PS to get a hardware proposal. They had the know how, they had already the foundations for a 3D affordable console because of the PS.
Sega of Japan refused. They went through all the trouple to make a complex hardware design that required assembly language and programmers were not familiar with.
The hardware SGI designed for Sega of America, migrated as a proposal for Nintendo.

So many opportunities missed. Things could have been Godly for gamers if Sony and Sega stayed together
 
I was reading the book The Rise and Fall of Sega and I find it ironic how Sega partly created the Playstation.
Both Sony and Sega were developing a 2D powerhouse with 3D capabilities as the additional feature. The reason? 3D hardware was expensive to produce and didnt want to take the risk of selling something that was not affordable or was sold at a loss.
They didnt want to become another 3DO.
According to the book, Kalinske noticed that Sega's Virtua Fighter created super high expectations for advanced dedicated 3D graphics for the next gen console.
Even model 1 was too expensive back when they were planning their next gen console. So he came up with tha amazing idea to approach one specific company for a joint product to halve the risk.
That company was Sony. Their proposal was brilliant for Sony. Kaliniske proposed that they would share the hardware costs but Sony would get 100% of the profit from their games and Sega would get 100% from theirs. Sony wanted to be able to license games themselves since the inception of the Playstation as a SNES CD Drive. It was a win win situation for both.
Sega of Japan rejected Kalinske's idea. But the meeting gave also Sony the hint that the next gen should be all about 3D. Ken and his team designed the console around the initial discussions with Sega of America.
So Sega shot their foot multiple times:

They indirectly created the design foundations for the Playstation that would have otherwise benefited them, since the PS ended up being a 3D powerhouse.
They took full responsibility of hardware costs.
They did not anticipate that Playstation would have been so powerful that they would have to redesign their own 2D dedicated console in a short period of time to make it comparable to the PS.
They did not aknowledge Sony's expertise and financial power from which they would have benefited from in marketing and R&D.

And they kept shooting theirselves on the foot. When Sega of Japan saw the specs of the PS they went in panic mode. Kalinske went to the SGI company that designed the PS to get a hardware proposal. They had the know how, they had already the foundations for a 3D affordable console because of the PS.
Sega of Japan refused. They went through all the trouple to make a complex hardware design that required assembly language and programmers were not familiar with.
The hardware SGI designed for Sega of America, migrated as a proposal for Nintendo.

So many opportunities missed. Things could have been Godly for gamers if Sony and Sega stayed together
Uhm... what? I always thought that the first PlayStation was because Sony and Nintendo had a thing...
The inception of what would become the released PlayStation dates back to 1986 with a joint venture between Nintendo and Sony.[11]Nintendo had already produced floppy disk technology to complement cartridges, in the form of the Family Computer Disk System, and wanted to continue this complementary storage strategy for the Super Famicom.[12][13] Nintendo approached Sony to develop a CD-ROM add-on, tentatively titled the "Play Station" or "SNES-CD".[14] A contract was signed, and work began.[12] Nintendo's choice of Sony was due to a prior dealing: Ken Kutaragi, the person who would later be dubbed "The Father of the PlayStation",[15] was the individual who had sold Nintendo on using the Sony SPC-700 processor for use as the eight-channel ADPCM sound set in the Super Famicom/SNES console through an impressive demonstration of the processor's capabilities.[16]

And much more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_(console)
 
Uhm... what? I always thought that the first PlayStation was because Sony and Nintendo had a thing...


And much more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_(console)
Read more carefully. I said: Sony wanted to be able to license games themselves since the inception of the Playstation as a SNES CD Drive
What you say happened BEFORE Sega approached Sony.
So after Sony and Nintendo broke their collaboration Sony was developing the PS for their own purposes and it was aimed to be a 32 bit 2D powerhouse with 3D capabilities.
After the success of VF, Sega of America approached Sony (who were developing already the PS in secret) to collaborate for their next gen console. So Sony and Sega were going to collaborate this time and Sony got the hint that 3D was the way to go which made them change direction into a 3D powerhouse. This happened around in 1993 long after Nintendo and Sony agreed to collaborate for the SNES Add On
 
Read more carefully. I said: Sony wanted to be able to license games themselves since the inception of the Playstation as a SNES CD Drive
What you say happened BEFORE Sega approached Sony.
So after Sony and Nintendo broke their collaboration Sony was developing the PS for their own purposes and it was aimed to be a 32 bit 2D powerhouse with 3D capabilities.
After the success of VF, Sega of America approached Sony (who were developing already the PS in secret) to collaborate for their next gen console. So Sony and Sega were going to collaborate this time and Sony got the hint that 3D was the way to go which made them change direction into a 3D powerhouse. This happened around in 1993 long after Nintendo and Sony agreed to collaborate for the SNES Add On
Yes, I meant that I only knew the part about Nintendo, I wasn't aware of the bit about SEGA.
 
Great timing, I got a Model 2 Saturn after many years of having sold my previous one. Also got an Action Replay Plus to play those imports and 1M/4M games too. It's fun (and a little sad) to compare PS1 to Saturn conversions, but in all honesty this is such a quirky little machine.
 
Back
Top