Burnout2 is the most beautiful racer on GC

[CaptainHowdy]

all the ones I gave but I guess you failed to read..
as if anti-aliasing and flicker filters werent enough of an improvement
to make it not look "Identicle" to the PS2 version..

another source you wont read

"The latter, Burnout, has gone on to see the birth of a sequel Burnout 2: Point of Impact. Even more arcadey at heart, it offers up more cars, more modes, and more tracks. Though it was released on the PlayStation 2 in the late summer of 2002, Acclaim and Criterion took the time to improve the visuals and add in a few extras for GameCube. "

IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS,IMPROVED VISUALS..

I know, thats a lot, read it all over again , let it sink in.

 

[marconelly!]

Advanced lighting effects such as Bloom Lighting: highlights reflect off of windshields and metal exactly as in real-life

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html

Upgraded graphics engine

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2gamefeatures.html

Significant increases in polygon count and texture size

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html

True specular reflections with specular mapping

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html

True specular lighting with specular mapping on all surfaces

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html

Anti-aliasing and flicker filtering

Also in PS2 version
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html

Not only it clearly says so in the list that was released months before GC version was even announced, but I have personally SEEN every single of those effects in PS2 version. Now if you would please shut the hell up and apologize, that would be just great.

The only thing that MIGHT be improved in visuals in GC version is texture mip-mapping, but beyond that, you would need a microscope to differ the two. There's certainly nothing like you are suggesting there is.

 

[randycat99]

I'm not even sure if AA is a "claimable" improvement because I don't see any sign of it from those pix.

 

[Tahir2]

"The latter, Burnout, has gone on to see the birth of a sequel Burnout 2: Point of Impact. Even more arcadey at heart, it offers up more cars, more modes, and more tracks. Though it was released on the PlayStation 2 in the late summer of 2002, Acclaim and Criterion took the time to improve the visuals and add in a few extras for GameCube. "

That is your ONLY source.

The rest of what you babbled on about was you being silly as per marconelly's post above.

And you are right I wont read the link you sent me as I do not have an IGN membership.

More sources please. I am not partial to IGN. I would prefer an official source as I have pointed you to one 3 times already. You may have an eye sight problem or it could be called selective information so dont mind me if I need to see the evidence first hand. It's all about trust and in this case I have none whatsoever for the information and statements you come out with.

Thanks again for a totally worthless discussion. I suggest you grow up (never thought I would say that).

P.S. I am one of the biggest Nintendo fans out there but you, my friend, embarrass me.

 

[DeathKnight]

Instead of listening to sites that have already done comparisons between the versions, like CaptainHowdy is trying to point out, you're relying on "proof" from poorly-made pages off of Acclaim's site. There are differences between all three versions and a cut and paste job doesn't cut it.

Here's proof positive that it's not entirely reliable: Goto the Xbox page on there. In the first set of features they talk about full DD5.1 support. Scroll down to the Game Features list and you'll see a straight cut and paste from the other pages... "Progressive scan and Dolby Pro-Logic II support." Uh, it has DD5.1 support, not PLII. I don't know of a single Xbox game anyway that outputs a PLII analog signal.

 

[marconelly!]

Mind I remind you that Captainhowdy was the first one to bring those poorly made charts as his most significant "proof"? As for reviews, I have yet to see any that has anything in it that would mention the level of improvement he claims there is.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Mind I remind you that Captainhowdy was the first one to bring those poorly made charts as his most significant "proof"? As for reviews, I have yet to see any that has anything in it that would mention the level of improvement he claims there is.

I didnt go to a cookie cutter page, mine are different than yours, mine are from IGN..

and the PS2 version does not have antialiasing, look no further than the lists that were posted by someone in your defense up a bit, AA is only listed in the GC chart.

did I mention IMPROVED VISUALS on the gamecube version? and, how about IMPROVED VISUALS...or, there is even the IMPROVED VISUALS

"This score may be the same as the original's, but the visuals are definitely improved. Standards change, but Burnout 2 is still a super-fast, beautiful racer. "

right from the review

 

[randycat99]

Are there any GC shots out there right now that show AA being used? The ones in here already don't seem to support that AA is in effect.

 

[phat]

did I mention IMPROVED VISUALS on the gamecube version? and, how about IMPROVED VISUALS...or, there is even the IMPROVED VISUALS

"This score may be the same as the original's, but the visuals are definitely improved. Standards change, but Burnout 2 is still a super-fast, beautiful racer. "

right from the review

The "improved visuals" in that quote you're providing (from IGN's GC review) refers to the differences between Burnout 1 and Burnout 2, not between Burnout 2 GC and Burnout 2 PS2, as you're trying to imply. This much is clear because IGN's graphics score for Burnout 2 GC is actually lower than its graphics score for Burnout 2 PS2, and not the same as the quote states if we were to interpret "original" to mean Burnout 2 PS2. Here's a matrix of the graphics scores on IGN for Burnout 1 & 2:

Burnout 1 GC 8.0 PS2 8.0
Burnout 2 GC 8.0 PS2 8.5

You certainly do have a knack for citing sources that do nothing for your argument....

Surely you realise that IGNCube and IGNPS2 have very different graphical standards?

Fair enough. The IGN reviews of the two versions of the game are by different people, and take care not to overtly compare the versions graphically. This, in itself, suggests that there probably isn't much of a graphical difference to write about. Jeff Gerstmann reviewed both the GC and PS2 version for Gamespot, and gave both identical scores for graphics, and didn't find any graphical differences between the two worth writing about. The omission here stands in stark contrast to CaptainHowdy's assertion of the irrefutable graphical superiority of the GC version over the PS2 version.

 

[Bowie]

got a newsflash, PS2 cant do Dolby Pro Logic 2, and the pS2 version doesnt have progressive scan...

and the PS2 version does not have antialiasing, look no further than the lists that were posted by someone in your defense up a bit, AA is only listed in the GC chart.

Here's a post made by Alex Ward of Criterion last year on the IGN boards about the PS2 version:

I think I'll let one of the other members of the Burnout Team respond to this...


"It's such a shame that a lot of people appear to have been jaded by first-generation PS2 games. And it's stange to hear this directed at Criterion in particular, have any of you guys seen Airblade?

Burnout (our first PS2 game) flickered a LOT due to 2 main reasons, it used the PS2s interlaced approach to rendering and it didn't use mip-mapping - both of these were early design decisions which we were forced to stick with, and as you all know it has been Burnouts largest source of criticism. However, we learnt so much during the development of Burnout that we were able to improve massively on it for the sequel.

Burnout 2 renders at a higher resolution than it displays (which is significantly more than double that of the first game), has mipmaps on everything, and combined with the well-known flicker filter hardware it doesn't flicker any more, I can promise you that. We've more than doubled the texture data thrown about every frame, upped the poly counts of all cars by 50% or more and added more effects (in addition to the new lighting effect that you've heard about) and we're still locked solid at 60hz - any less than that is not an option, in fact there's no excuse for it any more. All this from a few months work from myself and another graphics coder - we're a small team but do not doubt our ability to produce impressive results.

Anybody doubting that the PS2 can match the Gamecube (and even the XBox in certain respects) is deluding themselves, it's pretty much that simple."

Here's another quote from an IGN preview of the PS2 game:

Concerning the game's great looks, marred by jaggies and shimmering in the first PS2 game, the developer explains that full-screen anti-aliasing would have been very difficult to achieve its first time around while maintaining 60 fps. But in this second round, Burnout 2 promises to offer full-screen anti-aliasing, to run at a smooth 60 fps, and to draw twice as much on screen simultaneously. Hopefully, jaggies will be a thing of the past. Sounds good to us.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/362/362076p2.html

Here's some quotes from the IGN review of the PS2 version:

Graphics
And for those who love their technology, Criterion has delivered a technically savy game for you: Progressive scan TV support is fully supported on the PlayStation 2 version.

The texture work on the backgrounds, which usually zip by ever so fast they're hardly worth noticing, are highly ornamented and interesting to see here. The cars vary in texture work. With the exception of the later custom models, a few of the old time models, and the faux-NASCAR, the cars are still basic in design and texture-mapped with the most simplistic of sheaths. They all sport a metallic sheen as well as offering healthy doses of realtime reflections, specular highlighting, and Bloom lighting (a difficult-to-get effect showing off particular sun reflections and glare ample) to produce that attractive new car shine.

Again, those for who like their top-quality sound and vision, Criterion supports Dolby ProLogic II for excellent, clear and crisp sound quality.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/372/372031p1.html

 

[marconelly!]

I didnt go to a cookie cutter page, mine are different than yours, mine are from IGN..

And guess what IGN got them from? Developers, of course. The same list that is posted on IGN is the list on publisher's site.

and the PS2 version does not have antialiasing, look no further than the lists that were posted by someone in your defense up a bit, AA is only listed in the GC chart.

As matter of fact it is on the list:
http://www.acclaim.com/games/burnout2/features/PS2techfeatures.html
Click on the link and read it for yourself.

did I mention IMPROVED VISUALS on the gamecube version? and, how about IMPROVED VISUALS...or, there is even the IMPROVED VISUALS

"This score may be the same as the original's, but the visuals are definitely improved. Standards change, but Burnout 2 is still a super-fast, beautiful racer. "

I haven't had this much laught in while!

You're continuing to be ignorant now, aren't you? By 'Original' they mean 'Burnout 1 on GC'. If you read their review of BO1, you'll find out they gave it the same score for graphics, but as they've said, over the course of time, standards change.

Now, if you would please point out to some genuine sources with quotes that claim those huge improvements you seem to be screaming about, I'd be happy to read them. Otherwise, just stop making even bigger fool of yourself.

Are there any GC shots out there right now that show AA being used? The ones in here already don't seem to support that AA is in effect.

Again, that quite is copied over from PS2 version. They probably felt it should be included there (although there is no true FSAA in that version either) because first Burnout on PS2 used half frame buffer and was quite jaggie ridden. BO2 uses full frame buffer and filtering that on an interlaced TV translates to a form of vertical AA.

 

[randycat99]

Are there any GC shots out there right now that show AA being used? The ones in here already don't seem to support that AA is in effect.

Again, that quite is copied over from PS2 version. They probably felt it should be included there (although there is no true FSAA in that version either) because first Burnout on PS2 used half frame buffer and was quite jaggie ridden. BO2 uses full frame buffer and filtering that on an interlaced TV translates to a form of vertical AA.

Ah, I see now! I was beginning to wonder why everyone here kept mentioning this AA, but neither the PS2 or the GC pix were showing AA in the conventional sense. ...yet another indicator that these feature lists should not be taken as gospel.

 

[MonkeyLicker]

?

Anybody doubting that the PS2 can match the Gamecube (and even the XBox in certain respects) is deluding themselves, it's pretty much that simple."

I'm sure the new Star Wars game for GC will probably show this guy who is actually "deluding themselves".
Hell, let's see the PS2 do RS2 for that matter.
PS2 is a powerful and capable system, but it takes a back seat to the cube in some major areas.

 

[marconelly!]

Hell, let's see the PS2 do RS2 for that matter.
PS2 is a powerful and capable system, but it takes a back seat to the cube in some major areas.

Not in all areas, though, and I think that was his point. I agree that RS2 would probably be impossible on PS2, but some games on PS2 would also be extremely difficult to replicate on Cube.

 

[Magnum PI]

why care about GC version of burnout 2 being superior or not to the PS2 version ?

as a GC owner i'm happy to have this very good arcade racer available on my plateform .. even more because this is not a genre that is well deserved on GC ..

the GC may have the lowest library in size, but IMHO there are enough high quality titles, more that i could buy or play..

unless you're a very specialized gamer, you don't need 10 games in every genre, so having two AA games in every genre should be enough..

i know there are some genre w/o good titles on GC. but not many.

 

[zurich]

This thread should win an award

Highlights ->

"PS2 can't do DPL2 or progressive scan"

and

(paraphrased) "GDI YOU RETARDED MONKEY, THAT LIST IS THE IMPROVEMENTS FROM GC BO1 to BO2!#&!*(&!(*!!@#)@" [repeated 5 or 6 times]

 

[thundermonkey]

Hell, let's see the PS2 do RS2 for that matter.
PS2 is a powerful and capable system, but it takes a back seat to the cube in some major areas.

Not in all areas, though, and I think that was his point. I agree that RS2 would probably be impossible on PS2, but some games on PS2 would also be extremely difficult to replicate on Cube.

Just like some PS2 games are impossible to replicate on the Xbox...

...if your just porting straight code from one system to the other.

More often than not games will look better and be technically superior when the time has been taken to bring it to the GCN, than they could ever hope to be on the PS2.

This topic is moronic, Burnout 2 looks virtually identical on the GCN that it does on the PS2. Just chalk it up to sloppy porting if you want.

 

[Phil]

This topic is moronic, Burnout 2 looks virtually identical on the GCN that it does on the PS2. Just chalk it up to sloppy porting if you want.

Sloppy? Considering the nature of ports, I'd be happy if you get at least graphics identical to the original... Anything, but sloppy if you ask me.

BTW; I don't know where you get those funny ideas of console X being superior to console Y. They all have some sort of advantage or disadvantage over one another, so it's pretty pointless to put everything down to 'sloppy' programming. Even during the N64 days did the PSX have some games that arguably looked better over games on the 'superior' competition. Getting down to it, it just looked different much like many games in this generation on the various different platforms...

 

[Tahir2]

Instead of listening to sites that have already done comparisons between the versions, like CaptainHowdy is trying to point out, you're relying on "proof" from poorly-made pages off of Acclaim's site. There are differences between all three versions and a cut and paste job doesn't cut it.

Here's proof positive that it's not entirely reliable: Goto the Xbox page on there. In the first set of features they talk about full DD5.1 support. Scroll down to the Game Features list and you'll see a straight cut and paste from the other pages... "Progressive scan and Dolby Pro-Logic II support." Uh, it has DD5.1 support, not PLII. I don't know of a single Xbox game anyway that outputs a PLII analog signal.

Point? Where is the proof? What sites should I listen to?
Hey I didnt link to acclaim's site first I just showed CH that he cannot read.

If I want to see the differences I will damn well findout for myself first hand rather than reading a thread like this again.

 

[London Geezer]

the thing is, CH's credibility and *listenability* has gone DOOOOWWN since the *ps2 cant do DPL2 and PRO-SCAN* statement......

enough with this...

the 2 versions look pretty much identical. without reading reviews. just look at both games in action and take YOUR conclusions. or listen to competent people in here who know a lot more than some sloppy console website reviewer...