The first time I saw the shadow maps in Splinter Cell I was impressed. I don't think they were using UE2 projectors, but some nVidia specific format iirc. Today, though, I think MS2's graphics have a more timeless look to them, and Splinter Cell looks a bit dated.
Console marketing nonsense *spawn
- Thread starter vipa899
- Start date
Almost definitely target renders. That's what "gameplay visualization" sounds like to me. Didn't they give up on the PS2 because of technical difficulties? If they had their game looking that good, I don't think they would've gived up on the system in favor of one easier to work with. Plus, if the xbox version didn't even look as good, then it really wouldn't make sense that those are real.
Their switch to Xbox was the origin of the "Money Hat" meme in a Penny Arcade comic. MS paid for exclusivity.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
But that is a cool hat! 
I'm not saying it wasn't a factor, I'm just saying that to people I spoke to in store the BC and DVD were more the reasons than an article they saw. There was definitely a perception of PS2 being powerful etc. It just didn't come across as much.
Garrett Weaving
Newcomer
Well that's not really fair, is it? Splinter Cell came out about a year later, on a console that was quite a bit more powerful and it ran at 30FPS, which I'm not even sure if it was able to maintain at all times. I really like Splinter Cell and it goes to show you just how different the two games are both gameplay wise and technologically.
You are quite right, when the game was eventually ported to PC, they had to find alternative ways to render shadows on hardware other than GeForce3/4. They ended up dubbing the XBOX method Shadow Buffers and the rest were using Shadow Projectors I believe, which were far more simplistic. Said Shadow Buffers only really worked properly on GeForce3/4 hardware (not GF4MX) and later cards were broken in places etc.
Yep, I remember these very well. They were all over magazines and they hyped it up massively for me. I was also a little shocked when I learned that they switched to XBOX and then the game came out and not many people were talking about it. I ended up playing it a few years ago just to satisfy my curiosity, since I love this series and... it was a fun little game, but hardly anything to talk about. Stranger's Wrath, that was another story and a very impressive title at the time!
I suppose thoser were parents and adults that werent much into gaming?
Because I can't imagine a 18 year old or lower wanting a PS2 because it has a DVD. Yes BC was a big thing for PS1 owners but regardless being a strong point I dont think it was more important than the fact that they were going to play the sequels of their PS1 favorites in "stunning CG visuals".
It is not cool if you werent the one wearing it and you had a PS2But that is a cool hat!
Sorry for the delayed reply - I've been on holiday. I wasn't saying they bought a PS2 because it played DVDs...it was just a factor in choosing. And yes, where I worked it wasn't a gaming specific shop - but we did have quite a large selection of games (at the time it was a legit place to go and get consoles and PCs). But yes, many were parents buying presents for kids...I mean, it did come out that sort of time after all
Sigfried1977
Legend
Dunno. When the PS2 launched late in Europe for a ridiculous amount of money (870 Deutsche Mark I believe. That's about 450€), DVD players were already rather widespread, cheaper and also quite a bit faster. It was an added bonus for sure. More so in some territories than in others, though.
Was it that expensive? We never had/got euro here but euro in germany november 2000 already?
PS2 was quite expensive, atleast one memcard was needed and they didnt come cheap.
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...ed-the-industry-sony-finally-halts-production
"Sony did something quite intelligent with the PS2, and put in what was essentially a “free” DVD drive. The PS2 launched at $299, a price generally accepted for new consoles. Considering this price was around what people usually paid for a new console, the DVD player looked like an added bonus. Consumers had the choice to either pay a similar price for a standalone DVD player, or purchase a DVD player that also played video games. Easy choice. "
Also;
http://data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=497
DVD players (on average) were ~ $201 in 2000 and still $165 in 2001 meaning PS2 offered great value. Then in 2002 the PS2 dropped to $200 and DVD player averages were $142...
Last edited:
It is weird, but the PS2 slim (the drop to $199) was a very cut back unit vs the PS4 slim...I mean, top loader, much smaller...yeah, must have been quite a saving for Sony vs the launch unit.
The PS2 Slim didn't launch until late 2004 and was $129 at release.
PS2 had the benefit of massive gains with every frequent lithographic process shrink. You can't really blame Sony for falling victim to the laws of physics. Montgomery Scott isn't going to be around to circumvent those for a long time yet.
Yes, sorry - rookie mistake!
It may have been to counter the recently released Xbox and Gamecube?
It was released to decrease costs and increase sales and profitability. It'd have happened regardless of the existence of rivals.
Sorry, I meant the aggressive price drop from $299 to $199
