Could Dreamcast et al handle this/that game/effect? *DC tech retrospective *spawn

It's already close enough for the argument to be well and truly over IMO. I'd say the same for a PS2 version of Shenmue that had slightly worse texture quality but a more stable frame rate, or for a PS5 game that had a slightly lower max dynamic resolution than the SXS version.
PS2 never had a version of Shenmue AFAIK
 
I'm just stating what I see.



I've not seen any, do you have any time stamps?



The draw distance etc is well below what PC uses above PS2.



Any time stamps for this stuff?



Which I can't see in the video....



It's no where near close enough imo.



It's not the same as GTA3 though, as you would be porting to a more powerful platform and not porting to a lower performing one, and given the hardware differences, PS2 should be able to offer major graphical upgrades over DC in a theoretical Shenmue port.



Poor comparison, if the gap between PS5 and XSX equaled the DC and PS2 gap, you would be looking at much more then a difference in dynamic resolution.
God damn. There's a particular type of response - we've all seen it repeated many times over the decades - where some someone breaks apart a comprehensive response into fragments of arguments and discards the meat and the context, and responds only to those fragments which mean they don't have to accept they were wrong, or allow them to pretend that they were right.

The people handling the port have already talked about all the issues I raised, either directly or quoted in this thread. You know this. You've responded to some of the posts. You've been told some of the things you're feigning ignorance about. Additional geometry, additional barriers requiring physics calculations, additional objects in the world, additional CPU workload due to the home-brew environment, more than double the resolution, higher render output quality in all output modes. You were here in this thread for all this stuff.

An equally meaningless or churlish post would be someone asking to you "provide a timestamp" of PS2 playing the official version of GTA3 in 640 x 480 32-bit RGB progressive scan. Absolute dickery.
 
unprofessional conduct, this breaks our community rules. Do not respond to this.
God damn. There's a particular type of response - we've all seen it repeated many times over the decades - where some someone breaks apart a comprehensive response into fragments of arguments and discards the meat and the context, and responds only to those fragments which mean they don't have to accept they were wrong, or allow them to pretend that they were right.

The people handling the port have already talked about all the issues I raised, either directly or quoted in this thread. You know this. You've responded to some of the posts. You've been told some of the things you're feigning ignorance about. Additional geometry, additional barriers requiring physics calculations, additional objects in the world, additional CPU workload due to the home-brew environment, more than double the resolution, higher render output quality in all output modes. You were here in this thread for all this stuff.

An equally meaningless or churlish post would be someone asking to you "provide a timestamp" of PS2 playing the official version of GTA3 in 640 x 480 32-bit RGB progressive scan. Absolute dickery.

If you're not willing to provide timestamps or evidence in this technical section of the forum perhaps don't post.

All you've done is posted your feelings about what I've posted rather than tried to break it down and debate/counter it with your own video and timestamps.

I've tried to evidence what I'm saying/seeing, and it's not a big thing to expect others who are posting and replying to do the same.
 
17-30fps with audio, streaming, texture and graphical downgrades is 'handling' ??
What's this habit of yours, judging every new build like the be-all and end-all of the system's capabilities? It feels like you don't understand how software development works, or the purpose of a public alpha.
"It currently needs the 32MB mod" - So that kills any argument of it being able to run on a DC then đź‘€
 
A short clip between PS2 (left) and Dreamcast (right) since the Dreamcast Version is based on the PC version it has more stuff on the streets, and that means it has to procees also collisions and physics for objects that are absent on PS2, so not very fair to compare between both versions, the DC one is based on the PC version and that has more stuff going on on screen plus some models are higher polycount too, there are areas that are literally barren on PS2 compared to PC, and the DC version is the PC version NOT the PS2 one.


Both captures are from real hardware.
 
Last edited:
That's a bit of a one sided take IMO.

Textures are lower in some places and higher in others with the current build, which doesn't yet have all the texture conversion and streaming optimisation in place (probably little to no streaming optimisation really).

In some ways they're limited by the scalability settings of the PC version, which appears to be making them use higher than PS2 setting in some areas e.g. geometry, object and traffic density, physics calculations on additional obstacles like fences not present in the PS2 version. If they could cut back down to the lower complexity that the PS2 version used (which would need a lot of work from an modeller / artist) they would free up both memory and CPU time. Enough to match the PS2 in all areas? I dunno.

Also, with KallistiOS iirc access to the optical drive is slower than for commercial games, using a lot more CPU and not using all the hardware features available to commercial games. Something to do with optical drive DMA...?



With motion blur on, fillrate will be an issue for the DC, but without it, it's probably only during certain situation like with heavy rain settings for cinematics like with the intro.

DC can't actually drop to a lower resolution like the one PS2 used for GTA3. It's 640 x 480 - Sega made the decision to base the design around high IQ and built the binning and tiling stuff into hardware for performance reasons. It took a ton of work off the CPU and meant they could rapidly sort and ID lots of polygons - faster than the later PC version of PVR2, with a fraction of the CPU overhead.

Internally the DC is always 640 x 480 24+8bit, it's one of the reasons its ouput always so good, and with the hardware flicker filter it's also why interlaced output was always so good.



I mean, it's currently handling above the PS2 in several areas. 640 x 480 RGB progressive scan is a pretty huge step up, and the object density, geometry, and collision upgrades definitely won't be free.

But at this level, are these really "versions" in any meaningful way? It's the same game. It plays the same, uses the same rules, looks and runs worse in some ways, looks and runs better in others (e.g resolution x frame rate).

It's already close enough for the argument to be well and truly over IMO. I'd say the same for a PS2 version of Shenmue that had slightly worse texture quality but a more stable frame rate, or for a PS5 game that had a slightly lower max dynamic resolution than the SXS version.
You could actually go to the menu and turn down ped and car activity to something like PS2 level. Currently is at two ticks by default. To more or less ps2 you can to go down to one tick. Even then it's pc roots show. Walk around enough and even on one tick you will find 7 or 8 peds bunched up in a random corner or cars at one tick sit on the road long enough 6 to 8 cars spawn. The default 2 tick setting does more traffic than the above. Cars and some other models have a few extra polies and extra dumb little details that are Absent from the PS2 version.

I've stressed tested the setting to maximum ticks expecting DC to crash. The opposite happened. Basically I had 25 or more car pile up in an intersection with like 20 peds or even more walking around. Fps dropped to around a steady 8 to 9 fps and the environment maps shut off( iam guessing the vertex buffer for the scene ate all the memory. ) . Took around an hour for it to crash. All this in that dense part of the game with the times square like buildings .And this is alpha.

The stutter actually comes from the sound fix not making to the alpha. So in the homebrew sdk streaming the sfx ( ped voices) audio might lock up the game for a sec , they found a fix for that but didn't make it in time for release. Sure bring locked at half speed of a retail disc hurts as well but turns out it's less of an issue when the disc is built right. Just gotta wait for the sfx fix .
 
Last edited:
DC can't actually drop to a lower resolution like the one PS2 used for GTA3. It's 640 x 480 - Sega made the decision to base the design around high IQ and built the binning and tiling stuff into hardware for performance reasons. It took a ton of work off the CPU and meant they could rapidly sort and ID lots of polygons - faster than the later PC version of PVR2, with a fraction of the CPU overhead.

Internally the DC is always 640 x 480 24+8bit, it's one of the reasons its ouput always so good, and with the hardware flicker filter it's also why interlaced output was always so good.
is it not possible to use black bars to effectively reduce the resolution? like RE4 on GC? Shenmue 2 used black bars in cutscenes and the lighting and animations were better in cutscenes.

Very good port of GTA3 in any case, It would be nice if there were more projects like this on Dreamcast which died too soon.
 
is it not possible to use black bars to effectively reduce the resolution? like RE4 on GC? Shenmue 2 used black bars in cutscenes and the lighting and animations were better in cutscenes.

Very good port of GTA3 in any case, It would be nice if there were more projects like this on Dreamcast which died too soon.

There are other folks in the thread who can answer this better than me, but yeah, using black bars you could potentially reduce the cost of drawing. However, AFAIK internally the DC would still render at 640 x 480 and it would still allocate a full size front buffer (or half if using interlaced and the hardware flicker filter).

Trouble is, you'd either end up losing stuff from the camera view, or you'd end up increasing the FOV to make sure the full vertical view was maintained. And if you increased the FOV you'd end up with more detail in the view frustum/volume and ultimately put more load on the CPU (and likewise the sorting and binning part of the GPU).

Black bars are great for cutscenes because you know exactly what you have to work with, and so you can reduce the number of pixels to e.g. do lighting calculations for, and so add more lights.
 
There are other folks in the thread who can answer this better than me, but yeah, using black bars you could potentially reduce the cost of drawing. However, AFAIK internally the DC would still render at 640 x 480 and it would still allocate a full size front buffer (or half if using interlaced and the hardware flicker filter).

Trouble is, you'd either end up losing stuff from the camera view, or you'd end up increasing the FOV to make sure the full vertical view was maintained. And if you increased the FOV you'd end up with more detail in the view frustum/volume and ultimately put more load on the CPU (and likewise the sorting and binning part of the GPU).

Black bars are great for cutscenes because you know exactly what you have to work with, and so you can reduce the number of pixels to e.g. do lighting calculations for, and so add more lights.
Ok, thank you
 
A short clip between PS2 (left) and Dreamcast (right) since the Dreamcast Version is based on the PC version it has more stuff on the streets, and that means it has to procees also collisions and physics for objects that are absent on PS2, so not very fair to compare between both versions, the DC one is based on the PC version and that has more stuff going on on screen plus some models are higher polycount too, there are areas that are literally barren on PS2 compared to PC, and the DC version is the PC version NOT the PS2 one.


Another video showcasing all the extra geometry from the PC version that the Dreamcast has to handle compared to the PS2.

Left PS2 right Dreamcast


You are right, it is handling the PC version of GTA 3


The people doing this port are really playing on hard mode.

Less memory, no vector co-processors, no access to full speed optical media ... and a more complex version of the gameworld.

DCA3 is one the absolute coolest things to appear on the console horizon in the last decade. It's also how I personally found out that the DC was built to support more complex controllers that Sega never got the chance to release.
 
Coincidentally the same channel I used for the DC vs PS2 video also did a PS2 vs PC video around 8 months ago.


- Draw distance noticeably better on PC
- LOD transitions noticeably better on PC
- Texture resolution better on PC (Although not on ever texture and the increased rendering resolution is likely also helping)
Lod transition is configurable on the menu. The main reason it was cut down, is because of vram usage for vertex lists, which is already at 4.5 MB (out of 8)
 
Pretty fantastic work by the dev team overall. I wonder what enhancements they themselves realistically could make to the PS2 version, or even port the PC version over to the PS2.
 
Back
Top