Could Dreamcast et al handle this/that game/effect? *DC tech retrospective *spawn
- Thread starter xaeroxcore
- Start date
-
- Tags
- sega
I was playing Sturmwind on the DC last year I believe it was launched in 2012, absolutely stunning horizontal shooter that wouldn't have looked too far out of place as an Xbox 360 arcade title release, their is no denying that the DC was outclassed by the PS2, but out of the two formats time seems to have been kinder to the DC, sure you can see the lack of geometry in a lot of titles, but with the VGA cable and a scan line generator it's visuals just pop with a clarity that you certainly do not get with a PS2, even on level ground using RGB scart the DC still has it by a comfortable margin.
Most of the things you describe have mostly to do with art than with graphical detail.
Technically speaking, TTT had more detailed visuals in every aspect. If SC had better animations, or if you could roam the environment in SC (mind you, characters in SC were confined on a platform, whereas in TTT that platform was an infinite plane. In that regard they arent much different. You could roam the environment in none objectively speaking), or if SC was innovative in style or gameplay, all these have nothing to do with how much better it looked compared to TTT. You are describing something else here
You have a point, but my post was illustrating how much better TTT looked compared to T5, not how it looked compared to other DC games. Hence why I posted images from TTT and T5 on the PS3 and not a DC game
xaeroxcore
Newcomer
Yeah if we are to get into the discussion of gameplay there are is another fighting game on DC at the time that was more innovative with its level design and the impact it has on the fighting mechanics.
When it comesto how TTT and SC look in person at the time, I was always of the impression that TTT had better lighting and more polys on the characters. The character animations in Soul Calibur is what trumped everything for me. That felt like a true generational leap while TTT did not in that regard.
When it comesto how TTT and SC look in person at the time, I was always of the impression that TTT had better lighting and more polys on the characters. The character animations in Soul Calibur is what trumped everything for me. That felt like a true generational leap while TTT did not in that regard.
No @Reggy72, me and others are talking about the real life visual impacts of SC (and others games like ShenMue, Ferrari F355 and ToyCommander
) versus many PS2 games on a real TV / monitor where the (unmatched 
) high quality video produced by the DC (whether via RGB scart or VGA cable) was making a big and very often underrated difference.But back in the day the difference was utterly obvious to me: image quality (and motion quality if we add SC animations) of many DC games > polygons and effects of many (not all obviously) PS2 games.
I think composite or (in the case of the DC) RF (urgh!) hindered the DC more than the PS2.
The consistently fantastic 640 x 480 and 24-bit colour of the DC (sometimes dithered down to 16-bit on VGA) needed RGB or VGA on a CRT to really shine.
VGA on LCD doesn't always do the DC justice, IMO, as the dithering seems to have been designed for use with CRT phosphors. I really need to dig out my Dreamcast and throw it through my plasma. I bet that'd look nice ....
The consistently fantastic 640 x 480 and 24-bit colour of the DC (sometimes dithered down to 16-bit on VGA) needed RGB or VGA on a CRT to really shine.
VGA on LCD doesn't always do the DC justice, IMO, as the dithering seems to have been designed for use with CRT phosphors. I really need to dig out my Dreamcast and throw it through my plasma. I bet that'd look nice ....
Well, then the question is, would the DC be able to do TTT without any downgrades and look better than the PS2 version because of better output quality? I think not.No @Reggy72, me and others are talking about the real life visual impacts of SC (and others games like ShenMue, Ferrari F355 and ToyCommander
But back in the day the difference was utterly obvious to me: image quality (and motion quality if we add SC animations) of many DC games > polygons and effects of many (not all obviously) PS2 games.
Agreed
Well, TTT didnt even try to re-invent the traditional Tekken gameplay. TTT was Tekken 3 with a Tag mode (just with massively upgraded visuals on the PS2). SC on the other hand re invented Soul Edge/Blade and introduced a gameplay system like no other. We can say with absolute certainty that the arcade version of SC was above and beyond TTT on the arcades. Its animations where amazing before it even hit the Dreamcast which shows the tremendously amazing work that Namco did.
But since the DC version was upgraded visually and it was the first time many had their first experience with it, there is a false impression that it was DC's technological leap that introduced us to its amazing system and animations whereas it was just Namco's desire to make a better Soul Edge game
xaeroxcore
Newcomer
Agree with Nesh in some points...if the question is if DC have power to handle PS2 TTT 1:1, answer is no. I think DC can have a decent 128 bit version of TTT but downgraded in several areas, and may be upgraded in a fewer others or without any upgrade at all. In other hand, i think Tekken 4 or the PSP version of Tekken 5 could be handled by the Dreamcast with less downgrades , because those games are smartly developed than TTT and both display an apparent higher graphic quality using less polys per characters, and less quality textures here and there.Anyway i´d think that would be easier for the DC to handle decent ports of VF4, Mortal Kombat V Deadly Alliance or Soul Calibur 2 with fewer upgrades than any hypothetical port of the PS2 Tekken´s.
Given the amount of memory you could pretty much only use for textures on the DC, and it's advanced VQ texture compression, it's pretty safe to say that any PS2 -> DC port could have had upgraded textures.
A lot of other stuff would probably have suffered though ...
A lot of other stuff would probably have suffered though ...
I can confirm it does!
Ok, would someone be so kind as to explain the way the DC and PS2 handle 3D graphics to me? I thought the SH4 handled all the T&L and geometry while the PowerVR basically textured it? The PowerVR actually handled T&L data from the SH4 to build geometry on it's own?
Am I still correct to assume that on the PS2 the EE handled T&L and geometry before sending it to the GS? I'm starting to doubt everything I believe in
Am I still correct to assume that on the PS2 the EE handled T&L and geometry before sending it to the GS? I'm starting to doubt everything I believe in
No. On DC & Naomi 1, the SH4 did the geometry, i.e. transformations, per vertex lighting calcs, near plane Z-clipping, and projection. CLX2 (The PowerVR part) did tiling (AKA binning), polygon filling /Z testing and texturing.
On Naomi 2, the geometry was largely offloaded to the Elan processor, which then fed a pair of CLX2s.
OK, so I was effectively right. I keep seeing numbers posted on poly rates for the CLX2, and I'm thinking "the GPU didn't handle that stuff".
Sorry for the double post, but to clarifiy, this is what confused me.
Well, that is true. Although other limitations may come in to play, here it's probably a matter of dividing the CLX's 100Mhz clock by the number of clock cycles it takes to perform the "set up" for a triangle**. Having said that, the 'set up' is performed again for each tile a triangle crosses, but as the tiles are 32x32, this should not be a big issue.
**The figure for which I can't remember but I'd guestimate it's probably somewhere between 10 and 20 clock cycles.
Although Le Mans DC version was impressive, there are some flaws about it's graphics engine so the idea that Sega could have made a Sega GT isn't well explored.
My personal ignorant opinion from havingm.bbought Japanese DC magazines in late 90s on Sega GT's visuals is and was that Sega must have had the goal to offer an online mode thereby limiting the graphical engine and pushing of the technology back then to gain an advantage over Sony who didn't eventually seriously purse online mode because of it's cost added and added complexity and need of more tech power and ram and bandwith.
A separate object.
Enjoy.
The first version of Dead or Alive 2 for the ps2 features the same low poly character, later Tecmo released Dead or alive Hardcore with even more content than the Dc limited edition.
The game on the ps2 runs at very low resolution and the texture quality took a huge downgrade, but it's worth playing it due to the extra content.
I'd like to take a look at Dead or alive 2 ultimate for Xbox if anyone know some tools to dig into the game please let me know
Yes, I am a big Dead or alive series fan.
Just wondering, mind if you could DM or send me the file to the Dreamcast Nightmare model in OBJ or 3ds Format? Thanks.
There is also a leaked Half Life DC version
That would be an interesting analysis if we could compare with the PC version.
Me and a friend tried it. It played and looked great on the DC. For some reason though we couldnt change weapons either because of a bug or we didnt figure out the controls.
I am eager to see polygon models of VF4 PS2 and the Naomi 2 version
I have played the DC version it was interesting but there are lot of bugs and the framerate is terrible