Is PS2 more powerfull than GCN?
- Thread starter Logan Leonhart
- Start date
marconelly!
Veteran
Captain Howdy, I find it curious that you now jumped on to compare Tekken 4 to DOA3 when your initial claim was that PS2 isn't even more powerful than Dreamcast.
Well, I guess that automatically makes Halo, RE:Remake, RE:0, etc etc unimpressive looking. And yeah, Shenmue too.
Logan Leonhart
Newcomer
Fafalada said:
Yours?
Personally, I don´t see what´s the big graphics fuzz about Shenmue on DC. It has PS2-like textures, severe fade-in problems, shimmering, everything had a low poly count except Ryo´s face, and yes, jaggies.
Even the Xbox version with FSAA and a slightly higher poly count doesn´t look quite on par with graphically intensive PS2 games.
Steve Dave Part Deux
Newcomer
GT3=6 million polys/sec at best.
The thing is though, the tools (e.g. compilers) are far more mature on the GCN and Xbox than they are of the PS2. In other words, they're operating far closer to their potential out of the box than the PS2 was. Also the GCN and Xbox are not only more straight forward designs, but they're not nearly as intensive in terms of managing data flow, and maximizing execution resources. It's like learning to drive with an automatic vs. a manual tranny (a fussy one with a bad clutch)...
makes me think of the kind of childish conversation : "My car is faster than yours".
Who cares anyway a car is just a transportation vehicle...
Exactly the same for consoles, noone cares (or should be) which is the most powerfull, all that counts is that you enjoy playing games on it.
Why do you want to know what the fastest, more powerfull ?
What's the point in knowing that ?
I really don't get it.
Who cares anyway a car is just a transportation vehicle...
Exactly the same for consoles, noone cares (or should be) which is the most powerfull, all that counts is that you enjoy playing games on it.
Why do you want to know what the fastest, more powerfull ?
What's the point in knowing that ?
I really don't get it.
DOA2 looks alot better on the DC than PS2. No comparison!
Ozy, yeah Metroid is gonna rock but besides the great artistry and design one can't deny the technology behind it all. For one thing the Metroid engine is probably one of the smoothest motherfu$%ers I've ever seen and played. It appears that Retro went for texture detail and visual clarity over alot of multitexturing with 6 or 7 layers like Rogue Leader did.
Still one can't help but wonder what Retro could have done if they were'nt framerate whores. Metroid is smooth as a baby's butt in the fps dept. If they would have aimed at 35 to 40 fps instead of the constant 60 fps that it is now, there's no telling what the lil ole GCN could achieve.
BTW, It appears that FSAA is going on in Metroid. As well as some type of filter that just makes the scene jump out and scream movie like qualities.
Ozy, yeah Metroid is gonna rock but besides the great artistry and design one can't deny the technology behind it all. For one thing the Metroid engine is probably one of the smoothest motherfu$%ers I've ever seen and played. It appears that Retro went for texture detail and visual clarity over alot of multitexturing with 6 or 7 layers like Rogue Leader did.
Still one can't help but wonder what Retro could have done if they were'nt framerate whores. Metroid is smooth as a baby's butt in the fps dept. If they would have aimed at 35 to 40 fps instead of the constant 60 fps that it is now, there's no telling what the lil ole GCN could achieve.
BTW, It appears that FSAA is going on in Metroid. As well as some type of filter that just makes the scene jump out and scream movie like qualities.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
Not to mention Soul Calibur, one of the greatest fighters ever..
I am curious as to just what you guys are comparing to on GC, being there really is no fighters on the system yet.
I do know just about every port from PS2 , with some sloppy exceptions, turns out better on the GC, then even better than that on Xbox.
faster framerates, sharper textures.. because, oh yea, GC is more powerful, there is no question or arguments about it.
PS2 has great games going for it, but on a hardware level, it was poorly thought out
I am curious as to just what you guys are comparing to on GC, being there really is no fighters on the system yet.
I do know just about every port from PS2 , with some sloppy exceptions, turns out better on the GC, then even better than that on Xbox.
faster framerates, sharper textures.. because, oh yea, GC is more powerful, there is no question or arguments about it.
PS2 has great games going for it, but on a hardware level, it was poorly thought out
I asked myself, why nobody (from the anti-PS2-camp) gives Konami/Square/Namco some credit for their achievements on the PS2 platform?
Here are my assumptions, a bias is usually based on a reason. What could be the reason to compare the games of the PS2 to games on the DC/X-Box/GC in order to point out how badly the platform is? Even the design of the casing was criticised.
I guess everything started a long time ago, the Saturn was beaten by the PSOne, N64 was beaten by PSOne, DC was killed by PSOne/PS2. Still havin some great games on all beaten or killed platforms, Sony made it as market leader. Note: Sony was most the time the underdog visual-wise (PSOne VS N64, PSOne VS DC, PS2 VS GC/XBOX).
Realizing all this shows pretty clear: Nintendo/Sega fans having enough reason for some serious bias against the PS-brand. Now given the situation that Nintendo and MS released their platforms 18+ month later and gaining technical superiority, results into the situation at the moment: GC and X-Box(in fullforce/MS-enterprise-sponsored/Sega-powered) ... the AVENGERS ready to bring new hope to those who would love to see the PS brand fail. Pointing out weaknesses at every occasion, seems to be the only way to reinsure this hope. Superior sales of the PS2 are not helping to open those minds to the achievements games like WRC2, SH3, ZOE2, Burnout2, ViceCity or SlyCooper display.
This are just my 2 cents, I hope I am wrong and there is a better explication, otherwise it would be very sad.
(excuse my spelling/grammar mistakes, my native language is not english)
Here are my assumptions, a bias is usually based on a reason. What could be the reason to compare the games of the PS2 to games on the DC/X-Box/GC in order to point out how badly the platform is? Even the design of the casing was criticised.
I guess everything started a long time ago, the Saturn was beaten by the PSOne, N64 was beaten by PSOne, DC was killed by PSOne/PS2. Still havin some great games on all beaten or killed platforms, Sony made it as market leader. Note: Sony was most the time the underdog visual-wise (PSOne VS N64, PSOne VS DC, PS2 VS GC/XBOX).
Realizing all this shows pretty clear: Nintendo/Sega fans having enough reason for some serious bias against the PS-brand. Now given the situation that Nintendo and MS released their platforms 18+ month later and gaining technical superiority, results into the situation at the moment: GC and X-Box(in fullforce/MS-enterprise-sponsored/Sega-powered) ... the AVENGERS ready to bring new hope to those who would love to see the PS brand fail. Pointing out weaknesses at every occasion, seems to be the only way to reinsure this hope. Superior sales of the PS2 are not helping to open those minds to the achievements games like WRC2, SH3, ZOE2, Burnout2, ViceCity or SlyCooper display.
This are just my 2 cents, I hope I am wrong and there is a better explication, otherwise it would be very sad.
(excuse my spelling/grammar mistakes, my native language is not english)
ChryZ
You admit yourself that XBox and GameCube are supperior to PS2 technologically and then go on to accuse anyone who criticizes the PS2 of being jealous of its success. That doesn't make sense.
The PS2 is a weaker platform technologically, even PS2 developers readily say that all the time, just live with it ok and stop making excuses.
You admit yourself that XBox and GameCube are supperior to PS2 technologically and then go on to accuse anyone who criticizes the PS2 of being jealous of its success. That doesn't make sense.
The PS2 is a weaker platform technologically, even PS2 developers readily say that all the time, just live with it ok and stop making excuses.
I think ChryZ is just pointing out that in some places on the net, some people seem to harbor some very serious grudges against Sony and its platforms - to the point of pooh-poohing its best games (without giving them a fair shake) and discrediting or ignoring the achievements of talented PS2 developers.
I've seen it, and I think it sucks. Some people are letting their bias cause them to miss out on some great gaming.
Kolgar
I've seen it, and I think it sucks. Some people are letting their bias cause them to miss out on some great gaming.
Kolgar
I must try harder to make my point clear. My posting was no excuse. Yes, GC and X-Box having a technologically edge feature-wise. And yes, I could live with it. Why? Because I am open minded enough to acknowledge it. On the PSOne it was great to see how every generation of software excelled the previous one. Just compare RidgeRacer1 with RidgeRacer4. Now compare Burnout1 and Burnout2 ... one of many examples. Many new features (some previously presumed impossible) were implemented, progressive scan support (Burnout2,Tekken4), DTS ingame sound (ViceCity,SSX2). Sure its great to have those features right-out-of-the-box, but having them added later on is better then never.
To get good performance/IQ out of a good chipset set is not hard, to achieve something like SH3/ZOE2 with a chipset that was not bought-of-the-self is a different story.
I wish some people on this board would give more credit to the achievements on the PS2.
To get good performance/IQ out of a good chipset set is not hard, to achieve something like SH3/ZOE2 with a chipset that was not bought-of-the-self is a different story.
I wish some people on this board would give more credit to the achievements on the PS2.
Would you mind showing me any game on GC/XBOX/DC that has this "living city" feeling while playing? Sure, the graphics are a bit outdated, but the overall polish of the title is much more than you recognize. Without a doubt, Vice City is an achievement, from many standpoints, ranging from graphics, art, sound, music, gameplay and so on...
PS2 is a wonderful machine, but if you want to get the most out of it (which apparently, not many developer houses succeed in doing), you need to invest a large sum of money and have a very talented group of programmers, which brings me to the one major minus of the PS2: the overall complexty of the machine, the way programmers need to write assembly code to get the most out of the system as the compilers pretty much suck ass (one aspect where XBOX/GC suprass it). As I noted previously, the hardware is great, we just need more developer houses investing large money in their games and a talented group of programmers who can tap the real power of the PS2 (which according to certain papers, hasn't been tapped yet).
Similar threads
- Locked
