.....whatever mate.....
MGS2 tearing
- Thread starter JacksBleedingEyes
- Start date
.....whatever mate.....
THANK GOD.............
Haha thanks man , The love is so thick I can cut it with a knife. Btw what did you all think Nights into dreams for the saturn , I believe that and burning rangers were the two games to show the beauty the system could put out . It also showed when done right it could be on par with the playstation. What do you guys think Oh btw I will have my laptop with me this weekend . But i will most likely be drunk (its my buddys 21st birthday)
Oh btw I will have my laptop with me this weekend . But i will most likely be drunk (its my buddys 21st birthday) one of the things i couldnt get over with was that saturn's transparency effects were absolutely horrible compared to the beautiful (at the time) transparency effects on psx or n64............
Jvd:
About the only thing DC has over PS2 hardware-wise is the modifier volumes, which is a PowerVR-specific technique. It's not even included in the Kyro-series chips which succeeded the Neon250, it's not exposed in DirectX, and not in OpenGL either.
PS2 can do stencil volumes though, which can do much of what the modifier volumes are used for.
Your spiel about PS2 doing lots of stuff in software is basically bullshit, for two main reasons:
1 - PS2 DOESN'T do much of the things you mention in software, all the graphics rasterization is done in hardware just like with the DC. So you're simply wrong here.
2 - PS2 isn't hurt by doing the remainder part of the work (polygon transform, lighting, clipping, culling) in software, because that's the way it's DESIGNED to run! XBox vertex shader hardware is also software driven, except it isn't as powerful as the (edit)PS2's(/edit) vector units. You going to bitch and whine about that too now? You're spouting BS, you don't know what you're talking about. Period.
(By the way: 3 - DC also does tcl in software, so what's your point here really? Again, you're lacking knowledge and understanding!)
As for your gripe about MGS being dark, etc. Ever heard of art direction? The game's dark because it is MEANT to be dark! Not because PS2 can only draw dark polys or some stupid sh!t like that.
*G*
About the only thing DC has over PS2 hardware-wise is the modifier volumes, which is a PowerVR-specific technique. It's not even included in the Kyro-series chips which succeeded the Neon250, it's not exposed in DirectX, and not in OpenGL either.
PS2 can do stencil volumes though, which can do much of what the modifier volumes are used for.
Your spiel about PS2 doing lots of stuff in software is basically bullshit, for two main reasons:
1 - PS2 DOESN'T do much of the things you mention in software, all the graphics rasterization is done in hardware just like with the DC. So you're simply wrong here.
2 - PS2 isn't hurt by doing the remainder part of the work (polygon transform, lighting, clipping, culling) in software, because that's the way it's DESIGNED to run! XBox vertex shader hardware is also software driven, except it isn't as powerful as the (edit)PS2's(/edit) vector units. You going to bitch and whine about that too now? You're spouting BS, you don't know what you're talking about. Period.
(By the way: 3 - DC also does tcl in software, so what's your point here really? Again, you're lacking knowledge and understanding!)
As for your gripe about MGS being dark, etc. Ever heard of art direction? The game's dark because it is MEANT to be dark! Not because PS2 can only draw dark polys or some stupid sh!t like that.
*G*
JacksBleedingEyes
Regular
Thanks Grall
**Thanks Grall
What's the matter can't speak for yourself? **
well, better than speaking for oneself and covering everything with BS.....
sorry, couldnt resist
What's the matter can't speak for yourself? **
well, better than speaking for oneself and covering everything with BS.....
sorry, couldnt resist
marconelly!
Veteran
jvd, I'll second Chap in his thoughts. Just stop. You are making yourself look very uninformed.
Alright , Just got back from class , I will yeild to your knowledge over mine in terms of what the ps2 can do . But you have to admit that keeping a game dark (even if for artisic reasons) can hide alot of "flaws". Its common knowledge in the dark you can't see nearly as much as in the light. Also by keeping it in small area's you don't have to reneder as much, correct ?
I know thats why in unreal 2k3 and other games when I'm inside my framerate almost doubles to when I go outside. Anyway I'm off to AC , if i can't get back online have a good weekend guys.
I know thats why in unreal 2k3 and other games when I'm inside my framerate almost doubles to when I go outside. Anyway I'm off to AC , if i can't get back online have a good weekend guys.
jvd,
I am no 3D engine programmer, but I believe it's simply easier to build an engine designed for enclosed spaces than open ones. It's easier to cheat. Though if you build complex indoors environments, things WILL start to chug there as well, just look at Morrowind for example. There's some truly cathedral-like indoors structures in that game...
Anyway, you think you could ever do MGS's intro sequence with the rain and trailing car lights on the DC? Bwahahah! It would roll over and die of the strain, sorry but true...
I don't understand these people who say DC not only holds a candle to PS2 but actually BEATS it, that's so totally funny... PS2 may be a totally bass-ackwards architecture for your typical PC programmer, and the devtools might have been junky as hell initially, but it's still way way more powerful than DC, it's not possible to deny that.
Not saying DC's a bad machine of course, because it isn't. It's really nice for its time actually, and the PowerVR graphics chip is an awesome performer compared to what it has to work with. Texturing is its one strongpoint, but that is not enough to declare it the overall winner.
*G*
I am no 3D engine programmer, but I believe it's simply easier to build an engine designed for enclosed spaces than open ones. It's easier to cheat. Though if you build complex indoors environments, things WILL start to chug there as well, just look at Morrowind for example. There's some truly cathedral-like indoors structures in that game...
Anyway, you think you could ever do MGS's intro sequence with the rain and trailing car lights on the DC? Bwahahah! It would roll over and die of the strain, sorry but true...
I don't understand these people who say DC not only holds a candle to PS2 but actually BEATS it, that's so totally funny... PS2 may be a totally bass-ackwards architecture for your typical PC programmer, and the devtools might have been junky as hell initially, but it's still way way more powerful than DC, it's not possible to deny that.
Not saying DC's a bad machine of course, because it isn't. It's really nice for its time actually, and the PowerVR graphics chip is an awesome performer compared to what it has to work with. Texturing is its one strongpoint, but that is not enough to declare it the overall winner.
*G*
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
jvd said:
Why not?
Ascene in MGS2 had a whole tanker undulating in the waves with full geometry, guards patrolling and dyniamic lights crossing. That tanker have more polygons than a few cars and some pink leaves. Leaves blowing all over the place. Try a Godzilla sized Metal Gear rising out of the water and catch a Harrier by it's beak.
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
PC-Engine's point about MGS2 taking 3 years to develope while still tearing is just a complete showing of his lack of understanding for game development.
Everything in MGS2 shows why the game took so long to develope. The exasperating attention to detail that went into the gameplay is still unsurpassed in FPS/Action games. From playing the game, I feel most of the time went into coding for the story and direction, among the other countless gimmicks you can do.
One of the most impressive parts was the underwater segment. The entire water/swimming/animation is of the highest quality in this department. All these impressive areas requires time to code. AI that lean out of windows to shoot at your from the side need time to CODE. The story board, plot, whether you like it or not are all indications of why this game took 3 years to make. And 3 years isn't *That* long in game deveoplment. Truely incredible games can take up to 5 years to make. Try Mechwarrior2 and Falcon4 for total genere demolistion.
Under your (and jvd)'s direction, MGS2 will have flourecent pink tanker in bright summer and have a tree in the control room. HoooRAYY!
Everything in MGS2 shows why the game took so long to develope. The exasperating attention to detail that went into the gameplay is still unsurpassed in FPS/Action games. From playing the game, I feel most of the time went into coding for the story and direction, among the other countless gimmicks you can do.
One of the most impressive parts was the underwater segment. The entire water/swimming/animation is of the highest quality in this department. All these impressive areas requires time to code. AI that lean out of windows to shoot at your from the side need time to CODE. The story board, plot, whether you like it or not are all indications of why this game took 3 years to make. And 3 years isn't *That* long in game deveoplment. Truely incredible games can take up to 5 years to make. Try Mechwarrior2 and Falcon4 for total genere demolistion.
Under your (and jvd)'s direction, MGS2 will have flourecent pink tanker in bright summer and have a tree in the control room. HoooRAYY!
Oh yeah I forgot to mention the incredible in game physics that happens...uh..once? It must of taken a year just to program that. Yeah I'm talking about the very gimmicky physics that went into the broken shards of glass...Whoopdidoo!! Darn!! I have to go back and replay that scene, it looked so darn real!!
I don't know about the other gamers out there, but the last thing on my mind when playing a game like MGS2 is if the shattering of glass is scripted or physics based
Ooooooooh!!, Aaaaaaaaah!!, Whooooooow!!
Oh btw I don't recall Splinter Cell looking THAT GREEN or THAT DRAB...
I'm sure you understand game development much better than me though...I just hope you know that's just your opinion
You should learn how to argue without claiming to be the game designing GOD...I'm so not worthy...
I don't know about the other gamers out there, but the last thing on my mind when playing a game like MGS2 is if the shattering of glass is scripted or physics based
Ooooooooh!!, Aaaaaaaaah!!, Whooooooow!!
Oh btw I don't recall Splinter Cell looking THAT GREEN or THAT DRAB...
I'm sure you understand game development much better than me though...I just hope you know that's just your opinion
You should learn how to argue without claiming to be the game designing GOD...I'm so not worthy...
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
PC-Engine said:
You should stop shoving words down other people's throat and brush your teeth.
Similar threads
