What do you see the next gen consoles doing Graphicly?

[marconelly!]

3)Holding up against the newer system......i sure like to see your definition of holding up, because that is NOT true. I got ZOE2 recently and i tell you, apart from the particle madness(which i heard OTOGI does as well), ZOE2 is not much different from ZOE1,

Seriously though, who cares if anything isn't or is much different than ZOE1 (which is a *completely* false statement, btw. I can list you everything that is changed in the engine if you want), when the game overall is one of the best looking realtime things there is. It's a madness, a sensory overload, and a *damn* pretty one at that. I don't remember being so impressed with game's graphics in a long while and I honestly have no idea how can you say it's not holding up, with a straight face. But I guess, that's just you being you :\

 

[randycat99]

whats the speed on the gs 200mhz ? how many pipe lines did it have ? Yes it can move lots of polygons . And its polygon pushing takes hits when you factor in all the other things it can't support natively and have to be done in several passes.

Clock is...

Grall, that was an unprecedented owning you just did! What do you call that...how do you say...Shock & Awe?

I think we can dispel with this TNT comparison crap from now on. Those who continue to make reference to it shall be considered pre-emptively owned.

How so ? He showed me it pushed tons of polygons and had huge fillrates. Does it even have the bandwith to allow it to reach its fillrate ? Is its feature set the same or less than that of the tnt ? The geforce sdr had massive fillrates and yet never reached it because it was bandwitdh limited. Yes the tnt only had 8-16 megs of ram but thats more so than the 4 megs that the ps2 uses.

Just cause something does 2 things out f a dozen better than another thing doesn't mean it ownz it. Fillrate is great but when there is no hidden surface removal hardware built into it you will spend that extra fillrate quite quickly esp when it needs to do things that gs can't do. That takes alot of cycles and passes.

Man i don't know if this thread can get much further off topic

OWNED. Don't like it, don't bring it up again. Keep muddling it over with yourself, cuz I certainly wouldn't waste time endlessly splitting hairs with you on the topic (but, but, but, what about this...).

 

[jvd]

whats the speed on the gs 200mhz ? how many pipe lines did it have ? Yes it can move lots of polygons . And its polygon pushing takes hits when you factor in all the other things it can't support natively and have to be done in several passes.

Clock is...

Grall, that was an unprecedented owning you just did! What do you call that...how do you say...Shock & Awe?

I think we can dispel with this TNT comparison crap from now on. Those who continue to make reference to it shall be considered pre-emptively owned.

How so ? He showed me it pushed tons of polygons and had huge fillrates. Does it even have the bandwith to allow it to reach its fillrate ? Is its feature set the same or less than that of the tnt ? The geforce sdr had massive fillrates and yet never reached it because it was bandwitdh limited. Yes the tnt only had 8-16 megs of ram but thats more so than the 4 megs that the ps2 uses.

Just cause something does 2 things out f a dozen better than another thing doesn't mean it ownz it. Fillrate is great but when there is no hidden surface removal hardware built into it you will spend that extra fillrate quite quickly esp when it needs to do things that gs can't do. That takes alot of cycles and passes.

Man i don't know if this thread can get much further off topic

OWNED. Don't like it, don't bring it up again. Keep muddling it over with yourself, cuz I certainly wouldn't waste time endlessly splitting hairs with you on the topic (but, but, but, what about this...).

How is it owned ? Explain it to me . Or will you act like a five year old and when i ask why you will just responed with because. Since you have no clue what your talking about .

 

[chaphack]

Marc, do you have ZOE1 with you right now? If you do, please boot it up and do a comparision.

Yes, there are things that changed, like changing the trails to celshading and those many mosquitoes. But you will noticed that others like the backgrounds are similarly drab. The mech models are made smaller. The interior looks pretty much the same. Of course the change for the worse is the fps, ZOE1 had a MORE stable fps than ZOE2.


The biggest change i say again, is the use particle and effects. The lightshow is impressive, so is that anubis motion blurring. You have to remember that ZOE1 had quite good effects too.

Now saying that, I would like to see how ZOE2 holds up to OTOGI when it finally leaves Japan. AFAIK, it has more stable framerates and textures.


[non-graphics change]The auto targetting has been more "tricky", understandable since Jehuty is dealing with more baddies and the interior cam is now quite a bother. They are not that killAR but as it stands, ZOE2 is less user frendly than ZOE1.[/non-graphics change]

 

[Bowie]

How so ? He showed me it pushed tons of polygons and had huge fillrates. Does it even have the bandwith to allow it to reach its fillrate ? Is its feature set the same or less than that of the tnt ? The geforce sdr had massive fillrates and yet never reached it because it was bandwitdh limited. Yes the tnt only had 8-16 megs of ram but thats more so than the 4 megs that the ps2 uses.

PS2 has 9.6GB/s for texture sampling which is enough bandwidth for 16-bit bilinear-filtered 1.2Gpixel fillrate. With caching it can sustain 32-bit bilinear filtering at that fillrate.

While the TNT had 16-32 megs of RAM, it needed more RAM to support resolutions up to 1600x1200. Not to mention its smallest color texture format is 16-bit. The PS2's smallest color texture format, in comparison, is 4-bit. In addition, the PS2 stores the textures for a scene in its 32MB main memory.

Just cause something does 2 things out f a dozen better than another thing doesn't mean it ownz it. Fillrate is great but when there is no hidden surface removal hardware built into it you will spend that extra fillrate quite quickly esp when it needs to do things that gs can't do. That takes alot of cycles and passes.

Just a small correction, but Z-buffering is a form of hidden surface removal. What the Dreamcast does is tile-based deffered rendering.

It may take a lot of passes to do some special effects on the PS2 but that's hardly any different from running a pixel shader program on the Xbox, for example. Effects takes a lot of fillrate, cycles, and passes no matter the system.

 

[marconelly!]

Just on top of my head, changes they did to zoe2 from zoe1 include the full frame buffer usage (zoe1 had flickering all over the place), whole bunch of new pixel/postprocessing effects (light blooms / trails / overbrights / shaped screen warping like when anubis teleports), pixel/texture effects (like when you transform to that cannon, etc) nicer lighting and shading (just look at those soft shades on the ardjet), vertex based effects like the trails you mentioned *and* on top of that the craziest particle engine I've ever seen (and yes, I've seen whole bunch of Otogi videos and I don't think it's AS crazy, although it's very different looking)

All those things aside, in my opinion, art direction alone puts it in another class compared to zoe1, as I don't usually extract things and study them separately, but look at the whole (moving) picture.

 

[Grall]

I've already said in my posts its a monster when it comes to polygons and yes it has a ton of fillrate. I've stated though that its missing many effects and filtering modes that the voodoo2- geforce quality cards have.

It doesn't just have a ton of fillrate. GF2 GTS also has a ton of fillrate but most of it simply can't be used due to lack of mem bandwidth. The PS2s eDRAM gives it tremendous sustained fillrate abilities. Comparing it to a Voodoo2 like you do is stupid, it's like saying a Volvo from the 80s compares to a Bugatti Veron. The engines of both cars have all the same basic components, cylinders, pistons, valves etc, but the rest... No comparison!

I also said dreamcast can do mgs2. Never said the voodoo2 could.

Yeah, sorry. My mistake. Most the same things go for DC as for a V2 though; low poly performance, POOR pixel fillrate. It can't handle all the alpha-blend and particle effects without framerate dropping through the floor. OR the motion blur and depth-of-field stuff either by the way. It has only 100mpps bilinear texture filtered fillrate. Less than a TENTH of PS2, slightly more single-textured fillrate than a V2. Its deferred rendering tech isn't going to make up for the deficiency in fillrate, not when there isn't that much opaque overdraw in MGS2; most of the demanding stuff is the depth-of-field and alpha/particle effects.

Since the voodoo2 is at the mercy of a general cpu.

And the DC isn't? Look man, the Hitachi SH3 is good for it's class, but it's SLOW man. SLOW. It doesn't compare the slightest to the Emotion Engine when poly transforms are concerned. Maybe it can do all the geometry transforms for MGS, but do all the geometry AND run the 3D engine and game logic at the same time? Nuh-uh I say. Not without starting to sacrifice stuff.

Will the game even fit in the DCs relatively small memory space?

I also wonder how much fillrate the gs can sustain .

A LOT.

It doesn't matter it doesn't have fillrate-saving features. It doesn't really need them. Those in the know say 8 (or 16 untextured) pixel pipes and extreme mem bandwidth (48GB/s aggregate) means it's far preferred to simply draw your scene in texture order and use Z-buffer to reject hidden pixels rather than draw in front-to-back order and rely on fillrate/bandwidth saving features like you want to do on GC and XB. That you'll waste some or even a lot of drawing power on overdraw on PS2 doesn't matter, you have power to waste.

EDIT: Do some simple calculations yourself. 1200 MILLION pixels/sec rendering speed, using 640*448 pixel full height screen buffers means you can redraw the screen SEVENTY TIMES PER FRAME AT 60FPS! Even assuming atrocious real-world efficiency of 25% of theoretical fillrate, you still have *plenty* of headroom for overdraw.

Last thing is ram . The geforce cards had 32-64 megs of onboard ram. Is that more that the whole ps2 system had ?

PS2 has a total of 40MB RAM (32MB main, 4MB EDRAM, 2MB IO-processor RAM, 2MB sound RAM). 64MB GF2 cards have more total ram sure, but then again they NEED all that ram for texture storage because the AGP port is such a slow bottleneck. AGP4x is slower than PS2s GIF interlink to begin with, and it is an inefficient interface too. Besides, if you have (for example) 128MB main mem and 64MB GPU mem doesn't mean you have 196MB total. Frame buffers occupy some, and all textures in graphics mem have to be duplicated in main memory on the PC anyway (because else you have to transfer stuff back and forth TWICE over AGP and you'd start to trash memory space and all sorts of annoying things).

PS2 games are written to stream textures to eDRAM. You basically know at every instance which texture you're going to need next so you can upload it in time for it to be rendered. It requires care to make things look nice and flow smoothly, but you CAN make nice stuff if you know what you're doing (Fafracer, ZoE2, SH3, Jak2 etc).

We have to wait and see what they uses a gs this time around . what i really want to know is how much a 64 meg cell chip is going to cost .

Is Cell really going to use 64MB eDRAM? Didn't people speculate the proposed GS3 would have 64MB on-chip?


*G*[/b]

 

[zidane1strife]

Well, last time they claimed they would achieve 100x perf of the psx... but in reality they actually achieved 200+x theoretical perf, and ingame perf.

This time the budget, the manufacturing, the manpower has increased substantially, and the speed of the silicon cycle has hastened... They've claimed 1000x perf. jump for this new console... So it is very likely that theoretical and ingame perf. could actually exceed 2000+x the perf. of the ps2.

If that actually happens, I think stuff like Doom 3 will actually be leaved in the dust even by first gen. software.

On another note: I've heard the ps2 did a 10x jump during it's last dev. phases.... the ps3 I've heard was estimated over 200x ps2 perf. a few months back, based on some of the cell designs... If indeed a 10x jump perf. increase takes place during the last year prior to manufacturing just like last time....

 

[London Geezer]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

 

[jvd]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

Actually my most hated system is neo geo.. couldn't afford it and the school bully in 4th grade owned one.... but now i own it too damn it .

I own almost every system ever made. I'm a collector. I have intelivison , collecovision , atari , the pong system , turbo graphics 16 and the cd , All 3 versions of the genises and the 2 versions of sega cd , a 32x , both versions of the nes , super nes , and the n64 . I have 2 broken psxs , a psone. Two ps2s in my house. A gamecube down here at school , My xbox in my gfs place down here at school (she likes splinter cell) I also own the jaguar and jaguar cd (tempest 2000 baby) So i hardly think I hate the sony (although my crappy dvd player made by then sucks ... never b uy something when it first comes out) No i just see people going all crazy for something that isn't even completed and say its the second comming. When its simply not .

 

[jvd]

Well, last time they claimed they would achieve 100x perf of the psx... but in reality they actually achieved 200+x theoretical perf, and ingame perf.

This time the budget, the manufacturing, the manpower has increased substantially, and the speed of the silicon cycle has hastened... They've claimed 1000x perf. jump for this new console... So it is very likely that theoretical and ingame perf. could actually exceed 2000+x the perf. of the ps2.

If that actually happens, I think stuff like Doom 3 will actually be leaved in the dust even by first gen. software.

On another note: I've heard the ps2 did a 10x jump during it's last dev. phases.... the ps3 I've heard was estimated over 200x ps2 perf. a few months back, based on some of the cell designs... If indeed a 10x jump perf. increase takes place during the last year prior to manufacturing just like last time....

what exactly is a 100x jump from the psone ? or is it marketing speak like when nvidia says it will have the fastest gpu when the fx launched and mhz wise it did and yet the radeon 9700 pro beat it out in almost all the tests .

 

[jvd]

Just on top of my head, changes they did to zoe2 from zoe1 include the full frame buffer usage (zoe1 had flickering all over the place), whole bunch of new pixel/postprocessing effects (light blooms / trails / overbrights / shaped screen warping like when anubis teleports), pixel/texture effects (like when you transform to that cannon, etc) nicer lighting and shading (just look at those soft shades on the ardjet), vertex based effects like the trails you mentioned *and* on top of that the craziest particle engine I've ever seen (and yes, I've seen whole bunch of Otogi videos and I don't think it's AS crazy, although it's very different looking)

All those things aside, in my opinion, art direction alone puts it in another class compared to zoe1, as I don't usually extract things and study them separately, but look at the whole (moving) picture.

Yes Zoe2 looks beautifull. I think it might be the game that maxes out the ps2. I thought the game was shallow though.

 

[London Geezer]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

Actually my most hated system is neo geo.. couldn't afford it and the school bully in 4th grade owned one.... but now i own it too damn it .

I own almost every system ever made. I'm a collector. I have intelivison , collecovision , atari , the pong system , turbo graphics 16 and the cd , All 3 versions of the genises and the 2 versions of sega cd , a 32x , both versions of the nes , super nes , and the n64 . I have 2 broken psxs , a psone. Two ps2s in my house. A gamecube down here at school , My xbox in my gfs place down here at school (she likes splinter cell) I also own the jaguar and jaguar cd (tempest 2000 baby) So i hardly think I hate the sony (although my crappy dvd player made by then sucks ... never b uy something when it first comes out) No i just see people going all crazy for something that isn't even completed and say its the second comming. When its simply not .

jvd, thats where u're wrong..... NO ONE is saying it is going to be the second coming!!!

everyone is just looking forward to see how powerful it is. That's it.

NOTHING will ever be the second coming simply because in 6 months time there would be something more powerful coming out already!!!

at the end of the day, yes PS3 will be very powerful, but it will not be any second coming simply because it will be sold at
£299 (or whatever price it will be). that means that cuts will have to be made, just like everyone else had to compromise when making past consoles. of course the overhead will be greater and Sony will be able to afford bigger losses on a per-system basis, still there will be a price-performance target for them.

no one ever mentioned second comings.

apart from silly *1000x, 20000000x more powerful or whatever* hype... but thats the minority..

 

[jvd]

How so ? He showed me it pushed tons of polygons and had huge fillrates. Does it even have the bandwith to allow it to reach its fillrate ? Is its feature set the same or less than that of the tnt ? The geforce sdr had massive fillrates and yet never reached it because it was bandwitdh limited. Yes the tnt only had 8-16 megs of ram but thats more so than the 4 megs that the ps2 uses.

PS2 has 9.6GB/s for texture sampling which is enough bandwidth for 16-bit bilinear-filtered 1.2Gpixel fillrate. With caching it can sustain 32-bit bilinear filtering at that fillrate.

While the TNT had 16-32 megs of RAM, it needed more RAM to support resolutions up to 1600x1200. Not to mention its smallest color texture format is 16-bit. The PS2's smallest color texture format, in comparison, is 4-bit. In addition, the PS2 stores the textures for a scene in its 32MB main memory.

Just cause something does 2 things out f a dozen better than another thing doesn't mean it ownz it. Fillrate is great but when there is no hidden surface removal hardware built into it you will spend that extra fillrate quite quickly esp when it needs to do things that gs can't do. That takes alot of cycles and passes.

Just a small correction, but Z-buffering is a form of hidden surface removal. What the Dreamcast does is tile-based deffered rendering.

It may take a lot of passes to do some special effects on the PS2 but that's hardly any different from running a pixel shader program on the Xbox, for example. Effects takes a lot of fillrate, cycles, and passes no matter the system.

Yes and yet its feature set is akin to that of a voodoo2 is it not ? It may be alot faster than a voodoo 2 but if you were to put 16pipe lines in the voodoo 2 and give it 4 megs of on die cache you would be able to acomplish the same on both chips . The tnt class chip would also surpass it. Then of course there are the geforce , geforce 2 and radeon 64 which all came out in 2000 the year the ps2 launched. The feature sets for this are through the roof.

The reason why these chips didn't and still till this day don't have on die ram are .
Cost , the need to have a 3rd party develop them. Heating issues and complexity of the chip.
Yes the gs is a huge chip but not very complex.
But of course when it was designed it used current trends in the market. the voodoo2 chipset which was released in 99 was most likely completed around the same time the final design of the gs was created .

Yes but when there is hardware to do the effects they are done for "free" as compared to a software version. Not only that but they should be a hell of a lot easier to make. Couple that with the fact that is leaves fillrate and power for other effects that it needs to do in software.

The next gs will def have alot of hardware effects and leave the software side alone at least i hope so .

 

[jvd]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

Actually my most hated system is neo geo.. couldn't afford it and the school bully in 4th grade owned one.... but now i own it too damn it .

I own almost every system ever made. I'm a collector. I have intelivison , collecovision , atari , the pong system , turbo graphics 16 and the cd , All 3 versions of the genises and the 2 versions of sega cd , a 32x , both versions of the nes , super nes , and the n64 . I have 2 broken psxs , a psone. Two ps2s in my house. A gamecube down here at school , My xbox in my gfs place down here at school (she likes splinter cell) I also own the jaguar and jaguar cd (tempest 2000 baby) So i hardly think I hate the sony (although my crappy dvd player made by then sucks ... never b uy something when it first comes out) No i just see people going all crazy for something that isn't even completed and say its the second comming. When its simply not .

jvd, thats where u're wrong..... NO ONE is saying it is going to be the second coming!!!

everyone is just looking forward to see how powerful it is. That's it.

NOTHING will ever be the second coming simply because in 6 months time there would be something more powerful coming out already!!!

at the end of the day, yes PS3 will be very powerful, but it will not be any second coming simply because it will be sold at
£299 (or whatever price it will be). that means that cuts will have to be made, just like everyone else had to compromise when making past consoles. of course the overhead will be greater and Sony will be able to afford bigger losses on a per-system basis, still there will be a price-performance target for them.

no one ever mentioned second comings.

apart from silly *1000x, 20000000x more powerful or whatever* hype... but thats the minority..

were you here from the start ? Thats all that had been said. I come in saying i don't see it happening. That the returns are dimishing. That sony most likely will have to cut back its hardware. That final gen xbox games will look like pregen and first gen ps3 games ( the games made based on specs and unfinished hardware) oh and that mgs2 isn't all that and a bag of chips and I'm labeled stupid and a fanboy. A fan boy of what system I don't know. But I'm a fan boy of something according the few here. Then 90% of what i said is taken out of context or miss quoted and I spent half the thread resaying what i already said a few times . Oh i also said that the gs is on the same level of the voodo2 chips then i amended that to it falling inbetween voodoo2 and tnt class feature set. I gave it that it could do more fillrate and polygons than the voodoo and tnt class hardware

 

[London Geezer]

How so ? He showed me it pushed tons of polygons and had huge fillrates. Does it even have the bandwith to allow it to reach its fillrate ? Is its feature set the same or less than that of the tnt ? The geforce sdr had massive fillrates and yet never reached it because it was bandwitdh limited. Yes the tnt only had 8-16 megs of ram but thats more so than the 4 megs that the ps2 uses.

PS2 has 9.6GB/s for texture sampling which is enough bandwidth for 16-bit bilinear-filtered 1.2Gpixel fillrate. With caching it can sustain 32-bit bilinear filtering at that fillrate.

While the TNT had 16-32 megs of RAM, it needed more RAM to support resolutions up to 1600x1200. Not to mention its smallest color texture format is 16-bit. The PS2's smallest color texture format, in comparison, is 4-bit. In addition, the PS2 stores the textures for a scene in its 32MB main memory.

Just cause something does 2 things out f a dozen better than another thing doesn't mean it ownz it. Fillrate is great but when there is no hidden surface removal hardware built into it you will spend that extra fillrate quite quickly esp when it needs to do things that gs can't do. That takes alot of cycles and passes.

Just a small correction, but Z-buffering is a form of hidden surface removal. What the Dreamcast does is tile-based deffered rendering.

It may take a lot of passes to do some special effects on the PS2 but that's hardly any different from running a pixel shader program on the Xbox, for example. Effects takes a lot of fillrate, cycles, and passes no matter the system.

Yes and yet its feature set is akin to that of a voodoo2 is it not ? It may be alot faster than a voodoo 2 but if you were to put 16pipe lines in the voodoo 2 and give it 4 megs of on die cache you would be able to acomplish the same on both chips . The tnt class chip would also surpass it. Then of course there are the geforce , geforce 2 and radeon 64 which all came out in 2000 the year the ps2 launched. The feature sets for this are through the roof.

The reason why these chips didn't and still till this day don't have on die ram are .
Cost , the need to have a 3rd party develop them. Heating issues and complexity of the chip.
Yes the gs is a huge chip but not very complex.
But of course when it was designed it used current trends in the market. the voodoo2 chipset which was released in 99 was most likely completed around the same time the final design of the gs was created .

Yes but when there is hardware to do the effects they are done for "free" as compared to a software version. Not only that but they should be a hell of a lot easier to make. Couple that with the fact that is leaves fillrate and power for other effects that it needs to do in software.

The next gs will def have alot of hardware effects and leave the software side alone at least i hope so .

i'll ask you again, jvd..

talking about *feature sets*....

the Geforce and whatever else u mention DID have loads of features supported in hardware. TRUE.

now, give me one example where those features were actually used in a game. don't mention DOOM3 because we all know how well it will run on those cards....... they might support many things in hardware, but how well do they perform when devs turn them on?

is it not a wise move from a hardware manufactures to just leave the developer do whatever they want to do (they were asked to do so anyway), so that they can shift power should they not need some functions?

meaning, if one dev does not want to use aniso filtering, why should he be tied to hardware features, when he could use the remeining power for a custom effect? in modern PC GPU's the transistors are accounted for with all hardware effects. that menas if u don't use a feature, that power is lost.

so there u have Geforce 2 games with GAMES that do not use any of the nice features of the GPU simply because the chip itself does not have enough power to handle them properly.
then u have PS2 which does not natively support anything really, but with which a developer can channel all the power doing what actually is used in the game. so the same game without any nice pretty features will perform a gazillion times better on PS2 (or any other extremely flexible hardware).
if u wanted to turn the pretty features on, they surely would have an impact on ps2, but they sure as hell hinder the GPU's performance as well.

 

[London Geezer]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

Actually my most hated system is neo geo.. couldn't afford it and the school bully in 4th grade owned one.... but now i own it too damn it .

I own almost every system ever made. I'm a collector. I have intelivison , collecovision , atari , the pong system , turbo graphics 16 and the cd , All 3 versions of the genises and the 2 versions of sega cd , a 32x , both versions of the nes , super nes , and the n64 . I have 2 broken psxs , a psone. Two ps2s in my house. A gamecube down here at school , My xbox in my gfs place down here at school (she likes splinter cell) I also own the jaguar and jaguar cd (tempest 2000 baby) So i hardly think I hate the sony (although my crappy dvd player made by then sucks ... never b uy something when it first comes out) No i just see people going all crazy for something that isn't even completed and say its the second comming. When its simply not .

jvd, thats where u're wrong..... NO ONE is saying it is going to be the second coming!!!

everyone is just looking forward to see how powerful it is. That's it.

NOTHING will ever be the second coming simply because in 6 months time there would be something more powerful coming out already!!!

at the end of the day, yes PS3 will be very powerful, but it will not be any second coming simply because it will be sold at
£299 (or whatever price it will be). that means that cuts will have to be made, just like everyone else had to compromise when making past consoles. of course the overhead will be greater and Sony will be able to afford bigger losses on a per-system basis, still there will be a price-performance target for them.

no one ever mentioned second comings.

apart from silly *1000x, 20000000x more powerful or whatever* hype... but thats the minority..

were you here from the start ? Thats all that had been said. I come in saying i don't see it happening. That the returns are dimishing. That sony most likely will have to cut back its hardware. That final gen xbox games will look like pregen and first gen ps3 games ( the games made based on specs and unfinished hardware) oh and that mgs2 isn't all that and a bag of chips and I'm labeled stupid and a <bleep>. A fan boy of what system I don't know. But I'm a fan boy of something according the few here. Then 90% of what i said is taken out of context or miss quoted and I spent half the thread resaying what i already said a few times . Oh i also said that the gs is on the same level of the voodo2 chips then i amended that to it falling inbetween voodoo2 and tnt class feature set. I gave it that it could do more fillrate and polygons than the voodoo and tnt class hardware

i read pretty much all of the thread and i partecipated at the beginning.

i must have missed something but that's because some of u people are such nagging and winging drama queens it's just boring sometimes.... j/k

 

[jvd]

I've already said in my posts its a monster when it comes to polygons and yes it has a ton of fillrate. I've stated though that its missing many effects and filtering modes that the voodoo2- geforce quality cards have.

It doesn't just have a ton of fillrate. GF2 GTS also has a ton of fillrate but most of it simply can't be used due to lack of mem bandwidth. The PS2s eDRAM gives it tremendous sustained fillrate abilities. Comparing it to a Voodoo2 like you do is stupid, it's like saying a Volvo from the 80s compares to a Bugatti Veron. The engines of both cars have all the same basic components, cylinders, pistons, valves etc, but the rest... No comparison!

I also said dreamcast can do mgs2. Never said the voodoo2 could.

Yeah, sorry. My mistake. Most the same things go for DC as for a V2 though; low poly performance, POOR pixel fillrate. It can't handle all the alpha-blend and particle effects without framerate dropping through the floor. OR the motion blur and depth-of-field stuff either by the way. It has only 100mpps bilinear texture filtered fillrate. Less than a TENTH of PS2, slightly more single-textured fillrate than a V2. Its deferred rendering tech isn't going to make up for the deficiency in fillrate, not when there isn't that much opaque overdraw in MGS2; most of the demanding stuff is the depth-of-field and alpha/particle effects.

Since the voodoo2 is at the mercy of a general cpu.

And the DC isn't? Look man, the Hitachi SH3 is good for it's class, but it's SLOW man. SLOW. It doesn't compare the slightest to the Emotion Engine when poly transforms are concerned. Maybe it can do all the geometry transforms for MGS, but do all the geometry AND run the 3D engine and game logic at the same time? Nuh-uh I say. Not without starting to sacrifice stuff.

Will the game even fit in the DCs relatively small memory space?

I also wonder how much fillrate the gs can sustain .

A LOT.

It doesn't matter it doesn't have fillrate-saving features. It doesn't really need them. Those in the know say 8 (or 16 untextured) pixel pipes and extreme mem bandwidth (48GB/s aggregate) means it's far preferred to simply draw your scene in texture order and use Z-buffer to reject hidden pixels rather than draw in front-to-back order and rely on fillrate/bandwidth saving features like you want to do on GC and XB. That you'll waste some or even a lot of drawing power on overdraw on PS2 doesn't matter, you have power to waste.

EDIT: Do some simple calculations yourself. 1200 MILLION pixels/sec rendering speed, using 640*448 pixel full height screen buffers means you can redraw the screen SEVENTY TIMES PER FRAME AT 60FPS! Even assuming atrocious real-world efficiency of 25% of theoretical fillrate, you still have *plenty* of headroom for overdraw.

Last thing is ram . The geforce cards had 32-64 megs of onboard ram. Is that more that the whole ps2 system had ?

PS2 has a total of 40MB RAM (32MB main, 4MB EDRAM, 2MB IO-processor RAM, 2MB sound RAM). 64MB GF2 cards have more total ram sure, but then again they NEED all that ram for texture storage because the AGP port is such a slow bottleneck. AGP4x is slower than PS2s GIF interlink to begin with, and it is an inefficient interface too. Besides, if you have (for example) 128MB main mem and 64MB GPU mem doesn't mean you have 196MB total. Frame buffers occupy some, and all textures in graphics mem have to be duplicated in main memory on the PC anyway (because else you have to transfer stuff back and forth TWICE over AGP and you'd start to trash memory space and all sorts of annoying things).

PS2 games are written to stream textures to eDRAM. You basically know at every instance which texture you're going to need next so you can upload it in time for it to be rendered. It requires care to make things look nice and flow smoothly, but you CAN make nice stuff if you know what you're doing (Fafracer, ZoE2, SH3, Jak2 etc).

We have to wait and see what they uses a gs this time around . what i really want to know is how much a 64 meg cell chip is going to cost .

Is Cell really going to use 64MB eDRAM? Didn't people speculate the proposed GS3 would have 64MB on-chip?


*G*[/b]

Um i'm sure you will start off your trip much faster than i will but when your pulled over on the side and i come pasing u up with my moms old 88 volvo I'm sure thats one way the volvo is better


Its an sh4 moded in the dreamcast which while no EE it still pushing 1.2gigflop and about 5-6 million polygons persecond. When launched in 98 it was the best thing since sliced bread .

On the note of mgs2. The way it was done on the ps2 will not let it be done on the dreamcast or even the xbox for example. If you code to the systems strengths (like mgs2 was done ) And targeted at the dreamcast you would get a game that looks just like mgs2 with all its game play and most of its effects and then some effects that weren't in the ps2 version i.e bumpmaping .

The dreamcast actually has a much larger memory foot print than the ps2 and then it had its compresion sceme which i believe is actually even with or slightly edges out the dxtc or sxtc on the pc. Your right its not as high with fillrate but then again its done many games on it that even now would be hard on any other system (xbox playing shenmue for example ) .

Onto the voodoo2 graphics and what not. Its feature set is akin to that of the gs. Its basicly the same thing. Except the gs has 16pipes. I know the limitations of the pc set up. So its not really fair to compare a pc card and its whole system when I am just comparing a feature set of the card to a feature set of a similar thing. The gs and vodoo2 are similar just as the gs is similar to the geforce inside the xbox. The celeron in the xbox would be compared to the ee in the ps2 (no contest there, the ee is much better)

The voodoo 2 chip in a console would perform much better than it would in a pc.

Right now at 640x480 on my geforce ddr I can run doom3 at 30fps. Doom 3 looks better than most if not all ps2 games out right now. The problem with pcs is it has to be coded to the lowest hardware and right now it seems to be the geforce. I can run it at clost to 60 fps on my old geforce 2 too which came out in april of 2000 the same year the ps2 launched. Which also features a larger feature set than the ps2. much much larger. That is what I'm comparing.

 

[jvd]

i gave up on this thread and definately gave up on some people who are just too jaded to keep an objective mind about things. all this is really sad... only because of some incomprehensible brand fascism people close their eyes, when they could just embrace all brands and get the most out of it.
still, i don't think this whole argument has any meaning to it, we will NEVER see MGS2 on Dreamcast, not only because it could never be replicated at full detail, but just because DREAMCAST IS DEAD!!!
get the F**K over it........
great for its time, but DEAD!!!
sorry to hear when it happened, but now its OVER!!!
some people even go as far as bashing SEGA games on some consoles because they're not on their favorite console..... what is wrong with you people?? can't u just get over it? jesus it's not like the death of Lady D or something, it was a box to play games on. a box that has been surpassed in every conceivable way long ago by your most hated console, yes the one with a SONY name on it.... god forgive me for mentioning the forbidden name...

Actually my most hated system is neo geo.. couldn't afford it and the school bully in 4th grade owned one.... but now i own it too damn it .

I own almost every system ever made. I'm a collector. I have intelivison , collecovision , atari , the pong system , turbo graphics 16 and the cd , All 3 versions of the genises and the 2 versions of sega cd , a 32x , both versions of the nes , super nes , and the n64 . I have 2 broken psxs , a psone. Two ps2s in my house. A gamecube down here at school , My xbox in my gfs place down here at school (she likes splinter cell) I also own the jaguar and jaguar cd (tempest 2000 baby) So i hardly think I hate the sony (although my crappy dvd player made by then sucks ... never b uy something when it first comes out) No i just see people going all crazy for something that isn't even completed and say its the second comming. When its simply not .

jvd, thats where u're wrong..... NO ONE is saying it is going to be the second coming!!!

everyone is just looking forward to see how powerful it is. That's it.

NOTHING will ever be the second coming simply because in 6 months time there would be something more powerful coming out already!!!

at the end of the day, yes PS3 will be very powerful, but it will not be any second coming simply because it will be sold at
£299 (or whatever price it will be). that means that cuts will have to be made, just like everyone else had to compromise when making past consoles. of course the overhead will be greater and Sony will be able to afford bigger losses on a per-system basis, still there will be a price-performance target for them.

no one ever mentioned second comings.

apart from silly *1000x, 20000000x more powerful or whatever* hype... but thats the minority..

were you here from the start ? Thats all that had been said. I come in saying i don't see it happening. That the returns are dimishing. That sony most likely will have to cut back its hardware. That final gen xbox games will look like pregen and first gen ps3 games ( the games made based on specs and unfinished hardware) oh and that mgs2 isn't all that and a bag of chips and I'm labeled stupid and a <bleep>. A fan boy of what system I don't know. But I'm a fan boy of something according the few here. Then 90% of what i said is taken out of context or miss quoted and I spent half the thread resaying what i already said a few times . Oh i also said that the gs is on the same level of the voodo2 chips then i amended that to it falling inbetween voodoo2 and tnt class feature set. I gave it that it could do more fillrate and polygons than the voodoo and tnt class hardware

i read pretty much all of the thread and i partecipated at the beginning.

i must have missed something but that's because some of u people are such nagging and winging drama queens it's just boring sometimes.... j/k

you know my gf says that about me sometimes... I think the both of you are just jealous of me

 

[London Geezer]

nah i could never be jealous of u..... well actually i could, of one thing in particular, that u must have been a pretty loaded kid, owning pretty much every single system there is......