What do you see the next gen consoles doing Graphicly?

[Grall]

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

Put both cars side by side on the starting line of a race track and see if your mom's volvo still wins.

Its an sh4 moded in the dreamcast

WHATEVER. It's still a POS CPU. Looking at it through rose-colored glasses isn't going to change that.

while no EE it still pushing 1.2gigflop and about 5-6 million polygons persecond.

...Under simplistic circumstances. 6 million polys can't ever happen under in-game conditions. I don't think any DC game comes even close. Do soft skinning on a couple bones-based character instead of a rigid car model for example and you'll never reach even that level.

When launched in 98 it was the best thing since sliced bread .

That was a long time ago. Consoles don't exactly age like fine wine you know...

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.

No, because it leverages the PS2s super fillrate to make heavy use of particles and insane levels of transparencies.

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

I have three words for ya: "Ha", "ha" and "ha".

You are DELUDING yourself if you EVER think the DC could come close of PS2 if it was to attempt doing a version of MGS. That's just plain stupidity, what magic wand would that silly little PVR chip wave to try and emulate what the mighty GS2 renders with such apparant ease?

Remember, it has only slightly more than 8% (oh, ok then, 8.33%) raw textured fillrate of the GS! Let's not forget geometry processing ability, physics and general processing etc. Do get real, please.

and then some effects that weren't in the ps2 version i.e bumpmaping .

...Which would be ironic, since not even DC-exclusive games used bumpmapping!

The dreamcast actually has a much larger memory foot print than the ps2

No it does not. You seem to forget PS2 is able to store textures as MPEG2 pframes in main RAM. Yeah, there are quirks involved, but for the accomplished programmer those are seen as challenges, not obstacles.

PVRDCs VQ texture compression is said to be far inferior to MPEG2, both for compression ratio and visual quality.

Your right its not as high with fillrate

LOL, a bit of an understatement wouldn't you say? 8.33%, "not as high"? CHRIST, would you say an average-sized thermonuclear weapon produces a slight bang when it goes off at ground level?

but then again its done many games on it that even now would be hard on any other system (xbox playing shenmue for example ).

"Many games", "hard on any other system"? Can you even name five games that would be hard to do today? Shenmue is obviously a shoddy port much in the vein of you complaining about MGS2 on any other system than PS2. (Can you say "double standards"? )

The DC isn't magic in any way. It's got a puny 100mpps bilinear pixel fillrate (you wanna do trilinear it halves immediately) which it managed to put to good use, but that's IT, dude. The XB, or indeed any current console, does 100mpps effective fillrate without even breaking a sweat. There's really NOTHING a DC could do that would make any of the current consoles struggle, with the possible exception of modifier volumes which is a funky powervr-only feature and might be difficult to emulate precisely on other systems. Few games seem to use them for anything though, and then only for simple stuff like shadows and that can be done with stencils.

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.

Oh, so now you worry over ME making the V2 look bad by YOU comparing it to the PS2's GS? Christ, you can't have it both frickin ways man. Are you gonna say the GS is a glorified V2 or not?!

If you're just interested in comparing features, why are you indirectly implying the GS and the V2 are comparable when clearly they are NOT?

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

It would be a small degree of less suckyness. It's not hard to put together a PC that maxes out a V2 despite the PC architecture's flaws and inefficiencies. You can only wring so much water out of a stone you know.

Doom 3 looks better than most if not all ps2 games out right now.

Debatable. "Better", if you happen to like metallic-like, bumpmappy graphics with hard (sometimes black) shadows and one or a few on-screen creatures. Few PS2 games are like that, gameplay-wise I mean.

You can't say with any degree of confidence that apple pie is better than blueberry pie. You can say IN YOUR OPINION it is, but that's it. Your opinion is not the truth however.

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.

Hardly at maximum detail settings though, right?

Which also features a larger feature set than the ps2. much much larger. That is what I'm comparing.

Featureset schmeatureset. You haven't seen any game like ZoE2 on a system with a GF2 in it have you.

Shuddap.


*G*

 

[jvd]

Like i said. Both cars are designed with diffrent goals. You may go faster than me but at the same time you'd have less of a range with your car.

Heh. I dunno how you get off on callingthe sh4 a pos.. mabye you should read up on it.

Test drive le mans was about 5 million polygons persecond with all the dreamcasteffects (except bumpmaping )

Dc can use volume modifiers and other effects that it can do and the ps2 can't do to make up for its slower partical engine .


Don't forget the fillrate takes advantage of its defered rendering See the previous post about itn this thread .


I have heard many tmes tht the mepg compresion scheme does not ork in the 4 meg buffer since the ee or was it the gs can'tdecode it . I will ave to search for that .

On the voodoo2 front I said it once i will sayit again. I'm comparing feature sets . Why don't u look at the feature set of both chips. Mabye then you can see what i'm talking about .


Doom3. I aid it looks better than most if not all ps2 games out right now .. Notice i said most and out right now. Are you going to sit here and tell me it doesn't ? If you don't think so then mabye you should just stick with your ps2 and live i your bias .

I don'tknow if the geforce 2 runs it at full details. I run it at default settings at 640x480. He has said this was the card he was targeting all along so i'm assuming its full quality.

No I haven't seen game like zoe2 on the gf2. I haven't seen games like doom3 on the ps2 either. The pc world works diffrently than the console world. Games that are designed for video cards don't come out till years later. So right now we start to see the games ment for the geforce line of cards.

Grall mabye you should take a reading class .

 

[marconelly!]

I haven't seen games like doom3 on the ps2 either.

Nor you will see them running at any playable framerate on GF2 either I have a GF2 and you don't want to know how that Doom 3 alpha ran on it.

 

[randycat99]

All of a sudden a completely reworked version of Doom III designed to fully take advantage of the unique hardware design of PS2 doesn't apply with regard to plausibility? My how doublestandarded. (<=== word patent pending)

 

[jvd]

I haven't seen games like doom3 on the ps2 either.

Nor you will see them running at any playable framerate on GF2 either I have a GF2 and you don't want to know how that Doom 3 alpha ran on it.

were you playing it at 640x480 ? because it runs fine at a bout 60fps on my geforce 2 (i have a 64 meg card though. doubt it makes such a huge diffrence though )

 

[jvd]

All of a sudden a completely reworked version of Doom III designed to fully take advantage of the unique hardware design of PS2 doesn't apply with regard to plausibility? My how doublestandarded. (<=== word patent pending)

no it does. No one said anything about that though. So how can there be a double standard if no one brought it up. All i said was that doom3 looks better than most if not all the ps2 games out now .

Where did i say anything about doom3 designed to take full advantage of the ps2 ? Where did anyone say that . By your lodgic his arguement about zoe2 has the same double standard. Please don't run your mouth if your not going to make sense .

Btw i have another slurpee and straw... so damn good .

 

[randycat99]

All i said was that doom3 looks better than most if not all the ps2 games out now .

...and you seem to have no objections that a Doom 3 could exist on a PS2, so that places the "doom3 looks better than most if not all the ps2 games out now" bit on similarly pointless ground.

Running my mouth? Apparently you are unaware that you have been doing just that for what, 2 or 3 pages now? All of that typing just to maintain that anything "PS2" isn't that great, anyone who says so must be promptly batted down, and PC's will always be on top? Hash endless details thereon until you win by attrition. We get it now! Carry on...

 

[jvd]

All i said was that doom3 looks better than most if not all the ps2 games out now .

...and you seem to have no objections that a Doom 3 could exist on a PS2, so that places the "doom3 looks better than most if not all the ps2 games out now" bit on similarly pointless ground.

Running my mouth? Apparently you are unaware that you have been doing just that for what, 2 or 3 pages now? All of that typing just to maintain that anything "PS2" isn't that great, anyone who says so must be promptly batted down, and PC's will always be on top? Hash endless details thereon until you win by attrition. We get it now! Carry on...

and yet you make no point. Since doom 3 is not on the ps2 and there are no games that currently look like it my arguement holds true.

I also love how i'm now a pc lover. Before i was an xbox lover . For a point I was a dreamcast lover. Oh in a month ago in another post I was a sony lover.

I agree i was running my mouth about my slurpee straw. But come on man i can eat the straw after i'm done using it to drink the slurpee.... DO you not see the simple beauty in that ?

 

[randycat99]

Hey, it's all written out on the past few pages. No use denying it now.

 

[Fafalada]

No I haven't seen game like zoe2 on the gf2. I haven't seen games like doom3 on the ps2 either. The pc world works diffrently than the console world.

I haven't seen games like D3 run on GF2 either.
I saw it present a D3 slideshow... but definately not run.

 

[Phil]

and yet you make no point. Since doom 3 is not on the ps2 and there are no games that currently look like it my arguement holds true.

Ok - in that case, since MGS2 is not on DC and there's no games that currently look like it, my arguement holds true.

BTW; Grall made some good points, especially about fillrates. You can't just cut out effects and then argue that it would run as it would look completely different.

 

[jvd]

and yet you make no point. Since doom 3 is not on the ps2 and there are no games that currently look like it my arguement holds true.

Ok - in that case, since MGS2 is not on DC and there's no games that currently look like it, my arguement holds true.

BTW; Grall made some good points, especially about fillrates. You can't just cut out effects and then argue that it would run as it would look completely different.

Yea he brought up good points and then others brought up points about bump mapping and other effects the dreamcast can do that the ps2 can't and all he says is well my fillrate is so big it doesn't matter. It gets rather old quickly .

Your right about ms2 not being on DC , are there any games like Mgs2 on the DC though ? I'm sure can find alot of dc games with small rooms , dark lighting and the same few textures over and oever again tomake up the walls and floors .

I'm hard pressed to find games on the ps2 that use as many lights ,bump maps and shading effects as doom3 .

This fillrate thing is just pissing me off in most mgs2 scenes not much is going on , the fillrate being used is not going to actually drawing the scene , now mabye if a 1gigapixel of fillrate was going to the rain effects i don't see where tons and tons of fillrate are used in this game.

I'd post more but i'm only allowed to look at 4 images a day on that website

 

[Fafalada]

are there any games like Mgs2 on the DC though ? I'm sure can find alot of dc games with small rooms , dark lighting and the same few textures over and oever again tomake up the walls and floors.

No doubt, just as I'm sure you Could find PS2 games with small rooms, dark lighting, low poly models and mediocre art, as in doom3.

 

[marconelly!]

Btw, jvd that second MGS2 picture you posted, shows per-pixel lighting in that scene

Anyways, one look at scenes like outside that tanker, bridge in the intro, underwater, fight with the harrier, etc etc... should show you what exactly is fillrate and such used for. I'm beginning to think you've never even seen the game

And by God, what kind of GF2 and what kind of Doom 3 settings are you using? I was happy to get 10FPS in the most simplistic situations (like facing to the wall and such)...

 

[Lazy8s]

wazoo:

In non interactive cute scenes (like Ryo father death).

It's used during gameplay a lot. Performing many of Ryo's moves in fights have motion blur to them. The QTEs have a ton of it as well. You aren't going to see it much when he's just walking around, of course, as its purpose is to accentuate fast-moving action situations.

Considering you have to share video ram between texture/frame buffer and display lists, it is a not an advantage.

Physically, it's still 8MB vs. 4MB. It's not fixed, so the breakdown of how it's actually used is specific to each game for either platform. You're right, though, that it's not a clear-cut advantage nor a direct comparison since the DC has to store more stuff in the display RAM area.

Using hald frame would allow more display list to be stored.

Yeah. The developer of Test Drive Le Mans for DC, Melbourne House, said they'd consider doing that in a future DC game to get even more geometry performance.

hum, no, unless you prove it, I do not see them, and I'm seeing it in VGa on my monitor.

It looks to me that Dead or Alive 2 uses motion blur and distortion effects when you reach the final boss, Tengu, on his stage. There are other instances, too, like when Kasumi flips out from infront of the stained-glass window. In the desert stage of Virtua Fighter 3tb, there appears to be haze and heat waves. I think Jet Set Radio has some movement distortion and also trailing on some lights and explosion effects.

Crazyace:

If anything, it would be nice to see a PS2 title try for heavy texture detail on low poly geometry to compare directly - most are trying for higher detail though.

I think the PS2 could handle it very well, and I believe we'll see it for ourselves soon enough as I suspect Sonic Team is working on a version of the new Sonic for PS2. They are masterful texture artists, so I think the mapping in their PS2 games will turn out brilliantly in whichever games they end up making for the system.

I have a lot of DC games, and annoyingly enough about 15-20 of them dont support VGA output at all....

Really? With so many, I'm curious as to which ones they are. You may already know, but there are documented methods for enabling VGA compatibility on the majority of the titles that don't start up automatically. So, even for a game like Evolution that doesn't list support for VGA, you just have to do something simple like deactivating and then reactivating the VGA Box at a certain time during boot-up to get it to work.

My VGA adaptor now lies in a cupboard, and the DC connects via S-VHS to the same TV as the PS2 and Gamecube

That's a crime! VGA for the masses!

Grall:

...Under simplistic circumstances. 6 million polys can't ever happen under in-game conditions. I don't think any DC game comes even close.

Test Drive Le Mans for DC pushes about 5 million polygons per second and uses anisotropic filtering according to the developer, Melbourne House. They also said they could use field rendering in their next DC game to free up more room for the display list in RAM to push even more polygons per second. Most of the time, though, devs didn't give performance numbers.

The DC isn't magic in any way. It's got a puny 100mpps bilinear pixel fillrate (you wanna do trilinear it halves immediately) which it managed to put to good use, but that's IT, dude.

"put to good use" apparently translates to allowance for still looking comparatively respectable against newer and more expensive hardware. That's the full picture here and the perspective your rant seems to lack. Reviewers gave PS2 ports like Virtua Tennis 2K2 and GC ports like Sonic Adventure 2 (both games being graphically inferior to their DC counterparts) scores of eights and nines out of ten for graphics.

The vitriol seething from your criticisms makes me wonder if the DC has committed some crime against you! You can tell me, man... we all know it's one evil little off-white box. A mastermind of mip-mapped molestation... a perpetrator of polygonal pilferage... a tailor of textured travesties...

 

[wazoo]

wazoo:

Considering you have to share video ram between texture/frame buffer and display lists, it is a not an advantage.

Physically, it's still 8MB vs. 4MB. It's not fixed, so the breakdown of how it's actually used is specific to each game for either platform. You're right, though, that it's not a clear-cut advantage nor a direct comparison since the DC has to store more stuff in the display RAM area.

Stop with the 4Mb vs 8Mb, it is irrelevant. As far as I understand, from Faf explanations, the Dc has to store everything in its VRAM before each frame rendering, the ps can do streaming between frames, that make a lot of differences.

Yeah. The developer of Test Drive Le Mans for DC, Melbourne House, said they'd consider doing that in a future DC game to get even more geometry performance.

Yes, they did say that, and by doing that, they would have dropped the holy vga support (which then can be seen as a flaw limiting the poly power of the Dc).

It looks to me that Dead or Alive 2 uses motion blur and distortion effects when you reach the final boss, Tengu, on his stage. There are other instances, too, like when Kasumi flips out from infront of the stained-glass window. In the desert stage of Virtua Fighter 3tb, there appears to be haze and heat waves. I think Jet Set Radio has some movement distortion and also trailing on some lights and explosion effects.

maybe, it was not clear the day I played those games.

Really? With so many, I'm curious as to which ones they are. You may already know, but there are documented methods for enabling VGA compatibility on the majority of the titles that don't start up automatically. So, even for a game like Evolution that doesn't list support for VGA, you just have to do something simple like deactivating and then reactivating the VGA Box at a certain time during boot-up to get it to work.

Unless you live in europe, where non VGA compatible games stay in 50Hz and display nothing on your moniteur (Skies, RE for example).

My VGA adaptor now lies in a cupboard, and the DC connects via S-VHS to the same TV as the PS2 and Gamecube

That's a crime! VGA for the masses!

MSR and Shenmue look worse (sharper/jaggier) on a monitor than on a good RGB enabled TV setup. I liked the added filtering.

Reviewers gave PS2 ports like Virtua Tennis 2K2 and GC ports like Sonic Adventure 2 (both games being graphically inferior to their DC counterparts) scores of eights and nines out of ten for graphics.

sonic2 is not inferior on the GC. it looks the same with added effects and coop play.

The vitriol seething from your criticisms makes me wonder if the DC has committed some crime against you! You can tell me, man... we all know it's one evil little off-white box. A mastermind of mip-mapped molestation... a perpetrator of polygonal pilferage... a tailor of textured travesties...

Most people you are arguing with do own the DC

 

[chaphack]

I like to add that, the framebuffer effects like motion blur and heat haze, are not that common in DC games. I can clearly recall only one incident of moblur and that was the final stage of DOA2. Even Shenmue cutscenes do not have cinematic effects.

Only from PS2 period, do these effects start to grow in abundance.

 

[zidane1strife]

Perhaps. This kind of thing is hard to quantify since it's circumstancial. For example, if your goals on PSX were memory related/limited like storage of information or textures, or audio related like sound generation and capacity, it's possible to conclude a sub-100x performance increase on PS2

Well, let's see now, sound... nope, the ps2 has a more powerful sound processor that can be aided by the EE, and has as much memory available to it as the entire psx... aka FAR more sound memory... and let's not forget the cough, cough 4xdvd(was it 4x?) drive is significantly faster than the puny 2x cd drive in the psx...

The memory is another joke the ps2 has an aggregate memory number 20TIMES that of the psx, and at a SIGNIFICANTLY higher speed and with FAR MORE BANDWITH... again even if problems surged, the DVD drive would refresh it SO MUCH FASTER THAN THE PSX CD DRIVE... that per second possible memory would likely exceed 100x the psx performance.

As for textures the ps2 has 32MB of memory to store textures, IT can 'most likely'(i dunno, but it seems VERY plausible.) store MORE than 100+x psx level textures, those could be streamed on to the gs quite easily, not to mention(again) the DVD drive, which allows you to virtually stream such textures in memory at such speed that you could virtually have a per second possible psx texture number ridiculously high...

quite frankly the psx is such a joke compared to the ps2... it's not even funny... Pixel and vertex functionality, rez, textures, IQ, etc... are in quite another league when it comes to the ps2...

Test drive le mans was about 5 million polygons persecond with all the dreamcasteffects (except bumpmaping )

If what grall said is true... when trying to do non-rigid geometry like(mgs2 characters, hmmm.), That number would horribly collapse...

On the voodoo2 front I said it once i will sayit again. I'm comparing feature sets . Why don't u look at the feature set of both chips. Mabye then you can see what i'm talking about .

As previously mentioned feature sets are not as important... say if ps4 was capable of 100% photoreal gphx, but with most of it being programmable and few features... you wouldn't be comparing it to a voodoo2 now would you?

I like to add that, the framebuffer effects like motion blur and heat haze, are not that common in DC games

Not only that, doesn't anyone remember the voodoo3, and GS comments early on... THE VRAM BANDWITH allows ample amounts of framebuffer effects, and HIGHER QUALITY for those effects, now if the 9800 can't compete in vram bandwith(ok, they've got pixel shaders to aid in those effects now ), no way a DC will...

 

[Lazy8s]

wazoo:

sonic2 is not inferior on the GC. it looks the same with added effects and coop play.

Graphically speaking, I've heard the shadows, posibly the self-shadowing, doesn't project as well as it did in the DC version. Also, the DC version supports VGA clarity and progressive scan.

zidane1strife:

Well, let's see now, sound... nope, the ps2 has a more powerful sound processor that can be aided by the EE,

And if you used the EE to assist in making the sound processing 100x over PSX capacity, you would be taking away from its ability to maintain 100x graphical advantage.

and has as much memory available to it as the entire psx... aka FAR more sound memory...

But not enough to account for 100x in all tasks.

and let's not forget the cough, cough 4xdvd(was it 4x?) drive is significantly faster than the puny 2x cd drive in the psx...

If you're bringing up access times, that would be another isolated feature not showing 100x. But, this has a more indirect effect on final output, so it's not a clear-cut argument against your presumption.

The memory is another joke the ps2 has an aggregate memory number 20TIMES that of the psx, and at a SIGNIFICANTLY higher speed and with FAR MORE BANDWITH...

It really depends what type of app you had on PSX and how it was storage limited. I'm just saying there are conceivable situations where things like the volume of information you need to work with in a PSX game for certain functions would be such that the PS2 couldn't give 100x the headroom.

As for textures the ps2 has 32MB of memory to store textures,

But not display them.

quite frankly the psx is such a joke compared to the ps2... it's not even funny... Pixel and vertex functionality, rez, textures, IQ, etc... are in quite another league when it comes to the ps2...

Sure, but not necessarily 100 fold in all areas. Many areas, yes.

 

[Lazy8s]

(cont.)

About the postulation of 100x for PS2, also consider a scenario where you were creating a largely musical game, combining and layering sounds as gameplay progressed (like Rez, in a way.) I don't think the PS2 would give you 100x the simultaneous channel capacity for that kind of sound generation over the PSX, if improvement of that specific aspect was your goal.

If what grall said is true... when trying to do non-rigid geometry like(mgs2 characters, hmmm.), That number would horribly collapse...

You would find a more optimal solution for DC models that would instead emphasize its strengths, rather than strictly copying PS2 implementation.