Sonic:
But this situation has changed for the most part, I'm even starting to see PS2 games with textures that look better than even the best Dreamcast games graphics wise.
It doesn't help DC's cause that original development for it got frozen somewhere between second and third-generation software. Even its best-looking games like F355 and Sonic Adventure 2 dated back to projects started near the Dreamcast/Naomi launch (Sonic Adv. 2 was a modified Sonic Adv. 1 engine, according to Sonic Team USA programmers). This is in contrast to the PS2 platform where the lionshare of industry projects to this day continue to be designed specifically around its specs.
And, if you would, point me to some PS2 games with significantly better-looking texturing than Grandia 2 or Sonic Adventure 2.
Almasy:
There´s also games that DC would have a lot of trouble even trying to mimmick, games like GT3, MGS2 and FFX I doubt would be able to be reproduced perfectly, and it could be argued that those are merely first generation games.
Then again, I haven't seen the PS2 reproduce the eye-popping clarity in detail from games like Grandia 2, Sonic Adventure 2, and F355 either. You lose a lot when you go from progressive to interlaced, with half of your resolution over time getting thrown out the window.
Going from SoA to FFX is a serious jump in visual quality. How about reproducing Jak&Daxter or the polygonal complexity of Ratchet & Clank?
I agree that the PS2 ups the sophistication of certain visual elements, but the fact that only 9 or so games have the ability to be output in high-res with every update means that playing PS2 usually means sacrifcing something much more noticeable.
I mean, I could look at Soul Calibur II down at my local arcade right now, and I could sit there and take note of increased complexity in the character models and the backgrounds and things like that over the Dreamcast prequel. But, if I were stand the two versions up against each other, there's no doubt that the proscan VGA in my DC Soul Calibur makes it look much better than the Soul Calibur II arcade machine with its dull display. And that's really what it comes down to - what looks better in the end. Now, Soul Calibur II on PS2 may very well come with proscan capability, but that's still only one more acceptable game in a PS2 library with
FAR too few. The Dreamcast was cheaper, came out earlier than the PS2, and yet has a library of 250+ pro-scan/VGA compatible games. It was a standard for the platform... the PS2 really has no excuse, despite how few other people take advantage of VGA/HDTV. If it was done on Dreamcast, it should have been done on PS2 because it makes a big visual difference in the end.
DC showed the absolute best it could do in Shenmue 2, and it is pretty clear that its limitations are very apparent.
So... Dreamcast was some magic box that managed to be fully maxxed-out for all practical purposes in such a short few years with very little dedicated support, while the simple PSX showed impressive improvement even years longer into its existence?
Sorry if I don't take your word on it. I'd rather take Yuji Naka's, for instance, who said that they learned a ton about the hardware during the development of Phantasy Star Online which could be applied to new future projects (which they never got a chance to make.) Or to Suzuki, who said that they merely tweaked a little code from the Shenmue I engine to allow Shenmue II to support tons more characters on screen at once. He also stated, that like the PS2, the DC could handle VF4, and SEGA even pulled a display for footage from the DC version down a day before they were going to exhibit it at E3 (not saying that the DC could handle a flawless conversion, but then again, neither did the PS2 - not even close.) Or to one of the heads of Test Drive Le Mans development on DC who said the team had found ways to increase their geometry output on the system above the 5 million per second they already achieved in their game.
Clearly, the few devs that actually gave the Dreamcast dedicated support didn't feel it was even close to being maxxed out. How many projects even tried to make good use of its DOT product capabilities and its support for bump mapping and various other effects?
zidane1strife:
Wow, since when are Zoe2, and SH3 Less impressive than DC games...
Since progressive scan (and consequently VGA) means twice the resolution over time, makes a big impact on how the visuals end up looking, and it's what I'm getting in all of my Dreamcast games.
If many PS2 games were capable in that way, I wouldn't be disagreeing with you here. But in the end, that difference stands out to my eyes above all others. Ever had the pleasure of seeing Dead or Alive 2, Sonic Adventure 2, Grandia II, or Samba de Amigo through a Dreamcast VGA box? It's nothing short of jaw-dropping at times. You won't be missing some polygons or some heavier lighting here and there when you're faced with having to trade back to the interlace flicker of the PS2 library to get it.
Oh, you mean the past ps2 titles, now a days most high profile titles feature progressive out of the box, you know the wants people normaly would buy....
Oh really? So Ratchet and Clank, Lord of the Rings, Sly Cooper, Shinobi, Rygar, Suikoden III, Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance, Baldurs Gate DA, Grand Theft Auto Vice City, Kingdom Hearts, Devil May Cry 2, Contra, Wild Arms 3, Grandia Xtreme, etc, etc, etc all support progressive scan? It's definitely the rare exception and
not the rule.
The ps2 supports higher rez progressive than DC...
PS2 supports ALL HDTV standards in the specs, and even if games can't run at the highest of the standards... it supports many of them, many that the DC does not.
I remember you posting this at Gaming-Age once. If someone told you DC was limited to 480p output, someone lied. Dreamcast is capable of higher HDTV resolutions as well.
And, once again, you're mixing up "is capable of" with "has been practical to implement in games". Neither the PS2 or DC have yeilded games supporting HDTV resolutions of 720p or 1080i like Xbox has. Both machines supporting it doesn't mean much. Dreamcast supports FSAA through supersampling, like PS2 managed in Baldur's Gate, but that doesn't mean we see much of that in games from either system.
Yeah, that's a nice output advantage for PS2. Dreamcast has more dedicated audio muscle, though, with 64 simultaneous channels supported (compared to PS2's 48) and a nice Yamaha chipset. Both DC and PS2 could use their CPUs to assist for better sound if they wanted.
marconelly!:
Yeah, just like Dreamcast 'supports' them. Doesn't mean it can really be done in the game.
The Dreamcast could very easily do bumpmapping in a game, let alone the Naomi 2. Inclusion is a decision for the graphics designers, some of whom spoke about doing just that in Dreamcast projects that never made it out because of the machine's predicament in the marketplace. Some of Shiny's developers said they were going to have bumpmapping in their Dreamcast games, for instance, but their publisher decided not to support the machine at that point. People forget how short-lived dedicated Dreamcast development really was... lots of advancements that would've come with time never materialized. Imagine if we froze PS2 development accomplishments only a couple of years into its life (not to mention that our hypothetical example still has PS2 existing from 2000-2002 and not from 1998/1999-2000 like Dreamcast did... slightly different eras in graphic development).
The thing about the Naomi 2 versus PS2 comparison is that it doesn't even account for the fact that Naomi 2 didn't even use the Kyro+ parts a March 2000 console variant surely would've...
And I doubt ELAN was too much more than $30 a pop in quantity...
