Xbox in 2000, will its graphics still reign supreme.......!?

Discussion in 'Console Industry' started by Guest, Sep 25, 2002.

  1. BenSkywalker

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    5
    It was a generalization about having the option between the two in terms of hardware. You give developers the option to run 5x as many lights or 5x as many polys, the lights haven't stood a chance. This has remained a constant across all development platforms- PC, Console or Arcarde.

    Except it looks extremely poor compared to proper lighting for anything real time. Disjointed shadows work wonders to destroy realism. We are pretty much already at the point where developers are going to move straight from lightmaps to extensive shader effects for lighting.

    Per pixel lighting was nice in 2K when it started showing up regularly in games, but the number of lights utilized has remained low despite the vastly improved performance characteristics of current hardware. What I'm talking about is utilizing various PS/VS effects in tandem with an increased amount of lights. I guess you could say that Dot3 or CubeMaps would fall under that general guideline, but I was thinking more extensive utilization of a combination of shader effects ala Doom3. It seems that all the games looming on the horizon utilizing a decent amount of lights are going to be far more limited by the shader performance then they are by setup calcs(which have a relatively speaking minor impact on VS performance).

    Simply using multiple lights for the sake of multiple lights has never caught on with game developers, nor will it likely ever do so. Using additional poly simply for the sake of increased geometry has been constant since the start of 3D and will continue to be until it is no longer relevant in terms of count due to density. The same is not true of lighting. One light with true complete radiosity calculations will look a lot better then six, sixty of six hundred basic lights.
     
  2. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    Aww, too bad I guess. :(

    Also, is Elan T&L bandwidth limited ? or can you still double the clock rate and still used the SDRAM without going to DDR.

    I wonder why PVR, hasn't release high end card like ATI and NVIDIA or even MATROX. Given the cost of cards are mostly due to expensive memory, PVR can get away with slightly more expensive chip.

    Those high end card really leverage the low end card as well as improve company's image :)
     
  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Sarcastic?
    No. Just pointing out that using arcade HW as home console is not too economically viable. :oops:
     
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I meant, can you keep a stable framerates(30/60) in game, with all the graphic effects turn on(which affects performance more than resolution)?

    I do not think there is any GF1 game looking and/or running as good as TTT/Bouncer/TMB/GT3/BGDA/ZOE1...
    AFAIK, PS2 T&L, SFX, mem bandwidth and fillrate are superior to GF1 cards.
     
  5. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    Nobody said a console would use the exact board as the arcade. The DC doesn't use the NAOMI 1 does it? A NAOMI 2 based console would be similar to the NAOMI 1 based DC...VERY easily doable.
     
  6. zurich

    zurich Kendoka
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,376
    Likes Received:
    2
    T&L - Yes
    SFX - No
    mem bandwidth - system No, framebuffer Yes
    fillrate - Yes

    zurich[/quote]
     
  7. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    It should've :) Looking at some of the NAOMI to DC port, they should give both the same amount of RAM at least.
     
  8. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    Specifically which ports are you talking about? AFAIK NAOMI 1 to DC ports were 99.9% identical.
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest


    Hehe, my definition of SFX == cinematic and particle effects.
    For example, GT3 have all teh cool motion blur, heat haze, dust, environmental reflection, unseen in any GF1 game.

    Correct me if i am wrong, PS2 large fillrate more than made up for the lack of 3D features on the GS. Apart from bumpmapping, what other 3D features can a GF1 do better than PS2, practically speaking. :oops:
     
  10. zurich

    zurich Kendoka
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,376
    Likes Received:
    2
    Texture filtering, blend modes, and anything on the perpixel level (lighting) :p

    zurich
     
  11. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    Most of them. Crazy Taxi, DOA2, F355, etc, Like you said its 99.9%, but that extra 0.1% makes all the difference.
     
  12. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    Sorry, but I just don't see it. BTW I've seem Virtua Tennis in the arcade and it looked different, but not necessarily better. Probably has to do with the monitor that are used in arcade cabinets.
     
  13. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    Yet you said its 99.9%. I guess its like how most of my friends don't see the jaggieness on the early PS2 games, until you point it out to them.

    Then I guess, majority of people don't really see the difference between VF4 on N2 and VF4 on PS2. So what's the point of having a slight advantage if majority don't see that advantage ?

    Than you should wonder why N1 spec is different compare to DC spec.
     
  14. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    The 99.9% figure is based off of the fact that compression is used more on the DC version of the game. It's not based on what I have seen. What I've seen says 100% perfect port :wink:

    VF4 on N2 and VF4 on PS2 is a BIG difference not 0.1%. The fact that PS2 isn't using N2 technology accounts for that difference.

    N1 wasn't designed to show the difference between DC graphics and N1 graphics. It was created as a platform for quick porting to DC with little if any graphics downgrading :wink:

    The difference between N1 and DC is the arcade experience not graphics.
     
  15. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    A big difference if you don't know it, is the same as no different at all, that's the point I am getting at.

    If it were the same spec, wouldn't it be even easier ?

    Well there are graphics different. Last time I listed them down, in game such as CT by putting the DC and the Arcade version side by side. That was ages ago. I can't be bothered doing it anymore.
     
  16. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    But that analogy is flawed because VF4 on PS2 looks obviously downgraded from the N2 version. OTOH DC ports of N1 games don't look downgraded at all.

    If DC had twice the memory it would've been easier obviously, but it would've cost more to manufacture which wasn't an option. Again N1 was arcade tech so it could afford to be more expensive.

    Assuming there is a visible difference, that's only one game. That's far from most or majority. DOA2 wasn't a N1 game btw. Bottom line is, the majority of N1 -> DC ports were 99.9% the same graphically...period.
     
  17. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    Some of my friends can't tell a difference between PS2 and Arcade version of VF4. The analogy is only flawed to you because you can't see the different.


    No, not just one game, most of the game that get the conversion, showed the typical downgrading.

    DOA2 wasn't N1 ? what was it ? Model 3 ? Hikaru ?, System 246 ?, N2 ?
    You don't play in the arcade alot from the looks of things.
     
  18. marconelly!

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,742
    Likes Received:
    0
  19. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    Still doesn't change the fact that it didn't look any different from the DC port :wink:

    But thanks for clearing that up.

    Huh?? Read what I posted. I said it's obviously downgraded ESPECIALLY since it's not using the same hardware as N2. N1->DC ports are NOT obviously downgraded IF AT ALL!

    BTW bringing your friends into the equation isn't going to support your argument instead it's showing that you don't have a valid one to begin with.

    If that's what you believe then I'll just leave it at that. I think is OBVIOUS that a DC port of a NAOMI 1 game will be a lot closer than a PS2 port of a NAOMI 2 game since DC and N1 is basically the same system and ESPECIALLY when N1 is using 25% texture compression and DC using 75%. VF4 on PS2, however, was blurry and jagged among other things.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...