"Yes, but how many polygons?" An artist blog entry with interesting numbers

[Nesh]

Namco were really good artist and it shows, look at naomi mazan and you will pretty much see all tell tale signs of namcos style. Characters in tekken tag tournament are actually 2,000 to 3,000 lower triangles compared to dead or alive 2. I cant speak for the stages of TTT but the characters are much lower. The polygon allocation is mostly on the face and less on the hands, probably what gives the illusion of more detail than doa 2 who were crazy enough to model their finger nails and other nonsense. TTT probably does look better due to all the environments mapsthey did on the characters to imitate different types of materials. They took a similar approach in Sc2 and expanded that alot in sc3.

On the subject of soul calibur 2 , I spoke to someone who has a book on japanese developers art that included interviews with dev teams of soul calibur 2. So basically each soul calibur 2 character is around 4,000 polygons and the stage is around 20,000 they said. So its characters are actually lower than doa2 and ttt, if you ever extracted silent hill 2 model its similar to the main character which around 4.5k triangles. Overall in the scene detail is a similar count to doa2 due to the fact the stage being 20k. And all these is much higher than psp tekken5 . Funny enough they considred soul calibur 2 for dc as lead platform but decided against and used ps2 instead, they seem to complain dc used yuv textures.

jin from ttt 6,148 triangles:

thats really interesting. You could see well defined muscles in TTT, especially on the Mishimas, supported by geometry since normal maps did not exist on PS2. Its impressive if they were managing with such lower geometry.
Characters in DO2 look in general a lot more rounded and with "simpler" looking surfaces/geometry even though they are using a lot more polygons.

Kind of sad we never got to see SC2 on the Dreamcast. I wonder how that would have looked like.

 

[xaeroxcore]

Namco were really good artist and it shows, look at naomi mazan and you will pretty much see all tell tale signs of namcos style. Characters in tekken tag tournament are actually 2,000 to 3,000 lower triangles compared to dead or alive 2. I cant speak for the stages of TTT but the characters are much lower. The polygon allocation is mostly on the face and less on the hands, probably what gives the illusion of more detail than doa 2 who were crazy enough to model their finger nails and other nonsense. TTT probably does look better due to all the environments mapsthey did on the characters to imitate different types of materials. They took a similar approach in Sc2 and expanded that alot in sc3.

On the subject of soul calibur 2 , I spoke to someone who has a book on japanese developers art that included interviews with dev teams of soul calibur 2. So basically each soul calibur 2 character is around 4,000 polygons and the stage is around 20,000 they said. So its characters are actually lower than doa2 and ttt, if you ever extracted silent hill 2 model its similar to the main character which around 4.5k triangles. Overall in the scene detail is a similar count to doa2 due to the fact the stage being 20k. And all these is much higher than psp tekken5 . Funny enough they considred soul calibur 2 for dc as lead platform but decided against and used ps2 instead, they seem to complain dc used yuv textures.

jin from ttt 6,148 triangles:

Amazing!!!

Just a few questions? what is yuv textures?

Do you think would be able to use post processing effects displayed by PS2, may be reducing the native resolution, like dev´s did with PS2?

By the way, i made my own DOA 2 Hard*Core vs DOA 2 L.E comparison, incluiding boxes and manuals....

 

[Nesh]

Absense of post processing effects and of better lighting effects was something common in DC games.
DC games looked flatter in general. I think it was a limitation of the hardware. Even games like Shenmue that pushed it looked flat with barely much if any in terms of post processing.

Whatever the PS2 lacked in image resolution and texture quality it made up with effects, post processing and complex (for its time) lighting.
I doubt the DC could produce anything remotely close in terms of lighting and materials to TTT

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Absense of post processing effects and of better lighting effects was something common in DC games.
DC games looked flatter in general. I think it was a limitation of the hardware. Even games like Shenmue that pushed it looked flat with barely much if any in terms of post processing.

Whatever the PS2 lacked in image resolution and texture quality it made up with effects, post processing and complex (for its time) lighting.
I doubt the DC could produce anything remotely close in terms of lighting and materials to TTT

Its less actual limitations and more like performance issues when it comes to lighting and post process. There are homebrew demos of bloom and depth of field for the dc, so hardware can do it but it seems there would performance penalties to take into depends on the effect. Probably developers didnt feel it was worth investing time on these things than anything else really. The lighting calculations eat away at your scene complexity due to lack of tnl.

The whole ttt , sc2, sc3 material isnt actual material. Its tiny (32x32 or something like that) environment maps drawn in a variety of ways with different strengths on different segments of the character models to give the illusion of clothing/ metal/ hair/ skin speculars. Theres even shiny embroided emblems on models in sc2/sc3 that it isnt any else than a flat plane with env map and a alpha mask simply placed over the character models. Theres an exact sdk demo on the dreamcast that shows how this is done called the vase demo, using alphamask and environment maps. So as you see the hardware can do it, and it can even be accelerated using the specialized secondary accumulation buffer dc had, it was for the devs to exploit which they obviously didnt bother.

Seems biased for you to just say the hardware couldn't do it.

Same trick used to simulate different materials on namco fighting games on dc tech demo:

 

[Nesh]

Its less actual limitations and more like performance issues when it comes to lighting and post process. There are homebrew demos of bloom and depth of field for the dc, so hardware can do it but it seems there would performance penalties to take into depends on the effect. Probably developers didnt feel it was worth investing time on these things than anything else really. The lighting calculations eat away at your scene complexity due to lack of tnl.

The whole ttt , sc2, sc3 material isnt actual material. Its tiny (32x32 or something like that) environment maps drawn in a variety of ways with different strengths on different segments of the character models to give the illusion of clothing/ metal/ hair/ skin speculars. Theres even shiny embroided emblems on models in sc2/sc3 that it isnt any else than a flat plane with env map and a alpha mask simply placed over the character models. Theres an exact sdk demo on the dreamcast that shows how this is done called the vase demo, using alphamask and environment maps. So as you see the hardware can do it, and it can even be accelerated using the specialized secondary accumulation buffer dc had, it was for the devs to exploit which they obviously didnt bother.

Seems biased for you to just say the hardware couldn't do it.

Same trick used to simulate different materials on namco fighting games on dc tech demo:

Oh I think you took it too literally. Limitation is a very broad term. If the performance takes a huge penalty for basic effects then of course there is a limitation.

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Oh i see what you mean. Yeah but you have to admit there ways they could have tailored certain things for it to be more dc hardware friendly and simply didnt bother. For example the demo of depth of field on dc shows it can be with 0 transparency making it really fast implementation for dc. Or that secondary accumulation buffer that while not perfect could have helped cope with these multi texture effects, its been said by emu authors there literally less than a handful of games that used it out of the whole library. Thats why i said less of a limitation and more of developers not giving the same care they did for other hardware like say ps2.

I guess we will never know.

 

[xaeroxcore]

Oh i see what you mean. Yeah but you have to admit there ways they could have tailored certain things for it to be more dc hardware friendly and simply didnt bother. For example the demo of depth of field on dc shows it can be with 0 transparency making it really fast implementation for dc. Or that secondary accumulation buffer that while not perfect could have helped cope with these multi texture effects, its been said by emu authors there literally less than a handful of games that used it out of the whole library. Thats why i said less of a limitation and more of developers not giving the same care they did for other hardware like say ps2.

I guess we will never know.

We know the real reasons, they have always been there:

DC games were developed with 32/64 bit era tools, even Shenmue and Soul Calibur. They used everything they learned from DC and use it on PS2, Xbox and GNC...And also, PS2 was harder to develop, yes, but at the same time it was a more profitable bet, and they can port easily the PS2 version to other plattfforms, so it was a safer investment.

DC was more friendly, so they can port games that didn´t use it real potential, but still looked better than last gen hardware, with a minor investment and keeping in mind the system commercially wasn´t as atractive as PlayStation.

The thing is, indie 3D engines for DC are evolving, slowly, but they are getting better, source codes of games running on hardware comparable to DC are leaking....They even ported a PSP Minis 3D games few years ago to DC (4x4 Jam), 2020 and 2021 with all the Atomiswave porting extravaganza....you know what all that means? Community is slowly starting to take real advantage of DC capabilities, and even go further. Is a matter of time, but nowadays isn´t that crazy to think maybe someone can finally make GTA 3 run on DC with the leaked source code of PC version....and if more PSP and PS2 games source codes leaks, we can have more port to DC of demanding games...i dont know, or may be indie developers can finally make a game that goes beyond of what we have seen on DC until now...May be i´m too optimistic, but 5 years ago i did´t even wonder that we would be able to play Atomiswave games, Castlevania Resurrection or a PSP minis game on DC... so.... Time will tell.

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Dead or Alive 2 ( limited edition )- Dreamcast
Extracted using naomilib for the model files. Out of curiousity to compare Doa2 to other games , I looked through other peoples dump of naomi 2 version vf4 and vf5 FS character models. Results were surprising. Naomi 2 virtua fighter 4 character models ranged from 12k to 14 triangles(double of its ps2 counterpart) and Virtua fighter 5 FS ranged from 10K( dural) - 20k triangles. At around 10k triangles per model DoA2 is impressive. especially for an early game.

Tina costume 2 - 10,028 triangles ( no shadow volumes)

ein costume 4 - 9,005 triangles ( no shadow volume)

Demons Church( lower floor) - 17,358 triangles

 

[xaeroxcore]

Dead or Alive 2 ( limited edition )- Dreamcast
Extracted using naomilib for the model files. Out of curiousity to compare Doa2 to other games , I looked through other peoples dump of naomi 2 version vf4 and vf5 FS character models. Results were surprising. Naomi 2 virtua fighter 4 character models ranged from 12k to 14 triangles(double of its ps2 counterpart) and Virtua fighter 5 FS ranged from 10K( dural) - 20k triangles. At around 10k triangles per model DoA2 is impressive. especially for an early game.

Tina costume 2 - 10,028 triangles ( no shadow volumes)

ein costume 4 - 9,005 triangles ( no shadow volume)

Demons Church( lower floor) - 17,358 triangles

Impressive numbers! DOA 2 is the proof that at least poly count wise DC could have run without problems Tekken 4, 5, Bloody Roar 3 and 4, KOF Maximum Impact, Soul Calibur 2, MK V and probably any PSP fighting game.

PD: I´m surprised by the amount of polys on Tina´s boobs hahaha

 

[Cloofoofoo]

These are the models I decided to compare the poly counts of Dead or Alive 2 Dc models against. They fare far better than first thought, even against later gen stuff and even naomi2. These were not dumped by me but by others accross the net.

Virtua Fighter 4(ps2) -Akira - 7,782 triangles

Tekken Tag Tournament (ps2) - Xiaoyu - 6,699 triangles

Tekken 5 (ps2) - Jinpachi - 5,313 triangles

Bloody Roar 3 (ps2) - Alice - 6,734 triangles

Virtua Fighter 4 (NAOMI 2) - Jacky Bryant - 12,844 triangles

Virtua Fighter 5 (ps3 / x360) - Kagemaru -17,442 triangles

 

[xaeroxcore]

These are the models I decided to compare the poly counts of Dead or Alive 2 Dc models against. They fare far better than first thought, even against later gen stuff and even naomi2. These were not dumped by me but by others accross the net.

Virtua Fighter 4(ps2) -Akira - 7,782 triangles

Tekken Tag Tournament (ps2) - Xiaoyu - 6,699 triangles

Tekken 5 (ps2) - Jinpachi - 5,313 triangles

Bloody Roar 3 (ps2) - Alice - 6,734 triangles

Virtua Fighter 4 (NAOMI 2) - Jacky Bryant - 12,844 triangles

Virtua Fighter 5 (ps3 / x360) - Kagemaru -17,442 triangles

Impressive....we really need to see the potential of our Dreamcast unleashed!

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Soul Calibur 3 - ps2 (3ds max might read these slightly higher. Not sure if its counting bones as meshes or what)

Abyss - 8,418 triangles

hwang - 7,031

Taki - 8,282 triangles

Siegfried - 9,063 triangles

abyss scythe - 1,090 triangles

soul calibur - 613 triangles

 

[xaeroxcore]

Soul Calibur 3 - ps2 (3ds max might read these slightly higher. Not sure if its counting bones as meshes or what)

Abyss - 8,418 triangles

hwang - 7,031

Taki - 8,282 triangles

Siegfried - 9,063 triangles

abyss scythe - 1,090 triangles

soul calibur - 613 triangles

Wow SC3 has impressive numbers, keeping in mind that even the weapons are around 1k polys and stages are very detailed. Not Sure if SC3 is on DC reach, because it takes PS2 hardware beyond it´s limits. I´ve always had thought SC3 is the PS2 best looking fighter. In other hand SC2 would be possible on Dreamcast, i think.

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Soul calibur - Broken Destiny - psp

Siegfried - 3,051 triangles

Setsuka - 3,310 triangles

 

[xaeroxcore]

Soul calibur - Broken Destiny - psp

Siegfried - 3,051 triangles

Setsuka - 3,310 triangles

similar numbers to Dreamcast Soul Calibur. I´d say Broken Destiny is possible 1:1 on Dreamcast, and even with higher resolution!

 

[Nesh]

similar numbers to Dreamcast Soul Calibur. I´d say Broken Destiny is possible 1:1 on Dreamcast, and even with higher resolution!

Possible but surely with a lot of cut backs in the visuals.

 

[Cloofoofoo]

Possible but surely with a lot of cut backs in the visuals.

Why would there be any cutbacks? I couldn't get 100% of the stages but they are most likely 20k tops. So 3k character, 20k stages vs doa 2 10k character and 20k stages. And let me add broken destiny has tiny textures that you wouldn't see on dc. Lighting wise its very well below the usual soul calibur standard when you look at 1 to 3 on console. Its alot more static.

Provided the lighting stays the way it is , it would be only upgraded no cutback.

 

[Nesh]

Why would there be any cutbacks? I couldn't get 100% of the stages but they are most likely 20k tops. So 3k character, 20k stages vs doa 2 10k character and 20k stages. And let me add broken destiny has tiny textures that you wouldn't see on dc. Lighting wise its very well below the usual soul calibur standard when you look at 1 to 3 on console. Its alot more static.

Provided the lighting stays the way it is , it would be only upgraded no cutback.

I think you may be right actually. I am curious if the post processing effects and the lighting could be retained.
But looks largely doable.
Here is a comparison in HD between SC3 on PS2 and Broken Desitiny on PSP

With the DC's bigger VRAM we could see more high res textures. And now I am wondering even more how well a DC version of SC2 and 3 would have looked liked and faired compared to the PS2 version.
The game looks super impressive for PSP too

 

[Cloofoofoo]

I think you may be right actually. I am curious if the post processing effects and the lighting could be retained.
But looks largely doable.
Here is a comparison in HD between SC3 on PS2 and Broken Desitiny on PSP

With the DC's bigger VRAM we could see more high res textures. And now I am wondering even more how well a DC version of SC2 and 3 would have looked liked and faired compared to the PS2 version.
The game looks super impressive for PSP too

For broken destiny? Lighting probably wouldn't be an issue, even sc1 does more sources. You can see this is places like taki stages where you have like 3 different color light sources hitting the characters and still had "hit" light. It probably wouldn't be able to do broken destiny geometry with sc1 lighting but the default lighting in broken destiny is basic so it should be fine.

Soul calibur 2 if namco stats holds true complexity should be fine. Issues would come in with how they used environment maps to imitate materials ( silk, metals and so on). And thats used extensively. Ps2,gc,xbox can cope with that via fillrate/hw multitexturing. Dc has a feature to help with this( that would actually this be the perfect case use), secondary accumulation buffer but for whatever reason( lack of understanding or didnt care or its specialized) it wasnt used and i definitely wouldnt expect namco to bother. So visually model wise and texture wise it would the same as its brothers but probably no env map materials and simplified lighting. Not bad overall.

Soul calibur 3 takes the env map material thing into overdrive. Stages, characters clothing , armors. Ton of post processing effects( heck abyss stage brings ps2 fps to a slide show). I guess if the bare it down to no multitexture , simpler lighting, no post processing and probably slightly simplify the stages slight.( my opinion rather keep character full detail and cutback the stage).

 

[davew]

Very interesting discussions.

As much as I would love to see Dreamcast full potential revealed, I doubt it would be capable of anything near PS2 best. The computational power just isn't there, which is why the lighting is so flat on DC titles, although I was kind of impressed with it on Project Justice in at least one stage. We also have to remember that the PS2 was built for multiple pass rendering, its texture buffer alone was 60% faster than Dreamcast with its best compression scenario. The pixel fill rate for DC was about 500M pixels for normal opaque/translucent polys, where the PS2 was at least double that. Also, if I remember correctly, there was a tech discussion that the Dreamcast would run out of memory before it could reach its maximum polygon budget, so the additional memory of the PlayStation is going to pay dividends for not only that but other things.

Don't take my comments the wrong way, I firmly believe the Dreamcast did not see its full potential, DOA2 was probably pushing it as hard as could be at the time, but the game was an early 2000 release, no doubt developers would have found tricks/processes to achieve better results. I always thought that a well-designed Dreamcast version of VF4, would play well and not look drastically different from a polygon budget point of view, then say VF4 on PS2. I'm sure some nips and tucks would be needed in areas, and perhaps some geometry reduction, but I think we have the numbers in this forum to suggest that hypothesis. However, the lighting would take a drastic hit, as the Dreamcast just did not have the computational ability to do that amount of polygon budget with lighting, and this could affect the game presentation considerably. This is just one example of course.

I have no reason to think this particular way, and I'm no programmer, but I would guess the Dreamcast probably hit 80% of its potential with DOA2, it seems that well optimized. Had the DC been around longer, and developers put as much time/budget into games development on that console as say the PS2, we would have been duly impressed. As one commenter said before, "it was not the Dreamcast's technical ability, that was the issue".....