And you suggest Metroid Prime 2 models looks better?
.
Levels in Metroid Prime 2 are also small
And now lets look at textures
Stone texture in Metroid Prime 2 and Halo 1
Ground texture
Metroid Prime 2 is not the best looking FPS game on 6'th gen, IMO even "Black" on PS2 looks better than Metroid Prime 2.
You're comparing 30 to 60 and a game that I already, in earnest, said that does not screenshot well. In motion, it's a good looking game that runs like butter.And you suggest Metroid Prime 2 models looks better?
.
Levels in Metroid Prime 2 are also small
And now lets look at textures
Stone texture in Metroid Prime 2 and Halo 1
Ground texture
Metroid Prime 2 is not the best looking FPS game on 6'th gen, IMO even "Black" on PS2 looks better than Metroid Prime 2. If you want to talk about graphics there's no comparsion to halo games, not only halo games use DX8 to the extreme but also feature much bigger levels so it's possible to use vehicles and even flying ships sometimes unlike metroid prime 2.
You're comparing 30 to 60
Lol omg riddick is not 60. Even dark Athena and the remaster on 360. It's 30, prove me wrong.
You can give me the dumbest tag ever if you can show riddick is 60.
If you can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 you should stay quiet.
You actually are still blocked but I looked at the ignored content.What's up with the fake blocks, name calling, and telling people to stay quiet? You even had to be warned by the mods. It's just a bizarre dynamic considering you're an adult. People can be wrong. I was wrong earlier in the thread about something. It happens, you were wrong about Metroid loading rooms, but you tried to downplay it.
Anyway, Anthena is far more visually demanding. If you're right, Riddick is incredibly good at convincing me its smoother than it is. I'll check to see if I have an embedded FPS counter on my modded Xbox. Either way, it shouldn't run at 60fps on this hardware.
You actually are still blocked but I looked at the ignored content.
It's frustrating to me because I actually am neutral in this comparison, and from the very beginning never said the cube was better at everything ; you can check.
And nope, i said there was more than one room in memory, the other guy said it has one room at a time. We both moved on as it seemed to be a misunderstanding in communication.
But most of you are starting from "no way Xbox is the best I'll show him" instead of hmm maybe cube has advantages, maybe not, but let's check.
I have invested too much in this thread, that's for sure. I'll take a break.
What are you even arguing about? My entire point through out my posts is that GC pushes more polygons than xbox. Which is a fact.Yes, Riddick has low poly models, but with DX8 featues these low poly models are masked and looks good (sometimes like real)
And with advanced lighting possible thanks to DX8 even simple room look extremely impressive
I was playing Riddick yesterday and it looks like an early 360/ps3 era game. On the other hand Metroid Prime 2 looked like PS2 game to me. I have provided screenshot to show what I mean and if these screenshots looks good to you then we have nothing to talk about because it looks like you can only ignore the reality. I have asked you for impressive metroid prime 2 screenshots, and you have posted videos from mario games.
PS2 could outperform xbox hardware in geometry haha, sure multiplatforms proves that. Man you live in a fantasy world but at least I know you are here just to troll.What are you even arguing about? My entire point through out my posts is that GC pushes more polygons than xbox. Which is a fact.
That other guy also proved nothing, I didn't see him post Riddick in mesh.
I also posted a video from Metroid Prime 2 and a selection of other GC exclusives, try harder.
MP2 does not look like a ps2 game, try harder. It has geometry on par with RE4, of which I also posted a ps2 vs GC comparison showing superior geometry on GC. Ps2 also had a higher pixel fill rate than xbox meaning that Ps2 could outperform xbox in geometry.
I mean, I dunno if it was the best, but it sure was pretty good. What more do you need other than impressive games that wowed everyone back in the day like Resident Evil 4 and Rogue Squadron to be convinced it had "polygon capabilities"?I still haven't seen a single shred of hard evidence showing the gamecube's supposed polygon capabilities. Maybe its there, but 11 pages in and there hasn't been a single convincing argument.
I mean, I dunno if it was the best, but it sure was pretty good. What more do you need other than impressive games that wowed everyone back in the day like Resident Evil 4 and Rogue Squadron to be convinced it had "polygon capabilities"?
This or that system doing this or that better doesn't mean these were all suddenly shit considering the generation discussed here. They did impress people and with good reason.
I have checked it for myself and Riddick has unlocked fps exactly like you have said. It's 60fps sometimes, but most of the time it's around 30-40fps. It's easy to see when game is running at close to 30fps because there's a judder during motion, while in 60fps there's no judder.Riddick isn't 30fps. I could immediately tell you were wrong about that when I booted it up. It's much closer to 60fps with drops.
I have checked it for myself and Riddick has unlocked fps exactly like have said. It's 60fps sometimes, but most of the time it's around 30-40fps. It's easy to see when game is running at close to 30fps because there's a judder during motion, while in 60fps there's no judder.
What are you even arguing about? My entire point through out my posts is that GC pushes more polygons than xbox. Which is a fact.
That other guy also proved nothing, I didn't see him post Riddick in mesh.
I also posted a video from Metroid Prime 2 and a selection of other GC exclusives, try harder.
MP2 does not look like a ps2 game, try harder. It has geometry on par with RE4, of which I also posted a ps2 vs GC comparison showing superior geometry on GC. Ps2 also had a higher pixel fill rate than xbox meaning that Ps2 could outperform xbox in geometry.
If that's the case it just means there's no proper 30fps cap like killzone shadow fall rather than an impressive performance metric.I have checked it for myself and Riddick has unlocked fps exactly like you have said. It's 60fps sometimes, but most of the time it's around 30-40fps. It's easy to see when game is running at close to 30fps because there's a judder during motion, while in 60fps there's no judder.
If you want to see a real proof you must play Riddick on real hardware for yourself because I have no framerate benchmarking tool/software to measure framerate. I can only use my own eyes and I can see a clear judder most of the time during motion like in 30 fps games, and no judder when you look at some low demanding scene (and especially empty wall). Also latency is clearly improved when game hits 60 fps and it's much easier to aim then. To me it looks like real 60fps sometimes but I would rather see locked 30fps.If that's the case it just means there's no proper 30fps cap like killzone shadow fall rather than an impressive performance metric.
However I'm genuinely curious to see proof of this. I know for certain that the 360 version is capped at 30.
I have started this thread because of your claims. You have said GC was the best from the technical standpointIt's frustrating to me because I actually am neutral in this comparison, and from the very beginning never said the cube was better at everything ; you can check.
But most of you are starting from "no way Xbox is the best I'll show him" instead of hmm maybe cube has advantages, maybe not, but let's check.
GameCube was the best technically. While Xbox had faster clocks and more ram, it was bottlenecked by a slow front side bus and low memory bandwidth.
What's funny people here have booted up DOA ultimate in wire frame mode, but it's still not enough for you.Im simply making the case that cubes exclusives look better as they generally have higher poly counts and better/more effects (such as water in sms, wave race, alpha effects like fog in re4). And nothing short of booting up emulators in wire frame mode, game by game can prove what has higher poly counts, but I'm 100% convinced of my statements.
GC had no shadow buffer technology, no pixel and vertex shaders so how you can expect TEV unit alone to emulate everything. For example after geforce 5 Nvidia has no longer supported shadow buffer technology in their GPU and it was a problem in certain games. In order to emulate these shadows in splinter cell games shaders can be used but with very big performance penalty. There's no way GC hardware would emulate everything with good performance results and that's why developers rarely tried to emulate similar effects like on xbox. TEV in GC and DX8 features in xbox arnt equivalent.Gc could do anything Xbox can through its tev units
Proof or not it really doesn't matter either way.If you want to see a real proof you must play Riddick on real hardware for yourself because I have no framerate benchmarking tool/software to measure framerate. I can only use my own eyes and I can see a clear judder most of the time during motion like in 30 fps games, and no judder when you look at some low demanding scene (and especially empty wall). Also latency is clearly improved when game hits 60 fps and it's much easier to aim then. To me it looks like real 60fps sometimes but I would rather see locked 30fps.
I have started this thread because of your claims. You have said GC was the best from the technical standpoint
What's funny people here have booted up DOA ultimate in wire frame mode, but it's still not enough for you.
And when shaders and DX8 was mentioned you have said
GC had no shadow buffer technology, no pixel and vertex shaders so how you can expect TEV unit alone to emulate everything. For example after geforce 5 Nvidia has no longer supported shadow buffer technology in their GPU and it was a problem in certain games. In order to emulate these shadows in splinter cell games shaders can be used but with very big performance penalty. There's no way GC hardware would emulate everything with good performance results and that's why developers rarely tried to emulate similar effects like on xbox. TEV in GC and DX8 features in xbox arnt equivalent.
You have also said GC compared to xbox was a monster when it comes to polygons. Your opinion was surprising to me but I was willing to change my mind if only GC games would indeed look as good as you suggested. Because of that I have played the best looking xbox and GC games after so many years just to refresh my memory and see if you are indeed right. But it turned out my memory was correct, in fact in 480p (in xbox classic era I was only playing 480i on CRT) these xbox games looked even more impressive then I have remembered and I have posted many screenshots because I like to show what I'm talking about. Compared to Metroid Prime 2 I can see much more objects on the screen in these halo games, much bigger levels, better textures (with bump mapping and shader effects everywhere on top of that).
My screenshots shows how detailed xbox and GC games were and dont blame static screenshots because I have also played these games for myself, and I could see the same amount of objects and low texture quality also during actual gameplay.
Got a source about that? Seems kinda strange to me.GC had no shadow buffer technology, no pixel and vertex shaders so how you can expect TEV unit alone to emulate everything. For example after geforce 5 Nvidia has no longer supported shadow buffer technology in their GPU and it was a problem in certain games. In order to emulate these shadows in splinter cell games shaders can be used but with very big performance penalty.
TEV is analogous to GeForce 2 (register combiner) at best. It cannot run pixel shaders in any shape or form.
Got a source about that? Seems kinda strange to me.
How do they guarantee backwards compatibility (PC games, OG XBOX BC) when they axe features like that?
I remember GeForce 3 had the fixed-function circuitry of GeForce 2 for T&L BC (since the programmable vertex shader pipeline was too slow to emulate it in real time), but later on nVidia ditched it when T&L emulation via vertex shaders became fast enough.
This thread is making me want to hook my PS2 and GameCube up. Anybody on here use the HD Retrovision component cables with their PS2?
I use RGB Scart for PS2 coupled with a Framemiester at the 480p output setting into a Sony 4K receiver then into an mCable 1080p output to a Sony 4K LCD.
If the game supports 480p I use an OSSC in place of the framemiester in 480p pass-through mode.
Sample close up image taken with phone camera in this thread, but you get the idea.
Anyone using the latest mCable Gaming Edition?
Got a new 4k tv and I'm just thinking about sticking one of these between my receiver, (which does component to hdmi conversion), and my tv. I have a ps2 and ps3 connected to the receiver. Anyone done this or using the 2017 version of the cable? I'd love some examples or comments.www.neogaf.com
wait did a bunch of xbox doc get released, was working on an emu in 2015 and we struggled to get anywhere
TEV is analogous to GeForce 2 (register combiner) at best. It cannot run pixel shaders in any shape or form.
Got a source about that? Seems kinda strange to me.
How do they guarantee backwards compatibility (PC games, OG XBOX BC) when they axe features like that?
I remember GeForce 3 had the fixed-function circuitry of GeForce 2 for T&L BC (since the programmable vertex shader pipeline was too slow to emulate it in real time), but later on nVidia ditched it when T&L emulation via vertex shaders became fast enough.
Saying GameCube was the best technically clearly suggest it was more powerful. When I say Metroid Prime 2 looks like a PS2 game I really mean it becauae there's literally nothing in Metroid Prime 2 that PS2 wouldnt handle. Small levels, simple square objects, low quality textures and no shader effects. I have even used screenshots to prove why I think Metroid Prime 2 looks like a PS2 game. If you think my screenshots dont reflect how good game looks you can post your own screenshots, in fact that's what believable person would do to support his opinion. Do you really expect people here to believe you just because you say so?Proof or not it really doesn't matter either way.
Thats right, I still do say GameCube was the better more balanced machine. However not once did i say it was more powerful. You have proved Jack shit.
It's telling that in the op, you chose decent prime 2 shots but later you chose the worst you could find. However I never said i foind prime to be among the best of the best in the gen ; only in terms of sci fi fps. It is a damn great looking game in motion though. Your thoughts, like it looks a ps2 game shows your bias.
From the beginning I said GameCube couldn't do normals or stencil shadows ; it's just that these come with such a cost on xbox that it makes the games look worse (due to lower polys) and run worse.
Comparing a fighter which has two characters to frankly most genres is a joke and proves nothing.
This thread was fun but a waste in the end. Nobody changed their mind on anything it's like monkey's fighting over football teams.
Great (in my opinion) overlooked games from that era:
Try to find a game on Gamecube that pushes this amount of polys on screen,
Hint: you won't.
Modern Windows OSes don't even support DX8 properly? Wow, I thought BC was a given for PCs (not talking about proprietary APIs like Glide, Direct3D is a Microsoft staple technology, so there's no excuse).But if you want to see splinter cell 1 in it's full glorry on PC you can use dgvoodoo (DX8 emulator). Game looks perfect thanks to dgvoodoo because it has shadow buffer wrapper but of course performance impact is much bigger compared to standard game. GPU's with shader model 3 can emulate shadow buffer shadows with good results and even x360 GPU could do it, but I doubt GC hardware would do it without shaders.
That looks nice. That mcable looks like it does indeed work? Colors also seem to be richer?
I actually have my PS1 hooked up with scart, but I thought I'd go component with the PS2. I have an OSSC as well. Since the PS2 is mostly 480i, I'll be using the Framemeister though since it does deinterlacing.
How exactly are the PS2 480i games on the OSSC?
Yes, and some peoole for many years even build retro computers just to play certain old games correctly. But these days there are many patches and workarounds thanks to moders, for example there's a silent patch for far cry 1 that restore correct water rendering, and there's a dgvoodoo for splinter cell games so personally I'm happy playing these old games on my windows 10 PC. On top of that not so long time ago splinter cell games were added to Xbox X and xbox one BC, so many people can enjoy these old classic games on current gen consoles.Modern Windows OSes don't even support DX8 properly? Wow, I thought BC was a given for PCs (not talking about proprietary APIs like Glide, Direct3D is a Microsoft staple technology, so there's no excuse).
Is shadow buffer some sort of fixed-function circuitry (like T&L) and it was ditched because modern GPUs offer a programmable shader alternative? Unless it was proprietary tech like RTX. I don't remember if ATi cards supported shadow buffer tech.
I think Headhunter was a nice showcase for Dreamcast.Quite enough, especially if developpers use the same ps2 tricks to save ressources(corridors, fixed cameras...)
The screenshots you're showing are from tiny studios like No Cliche, Climax Graphics. Dreamcast games from Kojima, Square would be exciting to imagine...
Component on PS2 doesn't look as good as RGB Scart in my opinion, but the framemiester won't take anything above 480i from the PS2 with RGB Scart without an RGsB to RGBHV converter (like an extron interface). It can take anything from component but there are two problems here. The framemiester D-terminal component input is good but not as nice as scart. Also, you will get some issues with color and Gamma this way too.
However, the OSSC will take 480p and 1080i, so for 480p or 1080i that's what I use. I use pass-through mode.
The OSSC is a line doubler. So 480i on the OSSC looks horrible for 3D motion due to the fact that it will only line double the image to reach 480p. It can do pass-through of 480i but only if your TV can accept that.
So I end up using two PS2s right now, but I have ordered an interesting scart switching device called a PS2 Docking Station. I found two of them and plan on simply hooking one up backwards and see if it works. If not I'll just rewire one to do what I want.
A for the mCable itself, I will never go back. It's amazing now that I know how to use it. And the colors are the same, that is the character select for doahc and the background and lighting is constantly moving.
You could get pretty good initial performance out of GC, but usually that was pretty much it, no amount of dicking around would get you more polygons or more pixels.
PS2 was a pain in the ass poor implementations were really bad.
Xbox was basically underutilized because no one could be bothered.
You might get prettier pixels out of a gamecube than a PS2, but usually only because you couldn't be bothered trying to figure out have to make the PS2 produce the better imagery.
Gamecube's "big win" was the processors relatively large cache and the low latency main memory. I always felt it was designed that way as an over reaction to the horrible memory latency on N64 and all the developer bitching about it.
But the memory subsystem was over engineered, the large cache for the most part removed the advantage of the low latency memory...
When you're building a cross platform game, there is always an element of lowest common denominator, it's about costs (and I don't just mean financial).
PS2 was often the "lead SKU" at big publishers because of the installed base, Xbox was a version you had to do, in most cases you could write a simple version of your renderer and just drop the assets on Xbox and they would usually run faster. So you'd increase texture quality and call it done.
Usually when you dropped it on gamecube it would run slower and you'd have no memory left, so you downsample to make things fit, figure out how you could use ARAM without crippling performance and ship it.
If you wrote an XBox exclusive with no intention of ever shipping on PC, and you actually spent time optimizing there was a lot of performance to be had, usually most titles were CPU limited because then the polygon indices had to be copied into the GPU ring buffer (which wasn't actually a ring buffer). If your app was pushing a lot of geometry it could literally spend 60% of it's time doing nothing but linear memory copies.
It was possible to place jumps into the ringbuffer, to effectively "call" static GPU buffers, but it was tricky to get right because of the pipeline and the fact you had to patch the return address as a jump into the buffer so you'd have to place fences between calls to the same static buffer.
If you did this however you could trivially saturate the GPU and produce something much better looking.
On GameCube the biggest issue is it was just had pathetic triangle throughput, the 10M polygons per second (I don't remember the real number) assumes you never clip or light anything.
GameCube was DX7 class hardware for the most part, albeit a more fully featured version than ever shipped in a PC. The GPU just wasn't very fast.
As I said it's real benefit was the memory architecture and I still feel it was over engineered.
On the whole it wasn't a bad machine, but I wouldn't have said it was "more powerful than PS2)
He may be right, but the part where he says (On GameCube the biggest issue is it was just had pathetic triangle throughput ) excuseme sir, but every single game developed for the Game cube shows more rounded characters and complex stages than anything on the Ps2, plus there are multiplatform games that runs at 60 fps on Gamecube and 30 on ps2.
Capcom had to remodel the entirety of Resident evil 4 assets to lower the polycount in other to make it run on ps2.
More Dreamcast Captures.
Ok, this dude ins Sports Jam looks AMAZING its made of 15.000 polys and to me is the Higest quality character on any 6th gen game, it also runs at 60 fps.
His facial animation, the specular maps in his hair, face/lips and clothes are amazing, granted there is pretty much nothing else on screen, but hey it looks great!
Really this gif is not representative of how good it looks in real time on your telly at 60 fps.
Creepy Wireframe of that guy, even the wrinkles on his forehead are modelled and they move with his facial expressions, also fully modelled teeth.
When people thinks about good graphics on the Dreamcast most think about Shenmue, but there are actually better games in terms of graphics on the system that get systematically overlooked
Formula Grand Prix 2
Sega Extreme Sports is also a fantastic looking game on the system., what you see in the distant background isn't a static bitmap (like in SSX) it is actually fully modelled terrain.
Ecco the Dolphin. (beautiful game)
NBA 2k2
More Le Mans 24h because this games looks fantastic.
If all the best studios couldn't exploit its supposed strengths despite making the system their primary focus for that generation (for obvious reasons) then that's not even worth theorizing over. It's as powerful as they managed to make it appear, not more so. It's decidedly less powerful than the cube in most ways for sure (and better in some others). Which doesn't mean an AAA production of the era like MGS2 with the highest of budgets and one of the most pioneering tech and art team behind it couldn't look wonderful obviously. Labor, attention to detail and art with the budget to let them work until it's all perfected will always trump specs. If we pit Kojima Productions against Telltale with their usual budgets on top then we know whose game will look better even if the latter works on a next gen system, nevermind on one within the same gen, but it's clear PS2 was weaker.