Chozofication_
Banned
Can't believe i forgot that one.Ran XBC like shit though and at way lower resolution
Can't believe i forgot that one.Ran XBC like shit though and at way lower resolution
yes they are sprites when are far away and trees when close like most LOD system at the time and that is for good LOD systems most dont draw foliage at all when is that far and you forget that this amount of sprites for trees and bushes in far away mountains was uncommon in that generation and the resolution seems correct for the screen resolution of the time, so not exactly easy you need a lot of fill rate to draw so many.... like ps2
oblivion its a game for newer and more powerful consoles yet I dont see it use as many sprites for far and close foliage probably not the right game to compare not even the same genre different goals and requirements but if its so easy I think using lot of "ugly sprites" is a clever way of improving your game
transformers (PS2)
Oblivion(PS3 Xbox 360)
Morrowind(Xbox)
It looks like the PC, PS3 and Xbox are of the same build of the game and the PS2, GameCube and 3DS are of another build.Xbox was a beast. Here is a great comparison of all the different versions of Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and the the PS2 and GCN look like arse compared to the Xbox. While the Xbox version is comparable to the PC and PS3 versions. Visuals aren’t the only thing, as the PS2 and GCN versions had levels broken up in many third party games and had loading screens, while the Xbox version would be one large seamless level.
Look at it again and then look at the best the Xbox can offer, it's not that great. I've got both running through component to an at the time $1,400 CRT. Xbox is better.My understanding as far back as the mid 2000s was that the Gamecube was more capable than XBOX and PS2. With that said, I distinctly remember looking at stuff like Project Gotham and Splinter Cell on a really nice TV and thinking how much better they looked than most games at the time. I think Rogue Squadron II is probably the most impressed I've been by a game from that generation of consoles. Especially considering it was a launch title.
Xbox was a beast. Here is a great comparison of all the different versions of Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and the the PS2 and GCN look like arse compared to the Xbox. While the Xbox version is comparable to the PC and PS3 versions. Visuals aren’t the only thing, as the PS2 and GCN versions had levels broken up in many third party games and had loading screens, while the Xbox version would be one large seamless level.
I really need to one of these days. Part of the issue is dealing with 480i (well, for frame-rate tests) so every version needs to be 480p. 480i requires frame by frame manual adjustment!
The funny thing is that Factor 5 were going to release a 'Rogue Leader' trilogy on Xbox, complete with upgraded visuals and a higher resolution, but structuring by LucasArts caused the game to be canned (and Xbox being dropped after 4 years possibly).
If you dont believe me, Google it.
EDIT.
Also just to put an end to your babbling -
Factor 5 president details canceled Star Wars projects
Factor 5 earned plenty of goodwill from Star Wars fans with its Rogue Leader series across the Nintendo 64 and GameCube, but the studio planned to do more with the universe beyond those games. During an episode of IGN's Nintendo Voice Chat, former Factor 5 president Julian Eggebrecht detailed...www.engadget.com
"When Factor 5's exclusivity window with Sony ended in 2007, the studio's gaze was set on the Wii. They reworked the Rogue Squadron trilogy project originally built for Xbox and added optional play styles (you could steer an X-Wing with the Wii wheel and manage its pedals with the Balance Board, for example). Beyond piloting ships, Factor 5's "Rogue Leaders" used the Wii Motion Plus for 1:1 lightsaber battles between 20 characters, complete with force powers. Rogue Leaders essentially ran on Lair's graphics engine at 60 frames-per-second and featured ducking and dodging beyond what's found in Wii Sports Resort. "
Footage of the cancelled Xbox......er sorry Wii version -
Looks just as good, if not better than the Gamecube versions. So just stop with the nonsense.
It did, because the game was mostly bottlenecked by the GPU (even with the extra memory of the n3DS) and the engine was ported, not made on the ground up for the portable.Ran XBC like shit though and at way lower resolution
Yes, relative to the low resolution it ran most games at (typically 480i), the ps2 had a very high memory bandwidth (50gb/sec). PS2 was designed for high fill rate. This was possible because each pixel did only a very simple ALU operation and only accessed one texture. This allowed it to draw something to every pixel without breaking a sweat. However this was of limited utility outside of the transformers example, because the operations had to be fairly simplistic. i.e draw hundreds of shitty little 4 color sprites across millions of pixels.
There is so much more 3D space geometric complexity in Morrowind than in your transformers example.
More impressively, the Sega Saturn managed Faux-polygonal 3D WITH textures / sprites. i.e it couldn't even do polygons but could pretend to do so by creating 6 sided quads and manipulating each texture surface appropriately in real time. This made the 3d graphics on saturn more complex and culling more difficult which meant most 3d titles on the sega saturn underperformed relative to the ps1.
The 3DS GPU has a more modern feature set when specifically exploited it can produce great resuls as seen on Revelations and SM3DL the only downside is that's under powered and works at super low resolution.It did, because the game was mostly bottlenecked by the GPU (even with the extra memory of the n3DS) and the engine was ported, not made on the ground up for the portable.
Still, an impressive game, even with the drawbacks.
I resent the notion that the 6th generation of consoles is considered "ancient." I played with an Atari 2600 you know?
That said, I had the OG Xbox, and it was a fun console. Yeah the controller was big and unwieldy, but eventually I got used to it. And there were some quality games too, like Ninja Gaiden, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Max Payne, Hulk: Ultimate Destruction and others. I wouldn't call my other favorite game, Dead or Alive: Xtreme Beach Volleyball a quality title. It's more of a sentimental favorite.
A couple of games that are often overlooked in the Xbox library is the Kingdom Under Fire series. I played the shit out of these back in the day and really digged the Dynasty Warriors style combat combination with real time strategy. It's a shame though that the sequel became an MMO. I hope they come out with a new title focused on single player in the future.
To be fair while the per pixel operations of course favour the Morrowind example, the draw distance of Morrowind is a bit low for some of the most complex ones and they resort to distance fog soon... still amazing looking game if you play it over component... otherwise yuck... Vaseline filter hehe... well, this was my reaction when I switched to component cables. Personally, style wise, I prefer Primal and MGS2 to the Transformers shot that was posted... but that is just me maybe .
Considering when it came out, back then 1-1.5 years were an eternity in terms of technological evolution (and GPU generations), and the cost of the console rapidly dropping during the generation... I think PS2 held its own pretty well: it was designed back when you just had to do multi-pass rendering most of the time so they focused on a very very flexible geometry front end with the VU’s (much more versatile than the VS of the time), ensured the GS could access its memory without bottlenecks (RMW operations were super fast with read, write, and texture I/O channels and fast access to page buffers with even much faster access to the eDRAM macros), and the GS was also designed not to lose a beat when the developer changed render state or flushed buffers even on a per object basis. Blending modes and tri-linear filtering were both bit limited and I do not need to ask devs what they thought about anisotropic filtering on it or PSP , but at least multi-pass rendering allowed you to take advantage of the more limited fixed function blending operations you had.
Thanks to the massive popularity and ROI for optimising your title for it, devs got pretty creative with uses of the IPU and the CRTC and even per pixel bump mapping in some very late titles.
Thinking back do you think Sony made a mistake making the PS2 chip in house? It was a big expensive chip, the GC was much better all around and probably a fraction of the cost.Considering when it came out, back then 1-1.5 years were an eternity in terms of technological evolution (and GPU generations), and the cost of the console rapidly dropping during the generation... I think PS2 held its own pretty well:
Ralli sport challenge 2 was using shadows buffers and because of that many shadows were dynamic, pixel shaders were used also (on water surface, road surface, car reflections). Game also had very big levels with insane number of detailed trees and vegetation so 2x vertex units were used to the extreme for sure. I doubt this game could be ported to PS2 and GC.Beautiful games (although jetset doesn't really push technical boundaries much)
But none of those games really use xboxs advanced shaders much. Which is half my point ; games like Riddick and halo 2 were doing too much for their own good.
I honestly only think that rallisport challenge 2 wouldn't be doable on cube, since it doesn't tax the bandwidth much. Xbox really had great looking racers.
We have absolutely no idea how much the Wii footage resembled the Xbox build, if they even had it running on x.
A couple of games that are often overlooked in the Xbox library is the Kingdom Under Fire series. I played the shit out of these back in the day and really digged the Dynasty Warriors style combat combination with real time strategy. It's a shame though that the sequel became an MMO. I hope they come out with a new title focused on single player in the future.
This allowed it to draw something to every pixel without breaking a sweat. However this was of limited utility outside of the transformers example, because the operations had to be fairly simplistic. i.e draw hundreds of shitty little 4 color sprites across millions of pixels.
There is so much more 3D space geometric complexity in Morrowind than in your transformers example.
More impressively, the Sega Saturn managed Faux-polygonal 3D WITH textures / sprites. i.e it couldn't even do polygons but could pretend to do so by creating 6 sided quads and manipulating each texture surface appropriately in real time. This made the 3d graphics on saturn more complex and culling more difficult which meant most 3d titles on the sega saturn underperformed relative to the ps1.
I'm surprised no one has made a game like it since then other than developer Blueside with Kingdom Under Fire 2. As far as I know the Dynasty Warrior series or any other musou game hasn't adopted real time strategy elements into their hack and slash gameplay. I;d really to see another developer take a crack at this with today's graphics.Another graphical powerhouse during the timeframe I forgot about. I remember being blown away with how many units were onscreen and how detailed they were considering the sheer numbers(for the time).
That's your opinion, not a fact. I have played fzero GX yersterday on dolphin emulator and there's nothing impressive in that game besides framerate. Only ships models have high quality textures, but besides that textures are low quality and levels arnt very detailed.You are talking rubbish. The fact is that RE4, Rogue Leader(60fps), MP2(60fps} and F-Zero(60fps) all destroyed Xbox games in poly count. I posted two over 15 year old threads with links to developers quotes of the time stating real world performance of both consoles! With Rogue Squadron a launch GC game setting a bench mark that Xbox never reached in real world.
GC was similar in a way to ps3 in that exclusives were what pushed technical boundaries.
Reading comprehension for the win.
My whole argument here is based around the fact that GC was superior in pushing polygons.
I resent the notion that the 6th generation of consoles is considered "ancient." I played with an Atari 2600 you know?
That said, I had the OG Xbox, and it was a fun console. Yeah the controller was big and unwieldy, but eventually I got used to it. And there were some quality games too, like Ninja Gaiden, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Max Payne, Hulk: Ultimate Destruction and others. I wouldn't call my other favorite game, Dead or Alive: Xtreme Beach Volleyball a quality title. It's more of a sentimental favorite.
A couple of games that are often overlooked in the Xbox library is the Kingdom Under Fire series. I played the shit out of these back in the day and really digged the Dynasty Warriors style combat combination with real time strategy. It's a shame though that the sequel became an MMO. I hope they come out with a new title focused on single player in the future.
Problems with porting the engines. UE1 wasn't strictly written for consoles, therefore ithad many shortcomings compared to the same games on PC.Guys when it comes to PS2 I remember games like Half Life 1 and ureal engine 1 games like deus ex and unreal tournament 1. These games run like a dream on my PC back then (celeron 500MHz and geforce 2MX), yet PS2 was struggeling. Why is that? These games looked nowhere as good as the best looking PS2 games and should run without problems.
If you have a original disc and a 360 you can play it via backwards compatibility. I don't see it on the Xbox One's bc list sadly.I have never played that game on my xbox, but I can see insane amount of characters on the screen. But I'm sure Game Cube fans will ignore your video and still say GC hardware was pushing more polygons in GC games.
I read that the PS2 was initially difficult to develop games for, but eventually Sony offered proper support to developers and the games started pouring in. Of course, Sony wouldn't learn their lesson with the PS3, which was even more difficult to program for by all accounts. They finally settled on a PC friendly devkit with the PS4 though.Guys when it comes to PS2 I remember games like Half Life 1 and ureal engine 1 games like deus ex and unreal tournament 1. These games run like a dream on my PC back then (celeron 500MHz and geforce 2MX), yet PS2 was struggeling. Why is that? These games looked nowhere as good as the best looking PS2 games and should run without problems.
The PS2 does things that were not supported in DX7, its GPU can do shader, however it also had much less memory to store textures and polygons (it has less effective space for textures than the Dreamcast had).They can be compared in terms of graphical capabilities.
I havent said Playstation 2 or Gamecube are running D3D, of course, its a MS thing.
Shaders baby. During those days they were slowly standardizing it and more graphic cards started to use them. Before that fancy effects were really bound to specific cards and drivers, for example Dungeon Keeper 2 and it's fantastic bump mapping.I remember that water in Morrowind was like nothing else at the time. Even most PCs couldn't render it.
Thinking back do you think Sony made a mistake making the PS2 chip in house? It was a big expensive chip, the GC was much better all around and probably a fraction of the cost.
Imagine what could have been if Sony used the EE/GS R&D money and paid imgtech/Ati and IBM to develop a top of the line solution instead.
IBM + ATI/PowerVR (nvidia is a no no for consoles)IBM + ATI or say nVIDIA for the full solution? Like PS3 ?
But neither of them had the tech, talent, ip to match graphics technology from ati/imgtechNo, I think that the time was perfect for both PS1 and PS2 to be done in house and at that time Sony and Toshiba had a pretty powerful semiconductors division and quite lofty aims
lol not even closeMost of PS2's library is either remastered on PS3/4 or better on Xbox
library that's worth playing I meanlol not even close
Xbox was a beast. Here is a great comparison of all the different versions of Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and the the PS2 and GCN look like arse compared to the Xbox. While the Xbox version is comparable to the PC and PS3 versions. Visuals aren’t the only thing, as the PS2 and GCN versions had levels broken up in many third party games and had loading screens, while the Xbox version would be one large seamless level.
Most of Dreamcast ports to other consoles of the same generation run at lower res, lower textures or both.
No, but they had their own in house talent and when such talent is also able to work very closely with the chip layout/semiconductor manufacturing lines more efficient output can be achieved.But neither of them had the tech, talent, ip to match graphics technology from ati/imgtech
Some bits inferior, some bits not so much actually and again it came out a lot earlier (1-1.5 years then is one to almost two full GPU generations).The PS2 cost Sony billions (R&D and manufacturing fabs) with inferior performance to the GC,
When they were essentially discontinuing it yeah and it led to Nintendo re-using the same core tech for almost three home consoles in a row (Wii U count as the third CPU wise)didn't the GC hit $99 at one point?
Correct me if im wrong but i assume either ATI or imgtech would have delivered considerably better graphics solution than the GS for the same R&D budget for the same launch time frame
The DreamCast launched a year earlier with presumably a much lower budget and look what they managed, with one extra year in the oven and PS2s budget im sure Sony/Toshiba with a PowerVR design license would have delivered something truly impressive.
The only advantage i can think to Sonys in house exotic hw approach is making it harder to port PS2 games thus indirectly gaining console exclusives
Y'all are making me want to run some comparisons