Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
except no, they didn't do even remotely the same thing.
MVG: Was the PS2 "Emotion Engine" over hyped?
- Thread starter Thick Thighs Save Lives
- Start date
- Analysis Retro
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Last edited:
64gigabyteram
Reverse groomer.
Have balls and tell him he is ridiculous lol.(Obbe is GTA 3's technical director)
4 months- you don't know how much the game's scope could've increased in development since then.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
The dude's speaking in retrospect, I think he's aware of how the game evolved rather than only speak for early development, cope harder. He cited the Crazy Taxi games as they do things like stream assets to have a big city so dense with traffic and other physics objects, all at blistering speed and 60fps, so as a technical director he can imagine how another game/engine may aim for slower gameplay & framerate with less but more detailed traffic etc. affording the cpu/gpu time to process elements they don't have and GTA requires, even if it'd end up a bit different as a multiplatform game.
Anyway, on topic, it seems like they made PS2 capable of some things almost by accident but devs ran with it even though to push the effects they deemed impressive it ended up with games that look like corrupted gifs and run about as good. It's still cool, but clearly for overall solid results without compromise it was maxed early on with the likes of MGS2/TTT and from then on it was sacrifice after sacrifice, whether in the way assets were created to work around a limit or whatever else to maintain performance or say screw performance and just throw whatever it can theoretically do.
Of course having that crazy success thanks to Sony's amazing marketing and following from the PlayStation meant that often the other consoles got screwed over as games and effects, even if very much possible with other methods on other systems, were hand crafted for the PS2's peculiarities only.
Anyway, on topic, it seems like they made PS2 capable of some things almost by accident but devs ran with it even though to push the effects they deemed impressive it ended up with games that look like corrupted gifs and run about as good. It's still cool, but clearly for overall solid results without compromise it was maxed early on with the likes of MGS2/TTT and from then on it was sacrifice after sacrifice, whether in the way assets were created to work around a limit or whatever else to maintain performance or say screw performance and just throw whatever it can theoretically do.
Of course having that crazy success thanks to Sony's amazing marketing and following from the PlayStation meant that often the other consoles got screwed over as games and effects, even if very much possible with other methods on other systems, were hand crafted for the PS2's peculiarities only.
Last edited:
SirTerry-T
Member
Pot, kettle...etc
Futaleufu
Member
Particularly true with PC ports, with people asumming the PC ports missing effects was due to it being unable to render what the PS2 could when in reality it was developers or port coders not willing to put the time and effort to match the original game.
The average PS2 game had much better performance than the average PS1 game but still it wasnt the rock solid experience some people retroactively describe. Something like Katamari Damacy should've been a fixed 30 fps but it was all over the place.
Lysandros
Member
One and a half year later. The machines had different strengths.
squidilix
Member
GTA 3 looked like this before they drop Dreamcast
Yeah sure, first I don't even know you, second, I don't wast my time saying at each thread how Dreamcast was a failure and poor performance sales. I just litteraly don't care.
Last edited:
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Come on, dude !
Relax,it's just a joke 
.If i found the PSX, PSP and PS3 impressive, i admit that mocking the mighty PS2 is too easy
:LOOK, MY FRIENDS ! THIS IS...
E-M-O-T-I-O-N E-N-G-I-N-E
(ingame model without the cutting edge alliasing though
)
Last edited:
Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
Let's assume that GTA 3 runs on the Dreamcast, the car windows would be all black, no shadows, no light effectsGTA 3 looked like this before they drop Dreamcast
The most the Dreamcast can do is a Driver 2 at 640x480 with a little more detailed character and longer draw distance like it did in 98-2001 in its games. Or Super Runabout Omikron.
Unfortunately, the Dreamcast became outdated very quickly.
Last edited:
Wildebeest
Member
The hype for PS2 hardware was unreal back in the day. Really, it just about delivered on what it needed to do for the time, just in a very unconventional way.
squidilix
Member
Radical_3d
Member
diffusionx
Gold Member
well he states that it "looked like" it could have handled GTA3 but we don't know anything about what that entails by the end of it. He's making an educated guess. That's just a fact. It could mean anything from "it could run the exact same game better" to "it would have been a more limited game but we would not have known that because we couldn't access an alternative universe where we finished the game on DC to compare."GTA 3's technical director:
- "The Dreamcast could have handled GTA3."
A random dude on GAF:
- "4 months - you don't know how much the game's scope could've increased in development since then."
Internet
Last edited:
Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
Can Dreamcast handle this launch game?
Last edited:
Crayon
Member
It was really good stuff at the time. By the standards of the day, consoles being hard to program for was the norm and it was on the threshold of the time where more abstraction was becoming necessary. So it seemed like a real handful for developers but i don't think that's the hardware's fault.
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Ohhhhhhh, much better.Yeah... relax
JRPG in Dreamcast
8 month later on PS2
I like the spirit but let's compare big fishes now
:Emulator screenshots for everyone (don't cry, PS2 is strong at post process effect, Dreamcast at Image quality... so, Dreamcast has the disadvantage
)1999 Dreamcast (in engine cut scene intro)
2001 Playstation 2 (in engine cut scene intro)
(on top of that, it seems it was too much for the Alien PS2 Death Star hardware... Later Square reduced our precious polycount with FFXII models
)2005 Playstation 2 (in engine cut scene)
Blast processed...
Radical_3d
Sorry to disapoint you...
I know it sounds insane or out of reach for earlier consoles but Douglas from Silent Hill 3 has less polygons than 1999 Shenhua from Shenmue (8800 VS 9100)
The polygon war was a lie, Jim.
Last edited:
pepodmc_
Member
Yeah, Sega delivered with the Dreamcast but overall the words EMOTION ENGINE are pure marketing like the BLAST PROCESSING...
Shenmue cutscene intro (99/Dreamcast)
Of course, Playstation 2 games cannot match the high poly beautiful models of the Dreamcast but look at Yuna... Sure, the hair are a little rough but the model is not that far from Shenhua (Shenmue/Dreamcast)
FFX cutscene intro (2001/PS2)
PS2 is not that bad,seriously...
pure marketing no, there were games impossible in snes because of the fast processor.
Snes without the special chips, in the cartridges wouldnt have things like star fox for example.
kiphalfton
Member
My parents were pretty anti-video games and didn't generally spend much. So imagine my fucking surprise when I got a PS2 for Christmas.
Best.gift.ever
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
"Blast processing" was completely made up. It had a faster CPU than the SNES but the CPU was a 68000 that was in a million other devices at the time, it wasn't doing anything special.
Genesis couldn't do Star Fox on stock hardware either.
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
(Stock Genesis Hardware)
The Blast Processing is real.
Master Sega, I will never doubt again about your consoles
Last edited:
EverydayBeast
ChatGPT 0.001
Graphics weren't an issue with PS2.
We literally had to wait for console GPUs in 2020 to mimick everything PS2 was doing in 00 - not bad for a 'tech dead-end'.
Xaeroxcore666
Member
It was overhyped? YES and NO!
As the video states, it has an slow start thanks to it´s innovative but complicated architecture. Sony really exaggerated it´s capabilities at pre launch state, to make sure it was going to eclipse the competition (commercially it really did at a point is still unreachable), and first wave of PS2 games, despite doing some stuff more advanced than DC, overall they werent´ able to surpass the best DC offered by 2000...Yes, we know by 2001 everything changed and the heavy hitters of PS2 started to accomplish part of Sony´s promises and surpass the already dead by that year DC, but also by that time GCN and Xbox arrived and really showed a visual leap over PS2 even on launch games (Rogue Squadron 2, Halo and DOA 3 are really above everything on the entire PS2 catalog)...So i would say, on it´s first years it was kinda overhyped.... BUT the power of EE and GS well used really showed PS2 was able to keep up with those more powerful competitors and allow as someone said here, punch above it´s weight....And then, PS2 was capable of technical marvels, even beyond to what we could had imagined on it´s first years, like GoW 2,Black, Burnout Revenge, SotC, GT 4, MGS 3....and even RE 4, and elite GCN game, which most people thought it was simply impossible to even run PS2, but despite it´s expectable downgrades still looks amazing...So taking a look from a historic point of view and watching the whole lifecycle of the console...It just wasnt overhyped: PS2 even delivered visuals even above to what we thought it was possible on it! By the way, i love how TTT looks, it really did some stuff even ahead of Tekken 4 and 5, and was the closest to have the CGI Tekken chars from PS1 games opening scenes playable.
PD: I love DC more than any console, but PLEASE dont´turn the thread into an unnecesary war within PS2 and Dreamcast.
As the video states, it has an slow start thanks to it´s innovative but complicated architecture. Sony really exaggerated it´s capabilities at pre launch state, to make sure it was going to eclipse the competition (commercially it really did at a point is still unreachable), and first wave of PS2 games, despite doing some stuff more advanced than DC, overall they werent´ able to surpass the best DC offered by 2000...Yes, we know by 2001 everything changed and the heavy hitters of PS2 started to accomplish part of Sony´s promises and surpass the already dead by that year DC, but also by that time GCN and Xbox arrived and really showed a visual leap over PS2 even on launch games (Rogue Squadron 2, Halo and DOA 3 are really above everything on the entire PS2 catalog)...So i would say, on it´s first years it was kinda overhyped.... BUT the power of EE and GS well used really showed PS2 was able to keep up with those more powerful competitors and allow as someone said here, punch above it´s weight....And then, PS2 was capable of technical marvels, even beyond to what we could had imagined on it´s first years, like GoW 2,Black, Burnout Revenge, SotC, GT 4, MGS 3....and even RE 4, and elite GCN game, which most people thought it was simply impossible to even run PS2, but despite it´s expectable downgrades still looks amazing...So taking a look from a historic point of view and watching the whole lifecycle of the console...It just wasnt overhyped: PS2 even delivered visuals even above to what we thought it was possible on it! By the way, i love how TTT looks, it really did some stuff even ahead of Tekken 4 and 5, and was the closest to have the CGI Tekken chars from PS1 games opening scenes playable.
PD: I love DC more than any console, but PLEASE dont´turn the thread into an unnecesary war within PS2 and Dreamcast.
Last edited:
Avid Reading Horse
Member
Bro of course it was overhyped. The fucking news was telling us that Saddam Hussein could kill us all if he got his hands on a shipment of the PS2 supercomputers, lmao
AGRacing
Member
Where is this delusional Dreamcast power narrative coming from?
That Shenmue cutscene had a mountain as the backdrop that looked like it was made out of a cardboard box… and I was able to spot the trade off back when I played it. Meanwhile… that FFX scene you compared it to had multiple characters simultaneously in some instances and a background that didn't look like it was made by a high school art department for a spring play.
I loved my Dreamcast and it did a lot of cool things.. but the PS2 hardware was much more powerful. And I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say maybe it could handle some knee capped version of GTA3. BUT by that point, if the Dreamcast was still viable, the comparison between systems would have buried the thing right then and there.
I also see flat textured cartoon faces being compared with actually rendered lips and eyes and noses? Like wtf are we talking about here?
None of that matters though. I was there. Had them both. THE moment was Gran Turismo 3. That was it. It killed every last reasonable hope the Dreamcast could compete on a technical level. Still a great system with great games. But that single game was the END of that argument and the total vindication of Sony's hardware hyping.
That Shenmue cutscene had a mountain as the backdrop that looked like it was made out of a cardboard box… and I was able to spot the trade off back when I played it. Meanwhile… that FFX scene you compared it to had multiple characters simultaneously in some instances and a background that didn't look like it was made by a high school art department for a spring play.
I loved my Dreamcast and it did a lot of cool things.. but the PS2 hardware was much more powerful. And I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say maybe it could handle some knee capped version of GTA3. BUT by that point, if the Dreamcast was still viable, the comparison between systems would have buried the thing right then and there.
I also see flat textured cartoon faces being compared with actually rendered lips and eyes and noses? Like wtf are we talking about here?
None of that matters though. I was there. Had them both. THE moment was Gran Turismo 3. That was it. It killed every last reasonable hope the Dreamcast could compete on a technical level. Still a great system with great games. But that single game was the END of that argument and the total vindication of Sony's hardware hyping.
Last edited:
polybius80
Member
and she is 2.36k triangles in game
and that model is also used in some cut scenes, you can see triangle faces in the neck when close are a match for the model as well as geometry for ears and nose
heather 3d model from SH3 is 8k triangles while Ryo from shenmue is 3k, but SH3 use better textures, shadows and effects, so what is the point?, to find a single character with more triangles than the best you could find in a cutscene from a DC game? in that case jak from the first jak uses 9.8k not enough? use the jak model from jak3 then, that uses 14k triangles, that is more than shenhua cutscene model, are you happy now? can we proceed with the topic without mixing dreamcast now?
Last edited:
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Pawl...
and she is 2.36k triangles in game
Sega boys never cared about Shenhua's polycount (i just love trolling the PS2
not the other Playstation though)BUT...For almost 2 decades, people said that the mighty PS2 was in another League by posting Douglas's model from Silent Hill 3 as an ultimate proof.
"AAMAGAD the polycount is insane. It's out of reach."
FACTS
It appeared decades later that Douglas's polycount was high but inferior to Shenmue's intro...
No need to downplay a 1999 game, my friends
.My point is NO, Silent Hill 3's models has nothing to do with PS2's polygon capabilities.
FACTS
For 2 decades, PS2 was all about polygon masturbation on gaf.
Yeah, people can now touch their bananas and talk about cool post process effects
,BUT, NO, Silent Hill 3's model has nothing to do with eMOtiOn EnGinE.
Even an amateur guy on GAF runned Silent Hill 3's Douglas on the Dreamcast in a few days.
Last edited:
crackajack
Member
Never owned a PS2, and I don't regret being on Nintendo for fun and PC for visuals in that time. Don't feel like I missed much. Only GoW, Hitman, MGS seemed something I happily caught up with their PS3 ports afterwards.
Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
but you want to transform the thread into PS2 x GC and you also selected a very unusual ship game to make it difficult to compare with ps2 and a RE4 that works along the same lines as VF4, that is, it doesn't use the power of the ps2 to be made. I can argue that in 2001 the PS2's GT3 reigned supreme, surpassing a similar game on the Xbox, the GC on the other hand never showed a game like that
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
GameCube wasn't more 'powerful' than PS2. It was more efficient, much easier to maximize and partly more 'modern' in its architecture. A very nice and clever system really. But in terms of raw potential and metrics it was mostly less powerful compared to PS2, also less flexible.
Last edited:
Unknown?
Member
Who cares about character polygons, especially if they are in primitive environments. Total scene polygons is more important.Ohhhhhhh, much better.
I like the spirit but let's compare big fishes now
Emulator screenshots for everyone (don't cry, PS2 is strong at post process effect, Dreamcast at Image quality... so, Dreamcast has the disadvantage
1999 Dreamcast (in engine cut scene intro)
2001 Playstation 2 (in engine cut scene intro)
(on top of that, it seems it was too much for the Alien PS2 Death Star hardware... Later Square reduced our precious polycount with FFXII models
2005 Playstation 2 (in engine cut scene)
Blast processed...
Sorry to disapoint you...
I know it sounds insane or out of reach for earlier consoles but Douglas from Silent Hill 3 has less polygons than 1999 Shenhua from Shenmue (8800 VS 9100)
The polygon war was a lie, Jim.
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Radical_3d
Member
Maybe you can fool the youngsters in this forum but I've played Shenmue and it looked shameful. You can't compare it with the 2001 lineup of PS2 games, let alone SH3.
Sorry to disapoint you...
I know it sounds insane or out of reach for earlier consoles but Douglas from Silent Hill 3 has less polygons than 1999 Shenhua from Shenmue (8800 VS 9100
TheGodfather07
Member
I remember games looking better and better as the console aged. By the end, there was some great looking games on the system. PS2 delivered on pretty much everything.
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
Youtube gamer spotted.
The entire industry was shocked by Shenmue...
As for your Silent Hill 3 gif...
Yeah, Douglas looks awesome thanks to Konami.(not the PS2)
Douglas/Silent Hill 3 = 8,800 polygons.
Shenhua/Shenmue = 9100 polygons.
PS2 had no black magic polygons, that's my point...
Source: Beyond3D
Facts.
Deal with it.
Last edited:
Guerilla Munch
Member
yeah i owned all 3 consoles that gen (4 with dreamcast) and xbox/gc games looked half a generation ahead of ps2. the only ps2 games that blew me away technologically were gta3 and mgs2
pepodmc_
Member
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
It's an incomplete tech demo of the first level, ok. There are tech demos of Sonic running on SNES too.
cireza
Member
Fat Frog
I advertised for Google Stadia
: fap fap :
Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
Is Shenmue 2 that 20fps game?
so let's compare with 20fps game
Shadow of the colossus minotaur (Argus) in game real time
Polycount : 21256 triangles (27600 vertices and 3172 strips)
Shenhua/Shenmue = 9100 polygons in engine
Shenhua/Shenmue = 2366 polygons in game
so let's compare with 20fps game
Shadow of the colossus minotaur (Argus) in game real time
Polycount : 21256 triangles (27600 vertices and 3172 strips)
Shenhua/Shenmue = 9100 polygons in engine
Shenhua/Shenmue = 2366 polygons in game
Last edited:
cireza
Member
Great. The port is competent and makes good use of the SNES for sure. It is also only the first level I think.
Sonic doesn't use any enhancement chip though. In any case, the argument "SNES can do things that MD can't do" is not a great one to pick, because the way the MegaDrive was architectured is simply much more efficient and balanced overall, so with time the console has achieved a ton of things strictly through clever programming (all software). This is why nowadays we see games like F-Zero, Starfox or Wolfenstein running on MD, and even better than on SNES.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
This wasn't a discussion on SNES vs. Genesis hardware. It was about the term "blast processing." It is a term that had no bearing on the system whatsoever. There was no secret programming used only by Genesis developers to access blast processing. It was 100% marketing. The Genesis had a nice, fast CPU, which was put to good use. That's not "blast processing", it's just a nice, fast CPU.
Last edited:
Majukun
Member
it was a powerful chip but comparatively difficult to program for, but sony had no issues from that because EVERYONE was developing for the ps2, so the more time passed, the more they learned to "tame the beast"
i think in terms of raw numbers he was supposed to be way more powerful, but the GC was much simpler to program for...the first xbox IIRC was basically a PC in a box
i think in terms of raw numbers he was supposed to be way more powerful, but the GC was much simpler to program for...the first xbox IIRC was basically a PC in a box
Similar threads
- Poll