Support NeoGAF

[Pasta la Vista]

the GameCube beats the PS2 in basically every aspect... except 1

CPU: 485mhz vs 295mhz

GPU: 13 GFLOPS vs 6.2 GFLOPS

Memory size: 43MB vs 36MB
although the GC memory was split into multiple pools with specific usecases, while the PS2's was only split between CPU and framebuffer basically.
it's also hard to compare due to the texture compression tech used by the Gamecube, which in practice multiplied the amount and size of textures you could use massively compared to the PS2... which had to use 4MB without any decent compression to increase the texture resolution and diversity.

that is easily seen in RE4 btw. where Capcom had to massively reduce texture quality and variety, as well as reducing the variety of the general assets like trees.


Memory Bandwidth: THIS is where the PS2 gets interesting. because you can't really give it a simple GB/s number. the PS2 is designed to just fill the screen with layers upon layers of textures.
with a pixel fillrate of 1.2 Gigapixels and a famebuffer bandwidth of 38GB/s, stuff like Metal Gear Solid 2 was almost impossible to do on other hardware at the time without severe adjustments to some of the effects, especially in the tanker mission.

for comparison the GC only had a pixel fillrate of 0.648 Gigapixels and a framebuffer bandwidth of 18GB/s

so this scene from MGS2 would have brought the GameCube to its knees without redoing all the rain effects and framebuffer effects:

the Xbox was barely able to bruteforce MGS2, and ran slightly worse still. so even the by far most powerful system of that gen couldn't keep up with the sheer amount of transparencies, screen effects and layers of texture thrown on screen at once.
...

but on the other hand, this scene from RE4 was literally impossible on PS2, without an insane amount of asset variety reduction, polygon reductions, texture quality reduction and texture variety reduction:

I was obsessed with MGS2 on PS2 and I remember getting the Xbox version and was shocked that the tanker mission in the rain would just destroy the framerate. It had its moments where it looked very clean but there were so many hits to the performance.

 

[roosnam1980]

i dont see any HUGE differences as some are suggesting in here

 

[Parazels]

Wasn't Metroid the most advanced first person shooter in the world with tons of polygons running at 60 fps?

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

But isn't that the whole point of Nintendo games? To pay more for worse looking games? You'll get this warm fuzzy nostalgic feeling in your belly instead that obviously no other company can give you. Be thankful and please don't emulate.

 

[TNT Sheep]

Sounds like a topic for Digital Foundry Retro video. Compare some of the better known third parties on PS2, Xbox & GC.

I really hope they do, because most other comparisons on Youtube aren't as thorough or transparent in their analysis. It's hard to believe a comparison if it's only using emulator footage for instance.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

i dont see any HUGE differences as some are suggesting in here

PS2 looks better here
Our friends' insistence that the GC version looks better is a result of some misinformation obtained in the past.

 

[cireza]

PS2 looks better here
Our friends' insistence that the GC version looks better is a result of some misinformation obtained in the past.

Soul Calibur II looks better on Xbox and GC but this is due to the poor picture quality of the PS2. You won't see it on emulators...

 

[roosnam1980]

timestamped ps2vsgamecube versions

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

I like RE4 in the GC version but man, the game has a lot of jagged edges, maybe it's due to the very low resolution they used, there's no AA at all, it also bothers me that there are no shadows on the enemies, not even on the main characters and the textures fluctuate in quality, going from the most beautiful to the simplest in the same stage, GOW 2 for instance despite running at 60fps with effects, all characters have shadows, even in a scene with many enemies.

 

[TNT Sheep]

GOW 2 for instance despite running at 60fps with effects, all characters have shadows, even in a scene with many enemies.

Different games different priorities. Perhaps they could have added character shadows and/or improved the framerate if it had the same polygon counts as the PS2 version, but would that have made for a better looking game over all?

 

[Spukc]

t's not worth playing third-party games on the GC. All the ones I've played run and look worse than the PS2 version for example.

Capcom vs Snk 2 the controller is not suitable for fighting games.
Tomb Raider Legend lacks lighting, post-processing, and shadow effects and appears to run at 20 fps.
No Need for Speed game runs or looks better. Geometry, particles, reflections, and textures are missing. Without enemy cars on the track, the frame rate is good, but if there are two or more cars, it's not great. NFS Most Wanted was the worst; all graphical features were downgraded.
Although Red Faction 2 was later released with some improvements, it also looks worse overall.
No open-world game runs or looks better. It lacks geometry, particles, reflections, and the textures are very poor.

Only Sonic Heroes a RenderWare game miraculously runs at 60 fps and looks much better than the PS2 version. This is strange, since more advanced games run better on the PS2. I can only conclude that Sega wanted to make the PS2 version worse .

Did you play many third-party games on the GameCube ?

No the gamecube was fucking ass and barely worth it for first party games.
The wii was mucho better

And it supported gamecube games so

 

[Physiognomonics]

Yes MGS2 looked incredible on PS2. But they had to use tons of tricks with the lack texture compression. In the end it was OK du to the settings of the game and they used PS2 hardware advantages to the fullest with the rain, water, transparency effects, and the 60fps framerate.

But PS2 could usually render simple textures at 60fps except in fighting games were number of textures were always limited, that's a fact, at least in the beginning of the gen. Jak & Daxter is a good exemple of that. Rather big world, 60fps, but textures are very limited and at rather low resolution, yes they are, there are almost cell-shaded just showing a few colors without high frequency details (like in MGS2).

RE4 is a good benchmark to showcase GC hardware advantages. But even Shenmue 1 graphical variety notably in the high quality and number of textures in one scene has never been seen in any PS2 games AFAIK.

Another good benchmark showcasing hardware advantages of GC is Star Wars Rogue leader vs Star Wars Jedi Starfighter.

I do think GC hardware (notably the complexity of its ram) was a problem for many 3rd party devs.

 

[Connificent]

no way

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

lacks dynamic shadows, and uses 16 bit colors, there are other cuts but these are the main ones



well this very Dreamcastish



It's a shame no one made a detailed video of Baldur's Gate PS2 vs GameCube, Baldur's Gate is one of the most advanced games of the 6th gen, the GC version had massive cuts in the frame rate, model quality and interactive water effects, even the IQ. Baldur's Gate 2 is even more impressive but it was only released on PS2 and Xbox.

 

[TNT Sheep]

Always thought the differences were relatively minor in Killer 7, but this video seems to suggest otherwise.

 

[kevboard]

Always thought the differences were relatively minor in Killer 7, but this video seems to suggest otherwise.

well, the moment you set foot in the library in the first level you will know that the PS2 port is not really worth playing.

it's still crazy to me how hard the framerate tanks there

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Yes MGS2 looked incredible on PS2. But they had to use tons of tricks with the lack texture compression. In the end it was OK du to the settings of the game and they used PS2 hardware advantages to the fullest with the rain, water, transparency effects, and the 60fps framerate.

But PS2 could usually render simple textures at 60fps except in fighting games were number of textures were always limited, that's a fact, at least in the beginning of the gen. Jak & Daxter is a good exemple of that. Rather big world, 60fps, but textures are very limited and at rather low resolution, yes they are, there are almost cell-shaded just showing a few colors without high frequency details (like in MGS2).

RE4 is a good benchmark to showcase GC hardware advantages. But even Shenmue 1 graphical variety notably in the high quality and number of textures in one scene has never been seen in any PS2 games AFAIK.

Another good benchmark showcasing hardware advantages of GC is Star Wars Rogue leader vs Star Wars Jedi Starfighter.

I do think GC hardware (notably the complexity of its ram) was a problem for many 3rd party devs.

Since you mentioned MGS2 (a first-gen game on the PS2) why don't you compare it to Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes from 2004 ? Or isn't Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes a showcase? I like it despite it being a game with an open frame rate, it's 30fpsish.

 

[simpatico]

PS2 always felt the best. In racing games, a couple Need for Speed titles especially, the sense of speed felt so much better on PS2.

Xbox won when the game targeted PC or anything above PS2. Splinter Cell obviously, but it carried over to a few more. Fighting games usually had optimal versions on Xbox

GameCube only won when it was a weird situation. Or when it was the lead target like RE4. But, you could still buy a GameCube and use it as a primary gaming platform with the full intention of playing all the big third-party games, and you wouldn't be in bad shape. Outside of some outliers, nothing was bad enough that it wasn't worth playing or is a truly subpar experience of the title compared to others. This was the last time Nintendo offered such a feature, and even though it's not intuitive to me, I don't see anything to tell me it was the wrong business decision.

 

[kevboard]

PS2 always felt the best. In racing games, a couple Need for Speed titles especially, the sense of speed felt so much better on PS2.

Xbox won when the game targeted PC or anything above PS2. Splinter Cell obviously, but it carried over to a few more. Fighting games usually had optimal versions on Xbox

GameCube only won when it was a weird situation. Or when it was the lead target like RE4. But, you could still buy a GameCube and use it as a primary gaming platform with the full intention of playing all the big third-party games, and you wouldn't be in bad shape. Outside of some outliers, nothing was bad enough that it wasn't worth playing or is a truly subpar experience of the title compared to others. This was the last time Nintendo offered such a feature, and even though it's not intuitive to me, I don't see anything to tell me it was the wrong business decision.

this PS2 advantage in many games is the power of being the lead platform for most games.
the GameCube had the issue of being the 3rd wheel on the bike.

it didn't have the sheer brute force of the Xbox to overcome most of the issues that shoddy PS2 ports can have (the Xbox had a pixel fillrate of 0.7~0.9 Gigapixel, still not on par with the PS2, but closer than the GameCube's 0.65).
and it didn't have the easy to develop for hardware that the Pentium 3, GeForce 3 combo, as well as the HDD that could be used for temporary small installs as a data streaming buffer offered on Xbox.

the GameCube actually needed special attention by devs, while also being the worst selling system of the generation (if we leave the Dreamcast out of the picture of course).

it needed special attention for controls, because it had 4 fewer buttons.
it needed special attention for the data sizes, because it used mini DVD instead of normal sized ones like the other 2.
it needed special attention due to the more complex memory layout and texture compression.
and it needed special attention precisely because it couldn't brute force simple PS2 ports as much as the Xbox could.

the fact that the GC hardware was very competent and far above the PS2 is funnily enough more evident due to its successor than due to the GameCube itself.

the Wii, as most probably know, is literally just a GameCube with more memory and a slightly increased clock speed (the additional power of which was mostly needed for targeting widescreen now instead of 4:3).
and games like Mario Galaxy, Metroid Other M, Sonic Colors and The Last Story, are all a clear step above the PS2.
Wii games usually had the advantage that they were bespoke™ games targeting its specific hardware. even ports of PS360 games like Modern Warfare were not really ports of those games, but total conversions, developed from nearly the ground up for Wii... basically bespoke™ Wii optimised demakes.
and the Wii did get this attention because it absolutely destroyed the other 2 systems in sales.

and the Wii gave us comparison points like Silent Hill Shattered Memories, which looks significantly better on Wii than PS2. it needed similar cutbacks RE4 needed in order to work on PS2.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

You have to choose.

Ports are bad, GameCube is powerful, devs are lazy, worst selling system

Ports are bad, GameCube had a much lower fill rate, GameCube had a mini DVD, GameCube had less main ram and less CPU gigaflops

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Wasn't Metroid the most advanced first person shooter in the world with tons of polygons running at 60 fps?

This one?

 

[Physiognomonics]

Since you mentioned MGS2 (a first-gen game on the PS2) why don't you compare it to Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes from 2004 ? Or isn't Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes a showcase? I like it despite it being a game with an open frame rate, it's 30fpsish.

I never played that game on GC unfortunately. I have no idea how it compares graphically to MGS2 on PS2.

 

[Drew1440]

To be expected, the PS2 was a lot more capable than the GameCube. People always forget it had two dedicated vector units for processing and had much more fast system RAM along with it's eDRAM. The 16MB pool of A-RAM in the GameCube was too slow to be usable and was mostly used as a RAM disk for the dvd drive.

 

[Physiognomonics]

Wasn't Metroid the most advanced first person shooter in the world with tons of polygons running at 60 fps?

Star wars Rogue Leader is the best in that area I think. 15 million polygons by frame running at mostly 60fps. It was also rendering plenty of textures and others effect like bump mapping, AA, stuff Xbox and PS2 could do that so well. Basically Xbox was limited by polygons while PS2 was limited by textures rendering (even if it could render that amount of polygon or way more untextured).

Gamecube was a beast when coded properly. I have played Rogue leader at launch and nothing on both XBox or PS2 beat that level of fidelity IMO. They are close, yes, but they could not reach it.

But I still think gamecube didn't get GTA games because of the lack of main and fast memory (24MB) while PS2 had easy to dev 32MB. Should remind us the problems some devs had with XSS reduced memory. And considering the sales of those consoles, they (like Rockstar) didn't want to bother.

 

[Gameplay Gods Bless]

t's not worth playing third-party games on the GC. All the ones I've played run and look worse than the PS2 version for example.

Capcom vs Snk 2 the controller is not suitable for fighting games.
Tomb Raider Legend lacks lighting, post-processing, and shadow effects and appears to run at 20 fps.
No Need for Speed game runs or looks better. Geometry, particles, reflections, and textures are missing. Without enemy cars on the track, the frame rate is good, but if there are two or more cars, it's not great. NFS Most Wanted was the worst; all graphical features were downgraded.
Although Red Faction 2 was later released with some improvements, it also looks worse overall.
No open-world game runs or looks better. It lacks geometry, particles, reflections, and the textures are very poor.

Only Sonic Heroes a RenderWare game miraculously runs at 60 fps and looks much better than the PS2 version. This is strange, since more advanced games run better on the PS2. I can only conclude that Sega wanted to make the PS2 version worse .

Did you play many third-party games on the GameCube ?

PS2 was lead platform it had a weaker GPU but there's a couple of things it could do better. It doesn't matter because it was the lead platform, GC was always screwed. RE4 Gamecube was the lead platform and it spanks the PS2 version.

 

[RAIDEN1]

The reason why I brought the Wii for the first time ever last year, was to be able to tap into the GC library (as well as the Wii's) but for all of it's (under performance) against the likes of the Xbox, games like F-Zero GX, and the Star Wars trilogy games, looked on par with an Xbox title...fancy shaders or no fancy shaders

 

[Physiognomonics]

I just remembered the DVD / Mini disc big difference of storage. That was probably the main reason for big games like GTA not been ported to Gamecube.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

PS2 was lead platform it had a weaker GPU but there's a couple of things it could do better. It doesn't matter because it was the lead platform, GC was always screwed. RE4 Gamecube was the lead platform and it spanks the PS2 version.

How is it weaker if the GPU pushes more polygons and post-processing effects than the GameCube GPU? Skinned objects like Burnout and NFS cars penalize the GC GPU a lot.
Regarding the lead platform, what does this change? If the dev makes a game first on GC, will this make the mini DVD fit more data ? Will the CPU be better at vector calculations?

 

[cireza]

Regarding the lead platform, what does this change?

Everything. Anybody with development knowledge will tell you this.

And it was super important back then because of how different the consoles were.

 

[TNT Sheep]

How is it weaker if the GPU pushes more polygons and post-processing effects than the GameCube GPU? Skinned objects like Burnout and NFS cars penalize the GC GPU a lot.

It is weaker in the sense that Gamecube can process 4 textures comfortably in a single pass, while the PS2 has to do multiple passes to achieve the same.

 

[SScorpio]

i dont see any HUGE differences as some are suggesting in here

It's not a blow out, but the PS2 has much more aliasing and simpler shadows. A lot of it is hidden with the smaller video size and Youtube compression.

Back in the day most people weren't play on progressive scan, so the way PS2 handles 480i led to much more shimmering than the GC and Xbox versions as well.

 

[roosnam1980]

It's not a blow out, but the PS2 has much more aliasing and simpler shadows. A lot of it is hidden with the smaller video size and Youtube compression.

Back in the day most people weren't play on progressive scan, so the way PS2 handles 480i led to much more shimmering than the GC and Xbox versions as well.

shadows look similar to me on both

 

[SScorpio]

Star wars Rogue Leader is the best in that area I think. 15 million polygons by frame running at mostly 60fps. It was also rendering plenty of textures and others effect like bump mapping, AA, stuff Xbox and PS2 could do that so well. Basically Xbox was limited by polygons while PS2 was limited by textures rendering (even if it could render that amount of polygon or way more untextured).

Gamecube was a beast when coded properly. I have played Rogue leader at launch and nothing on both XBox or PS2 beat that level of fidelity IMO. They are close, yes, but they could not reach it.

But I still think gamecube didn't get GTA games because of the lack of main and fast memory (24MB) while PS2 had easy to dev 32MB. Should remind us the problems some devs had with XSS reduced memory. And considering the sales of those consoles, they (like Rockstar) didn't want to bother.

It's even crazier when you play Rebel Strike and realize all the Rogue Leader missions are there, but they are outputting those graphics in two different view points for the two player split screen game play.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Namco's marketing was very good on the Nintendo console at that time, even with soft visuals because of mipmapping and flicker filter, people think it's better. Times have changed. At that time, they also said that 007 Agent Underfire and XGIII: Extreme G Racing were superior on the GameCube, this is not true.

 

[NeverYouMind]

i dont see any HUGE differences as some are suggesting in here

There is a slow down when a really particle heavy move comes out on PS2. The unintentional slo-mo effect, I love it.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

It is weaker in the sense that Gamecube can process 4 textures comfortably in a single pass, while the PS2 has to do multiple passes to achieve the same.

"Yes, it's very nice that Nintendo Gamecube can do eight layers in one pass. It's all set up for you. Believe me, I would have loved it," says Jason Rubin of Naughty Dog. "But we'll have eight-pass techniques done on PlayStation 2 by the time we're done with our first game. So it's automatically done on Gamecube, but we've got the same techniques. Yes, they take more time and yes they take more CPU power, but here we go again -- [PS2] is a more powerful CPU so who cares? In the end you break even."
Naughty Dog's Jason Rubin concedes: "The Gamecube is going to have a great renderer, and probably will put out almost as many polygons as the PS2, but they will be prettier polygons. Its problem is going to be, truthfully, that its CPU is weaker so it won't be able to do as many cool things with those polygons."

 

[TexMex]

Tons of multiplatform games run better on the GC than the PS2 and it isn't even close. In fact, most of them do. Xbox was almost always the best, then GC then PS2 version.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Star wars Rogue Leader is the best in that area I think. 15 million polygons by frame running at mostly 60fps.

People who like to count polygons using Dolphin found in this game a peak of 12 million polygons in just one static scene, and only there.

These two Star Wars games are the only GameCube games to exceed 6 million polygons due to a trick involving the light source. The other games don't exceed 100,000 polygons per frame at 60fps, and if you go higher, the frame rate drops. Nintendo wasn't lying when they said 6 to 12 million polygons (for standard games, the limit is 6, and for Star Wars, the limit is 12).

 

[TNT Sheep]

Its problem is going to be, truthfully, that its CPU is weaker so it won't be able to do as many cool things with those polygons."

Well technically the core that can be counted as a CPU on the PS2 is weaker. The CPU + VPU1 + VPU0 yes those are stronger, but they also do the work Gamecube does with its GPU.

Naughty Dog says that in the end the results will be similar, but that the PS2 can do cooler things with polygons. That's alright, because Gamecube can also do cooler things but with textures. Again it depends on the types of games you want to make. Sometimes Gamecube will pull ahead sometimes PS2 will pull ahead.

 

[TNT Sheep]

People who like to count polygons using Dolphin found in this game a peak of 12 million polygons in just one static scene, and only there.

Okay, suppose this is the absolute max for Rogue Leader then what about the more impressive Rebel Strike?

And other Gamecube games like Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4? According to the same source you are using RE4 is at almost 8 million polygons per second.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

what about the more impressive Rebel Strike?

It makes fewer polygons per frame and or lower average frame rate than Rogue Leader to be able to make more impressive effects.
in short Rogue Leader is the biggest GC polygon pusher.
No other 60fps game pushes more than 100,000 polygons per frame, if you push it higher the frame rate drops. The average is 70-75,000 per frame at 60fps and around 100,000 for 30fps games.

 

[Esppiral]

Diehard is also waaaay better on GameCube

 

[TNT Sheep]

It makes fewer polygons per frame and or lower average frame rate than Rogue Leader to be able to make more impressive effects.

That's an assumption unless you can provide a source.

No other 60fps game pushes more than 100,000 polygons per frame, if you push it higher the frame rate drops.

I think Metroid Prime/Metroid Prime 2 would be a good one to test here.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

who want to test it, use Dolphin 4 157 and Ripper. The data is accurate and consistent with the assets on disk. The statistics shown on screen aren't actually accurate; the rips are.

 

[BlackTron]

Gamecube's day one Rogue Leader on s-video blew away anything else the whole gen...

Although, this is a game you cannot play with Dolphin...