Support NeoGAF

[blacktout]

OP is the console war equivalent of one of those Imperial Japanese soldiers they discovered on small Pacific islands in the 70s who thought WWII never ended.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

lol of course this is the only game I compared back in the day.

I didn't like the game for (probably) the same reason as the inconsistent graphics. It was their first time using an existing engine to make a multiplatform Sonic. Felt like shit to play.

But further than that, at the time PS2 felt like a distant third place graphically. A real one hooked to a real TV. Not sure how the games look in emulators today.

GameCube is a curious console. I mean, the Wii was a low-end console, but Nintendo never suggested it might have a secret sauce. The GameCube, on the other hand, represents a unique case in the history of home consoles, arriving 18 months after its weaker competitor.

I honestly don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

You never played Gran Turismo 3 or MGS2 in 2001 or 2002 ? I've never seen anything like it on GC, even MGS TTS from 2004 looked worse than MGS2, open world games, none... so I don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

 

[BlackTron]

GameCube is a curious console. I mean, the Wii was a low-end console, but Nintendo never suggested it might have a secret sauce. The GameCube, on the other hand, represents a unique case in the history of home consoles, arriving 18 months after its weaker competitor.

I honestly don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

You never played Gran Turismo 3 or MGS2 in 2001 or 2002 ? I've never seen anything like it on GC, even MGS TTS from 2004 looked worse than MGS2, open world games, none... so I don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

Despite standouts like MGS, it probably has to do with PS2's terrible AV output, along with how many games have excessive jaggies. Games improved the further into the gen we got, but GC had Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion on day one...

 

[Parazels]

GameCube is a curious console. I mean, the Wii was a low-end console, but Nintendo never suggested it might have a secret sauce. The GameCube, on the other hand, represents a unique case in the history of home consoles, arriving 18 months after its weaker competitor.

I honestly don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

You never played Gran Turismo 3 or MGS2 in 2001 or 2002 ? I've never seen anything like it on GC, even MGS TTS from 2004 looked worse than MGS2, open world games, none... so I don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

But what about RE4 and Metroid? Don't they both prove the GC's advantage over the PS2?

And would RE Remake have been identical on the PS2?

 

[yurinka]

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 ?

I had a GameCube back then. Theorically it had a better hardware than PS2 (as shown in a few exceptions like Resident Evil 4), but since PS2 was by far where the 3rd party devs sold more games, they obviously focused their efforts there. And later made some quick port to GC not spending a lot of effort on it because they knew sales weren't going to be great there.

And this is for those who thought it was worth it to release a GC version of their games. Most considered sales were going to be so bad on GC that wasn't worth it. As already happened before in N64 and as happened later in Wii, WiiU, Switch or now will happen with Switch 2.

 

[cireza]

I honestly don't know how you came to the perception that the PS2 was, according to your words, in a distant third place graphically.

Because it is. It's even behind Dreamcast depending on what matters to you in terms of picture quality.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

But what about RE4 and Metroid ? Don't they both prove the GC's advantage over the PS2 ?

What answer would you give to this question if I had asked it to you ? I'm curious to read your opinion.

What I can tell you is that:

Flipper speed: 162 MHz
pixel pipes: 4
Maximum theoretical fill rate: 162 x 4 -> 648 MPixel

GS speed: 147 MHz
pixel pipes: 16
Maximum theoretical fill rate: 147 x 16 -> 2352 MPixel

Therefore, assuming the GS is always operating at only 30% efficiency, it can still perform more work than the Flipper.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Because it is. It's even behind Dreamcast depending on what matters to you in terms of picture quality.

Dreamcast ? lol please no
It's not about picture quality, Dreamcast lacks buffering effects in most of its games, and the lighting is flat. If your mind interprets this lack of features as an advantage, there's nothing to debate.