It looks good, without a doubt like a typical Dreamcast game but it's not at the level of Timesplitters, Timesplitters needed filters but the devs didn't want to add them to avoid muddying the image and avoiding frame drops.
Eh... we're talking times where architectures were so different, you first need to define what 'more powerful' means. And most people vehemently disagree with each other on that so there's basically no consensus to compare against - to begin with.
From what I could find GC and PS2 have a similar number of 480p games out of the box. Somewhere in the range of 200 games.
I don't have to define what 'more powerful means' as I am not the one here stating such thing to begin with. Each console has strengths and weaknesses and rather than taking absurd shortcuts like this one, I am the kind of person who will factually list important aspects of each console and how they compare.
480p is something the devs decide to add or not for the most part, the interesting thing is that you can force 480p mode in most of the catalog with third party software in PS2, the amount of 480p games really dont say anything about the capabilities of the machines involved only whats most devs included
You can also force 480p on gamecube games and 720p on xbox for that matter. It would be interesting to look at the list of games that can be forced or not, because 480p ain't exactly free it still requires more processing power.
yes, in my experience I have forced 1080p in area 51 and the result is very good in LCD TV compared to standard 4080p, also tried matrix path of neo no performance problem on either game, most graphical demanding games of the time included progressive modes(480p) anyway, I will test the champion of norrath and baldurs gate games to see what modes can be used as those games have very big internal resolution compared to the output
I don't know how it works on PS2, but on GC you can indeed force 480p render resolution with Swiss or Nintendon't if you have a Wii.
I get the point - but I'm pretty sure the actual ratio was somewhere around 4x (the number of actually unique titles - not total SKUs that some manufacturers quote - which typically inflate the number quite a bit).
I was referencing internal res - it wasn't uncommon for both consoles to render below 640, even in games with official 480p support.
XBox actually did have a handful? of native 720p games (not just output). And PS2 had ... 3? (I may be missing some) that ran at 1280x960 but obviously only output 480i/480p.
That's fair.
that depends the game you cannot take for granted the internal resolution of a random game
is not true, anyone who has played from Tekken Tag to Tekken 4, Unreal Tournament and BGDA knows it's not true.
Dreamcast fanboys pretend to ignore this, GTA 3 at 480p is the example, looks amazing.
And goes down to like 15 fps for it so maybe it shouldn't have been 480p
No matter what, the Limited version on the Dreamcast just trounces any of the PS2 versions that are steamy piles of complete jagged mess.
I'd argue that version was worse. They didn't bring any gameplay improvements from 3 over and limited some of the infinite stages and took a lot of personality out of others
R* games were almost offensively CPU limited on consoles.And goes down to like 15 fps for it so maybe it shouldn't have been 480p
Maybe it's possible on the Dreamcast with 30fps, reduced draw distance and some cuts in alpha effects.Each game has a reason, the dev's choice to make Gungriffon this way was to explore long draw distances without fog at 60fps. In the later stages there is fog, but with an artistic purpose. Gungriffon Blaze is part of the initial wave of the ps2 with a Dreamcastish look.
there is no 'crossgen game' this is just buzzyword.
It's not the same thing, AC Black Flag is an old gen game with hi res textures. For AC Black Flag to be analogous to the games mentioned, the main character model would need to triple the polygon count, double the draw distance etc and other words be another game, do you realize it? However AC Black Flag reached the gpu limit (like any game does) otherwise it wouldn't be at 900p but didn't even scratch the main ram and vram as Valhalla does as next gen does. But stay calm, you don't have to agree with me, it's just a dialogue where we improve our points or confirm them in light of different opinions.
We have to remember how shortlived the Dreamcast was. In the West it was only on the market for 18 months or so before it all went to shit. In 2001 it was over. I think Sega put out an excellent portfolio of games during that short lifespan. Yes, there was too much emphasis on short arcade experiences. I loved many of them, but the market was clearly shifting away from these type of experiences.
Same applies here, you are forcing 480p output, the internal resolution still is lower than that, just think of the Xbox One and the huge amount of games at 900p or 720p outputting at 1080p...
TS had simple graphics run at a lew res and had jaggies everywhere., I thought Maken X looked so much better at the time and of course, supported 480p
The facts were DC games run at a higher res, in a lot of cases and you going to tell me that in 2000 and 2001 only a limited number of people had access to a VGA monitor ?Resolution, much like reduced color depth on a lot of GC games, was a fact. Not debating what people personally noticed or not - we all know what thread we're in
Likewise for most people not playing on (or having access to) progressive scan displays.
VGA was progressive scan ('technically' you could still use VGA monitors to display interlaced - but I can't think of many people that did).
Just like how very few people plugged consoles into PC monitors.
Gameplay wise:
It is an interesting one, because it was a developer choice issue going by all the great looking games on PS2 like GT4. Ico, SotC, MGS2, MGS3, Pro Evolution Soccers, Jak and Daxter, God of Wars, etc, etc, and the problem was the limited amount of memory, making it difficult to maintain adequate RAM for the framebuffer and all the textures and assets without more RAM or a fast writeable storage device like the Xbox's HDD. But that does bring up another interesting question:
Who cares if it can do it when it was never used ? We played games, not technical specs.
The whole thread topic is about the potential of the Dreamcast, and if it had similar versatility would be a solid argument for it getting much better results than we saw.
I already understand your malice.
Malice ? LOLI already understand your malice.
As progressive scan was only implemented on the ps2 when Tekken 4 was released in 2002, it follows that Dreamcast > Ps2 at least until 2002
Fortunately, your opinion is yours alone, I personally wouldn't trade the 480i of GT3/MS2 for the 480p of the Dreamcast.
I already understand your malice.
As progressive scan was only implemented on the ps2 when Tekken 4 was released in 2002, it follows that Dreamcast > Ps2 at least until 2002
Fortunately, your opinion is yours alone, I personally wouldn't trade the 480i of GT3/MS2 for the 480p of the Dreamcast.
If all it is, is upscaling the image, then my previous point still stands. More 480p support on GC compared to PS2 relatively speaking.
Then the question becomes how many games on the 480p supported list actually render at that resolution internally. That list is smaller to begin with on PS2 when you account for a library that's 4 times bigger.
It could compute those algorithms within its hardware was what I was trying to say, whether it could run them - compute in real time for games on the EE and GS- is the part we'd need to see working, but theoretically taking a 160x120 image and using FSR2.0 to get it to 320x240, or take a 15fps game or game using RGB_565 )16bit colour) at 512x480 and get it to 512x480@30fps or get it to true colour (24bit) using today's algorithms on tiny data on proportionally weak hardware isn't far fetched when the hardware like the PS2 has a to-the-metal interface like the Vulkan API.
You can be sure that lighting would have been a topic on which developers would have improved if the console had the opportunity to live for a few more years. PS2 would have had the edge in this topic, probably, but doesn't mean that no progress would have been made on DC.
How exactly would they have made progress against a high level API graphics feature set (AFAIK opengl 1.4 or less). no use of an Accumulation buffer, no Shadow mapping/Cube mapping or 3D texture support, no shaders to provide per pixel shading logical for more than Gouraud shading(Per polygon)?
the better path is to employ more aggressive LOD systems and apply some effects to the very minimum and in a controlled way, some genres are more permissive than others too, not having shaders is not necessarily an impediment for complex effects more passes can be used among other things for effects............. yes I know DC is particularly limited in this too, but being creative can do wonders after all when it comes to real time graphics in games all effects are basically smoke and mirrors and there are effects in DC games that were almost unused like the bump mapps effecs put them here and there and you can get an improvementHow exactly would they have made progress against a high level API graphics feature set (AFAIK opengl 1.4 or less). no use of an Accumulation buffer, no Shadow mapping/Cube mapping or 3D texture support, no shaders to provide per pixel shading logical for more than Gouraud shading(Per polygon)?
Gouraud shading - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
