Support NeoGAF

[dark10x]

Switching from a DC in both composite and S-video on a range of TVs (a 35-inch Mitsubishi set mainly) to a DC in VGA on an unbranded 19-inch monitor which shipped with a PC bundle has always resulted in much richer and more vibrant colors.

???

That's not what I was asking.

You said that, in your personal experience, DC produced much better colors when running via VGA when compared to PS2 running VGA. I wanted to know which PS2 and Dreamcast games you tested and on which monitor you tested them on (ie - if you were using VGA, you should have plugged both machines into the same monitor via VGA). That's all.

I was talking about grainy image quality, which is something that can only be noticed with Dreamcast when running on a PC monitor via VGA (or so I've found). The 4 PS2 games I tested on the same VGA monitor did not have those same problems.

Also, Lazy, please...once again...

What was preventing the DC from displaying lighting effects like this...

That type of lighting has been present in PS2 games from day 1, yet I've NEVER seen anything like that on Dreamcast. Why exactly? What is it about those effects that prevented DC developers from using it? Surely there was a reason for it...

I have always thought that type of intense light was really beautiful to behold, even though it seems like a simple effect.

Oh yeah, and a side note: That crowd in VT was always awesome! The sprites used most of the time were a bit blah, but the polygonal crowd was a sweet idea and they managed to integrate is very well.

 

[COCKLES]

Toasts Speed Devils Online - 5 player racing faultless over 56K.

 

[ourumov]

Mip-Mapping on DC was pretty abusive and always to save framerate...I never considered it to improve the whole experience but just the opposite.

 

[dark10x]

Mip-Mapping on DC was pretty abusive and always to save framerate...I never considered it to improve the whole experience but just the opposite.

Yes, I agree with that. It looked pretty bad in most cases...

 

[segasonic]

Yeah, who would want a nice clean picture if he could have shimmering and jaggies like on PS2

 

[Boogie9IGN]

I will cut you.

Anyways, Shenmue > Everything (Except Zelda)

So I guess that means, yes, DC is better than PS2. Hell even better than Xbox too

 

[dark10x]

Yeah, who would want a nice clean picture if he could have shimmering and jaggies like on PS2

Hmm, that's funny...

Model 3 didn't use mipmapping, you know, yet people are always clammoring for that "Model 3 look". It isn't even particularly high resolution either...

I'd prefer no mipmapping to that the low quality mipmapping DC used. LeMans managed to pull of anisotropic filtering, though, which was nice. GC and XBOX do a much better job than either PS2 or Dreamcast, though. However, PS2's lack of mipmapping can look very nice in a lot of situations...and it isn't as if every game lacks it either.

 

[Socreges]

First let me say that:

The DC comes out on top.

Just understand that such a contention is far from unanimous, if even of a majority. And like dark10x said:

Now, if you were referring to game quality. The ".5" of the PS2's first 1.5 years of life was EXTREMELY strong and places it above the DC simply for that. MGS2, SH2, ICO, and FFX were all very memorable games. Of course, if you don't like those types of games...you probably would disagree.

Though I'd remove SH2 and put in GTA3.

^^

You miss the point. The PS2 after 1.5 years, vs DC after 1.5 years... The DC comes out on top.

As Shadow and others pointed out, you can't really include post-DC PS2 content.

Can't? For what purpose? Comparison? But you can limit the PS2 to 1.5 years? What? Listen, go ahead and say that it had a better 1.5 years. But what's that worth? I don't understand the point.

Does that concern potential? Should we then tack on some hypothetical games? From who? Sega, of course. But who else? And how can we even do that?

Success --> Support --> Library

Unfortunately the DC was not successful. And unfortunately, though fairly, success often defines what may be of an overall library. If Sega had stuck around for as long as they could, I'm sure other developers would release a couple more games as well, if that. But it was inevitably a sinking ship and, practically, it had to be abandoned at some point. Is the idea that if it had been a great success, it would have been the better system? Possibly. But then we have attribute that ubiquitously to every system. Success breeds support.

It's a fruitless argument. It's like, who's better at basketball: The quick-footed midget at 4'2 or the 6'6 athlete? Well, obviously the guy at 6'6. The midget never had a chance. But that's the way it is.

 

[Lazy8s]

dark10x,

I was talking about grainy image quality, which is something that can only be noticed with Dreamcast when running on a PC monitor via VGA (or so I've found).

I can't even diagnose your comparison because it's predicated on VGA making things grainy for you when it rightfully makes things rich and vibrant for me instead.

 

[dark10x]

dark10x,

I can't even diagnose your comparison because it's predicated on VGA making things grainy for you when it rightfully makes things rich and vibrant for me instead.

Well, then you are blind or in denial. I don't know what to say, it's extremely obvious to me and virtually everyone else I know who has witnessed it.

Also, Lazy, please...once again...

What was preventing the DC from displaying lighting effects like this...

That type of lighting has been present in PS2 games from day 1, yet I've NEVER seen anything like that on Dreamcast. Why exactly? What is it about those effects that prevented DC developers from using it? Surely there was a reason for it...

I have always thought that type of intense light was really beautiful to behold, even though it seems like a simple effect.

 

[ypo]

LOL, what a fucking way to dodge the question.

 

[BuddyC]

WHY IS THIS STILL ALIVE