Never said it was.
[quote=“Kadamose”]The Dreamcast was far superior to the PS2, graphics wise. Though the PS2 has a 300 MHz processor, and the Dreamcast only has a 200 MHz processor, in this case, the processor specs don’t mean jack. Basically, what makes the Dreamcast superior to the PS2 is the fact that it sports 8 MB video ram, while the PS2 only has 4 MB; the fact that the PS2 didn’t have any built-in anti-aliasing was another huge flaw for the system.
The only reason why the Dreamcast died was because of Sega’s lousy marketing division; it’s tarnished name at the time; and the fact that the PS2 came with a DVD drive.[/quote]
But they are those that say the PS2 didn’t need 8Mb of Video Ram thanks to the massive piplelines inside the machine which could handle tons of data. X-Box, NA@MI II, DC show that its the GPU that counts for a awful lot when in come to graphics , but in saying that there’s PS2 games that the DC could never handle not matter what anybody says .
I think the GPU inside the PS2 was a mess and thats why most DC games look better thanks to the textures the Power VR II could handle and throw out . Still yet to see many better looking games than Virutal On II running on my DC .
BTW DC failed becasue of the damage SOA/SOE did with the Saturn, SOJ not gettig square and becasue we had a dick in charge of SEGA Europe at the time of the DC I could do time for that french prick
[quote=“Parn”]Not completely true. Take Rez as a simple example… a game programmed for and released on both the PlayStation 2 and Dreamcast, both versions that I own and have played extensively. Both games are virtually identical, except the Dreamcast’s sound is more crisp, but the game runs at a reduced framerate (feels like 20 FPS, maybe even less). The PlayStation 2 version of the game runs considerably smoother in comparison and controls better as a result, probably running at 30 FPS with a few hiccups here and there during some busy moments, but no more hiccups that the Dreamcast has of its own during slightly different spots.
[/quote]
DC REZ run @ 30 fps and the PS2 @ 60 fps. But give me the DC version anyday of the week. The graphics and textures look better and more detailed and the dead zone on the Dual shock is just a joke when playing REZ . For a laugh you should play Space Channel 5 Pt II on both the DC and then the PS2.
PS2 looks an insult thanks to the lack AA despite the better frame rate
But when you look at the likes of GOW, GT IV, MGS III , DMC there’s no way the DC could handle those sort of polygons
But you don’t know how those games would end up if they were developed for the Dreamcast from a company that had years of experience with the hardware. Maybe it would have lower polycounts but better textures and an overall better look… Same for the likes of Metal Gear Solid 3 Subsistence. We simply can’t really know since not even Sega themselves got to have several years of experience with their own hardware in order to show what it’s capable of…
If the PS2 had died when the best it had to offer was the likes of Kessen and X-Squad, and we were now seeing games like Yakuza on the DC (or whatever system), you would also think “no way the PS2 could ever handle anything like that”.
We can’t do anything but assumptions…
[quote=“Al3xand3r”]But you don’t know how those games would end up if they were developed for the Dreamcast from a company that had years of experience with the hardware. Maybe it would have lower polycounts but better textures and an overall better look… Same for the likes of Metal Gear Solid 3 Subsistence. We simply can’t really know since not even Sega themselves got to have several years of experience with their own hardware in order to show what it’s capable of…
[/quote]
But the likes of DMC and GT III, MGS II did not take 7 years and they way above most DC games . For me F355 , Shenmue II and VO II got about as much out of the DC that the DC could give . I take the point , becasue I just wonder what the likes of Treasure could have got out of the Saturn 2D with a few more years work, but Shenmue II and VO II must have been pushing the DC to its limits
So, does DMC look considerably better than Code Veronica? I haven’t played it.
[quote=“Team Andromeda”]
But the likes of DMC and GT III, MGS II did not take 7 years and they way above most DC games . For me F355 , Shenmue II and VO II got about as much out of the DC that the DC could give . I take the point , becasue I just wonder what the likes of Treasure could have got out of the Saturn 2D with a few more years work, but Shenmue II and VO II must have been pushing the DC to its limits[/quote]
Virtual On II pushing the DC to it’s limits? But that was a Model 3 game, Model 3 games should be easy stuff for the DC.
I think they could’ve pushed the DC further than Shenmue II, they just never got the chance because the DC suffered a premature demise. The Saturn was more or less at the end of it’s run as is, and Sega had Shining Force III, Burning Rangers and Panzer Dragoon Saga to show for it.
But then, we’ll never know for sure how much Shenmue II stressed the Dreamcast. As not much came out after it. Or at least, nothing of that scale.
And I assume that with 7 years you refer to Shenmue 1, but take in mind that those years include concept design, the game during it’s life as a Saturn game. I think that as a Dreamcast game it can’t have taken much more than a year seeing how it came out in late 1999 in Japan.
And if we then take into account that Shenmue II wasn’t that much of a leap compared to Shenmue, a second gen Dreamcast game, it can’t possibly have stressed it all that much.
But again, just theorising. The only way of finding out is asking Yu Suzuki himself.
Model 3 Step 2 was a mega powerful board and the DC had it work cut out handling ports of VO II and SR II. Very few DC games pushed over a million ploys and Model 3 Step II could do that with all effects on and effects layed on top of each other , and you add in the huge ammount of Ram and Model 3 Step II ports weren’t easy at all
The Fact that VO II was all but perfect with not a hit of slowdown (no matter what was happing) and with some of the best textures you?ll ever see in you life. Told me not only was the most impressive Arcade port I’ve even seen from SEGA (at the time) but was really pushing the DC to it’s limits
Shenmue II was massive leap over part I and that game at the cost of the screen Res.
In part II would had the streets of Hong Kong with Hundreds of on screen characters and massive wide open spaces to worry about (the flyby?s on Disc are still to this day awesome) . At times you could almost hear the DC groan with pain with what AM#2 were asking it to perform .
Plus Shenmue II shipped in 2001 and after AM#2 were fully use to the system . I doubt the could give more with the memory and polygon limits of the DC
[quote=“Pedro The Hutt”]
Virtual On II pushing the DC to it’s limits? But that was a Model 3 game, Model 3 games should be easy stuff for the DC.[/quote]
grumbles that VO2 was never released in Europe
Character model wise, DMC is on par with Code Veronica. As far as spacious 3D enivornments go though, DMC is the clear winner.
Textures are where we’d see the biggest difference. The DC was doing 16-24 bit textures (like the reflective textures in MDK2) when the PS2 was stuck at 4-8 bit ones and still doesn’t go much higher. DMC’s polygon count couldn’t be replicated on the DC, IMO. And the real time shadows in Headhunter were noticeably absent from the PS2 port. If Sony had used a better GPU, the 16 month difference between the consoles could have been plain for all to see, but Sony took the cheap-ass route with a custom CPU no one wanted just to kill off smaller developers with R&D costs.
But this is all moot because graphics didn’t seem to matter when the GC and Xbox arrived.
[quote=“Team Andromeda”]In part II would had the streets of Hong Kong with Hundreds of on screen characters and massive wide open spaces to worry about (the flyby?s on Disc are still to this day awesome) . At times you could almost hear the DC groan with pain with what AM#2 were asking it to perform .
Plus Shenmue II shipped in 2001 and after AM#2 were fully use to the system . I doubt the could give more with the memory and polygon limits of the DC[/quote]
I think they could have ironed out the slowdown given more time, but I don’t think the DC was capable of much better than Test Drive Le Mans and Shenmue 2. Those graphics would have still been satisfactory for another 2 years though IMO.
I don’t buy it. The Dreamcast version of Rez controls like shit and feels sluggish. There’s no way that’s running at 30 FPS. The graphics are also virtually identical. The only thing the Dreamcast version has on the PlayStation 2 version is crisper sound (which matters a lot considering Rez’s design), but to say that the graphics are better is nonsense. If you can provide screenshot proof to show me otherwise, I’ll retract my stance.
[quote=“Parn”]
I don’t buy it. The Dreamcast version of Rez controls like shit and feels sluggish. There’s no way that’s running at 30 FPS. The graphics are also virtually identical. The only thing the Dreamcast version has on the PlayStation 2 version is crisper sound (which matters a lot considering Rez’s design), but to say that the graphics are better is nonsense. If you can provide screenshot proof to show me otherwise, I’ll retract my stance.[/quote]
C’Mon every sod knows how poor and absolute sh8t the dual shock analogue twin stick are. The dead zones in there are pathtic and shows when you play both version of REZ. As for sound , I beg to diff The PS2 has the better sound somewhat thanks to coming out of the digital output.
I?ve played the 2 versions to death, and in the DC version there?s a slight pause to load the boss data in, and the odd bit of slowdown (none of which are present in the PS2 version) But the DC got the better looking textures and slightly more detail (more so on the explosions ) Hell the DC even has the butterfly on the title screen .
So its not nonsense at all
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]
[quote=“Team Andromeda”]In part II would had the streets of Hong Kong with Hundreds of on screen characters and massive wide open spaces to worry about (the flyby?s on Disc are still to this day awesome) . At times you could almost hear the DC groan with pain with what AM#2 were asking it to perform .
Plus Shenmue II shipped in 2001 and after AM#2 were fully use to the system . I doubt the could give more with the memory and polygon limits of the DC[/quote]
I think they could have ironed out the slowdown given more time, but I don’t think the DC was capable of much better than Test Drive Le Mans and Shenmue 2. Those graphics would have still been satisfactory for another 2 years though IMO.[/quote]
Very true , It also doesn’t get much better than Underfeat and D2 or Power Stone , Code Veronica imo too. I’ve yet to see a Snowy Landscape done so well as those in D2 , I felt cold playing D2 . Also Zombie Revenge had some awesome (almost eyepoping ) textures on some of the latter levels (shame the game was sh8t)
But for me the likes of Sonic Adv II, VO II and Shenmue II pushed the machine to it limits
[quote=“Team Andromeda”]C’Mon every sod knows how poor and absolute sh8t the dual shock analogue twin stick are. The dead zones in there are pathtic and shows when you play both version of REZ. As for sound , I beg to diff The PS2 has the better sound somewhat thanks to coming out of the digital output.
I?ve played the 2 versions to death, and in the DC version there?s a slight pause to load the boss data in, and the odd bit of slowdown (none of which are present in the PS2 version) But the DC got the better looking textures and slightly more detail (more so on the explosions ) Hell the DC even has the butterfly on the title screen .
So its not nonsense at all[/quote]
I’m not talking about the controllers themselves, I’m talking about how the console responds to your inputs. The Dreamcast is running sub 30 FPS with the game, and it controls like crap as a result. Phantasy Star Online runs at 30 FPS, which I’ve played EXTENSIVELY, and I can easily tell that Rez is not running at the same framerate. There’s no way.
Additionally, digital output merely allows for no chance of audio degradation through transmission. It means jack and shit if the source outputting the audio is inferior. It’s kind of like the two versions of Ikaruga for Dreamcast and GameCube… there’s a few slowdown spots on Dreamcast, but the GameCube audio is inferior.
And the butterfly on the title screen is just nitpicking.
[quote=“Parn”]
[quote=“Team Andromeda”]C’Mon every sod knows how poor and absolute sh8t the dual shock analogue twin stick are. The dead zones in there are pathtic and shows when you play both version of REZ. As for sound , I beg to diff The PS2 has the better sound somewhat thanks to coming out of the digital output.
I?ve played the 2 versions to death, and in the DC version there?s a slight pause to load the boss data in, and the odd bit of slowdown (none of which are present in the PS2 version) But the DC got the better looking textures and slightly more detail (more so on the explosions ) Hell the DC even has the butterfly on the title screen .
So its not nonsense at all[/quote]
I’m not talking about the controllers themselves, I’m talking about how the console responds to your inputs. The Dreamcast is running sub 30 FPS with the game, and it controls like crap as a result. Phantasy Star Online runs at 30 FPS, which I’ve played EXTENSIVELY, and I can easily tell that Rez is not running at the same framerate. There’s no way.
Additionally, digital output merely allows for no chance of audio degradation through transmission. It means jack and shit if the source outputting the audio is inferior. It’s kind of like the two versions of Ikaruga for Dreamcast and GameCube… there’s a few slowdown spots on Dreamcast, but the GameCube audio is inferior.
And the butterfly on the title screen is just nitpicking.[/quote]
The DC version is not running @ sub 30 fps, Sub 30 fps is Daytona and Panzer Dragoon onthe Saturn , REZ is nothing like that
It’s running @ 30 fps for most of the time, and the music does get a boost from running through the Digital out onthe PS2, thanks to no Interference (basically sounds a better more louder) .
But the DC visuals are far more crisp and Vibrant, and just look truly beautiful though VGA or RGB Scart
Butterfly isn’t nick picking its part of the game, as the true ending shows 
A good example for comparisons: Grandia 2
The Dreamcast version is vibrant, has anti-aliased textures, and the sound is very good.
The PS2 version has no anti-aliasing (not even software based), looks grainy, and the sound is degraded for some reason. The only improvement seems to be the ‘shitty’ cutscenes, which seem to be re-encoded with MPEG2.
Using this particular game as a benchmark, the Dreamcast version is vastly superior.
Can’t really use that as a benchmark, though. The way each machine works is vastly different. A lot of games, like Grandia, were built to take advantage of the Dreamcast’s unique features that the PS2 simply didn’t support, and the developers would have had to essentially build large portions of the game over from scratch in order to get it back to the same quality. Just some examples: PS2 is built to stream textures, not load large amounts of compressed textrures.
The PS2 is more powerful than the DC in many respects. The DC, on the otherhand, is more powerful than the PS2 in many others. Overall, from what I’ve heard, is that if you really spend the R&D on the PS2, it is the superior system, which is why you are seing games on PS2 that still amaze people (God of War, GT series, Jak/Ratchet series, etc).
[quote=“Kadamose”]A good example for comparisons: Grandia 2
The Dreamcast version is vibrant, has anti-aliased textures, and the sound is very good.
The PS2 version has no anti-aliasing (not even software based), looks grainy, and the sound is degraded for some reason. The only improvement seems to be the ‘shitty’ cutscenes, which seem to be re-encoded with MPEG2.
Using this particular game as a benchmark, the Dreamcast version is vastly superior.[/quote]
Yep spot on , and the same goes for Head Hunter, and for a laugh people should play the PS2 versions of Rayman and MDK , the DC versions just blow the PS2 out of the water when it comes to textures .
But in saying that, a very early PS2 game like International Track And filed the DC could never do in terms of polygons being thrown around .
But any current gen machine would be hard pressed to match the textures of that Power VR II chip , but in saying that I thought the Saturn was miles better than the PS when it came to texture maps
I’ve yet to see a better looking 32Bit game than Zwei , I could almost kiss the TA boys after what they did onthe Saturn
[quote=“Abadd”]
The PS2 is more powerful than the DC in many respects. The DC, on the otherhand, is more powerful than the PS2 in many others. Overall, from what I’ve heard, is that if you really spend the R&D on the PS2, it is the superior system, which is why you are seing games on PS2 that still amaze people (God of War, GT series, Jak/Ratchet series, etc).[/quote]
That’s not a very fair argument, considering the Dreamcast’s lifespan was only two and half years, while the PS2 has had a 6 year lifespan…on top of which, the 5th and 6th generation of games are the only ones showing the true potential of the PS2. If the Dreamcast were given a chance to live that long, it would have had MANY games that would have amazed people to this very day. In this respect, the Dreamcast is not getting the credit it deserves.