Quantcast

Page 22 of 104 FirstFirst ... 121819202122232425263272 ... LastLast
Results 316 to 330 of 1557

Thread: PS2 vs Dreamcast Graphics

  1. #316
    Raging in the Streets Team Andromeda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,814
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Based on the above I've come to the conclusion that TA is an idiot
    I expect nothing less from you and the tradamark insults. Who knows one day you'll get your facts and do just a little bit of research .



    But don't tell you know better than the likes of Hideki Sato-san
    Panzer Dragoon Zwei is
    one of the best 3D shooting games available
    Presented for your pleasure

  2. #317
    Smith's Minister of War Hero of Algol Kamahl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Belgium
    Age
    27
    Posts
    7,963
    Rep Power
    121

    Default

    "It's not real bump-mapping, but it looks the same".

    So it has a hardware effect that looks just like bump mapping. It is, for all intents and purposes, bump mapping (regardless if it's implemented a bit differently). Key here is that it's *not* (and not even that interviews says) a software effect. It's hardware.

    You're basically misquoting him.
    This thread needs more... ENGINEERS

  3. #318
    Raging in the Streets Team Andromeda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,814
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    So it has a hardware effect that looks just like bump mapping.
    Hence why I said

    It doesn't . DC support a effect that works and looks similar to Bump Mapping but the Power VR2 DC chispet didn't support it

    So Like I said the DC doesn't support Bump Mapping in Hardware . Next time do a little bit of research and also take the time to read what people type and who's knows learn to grow some manors too.
    Panzer Dragoon Zwei is
    one of the best 3D shooting games available
    Presented for your pleasure

  4. #319
    Smith's Minister of War Hero of Algol Kamahl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Belgium
    Age
    27
    Posts
    7,963
    Rep Power
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    So Like I said the DC doesn't support Bump Mapping in Hardware . Next time do a little bit of research and also take the time to read what people type and who's knows learn to grow some manors too.
    But it looks just like bump mapping... So technically it is supported, just not following whatever the "correct" definition of bump mapping is. The PS2 has horrible software hacks to do bump mapping and bloom effects and everyone calls those "bump mapping" and "bloom".

    When you have an effect that's "exactly like bump mapping but done in another way", it's bump mapping.

    It's like saying the Amiga can't do multiple backgrounds because there it's called "Dual Playfield" and involves splitting the biplanes. It's the same damn thing.
    This thread needs more... ENGINEERS

  5. #320
    Road Rasher
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    428
    Rep Power
    36

    Default

    Looks like I need to catch up with this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by azonicrider View Post
    I still stand by GameCube and Xbox being secondary 6th gen consoles. Xbox being a 3DO M2? not a chance in hell. I wanna know what game, or specs is making you overestimate the Xbox so much.
    Well you're entitled to your opinion as much as I am to mine. I would say that PC conversions of high end games (circa 2004) like Doom 3 or Half Life 2 really were impressive and I find it interesting that the only 6th gen system to receive ports of those games was the Xbox.

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    I still think the 3 best looking games of that generation were on the Gamecube, with RS II/III and Metroid Prime. Nintendo really downplayed the polygon performance of the Gamecube and just posted realistic numbers for the hardware.
    Well I've only just picked up a GameCube in the last couple of months and so I've not really collected a lot of games for it yet, those games you mentioned sound like ones I should look out for (I am assuming that RSII/III are the 2 Rogue Squadron games) thanks for the info.

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    What 3rd party developer was going to port a PS2/Gamecube game to the Xbox using DirectX?

    Most of those titles that were shared with the PC were using DX. I could only imagine how much better Knights of the Old Republic could have been, if it wasn't tied to MS' resource hogging API.

    I wasn't aware that there were any Xbox games that didn't use DirectX, I'm not sure on the Xbox but I have read that with Xbox360 the developers are required to use DirectX or else their game will not pass certification by Microsoft. I thought developers were required to use official Microsoft dev tools which included use of DirectX. I tried doing a search but could not find anything confirming this for the Xbox specifically so I might be wrong.

  6. #321
    Raging in the Streets Team Andromeda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,814
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    But it looks just like bump mapping... So technically it is supported,
    Its not true 'bump mapping' and its very telling that the only time we saw any real use of the effect was in the 1998 Irimajiri-san demo and a bit in the Godzllia game (if you're going to bring up the coins in Shenmue I'm going to laugh) . So it's a fact that the DC Power VR didn't support 'Bump Mapping' in hardware.

    It's like saying the Amiga can't do multiple backgrounds because there it's called "Dual Playfield" and involves splitting the biplanes
    No its just saying it didn't support it in Hardware. F355 gives a nice impression of envoirmetnal mapping on the cars but its not true envoirmetnal mapping and it's not supported in the Hardware.

    I wasn't aware that there were any Xbox games that didn't use DirectX, I'm not sure on the Xbox but I have read that with Xbox360 the developers are required to use DirectX or else their game will not pass certification by Microsoft
    Yes and I'm sure it was the same for the XBox too
    Panzer Dragoon Zwei is
    one of the best 3D shooting games available
    Presented for your pleasure

  7. #322
    ding-doaw Raging in the Streets tomaitheous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sonoran Desert
    Age
    41
    Posts
    3,981
    Rep Power
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    And they're all wrong . DC Power VR didn't support it in Hardware its a fact .
    Uhmm...
    One of the architects of the Dreamcast's graphics chip (Simon Fenney) disagrees: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=51062

    Bump mapping is not a single technique, it's a generic term. If it looks like bump mapping, and smells like bump mapping, it is bump mapping, it doesn't matter how it is performed.
    Sooo... no, then?

  8. #323
    WCPO Agent
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Age
    36
    Posts
    990
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    Its not true 'bump mapping' and its very telling that the only time we saw any real use of the effect was in the 1998 Irimajiri-san demo and a bit in the Godzllia game (if you're going to bring up the coins in Shenmue I'm going to laugh) .
    Ok then, give us a definition of "true bump mapping".

    Oh, and I believe this is the patent for the method of bump mapping employed on the Dreamcast: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6819319
    Last edited by Silanda; 01-27-2014 at 02:10 PM.

  9. #324
    Raging in the Streets azonicrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    2,588
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Andromeda is constantly rejecting anything that makes the Dreamcast sound impressive.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  10. #325
    I remain nonsequitur Shining Hero sheath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,313
    Rep Power
    128

    Default

    This is the same story every time, if Sega managed to do something it is somehow not the same and therefor less important. The Genesis doesn't have enough backgrounds even though it is the only system of its generation to push as many layers. They don't count and are "excessive" because they aren't "real" backgrounds. The Saturn is bad at 3D, really bad, in fact it doesn't do 3D at all because it only renders quads. The Dreamcast can't generate enough theoretical polygons and its GPU effects don't count or should not be considered.

    To me all of this is just conjecture designed to make people argue about nothing. The "successful" companies definitely cannot be questioned in most places though.

  11. #326
    Hard Road! ESWAT Veteran Barone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    6,928
    Rep Power
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christuserloeser View Post
    Since when is IGN a reputable source ?
    Since when they quote programmers/developers in their interviews. In other occasions they're still good sources for info about frame rate and other technical details of some specific games, especially when they mention to have gotten those numbers directly from the developers.
    Besides that, they do have tons of reviews with very biased comments and scores but to dismiss all their info is a huge mistake.



    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    I'm the only one who doesn't have any facts? How many polygons per second does F-Zero GX push? What about the demands on VRAM for texture maps? Normal mapping or other more modern effects, do we know a single thing? Again you took my statement, that F-Zero GX would not look as low end as Magforce Racing on Dreamcast, and ran it to the absurd. This is why I posted Daytona 2001 on Dreamcast and F-Zero GX together.
    I see that you're badly trying to invalidate some proper observation and descriptive comparison as a good source of info, but that doesn't work with me.
    An important part of many scientific experiments rely mostly on careful observation and annotation of the details/phenomena observed. A lot of the fundamentals of actual Astronomy, for an example, is mostly built upon Kepler's notebooks. And, no, Kepler wasn't capable of measuring with discrete numbers most of his observations. However, they were and still are very valid and important notes to this day.

    I've described, previously, several details that can be observed in F-Zero GX and which aren't presented in most of Dreamcast games if any at all. You can also create a poll thread and ask people which game they think that looks better: DC's Daytona USA or GC's F-Zero GX. I think I know which will be the result, despite not having any extracensorial power.
    I also "guess" that people will often cite stuff like "texture", "lighting", "backgrounds" and "effects" when talking about their preferences.

    Of course, to produce any valid observation you have to be able to give away your special Sega's goggles; which is not always an easy task in this forum.


    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    It is completely obvious that a Dreamcast version of F-Zero GX would be significantly better in every respect than Magforce Racing. This was my only point.
    It probably COULD but you can't be sure that it would without a real F-Zero GX port or another similar futuristic racer featuring stuff like 4P split-screen at 60 fps as both games do.


    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    So we should develop a list of graphical effects that you think make a game look "better" in this generation and go from there.
    You always seem to miss the point that a lot of people like some effects as proper environment mapping that you usually don't see in DC games.
    You also miss the point that a lot of PC gamers back then were upgrading their video cards to actually be able to enable in their beloved PC games same/similar effects that the PS2/GC/Xbox games usually have over the DC ones.


    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    I will never assume or accept what you and a couple of others have read into my statements. The actual truth is as I have always said, we need more facts not more opinions.
    I suppose you think this is a fact, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    By the time the PS2 "took off" with actual software that needed Dual Analog sticks, it was for games with shoddy AI cameras that forced the player to play Actor and Director.
    Now, let me tell you something: this isn't a fact and actually it sounds awfully biased from your side.



    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    Have we really come to the place that we can look at a 3D game from that generation and just eyeball which is a generational leap ahead without any assistance? If so, I will end any part I have in this discussion right now.
    Again, I see that you desperately try to thrash any honest descriptive observation so you can keep forcing your own biased ones. That's a trick which usually don't work with me that easy.
    Believe it or not, most of minded gamers can eyeball PS1 games from PS2 games and PS2 games from PS3 games without any assistance or extracensorial power. Wow.



    Quote Originally Posted by sheath View Post
    I have actually posted every technical document I have found so far on the two systems' performance. To say otherwise is crude and insulting. You know what I want, more facts. If the PS2 ends up being the polygon monster Sony always promised, even if that took five, eight or ten years, I will not deny it. Do you have that fact documented?
    Be my guest:

    "Gentlemen!

    I'd like to answer a few of your questions regarding GP Challenge.

    Firstly I'd like to absolutely guarantee you that these screenshots are indeed taken from the PS2. You will get absolutely this and then some from the actual game and in fact these shots are taken directly from the game several weeks ago prior to final graphics. I should explain that the reason for the apparently high resolution of the screens is that our graphics engine generates images internally at a higher resolution than your TV can natively display. So the final on TV image is the antialiased result of the high resolution image you are seeing on your PC monitor. With its final lighting, the real, final game on PS2 really does look better than these today. It’s not like a certain other recently released PS2 racer!

    Also I’d like to confirm that the game runs at a constant 60 frames/second regardless of how many of the 22 cars are on screen and how many effects are being generated. PS2 is both complicated and versatile and it has taken a project with time on its side to allow us to extract full results.

    We have really tried hard to push PS2 to the limit on this game whilst still progressing the gameplay and style that people enjoyed so much on Dreamcast TestDrive:Lemans. We set out to make an F1 game that fans of the GranTurismo series would feel genuinely justified in wanting and enjoying. We believe it is the first console racing game that really does rival GT3 visuals and exceeds it in pure motor racing feeling. It feels ferocious for experts (far from ‘lite F1’ as mentioned in the forum!) but also has modes to encourage those new to racing and Formula 1! Without doubt you will notice a massive difference between GrandPrix Challenge and every other console F1 game released to date.

    Happy Racing,



    Andrew Carter
    Executive Producer: GP Challenge. "

    "Hey Seb, Monkey and GTMax,

    Thanks for your comments!

    I totally understand any doubts as I and many on the GP Challenge team are also sick and tired of gimmick ridden sub standard racing games being advertised as amazing.

    It makes our life difficult when we have something genuinely awesome. It's really a shame because so many make false claims in this and other racing genres that it is hard to be heard through the noise sometimes.

    I only ever get involved in these forums in this way when I'm certain racing fans will not be disappointed and then we have to make some noise!

    We're really proud of this game and I promise it really does look better running on PS2 today than in the shots. It has gameplay to match as well.

    Regarding the number of cars, GT3 used to have me in awe, but since it was made several years ago we have made a real discovery on PS2 that means our game pushes close to double the polygons and more than 3 times everything else of that game. It is actually a unique 'technology feature' in GP Challenge right now that allows 22 cars with more individual detail than GT3's 6 cars at 60fps. By the way in GPC all the AI cars in the game drive with the same full physics model as the player car so they are not at all simplified either."


    "Hi max,

    A few stats for you,

    Raw car model - 8000 Polys
    With reflections / lighting - 20000 polys

    Total max displayed on screen including all cars / scenery 200,000 - 300,000 @ 60fps in game depending on the scene."



    Let me do the math for you, sheath:
    200,000 x 60 = 12 million polygons per second
    300,000 x 60 = 18 million polygons per second
    .


    "N1SMO,

    Thanks!

    As for damage, there are real physical reactions from the car including spinning, getting one or more wheels airborn and flipping in extreme cases. Wheels and wings sustain visual damage and have very cool physics when broken off in a collision. You can still limp home to the pits on 3 wheels (lots of understeer though!).

    The three selectable handling levels (Beginner, Intermediate and Expert) adjust the damage thresholds so Beginner cars are pretty sturdy and Expert cars are quite brittle.

    There is an overriding theme in the game of 'one size does not fit all', so handling can be selected from the following and subtly effects many other in game parameters:

    Beginner - just that for those new to racing and F1.
    Intermediate - Arcade style, but still with a realistic basis.
    Expert - sim (GT) style."

    This was all in the first page of this topic:
    http://web.archive.org/web/200211272...threadid=71733

    Sadly, the second page is not archived but we have quotes provided in other forums at the time:
    "Just a note on the antialiasing - I can't let too many of our techniques out, but the game runs at 640X960 pixel resolution - realtime supersampling. Almost all 'normal' PS2 games are still using 640X480 and the original early ones were a two raw fields of 640X224 - so we have a 4X improvement in resolution compared to early PS2 games and 2X most of the current others (including games on other console platforms)."
    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...19&postcount=5

    About Andrew Carter: http://www.mobygames.com/developer/s...eloperId,2746/

    Interview with Melbourne House about GPC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltCbt9Hkqws | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbPtkwQbhg

    GPC Q&A:
    "It is very difficult to have 22 very detailed cars with full physics and AI simulation running on richly detailed tracks at a nonstop 60 frames per second with no slowdown. Achieving this with wet weather and replays was particularly challenging, and we don't know of any other title that manages this feat."

    "When we started GPC we really set out to push the PS2 hardware. We wanted to achieve a level of graphical splendor at least equal to Gran Turismo but with the great effect of a 22-car racing field. This was very difficult. In the end it meant discovering a special graphics technique of PS2 that nobody else seems to yet know about. Basically it means we have almost twice the polygon and simulation capacity of any other PS2 title. Eye candy therefore is a big wow-factor in GPC. First the game runs at a constant 60 frames per second with zero slowdown ever. It also runs at double the resolution of many other PS2 titles. We have the most complete and detailed F1 car models (more than 11,000 polygons per raw car model, 20,000 polygons with multipass effects) running on the most complete and detailed F1 tracks (more than 500,000 polygons per track) yet. Add to this dynamic weather effects including variable-strength rain composed of up to 10,000 individual particles, sunny to wet transitions, dynamic environment mapping, per-pixel road lighting, and full-on wet-weather spray effects with all 22 cars generating up to 1,000 spray particles. We have multipass rendering for graphical effects such as reflection of real trackside environments and reflection on track surfaces. Actually there are tons of subtle and not-that-subtle effects in the game. It's "particle city" out there on the track! Achieving this with a full field of 22 cars at a nonstop 60fps is an achievement we are extremely proud of. Take a look at the stunning replay cameras--they are better than TV and show the full graphical beauty of GPC."

    " It was very difficult to be honest. There was slowdown in the game until the last days of development. There were times in the last few months of development when I didn't know for sure if we could solve all the technical hurdles. But in the end, each time we hit a wall with PS2 performance we found a new way of exploiting the hardware to make it go faster. That is really both the cool thing and sometimes the nightmare of PS2--there is always another way, another approach to get more from it. It can be very time consuming, and in the end the development schedule and our ingenuity are the only limitations."

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/mel.../1100-2912020/


    Now, sheath, please, tell me how I'm a liar and a troll when I just layout the truth during the entire thread: DC's graphics capabilities are NOT on par with the PS2's.

  12. #327
    Hero of Algol TrekkiesUnite118's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Age
    29
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    Yes and that's the trouble with just view videos on-line . You can also effect the contrast, Hum and various other things with most videocards and the software - It doesn't give you a real impression of what it was like to play it in your own home on a CRT TV.
    Why the hell would I be playing a 480p game on a 480i CRT TV? Anything 480p and up get's hooked up to my Plasma TV. I may not own Riddick, but it doesn't mean I can't compare graphics based on screenshots. You see, I didn't own an Original Xbox for most of that generation, I had a Gamecube and a PS2. I still played Xbox Games, but that was at my friends houses and later after I got one for my Brother so he would stop taking my Gamecube. Just because I don't own every single game ever made doesn't mean I may not have played them, nor does it mean I can't use my own fucking eyes to look at official screenshots as well as direct captures from real hardware and compare the two.

    This argument of yours is old and stupid. The logic of this is basically saying unless you own a game you're completely fucking blind when viewing any footage or screenshots of it. The only aspect of a game that this matters on is gameplay, nothing else.

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    Saturn games really show this up where the High Res shimmer isn't displayed as good as it looks on a CRT TV,
    You mean the flicker caused by the interlacing of High Res mode?

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    You'll be surprised at the difference dynamic lighting makes to the game . The game looked really close to Doom III on the PC which given most people had to buy a new Gfx card just to run Doom 3 on the PC was amazing for a 3 year old console .
    I didn't say the dynamic lighting wasn't impressive. The argument was about the complexities of the geometry, not lighting effects. You said the geometry in Metroid Prime is simple. It's not, there's lots of complex shapes and tons of detail. Lighting is completely irrelevant to this.

  13. #328
    Death Bringer Raging in the Streets Black_Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    40
    Posts
    3,952
    Rep Power
    86

    Default

    Sega Saturn Magazine from the UK had extensive coverage of the pre-release Dreamcast tech demo that showed off some of the hardware effects. The bump mapping demo was a golf ball with the dimples rendered by bump mapping.

    The Dreamcast has hardware support for bump mapping, just not hardware support for bump mapping™.

    It's what's known as common sense™ to all but one forum member.
    Quote Originally Posted by year2kill06
    everyone knows nintendo is far way cooler than sega just face it nintendo has more better games and originals

  14. #329
    Hard Road! ESWAT Veteran Barone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    6,928
    Rep Power
    146

    Default

    Here's a interesting link talking about some DC graphical effects and capabilities:

    "And there is one more major problem. Notice the wrong shadowing in the middle of the picture. This happens when the camera enters a shadow volume. The polygons of the originally closed volume are clipped against the z near plane and the volume is opened. There is a nice solution to that famious capping problem by John Carmack but it works only with 8 Bit stencil buffer depth. On Dreamcast we have some kind of what I call 1.5 Bit stencil buffer. For one volume object there is only 1 Bit stencil, so either in or out. But you can have multiple overlapping separated volumes without any problems. So what we have to do is to generate capping polygons at the znear plane in order to close the clipped volume. "

    "Above you can see some multi texturing and environment mapping with specular highlights. On the left there is only one environment texture, on the right there is a base texture and an environment map that makes up the black blots. On Dreamcast there is no real multitexturing support in hardware. Each additional texture layer must be rendered with translucent polygons, i.e. you have to send almost the same geometry vertex data to the graphics chips multiple times. My intention was to reduce the burden on the CPU (all geometry processing is done by the CPU on Dreamcast) by organizing the data in such a way that it could easily be cloned in one go. And in some cases it is even almost for free!"

    "Now that we've got multitexturing up and running we can continue with some more interesting stuff: The bump mapping. I don't remember seeing any game out there that makes use of it. But I also must confess that you won't be able to recognice it when you don't know it's there in some cases. On Dreamcast bump mapping can be done quite easily, too. Basically all you have to do is just a lookup table for the atan2 computation. However, things get complicated again if you want more than one light source to affect the bump mapping surface. "
    http://yam.20to4.net/dreamcast/index_old.html
    http://yam.20to4.net/index.html

  15. #330
    End of line.. ESWAT Veteran gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    6,565
    Rep Power
    89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Andromeda View Post
    Pretty sure SEGA did with Monkeyball for starters Also Smilebit were made up from SEGA's old PC division and I'm sure in a interview they confirmed they were using Direct X for both Orta and GV as their R&D lines were accustomed to and use to using Direct X .
    Looks like you may be right on that one.

    According to this article, all titles on the Xbox 360 were required to use DX and developers weren't allowed to design software that could take full advantage (to the metal) of the hardware.

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...nce-blog-entry


    Quote Originally Posted by eurogamer

    It's often been said that one of the many advantages of working on console is that you have a fixed set of hardware to work with, that you can "write to the metal" and code to the "bleeding edge" of the spec. However, our sources suggest that this simply isn't an option for Xbox 360 developers. Microsoft doesn't allow it.

    Suspicions were first aroused by a tweet by EA Vancouver's Jim Hejl who revealed that addressing the Xenos GPU on 360 involves using the DirectX APIs, which in turn incurs a cost on CPU resources. Hejl later wrote in a further message that he'd written his own API for manual control of the GPU ring, incurring little or no hit to the main CPU.

    "Cert would hate it tho," he added mysteriously.

    According to other dev sources, what that actually means in real terms is that circumventing the use of the standard APIs would result in a submitted game not ever making it past Microsoft's strict certification guidelines which state that all GPU calls need to be routed through DirectX. Compare and contrast with PS3 development, where writing your own command buffers and addressing the RSX chip directly through its LibGCM interface is pretty much the standard way of talking to the hardware.
    This goes back to my original point that DX8 was holding the Xbox back. On paper, the hardware was a beast, but when you look at the best available software on the console, I have to give the nod to what Factor 5 and Retro Studios were able to do with the Gamecube.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •