Sega Saturn?

[16bitter]

Beyond the issue of play -- VF is generally seen as the best playing 3D fighter ever -- Toshinden which came out around the same time as Saturn VF kicks the crap out of it and anything else the Saturn was doing at the time graphically, which is where the argument as to Saturn's capabilities lies.

Or compare Ridge Racer on PS to Daytona. An in-house game from Sega themselves, Daytona is one of the ugliest arcade ports I have seen in the modern era -- in fact, that's probably an understatement; more like it is the most pathetic big-name arcade to console port graphically I have seen. AT least in the 90's.

Just two examples. I don't know if the Saturn had some awesome 3D power that was hidden within it, but I think it's obvious that if this is true it was just buried too deep.

[lordofduct]

And again I'd rethink that Panzer Dragoon comment.

I only recently played Panzer Dragoon saga about a year ago - year and half ago. Even after owning an XBOX PDS was breathtaking to me with its beautiful graphics. the maps were gorgeous (especially the ancient lake) the battles were VERY detailed. Boss battles insanely detailed with gigantic bosses. The 3D graphics in this game are extremely nicer then FF7 and only released a mere 5 months after it. Shit it was released before 8 and the graphics wow me even more then FF8 did! Yeah Panzer Dragoon 1 looks kinda meh... but then again Panzer Dragoon is one of the very early 3D games for it, being released a mere 3 months into the PSXs life time. Check some release titles on the PSX and compare them to Panzer Dragoon! BIG DIFFERENCE.

[lordofduct]

TOSHINDEN!?

WHAT! that game plays like ass... much prettier then VF1 true (but then VF1 was a port of a 2-3 year old arcade game...)


In the long haul, yes the PSX certainly out performs the Saturn. It sure did put out some great games though that graphically could compete with the PSX at the time. There just wasn't enough of them.

[16bitter]

TOSHINDEN!?

WHAT! that game plays like ass...

I'm not talking about playability, I'm talking about graphics -- one of the true tests of a system's abilities from the base standard of its chips, as opposed to playability which can still be found on an Atari console of your choice today.

much prettier then VF1 true (but then VF1 was a port of a 2-3 year old arcade game...

But even more tellingly, it was a lousy port. The Saturn was just too much of a bear to program for, even for Sega's teams.

[16bitter]

Compare all these games to games at the same time. PSX didn't start shelling out better looking games until late in its appearance when developers had a lot of time with the machine and everything. (if time didn't improve graphics then why doesn't FF7 look like FF9????).

I'd actually say that the PS looked great early, as opposed to Saturn which remained hit or miss for the majority of its existence. I can't say that there were too many later PS games that wowed me though -- it didn't continue to improve late in its life graphically to the extent that the SNES or Genesis did the previous generation. But then, I can't say that for any of the consoles from Sony's initial era in the business -- I can't think of an N64 game that looks dramatically better, or generally as good, as Wave Race 64 for example.

VF2 is a great looking game on Saturn though. The biggest blunders of the Saturn beyond the graphical issues were really about timing -- it was released too early with unimpressive software for the price, whereas Sony came in cheaper with better looking software overall and tons of positive hype. The Saturn didn't really get its killer apps until the holiday season had arrived, and in this case it was too late. The timing for Sega was just screwed that year, and it led to their downfall -- more specifically, their choices did. The early Saturn release has to stand as the decision that, from the line of events as we know them, doomed the system here.

[Vicman]

Here's an easy comparison since you guys want to make it seem like it took forever for PSX games to look better than Saturn games. Virtua Fighter 2 came out in Japan for the Saturn in 12/01/95 according to Gamefaqs. Soul Blade, the precursor to Soul Calibur, came out in 12/20/96.

VF2:




Soul Blade:





Here's another comparison. SF3 came 12/11/97, FF7 came out 01/31/97:

SF3:





FF7:





One last one DOA Saturn:


DOA Playstation:


Man that Saturn one looks great doesn't it? And these 2 versions only came out a month apart.

Top this with the fact that:
Burning Rangers 02/26/98 JP
Panzer Dragoon 03/10/95 JP
Panzer Dragoon Zweii 03/22/96 JP
Panzer Dragoon Saga 01/29/98 JP
Shining Force 3 12/11/97 JP

So outside of Panzer 1 most of these games came out in the middle of the 32 bit era (1994-1999). And again and again in those pictures above the PSX had better lighting and particle effects than Saturn's best games. And not as you guys have suggested way late into the PSX's life span but around the same time these first party Saturn games were coming out. Are you telling me PSX's best graphical games took till 1998/1999 and beyond to start beating out Saturn's first party games? Please, that's just pure bunk.

[16bitter]

As far as VF2 versus Soul Blade, though the two were a year apart in release VF2 remains the Saturns best looking (and playing) fighter, but outside of resolution it pales in graphical prowess next to SB. The backgrounds were 2D on SVF2 which allowed the programmers to up the polygon count on the characters, whereas the arcade version of VF2 and PS port of SB (which ran on Playstation hardware in the arcade) had 3D backgrounds.

I don't think there's much doubt that SB could not have ever have been pulled off at or near the same level on Saturn.

[Vicman]

Nonetheless Sega lost me as a fan during that timeframe. I fell in love with them not only for their games but for the way they treated their userbase. They worked hard to earn my family's money during the Genesis era. They didn't do that during the Saturn era, and by the time they tried to make it all up during this era with the DC it was too late for most people unfortunately.

I am a gamer first and a Sega fan second. If and when a company I like starts to screw with me and my money I have no problem taking it elsewhere. It's the reason I don't like Nintendo all that much and don't like Sony that much anymore either. Sega at least made up with the DC, they tried so hard and it was a shame that system didn't last longer than it did.

IMO Gaming history has repeated itself in almost each generation as the downfall of a once gaming giant happens when their arrogance superceeds their intelligence. It happened to Atari, then Nintendo, then Sega, and eventually it'll happen to Sony as well if they price their PS3 @ $400 USD. A company earns it's position via great/big name games and aggressive pricing/marketing. After it's name is established it can ride on it's laurels, but only for so long, eventually its arrogance/liberties taken with consumers will come to bite it in the ass.

[Mel]

Nonetheless Sega lost me as a fan during that timeframe. I fell in love with them not only for their games but for the way they treated their userbase. They worked hard to earn my family's money during the Genesis era. They didn't do that during the Saturn era, and by the time they tried to make it all up during this era with the DC it was too late for most people unfortunately.

I am a gamer first and a Sega fan second. If and when a company I like starts to screw with me and my money I have no problem taking it elsewhere. It's the reason I don't like Nintendo all that much and don't like Sony that much anymore either. Sega at least made up with the DC, they tried so hard and it was a shame that system didn't last longer than it did.

IMO Gaming history has repeated itself in almost each generation as the downfall of a once gaming giant happens when their arrogance superceeds their intelligence. It happened to Atari, then Nintendo, then Sega, and eventually it'll happen to Sony as well if they price their PS3 @ $400 USD. A company earns it's position via great/big name games and aggressive pricing/marketing. After it's name is established it can ride on it's laurels, but only for so long, eventually its arrogance/liberties taken with consumers will come to bite it in the ass.

Yep, I became a sega fan, AFTER everything went down. Good development house, bad corporate structure.

I agree, each generation history has repeated itself, with the arrogance of corporate management.

Generally I don't like the microsoft behemoth. And I don't appreciate Sony's behavior and marketing with the ps2. This generation I really enjoyed the cube the most.

I'll be keeping a close eye next generation, but it seems that nintendo has the right idea by making a const concious and fun system, ala' Dreamcast.

[Dartagnan1083]

If you look closely at the DOA pics you'll notice that the PSX version never even tried to do full 3D backgrounds like the Saturn version.
There is also favortism in Team Ninja toward the Saturn Version. As it was included with the DOA-U release instead of the PSX one.

Those FFVII shots look like they were taken from the PC version. The PSX never had resolutions THAT sharp. Even FFVIII had horrendous jaggies.


Sega lost my loyalty during that time as well for how they managed themselves. Very little good was happening.

But I still Love my Saturn,

[16bitter]

I knew that the Saturn's DOA was favored, but I couldn't remember why. That's interesting that we actually have a case where the Saturn was creating fully 3D backgrounds where the PS wasn't.

[j_factor]

Comparing VF2 to Soul Blade isn't really fair.. a much more apt comparison would be to Last Bronx, which is relatively similar. Last Bronx, unlike Soul Blade, runs at a constant 60 frames per second, and at a higher resolution to boot.

Consider also the case of Duke Nukem. The Saturn conversion of Duke Nukem 3D, which came out before the Playstation's Total Meltdown, has significantly better graphics than its psx counterpart in pretty much every way.

Further, take a look at NHL All-Star Hockey '98 and World Series Baseball '98 compared to Wayne Gretsky's 3D Hockey '98 (psx's only hockey game that year) and MLB '98. Don't tell me you think the Playstation games looked better.

Sure RE wasn't a perfect port to Saturn, but Enemy Zero had better graphics anyway. The Lost World was quite a bit better on Saturn, from what I've seen.

Were I talking about some of the earliest stuff, you could blame it on fluke or whatever, but this is all from when both systems were established. Going a bit earlier though, I never found anything from Playstation in 1996 as lush as NiGHTS was; when Gungriffon came out in early '96, I hadn't seen anything for Playstation that rendered open environments that well.

[16bitter]

Though obviously we're talking about completely different engines, I'd argue that Crash Bandicoot was easily the best looking mascot game of 96. It still looks good today.

[j_factor]

Crash ran in enclosed tracks, while NiGHTS rendered full environments (even though it ran on rails within said environments, it still had to render fully 3D ones). Crash Bandicoot could more rightly be compared to Bug Too, which I'd say looks a smidge better.

[16bitter]

Crash ran in enclosed tracks, while NiGHTS rendered full environments (even though it ran on rails within said environments, it still had to render fully 3D ones). Crash Bandicoot could more rightly be compared to Bug Too, which I'd say looks a smidge better.

Bug Too>Crash? I really can't agree with that. At all.

Nights is a wondrous game though. It's one of the masterpieces of the 32-bit era.