PS2 vs Game Cube graphics?

[segarule]

Well, your data is showing that numbers are higher in racing games. So would try measures there.

[SegaAMD]

Well, your data is showing that numbers are higher in racing games. So would try measures there.

yes, but not in this sense, for example among games analyzed You can see that the open world produces fewer polygons than linear games (this obviously includes racing games) fighting (and other) games that are highly textured games also produce low polygonal count.
. Games like Buffy, Blood Omen 2, and knights of Temple caught my attention because they consist of rooms and each room has a low poly.
. Ragdoll games or similar also produce low polygonal count.
. It's not conclusive, after all I only tested the early stages of each game, but there seems to be a generational limit of 9kk, at least that's what my numbers point out.
. Finally, some sequels of some games like SSX had reduced counts on SSX3, Starfox, Metroid, this seems to indicate that the improvements made in lighting or even the scope of the game itself had an impact on polygonal counting.

[StuOhQ]

Gamecube definitely has the leg up in this one. Even with a nice pair of YPbPr cables, the PS2 only gets so sharp. Most games max at 480i.

[SegaAMD]

I feel that the progressive scan is overrated, in many situations the ps2 version is sharper at 480i than its competitors at 480p, Tony Hawk Underground the ps2 has been jagged, but the image is sharp, the other consoles seem to use filters and AA that causes a blurry look, in fact AA blurs the games, to this day it is so. Tekken TaG Tournament stands well in sharpness compared to any sixth generation game, and it is a 480i game, since at the time the progressive scan function did not was still available on PS2. I prefer a crisp look.

[gamevet]

The 1sr time I moved from a 480i SD CRT to a 480p CRT, I was floored by all of the details I couldn’t see in Forza Motorsport, like the light of the sun putting a shine on the pavement, or the shine of the paint on the cars. I didn’t want to play 480i ever again, unless it was on the older consoles.

[StuOhQ]

I feel that the progressive scan is overrated, in many situations the ps2 version is sharper at 480i than its competitors at 480p, Tony Hawk Underground the ps2 has been jagged, but the image is sharp, the other consoles seem to use filters and AA that causes a blurry look, in fact AA blurs the games, to this day it is so. Tekken TaG Tournament stands well in sharpness compared to any sixth generation game, and it is a 480i game, since at the time the progressive scan function did not was still available on PS2. I prefer a crisp look.

That definitely depends on what you're playing on (display), and what equipment you're using to get the signal to the display (if LCD). 480i games look pretty decent if they're routed through my RetroTINK 2X before hitting my scaler. Since it doesn't have 480p passthrough though, I would be out 480p+ content on the PS2 if I did that.

I prefer a progressive picture on anything but a CRT. N64 games with 480i modes, I will often switch down to 240p and take a lower resolution with sharper pixels. Just my preference, though.

[SegaAMD]

3 times @Team Andromeda you asked me about the Gamecube's memory, this thread, here is more appropriate perfect for talking about comparatives

In the Saturn, PS and PC FX 32bit we had consoles with similar amounts of main system RAM but even Saturn fans would need to accept the PS had the better GPU and NEC fans just needed to cry
You like to talk of speed of memory, but don't like to talk about that when it comes to the PS2 Vs Cube; The Game Cube had faster disc data read and much faster main ram and also unlike the PS2 could handle perfect ports of NA@MI II, so it must be more powerful right


Like with any gaming gen, it comes down to a combination of various factors, but mainly market share..

saturn vd1 < ps1 gpu
saturn vdp+vdp2 > ps1 gpu


in fact it doesn’t, the theoretical transfer rate (gcn) is between 2mb / s and 3mb / s the ps2 does on cd rom up to 3.6mb / s and on dvd something like 5.28mb / s

so numbers aren't everything, looking at the memory of the cube it has 43mb but 16mb (very slow 81mb / s) of those 43 are dedicated exclusively for sound and load optimization, so 27mb (24 + 3) is left the ps2 has 36mb (32+ 4).

So the ps2 has 8mb more useful than the gcn this explains why the ps2 is more powerfull. Neither of them can receive perfect ports from Naomi 2 since the latter has a lot of memory, it is not because GCN received virtua strike 3 that he would be able to receive virtua fighter 4 at same level

[gamevet]

The best on PS2 wasn’t even close to matching the best on GameCube. F-Zero GX makes Wipeout Pure look silly in comparison. GX runs blistering fast with tons of lighting and particle effects just not seen in Wipeout.

The PS2 has a horribly limited texture cache, just like the N64, so textures generally look pretty bad in most games for the console.

[Team Andromeda]

3 times @Team Andromeda you asked me about the Gamecube's memory, this thread, here is more appropriate perfect for talking about comparatives



saturn vd1 < ps1 gpu
saturn vdp+vdp2 > ps1 gpu


in fact it doesn’t, the theoretical transfer rate (gcn) is between 2mb / s and 3mb / s the ps2 does on cd rom up to 3.6mb / s and on dvd something like 5.28mb / s

so numbers aren't everything, looking at the memory of the cube it has 43mb but 16mb (very slow 81mb / s) of those 43 are dedicated exclusively for sound and load optimization, so 27mb (24 + 3) is left the ps2 has 36mb (32+ 4).

So the ps2 has 8mb more useful than the gcn this explains why the ps2 is more powerfull. Neither of them can receive perfect ports from Naomi 2 since the latter has a lot of memory, it is not because GCN received virtua strike 3 that he would be able to receive virtua fighter 4 at same level

Try as you might we all know and could see Game Cube looked better than the PS2 and the PS2 had a much harder time with handling NA@MI II ports. No doubt the reason why SEGA also only looked to use the PS2 Arcade board once, even SEGA AM team knew there was better console hardware to use for it Arcade games . And even this Saturn fan knows the VDP 1 was outgunned by the PS GPU; Even if some say the Saturn had the memory advantage and I believe the Saturn Biohazard port team said the SH-1 was better at data management off the CD, than that to the PS too?

[SonicTheHedgehog]

The slow portion of memory in the Gamecube was never a limiting factor though. I'm amazed some people try to make out that the PS2 was more powerful or that the games looked better than on the Gamecube. I think the only thing that held the look of Gamecube games back was the tiny storage space on the 1.4gb disks compared to the 4.8gb available on dvds. This meant that most games textures and audio had to be compressed, sometimes heavily to fit on a single disk. Although still better looking than PS2 games I would love to see what Gamecube games would have looked and sounded like had they had more space to store uncompressed textures and audio.

[SegaAMD]

I agree that the GameCube does in its exclusives a look that can be described as better, I understand that it is a weaker but more modern console, it is no surprise that even Dreamcast can make some games look better than those on PS2 and even the gamecube ones. But being able to make some simple games look better doesn't erase that the console has weaker and more limited hardware.

see that irony, the same console capable of running resident evil 4 is not able to run this game without destroying the quality and due to the limitation of the 24MB of main memory 8MB less than the PS2 you can search

https://youtu.be/7j2Jla1OKWI?t=981

everything that the eye sees at this stage would have been even worse if it was run on the Nintendo console, so the producers preferred not to make the game for the platform, people would not understand and would accuse them of bad port.

[BonusKun]

All I have to do is look at Rogue Squadron II & F-Zero on the Cube to know that the PS2 while it would have been able to run those games they would have never looked as sharp.

[j_factor]

The slow portion of memory in the Gamecube was never a limiting factor though. I'm amazed some people try to make out that the PS2 was more powerful or that the games looked better than on the Gamecube. I think the only thing that held the look of Gamecube games back was the tiny storage space on the 1.4gb disks compared to the 4.8gb available on dvds. This meant that most games textures and audio had to be compressed, sometimes heavily to fit on a single disk. Although still better looking than PS2 games I would love to see what Gamecube games would have looked and sounded like had they had more space to store uncompressed textures and audio.

I think the issue is more economical than technical. Those little discs cost a tad more than DVDs. Not nearly as big a difference as cartridges, but significant enough at the margins, when the Gamecube was a somewhat marginal platform. If software sales were higher, there would have been more games with multiple discs.

[BonusKun]

I think the issue is more economical than technical. Those little discs cost a tad more than DVDs. Not nearly as big a difference as cartridges, but significant enough at the margins, when the Gamecube was a somewhat marginal platform. If software sales were higher, there would have been more games with multiple discs.

This I really can't disagree with. Good Post.

[Blades]

OutRun 2006 on PS2 is very sharp and full 60 FPS at 480p.