Quantcast

Page 214 of 224 FirstFirst ... 114164204210211212213214215216217218 ... LastLast
Results 3,196 to 3,210 of 3350

Thread: PS2 vs Dreamcast Graphics

  1. #3196
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingRoad Rasher
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yharnamresident View Post
    Yes the difference is huge, however I expect to see a certain member start damage-controlling what you just posted.
    Yes it's quite big . I forgot to mention that Naomi 2 had an added co processor specifically for generating polygons and lighting them. I guess it levels the playing field with the ps2/Xbox/GameCube. Not mention it has like 2 to 3 times more overall memory than the Xbox.

    Would have been interesting to see a mid generation refresh of a Dreamcast based on it. Maybe keep it to 1 GPU instead of 2 and make the ram 64mb+16mb polygon data. And since it's the same architecture it would have played regular DC games.

  2. #3197
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-Training
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    1
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Arcade hardware is designed differently to console hardware because you don't have economy of scale. With arcade hardware, it's fine to have a more expensive bill of materials if the cost of R&D is reduced enough, but with a console, you're producing so much more that the cost of hardware becomes more important.

    The Naomi 2 appears to be designed with the idea of "how do we cheaply and quickly get more power out of our existing chips?" Their solution was to take two Dreamcast GPUs and glue them together with a single custom chip that does T&L. Model data is stored in a separate RAM pool because it's easier to design hardware that doesn't have to share things. Each GPU has it's own RAM because the DC's GPU was never designed to share RAM. A lot of stuff gets duplicated (video RAM, on-chip frame buffers, color palette, fog table, DMA engines, controller reading circuitry, display lists, textures), but that's ok because volume is so low that R&D cost is a huge percentage of the cost to produce the hardware.

    A consolified Naomi 2 would not be designed like the arcade hardware. It might have similar T&L capabilities and power, but they would at least combine the two video RAM pools into one, store the model data in main RAM, have less total RAM than the arcade HW (but more than the DC), and use a single, but more powerful, CPU and GPU.

    You know, I think Naomi 2 is the last piece of high-power arcade hardware I can think of to have major custom rendering chips. I think everything afterwards is based on commodity hardware, either console, PC, or some SoC.

  3. #3198
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingRoad Rasher
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TapamN View Post
    Arcade hardware is designed differently to console hardware because you don't have economy of scale. With arcade hardware, it's fine to have a more expensive bill of materials if the cost of R&D is reduced enough, but with a console, you're producing so much more that the cost of hardware becomes more important.

    The Naomi 2 appears to be designed with the idea of "how do we cheaply and quickly get more power out of our existing chips?" Their solution was to take two Dreamcast GPUs and glue them together with a single custom chip that does T&L. Model data is stored in a separate RAM pool because it's easier to design hardware that doesn't have to share things. Each GPU has it's own RAM because the DC's GPU was never designed to share RAM. A lot of stuff gets duplicated (video RAM, on-chip frame buffers, color palette, fog table, DMA engines, controller reading circuitry, display lists, textures), but that's ok because volume is so low that R&D cost is a huge percentage of the cost to produce the hardware.

    A consolified Naomi 2 would not be designed like the arcade hardware. It might have similar T&L capabilities and power, but they would at least combine the two video RAM pools into one, store the model data in main RAM, have less total RAM than the arcade HW (but more than the DC), and use a single, but more powerful, CPU and GPU.

    You know, I think Naomi 2 is the last piece of high-power arcade hardware I can think of to have major custom rendering chips. I think everything afterwards is based on commodity hardware, either console, PC, or some SoC.
    Good to see you posting

    Huh, so separate vram pools for each GPU containing exactly the same data? Seems like a waste. The naomi version already could drive twice the fill rate right? Why not just use one powervr2dc , they are enough to drive 3 to 5 mpps anyway right?

    A console version of Naomi 2 would just be a stock Dreamcast plus the t&l chip and maybe a unified pool of 64mb of ram. That would have been quite nice. I never like the fact that spread themselves thin by making Naomi 1, hikaru , Naomi 2 and still doing model 3 games up till 1999 despite all these.

    I wonder about a Dreamcast designed on the hikaru would have been like, that one doubled up on every component. Makes me wonder if it was even utilized / necessary.

  4. #3199
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cloofoofoo View Post
    A console version of Naomi 2 would just be a stock Dreamcast plus the t&l chip and maybe a unified pool of 64mb of ram. That would have been quite nice. I never like the fact that spread themselves thin by making Naomi 1, hikaru , Naomi 2 and still doing model 3 games up till 1999 despite all these.
    Thats pretty ironic. Whenever I discuss the topic of "beefing up the Dreamcast", I always say a format with more disc space was most important, however after that its adding a co-processor(like a SH-2) and 8 MB more main RAM.

    So Ephemeral Fantasia should be posted tonight. Time to put more food on the table.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  5. #3200
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingRoad Rasher
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yharnamresident View Post
    Thats pretty ironic. Whenever I discuss the topic of "beefing up the Dreamcast", I always say a format with more disc space was most important, however after that its adding a co-processor(like a SH-2) and 8 MB more main RAM.

    So Ephemeral Fantasia should be posted tonight. Time to put more food on the table.
    I think disc space was a non issue considering the gamecube was only slightly bigger in storage. If we step back and look at let's say the pa Vita who died in 2019, it's cartridges were 4 gigabytes big. The DC would have been just fine in the storage department.

    I agree Sega underestimated the amount of ram. Probably 32 mb main ram and 16mb vram like Naomi would have been great.

    Sh2 is magnitude slower than the sh4, it would provide no help. Sh4 was the high performing part in that family in those years. Maybe the sh4 running at 240 MHz would have provided a nice performance boost. And give the DC the better version of powervr2dc GPU. Done.

  6. #3201
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cloofoofoo View Post
    I think disc space was a non issue considering the gamecube was only slightly bigger in storage. If we step back and look at let's say the pa Vita who died in 2019, it's cartridges were 4 gigabytes big. The DC would have been just fine in the storage department.
    There was a lot of GameCube games with cut content or cancelled altogether because of the disc space problem. Or split into 2 discs. I've come to the realization that there was still tons of 6th-gen games that would've been no more than 1 GB up until about 2004, but there was still tons of games going way past that.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  7. #3202
    The Future is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingESWAT Veteran Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    1999
    Posts
    5,425
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    Gamecube port of Skies cut a lot of little corners. Some cutscenes had several seconds shaved off. Music was worse and yet they did add content but none of the DLC DC had.

    Life!? ... What console is that on?



    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  8. #3203
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    We should finally mention that the GameCube is actually the console with the most similar hardware to the Dreamcast, not the PS2. Sonic Team even mentioned thats why they liked doing Dreamcast to GameCube ports. In terms of tech power the PS2 is the most similar, but in overall architecture the GameCube is actually the closest.

    So sadly theres been a delay for Ephemeral Fantasia. I will start uploading the images and writing it up tonight, however it won't be posted until tomorrow night.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  9. #3204
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Ephemeral Fantasia (PS2, 2000)


    This was the 1st J-RPG released for the PS2. But its even older than that, it was first developed for the Dreamcast and still looks like a mid-1999 Dreamcast game. They essentially did no upgrading when porting the game to PS2. So this entire game is a Dreamcast game in disguise. When this was released, it got lots of very low scores like 4/10s, I definitely feel the game is better than that like a 7.1/10. It is a good game with many flaws.




    If the textures and presentation were better, this would be indistinguishable from a Dreamcast game.



    Getting ready to play at a wedding.



    The characters look pretty good, but of course we got some of those sawtooth jaggies.



    NPCs look fairly good.



    Characters seem like they have a lot of polygons.



    The shadows often do appear pretty weak.



    Lots of detail in the city.



    Game is filled with Greek architecture.



    You can also go into the countryside.



    Its very cool that this game takes place in Greece.



    Dusk lighting looks pretty good.



    In battle. The battle stages are all pretty bland with no good scenery.



    You fight some interesting enemies.



    The particle effects aren't anything impressive.



    This battle stage looks a bit better.



    That outfit is pretty distracting.



    In the palace.



    You'll be playing a song for this guy's wedding.



    The beach is pretty bright with good colour.



    The rain effect isn't anything impressive but its good enough.



    Somewhat epic scene, fighting a flower in the rain at night.



    In the wilderness.



    Doing a deathblow on a crab.



    Thats right, Konami was gonna be one of the few developers to do motion-blur on the Dreamcast.



    I don't know if thats real volumetric-lighting but it still looks pretty good.

    So Konami just dumped this Dreamcast game on the PS2 with no improvements. These graphics would've been fine on the Dreamcast in mid-1999, however for a 2000 PS2 game I doubt anyone was impressed.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  10. #3205
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Ephemeral Fantasia (PS2, 2000) (Continued)


    In terms of polygons, this is where you can tell Konami didn't make any improvements. Running at the same polycounts as Tokyo Xtreme Racer, this screams of mid-1999 Dreamcast. But this also showed you didn't even need 1 million PPS to have a fairly good-looking game at the time.

    Average: 400,000 to 700,000 polygons per second





    This scene is 450,000 PPS.




    View of island is 1 million PPS.



    Ship is 4100 polygons.



    Player character(he was on the ship) is 3100 polygons.




    Player character and side character on-screen is 450,000 PPS.



    Player character is same 3100 polygons.



    Side character is 3000 polygons.




    With all the main/side characters and NPCs on-screen, the game will hit its biggest spike at 1.25 million PPS.



    NPC is 1300 polygons.



    NPC with buckets is 1400 polygons.



    NPC lady is 1400 polygons.



    Tree is 50 polygons.




    At Inn with no other characters or NPCs. 350,000 PPS



    Player character is 3100 polygons.



    Palm tree is 100 polygons.




    At house with 2 NPCs on-screen. 650,000 PPS



    Father NPC is 1500 polygons.



    Child NPC is 1500 polygons.



    Container is 50 polygons.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  11. #3206
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Ephemeral Fantasia (PS2, 2000) (Continued Part 2)





    Lots of NPCs on-screen. 850,000 PPS



    NPC is 1400 polygons.



    NPC in dress is 1400 polygons.




    At farm with couple NPCs. 700,000 PPS



    NPC is 1400 polygons.



    Chicken is 300 polygons.




    Battle with caterpillar enemy. 300,000 PPS



    Caterpillar enemy is 500 polygons.




    Battle with venus trap enemies. 450,000 PPS



    Venus trap enemy is 600 polygons.




    Battle with crab enemy. 450,000 PPS



    Crab enemy is 900 polygons.




    At palace with 1 side character. 400,000 PPS



    Side character is 3100 polygons.




    Lots of player/side characters on-screen. 1.05 million PPS



    For some reason this side character is slightly lower at 2600 polygons.



    Side character is 2900 polygons.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  12. #3207
    The Future is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingESWAT Veteran Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    1999
    Posts
    5,425
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    Stricly in visual style. I get a small Climax Landers vibe. If the images were a little sharper and the colors a little brighter then this looks exactly like a 98-99 Dreamcast game. Possibly a launch day game. That's honestly cool. That was a great post!

    Life!? ... What console is that on?



    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  13. #3208
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    4,117
    Rep Power
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leynos View Post
    Stricly in visual style. I get a small Climax Landers vibe. If the images were a little sharper and the colors a little brighter then this looks exactly like a 98-99 Dreamcast game. Possibly a launch day game. That's honestly cool. That was a great post!
    They're about graphically on-par but this game is still better from a gameplay perspective. This game has a lot of flaws but still not as many as Time Stalkers.

    Also Leynos I'm gonna need you around. This thread is essentially dead and I still got 6 games to post before my big break. If you feel like doing some combo-breaking then that will be needed so I don't keep quadruple posting.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  14. #3209
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingOutrunner
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    564
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yharnamresident View Post
    We should finally mention that the GameCube is actually the console with the most similar hardware to the Dreamcast, not the PS2. Sonic Team even mentioned thats why they liked doing Dreamcast to GameCube ports. In terms of tech power the PS2 is the most similar, but in overall architecture the GameCube is actually the closest.

    in fact, the Dreamcast architecture is very different from the GCN architecture which in turn is very different from the ps2 architecture, but if we look at it we will see that the GCN is closer to the ps2 in architecture than the Dreamcast, the latter doesn't even have programmable pipeline.

    other features that bring GCN closer to ps2 is the use of small video memory as a cache ect ect

  15. #3210
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingOutrunner
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    564
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leynos View Post
    Stricly in visual style. I get a small Climax Landers vibe. If the images were a little sharper and the colors a little brighter then this looks exactly like a 98-99 Dreamcast game. Possibly a launch day game. That's honestly cool. That was a great post!
    Dreamcast has no power to deal with this game at any time and you compare it to a 1998 dreamcast game

    because there’s no ram or processor or storage for that, even on ps2 the loadings are high

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 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
  •