[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 39 KB, 478x345, 1494871570563.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4008554 No.4008554 [Reply] [Original]

>the Saturn wasn't intended to be 3D capable until the Playstation was announced

>The video game market crashed in 1983

>Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s

>> No.4008558

>The N64 is a good console.

>> No.4008603

>>4008554
>Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s
Which chestslappers ever actually thought this?

>> No.4008604

>it's pronounced Segga
>It's pronounced Sonny

>> No.4008610

>>4008603
American youtubers.

>> No.4008639

>The Super Mario Bros. 2 that was released in America was an original game

Actually...

>> No.4008716

>>4008554
>OP is not really a faggot

>> No.4009037

>>4008716
Nice /b/ meme.

>> No.4009041

>>4008603
Usually a misconception about the n64

>> No.4009047

>>4009041
The N64 was more powerful than PCs though at its release. The PS1 was also for that matter at its time of release. Not necessarily more powerful at everything, but more powerful at vector maths and rasterization (i.e. the essentials of 3D rendering).

>> No.4009057

>>4009047
What specs are we talking about when you compare a PC of the time to the N64 and Playstation X?

>> No.4009070

>>4008554
>>The video game market crashed in 1983
This one cheeses me off.

>> No.4009073

>>4009057
>Playstation X
There's no such thing.

>> No.4009080

>>4009073
Some Namco games use PSX on the back of the box, and all the magazines used it.

>> No.4009085

>>4008554
>the Saturn wasn't intended to be 3D capable until the Playstation was announced
Yes that is false but it wasn't a priority.

>The video game market crashed in 1983
That is true. You're 3rd world if you think otherwise.
>Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s
Yes this is false. Consoles were more power up to the 6th generation. So around 2000.

>> No.4009086

>>4009057
Well let's say the best PC hardware you could get at the time (pretty unrealistic since the best PC hardware was uber expensive then). Let's also imagine there was software that could take full advantage of the PC hardware (there wasn't).

For the PS1 it would be a Pentium 100 equipped with an S3 Vision (2D card). The PS1's vector unit and the Pentium 100 would have pretty similar vector maths performance (though I reckon the vector unit would outperform it since it's specialized for that purpose). The S3 Vision can't assist the CPU in rasterization since it's not a 3D card - that extra duty would fall to the Pentium 100. So the PC is already a loser, and that's not factoring in that the PS1 has its own CPU.

For the N64 it would be a Pentium Pro 200 equipped with a S3 Virge. The N64's vector unit can easily outperform the Pentium Pro 200 (the vector unit in the N64 is ridiculously powerful for its time - it can operate on two vectors in a single clock). MMX instructions would help the Pentium but it hadn't been implemented yet. The S3 Virge is capable of 3D acceleration, but it's a slug - 27.5 MPixel/s. With bilinear filtering turned on, it's 6.875 MPixel/s (it takes 4 times the normal cycles to do bilinear filtering). The N64's GPU can do 62.5 MPixel/s with bilinear filtering turned on. So it's almost 10 times faster than the Virge...yes seriously.

>> No.4009087

>>4009085
>Yes that is false but it wasn't a priority.
Actually, it was a priority. They were making a console for their recent, successful arcade games, which were all 3D.
>That is true. You're 3rd world if you think otherwise.
In Japan video games boomed in 1983. In Europe video games boomed in 1982 and continued to grow in 1983. In the US the home console market crashed, but video games remained viable in arcaded and on home computers.
So how did video games crash in the first world?

>> No.4009089

>>4008554
>>The video game market crashed in 1983

This is true.

>> No.4009090

>>4009087
>They were making a console for their recent, successful arcade games, which were all 3D.
The ports weren't particularly great outside of the 2d arcade ports. Again it's clear it wasn't a priority and that 2d arcade ports were.
>So how did video games crash in the first world?
The biggest market and really the only market that matters crashed.

>> No.4009093

>>4008554
>>Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s

NO ONE thought this.

>> No.4009096

>>4009090
>The ports weren't particularly great outside of the 2d arcade ports. Again it's clear it wasn't a priority and that 2d arcade ports were.
Their most popular arcade game, and the most popular Saturn game, was Virtua Fighter. That was what made the console popular when it launched in Japan. Their other Model 2 arcade games were also what they designed the console for.
>The biggest market and really the only market that matters crashed.
How did it matter? It was a localised market with next to no international reach that has had no lasting impact on video games. It didn't matter to most people back then, and it doesn't matter now. The next successful American console was nearly 20 years later, so clearly it wasn't even an important market to the locals.

>> No.4009098

>>4009093
Except everybody thought this...when it came to 3D. People knew that PC was more powerful for doing general operations like spreadsheets, business apps, etc.

Everybody knew that Windows 95 would run faster on a PC than a PS1, but the PS1 would kick the PC's ass at games. Only the 3Dfx Voodoo turned the PC into a credible 3D gaming platform.

>> No.4009105

>>4009093
That is a true fact dumbass.
>>4009096
The Saturn has little to nothing from the arcade boards. It's beyond clear that 3d arcade ports weren't the priority. The fact it came with a dpad controller even more so enforces that.
>It was a localised market with next to no international reach that has had no lasting impact on video games
>American market
I'm dealing with a retard I see.

>> No.4009106

>>4009098
>Console apologists actually believe this

>> No.4009109

>>4009105
>The Saturn has little to nothing from the arcade boards. It's beyond clear that 3d arcade ports weren't the priority. The fact it came with a dpad controller even more so enforces that.
It had aracde sticks available as well, you idiot. But they're not going to ship it with such an expensive controller, are they? Their priority was their popular games, which were 3D arcade games. That's how it worked. They needed a machine capable of handling ports of their popular games.
>I'm dealing with a retard I see.
Tell me how popular American home consoles were outside of America. Go on, I need a laugh.

>> No.4009118

>>4009106
>neo-mustard race revising history again

>> No.4009119

>>4009109
>Their priority was their popular games, which were 3D arcade games. That's how it worked. They needed a machine capable of handling ports of their popular games.
Hmm... And yet the 3d ports were poor in comparison to the 2d ports that were near arcade perfect. Let me get my noggin working here. Hold on. Ok let me go over one more time. The 3d ports were ok to meh and the 2d ports were near arcade perfect. Ok I got it. Clearly the Saturn was a 3d arcade port machine!
>Tell me how popular American home consoles were outside of America. Go on, I need a laugh.
You're saying the Atari wasn't popular? Ok kid. It's time to stop.

>> No.4009120

>>4009118
PC's already kicked console's asses in the early 90's with games like Doom.

>> No.4009121

>>4009119
>Hmm... And yet the 3d ports were poor in comparison to the 2d ports that were near arcade perfect. Let me get my noggin working here. Hold on. Ok let me go over one more time. The 3d ports were ok to meh and the 2d ports were near arcade perfect. Ok I got it. Clearly the Saturn was a 3d arcade port machine!
It's almost like it's easier to program a 2D game to run well on hardware that was limited to keep costs down, while still being able to run 3D games.
>You're saying the Atari wasn't popular? Ok kid. It's time to stop.
Outside of the US Atari was not very popular.

>> No.4009123

>>4009121
>It's almost like it's easier to program a 2D game to run well on hardware that was limited to keep costs down, while still being able to run 3D games.
It's almost like they prioritized 2d games.
>Outside of the US Atari was not very popular.
Nice 3rd world ramblings.

>> No.4009124

>>4009120
And home computers, like the Amiga, kicked consoles ass in the 80s.

>> No.4009126

>>4009089
Only in the US.

>> No.4009127

>>4009124
>>4009120
>>4009106
A 15 frames per min machine beat a nes?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOGxxYm4z5I

>> No.4009129

>>4009123
>It's almost like they prioritized 2d games.
But why would they? Their most popular arcade games were 3D. Just because it's easier for 2D games to run well doesn't mean they prioritised them when designing the console.
>Nice 3rd world ramblings.
My point was that the American home console market was a local market that didn't have international reach, which you can't even dispute. Now you're calling countries that are richer, healthier, happier, more efficient, more productive, more innovative, more egalitarian, safer, and whiter than yours "3rd world". Adorable.

>> No.4009135

>>4009127
So this is the power of the NES.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g67EeteCFa0

>> No.4009140

>>4009120
>doom
who would have thought that 1993 PCs would kick the ass of last-gen consoles like genesis which came out in 1988

>> No.4009141
File: 530 KB, 850x1120, TLW-VGArcadePromo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009141

>>4009129
>Their most popular arcade games were 3D
SEGA had a lot of popular arcade games. And a lot of 3d games we never got ports for.

>didn't have international reach, which you can't even dispute.
That's false.
>>4009135
Woah man you sure did disprove me with that shitty NES game! Totally a high profile game like Outrun.

>> No.4009146

>>4009140
So PC's were more powerful than consoles, otherwise consoles should have beaten PC in performance.

>> No.4009147

>>4009140
Fun thing is that 1993 PCs could kick the megadrive's ass when it came to 3D but were still unable to match it's 2D capabilities, with the exception of the number of color displayed on-screen.

>> No.4009148

>>4009147
>Source:My ass

>> No.4009151

>>4009146
PCs were better at software 3D until the next-gen consoles came out with hardware 3D capabilities...then PCs were so far behind in 3D it wasn't funny, until Voodoo came out at least.

At 2D though PC was still far behind. Neo-Geo destroyed PCs at 2D for many many many years.

>> No.4009154

>>4009151
>Source:My ass

>> No.4009156

>>4009141
>SEGA had a lot of popular arcade games. And a lot of 3d games we never got ports for.
Because they moved on to the Dreamcast, and/or didn't see the money in some arcade games, particularly those not designed for the Japanese market, where the Saturn was successful.
>That's false.
No it isn't.
>Woah man you sure did disprove me with that shitty NES game! Totally a high profile game like Outrun.
You're cherry picking. That's the point. Meanwhile the Amiga, released in 1985, is so far ahead of consoles of the time that it isn't even funny.

>> No.4009159

>>4009156
>Because they moved on to the Dreamcast, and/or didn't see the money in some arcade games, particularly those not designed for the Japanese market, where the Saturn was successful.
We got like 3 3d ports. Virtua fighter, Daytona, and Sega Rally. Compared to the fuckload of 2d ports.

>You're cherry picking.
>Outrun
>cherry picking
Don't think so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxw4X6WvKAk

The Amiga was a pile of shit. Only thing playable are point and click and text games.

>> No.4009161 [DELETED] 

>>4009151
Name a 2D PC game released in 1994 or earlier with better animation than King of Fighters '94

>> No.4009167

>>4009154
Name a 2D PC game released in 1994 or earlier with better animation than King of Fighters '94

>> No.4009174

>>4009167
You still haven't given me a source.

>> No.4009182

>>4009174
Neo Geo's memory bandwidth is unknown

>> No.4009183

>>4009159
>We got like 3 3d ports.
Virtua Fighter 2, Virtua Fighter Kids, Athlete Kings, Virtual On, Die Hard Arcade, Virtua Cop, Virtua Cop 2, House of the Dead, Fighting Vipers, Manx TT Superbike, Sega Touring Car Championship, Sky Target. Plus the three you mentioned.
>The Amiga was a pile of shit. Only thing playable are point and click and text games.
You're just a fanboy. Really. You have no idea what you're talking about, you speak through blind loyalty.

>> No.4009192
File: 117 KB, 1440x1080, 1487255039638.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009192

>>4009183
>Virtua Fighter Kids
And you accused me of cherry picking when you're reaching this hard? Also take all that shit listed and times it by 5. That's the 2d ports and then some.

>You're just a fanboy. Really. You have no idea what you're talking about, you speak through blind loyalty.
No I just pretty much universally hate early PC shit and tech from 3rd world countries. Didn't like it back then and it still hasn't grown on me the whole playing a game at 15 frames per min and a PC speaker screaming at me.

>> No.4009196

>>4009192
>And you accused me of cherry picking when you're reaching this hard?
How is that reaching?
>Also take all that shit listed and times it by 5. That's the 2d ports and then some.
Only if you include the ports of near 10 year old arcade games. But clearly the machine wasn't designed to be sold on the backs of those.
>No I just pretty much universally hate early PC shit and tech from 3rd world countries. Didn't like it back then and it still hasn't grown on me the whole playing a game at 15 frames per min and a PC speaker screaming at me.
We're not talking about PCs. Play an actual Amiga game, not a notriously low quality port. But you don't even know the difference between the Amiga and a PC.

>> No.4009202
File: 882 KB, 1230x1080, 149402671845.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009202

>>4009182
DON'T CARE JUST BACK YOUR FUCKING FACTS UP

>> No.4009210

>>4009196
>How is that reaching?
>Virtua Fighter Kids
>Only if you include the ports of near 10 year old arcade games. But clearly the machine wasn't designed to be sold on the backs of those.
k
>you don't even know the difference between the Amiga and a PC.
Oh I'm sorry I referred to your precious shitbox with such an over generalization term like "PC", Man what a critical error on my part.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCg4LiQ_sb0
Man just listen to that quality Amigshit music. Just makes me want to play it.

>> No.4009212

ITT: people who were born after 1995, but consider themselves "90's kids"

>> No.4009216

>>4009210
>k
So which was more popular in 1994, Virtua Fighter or Space Harrier?
>Oh I'm sorry I referred to your precious shitbox with such an over generalization term like "PC"
That's not what it is. It is designated as a specific term.
>Man just listen to that quality Amigshit music. Just makes me want to play it.
You've clearly never used audio software if you think the Amiga isn't capable of some of the highest quality synthesised music of not only the 80s, but the 90s as well.

>> No.4009220

>>4009202
The onus is on you now that I've named a game for Neo Geo to compare with PC

>> No.4009225

>>4009220
First you need to back your facts up.

>> No.4009228

>>4009148
>>4009154
>>4009202
>>4009225
>all this denial
Ok let's just compare glorious early 90s PC 2D action games :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SILi2Qa89U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYa2g9_5Ss4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp-ZewkGIh4 (delicious 15fps action)
with Megadrive games of the same era :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyidOnxyfGk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AidB6X70izw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAwjbjU2pzs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHXru-sM_Ko
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_CQC0n_3mw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKxYg2c7wiY

>> No.4009230

>>4009216
>So which was more popular in 1994, Virtua Fighter or Space Harrier?
I don't have that information. I can tell you that at the time Virtua Fighter was in pop culture a lot more than Space Harrier. Even showed up in an episode of Xfiles. But Space Harrier was at nearly every arcade worth a shit so I wouldn't be surprised if it was still making significant money.
>That's not what it is. It is designated as a specific term.
Only when in reference to IBM. Otherwise it's just a Personal Computer.
>Amiga
>highest quality synthesised music of not only the 80s, but the 90s as well.
BAHAHAHAHH AHAHAH HA HOLY SHIT AHAHAH That fartbox? Holy fucking shit. You are delusional random 3rd world guy on the net.

>> No.4009232

>>4009216
>You've clearly never used audio software if you think the Amiga isn't capable of some of the highest quality synthesised music of not only the 80s, but the 90s as well.
Paula is an OK sampler but it's not some high quality synthesizer chip.
Any real synthesizer blow it out of the water.
FM synthesis chips and the C64 SID have more interesting features.

>> No.4009238

>>4009230
>I don't have that information.
Considering Virtua Fighter is one of the most successful aracde games of all time in Japan, I'd say it beats out Space Harrier.
>Only when in reference to IBM.
It is always in reference to IBM compatibles. That is why it is designated.
>BAHAHAHAHH AHAHAH HA HOLY SHIT AHAHAH That fartbox? Holy fucking shit. You are delusional random 3rd world guy on the net.
So you're just willfully ignorant? Okay. Clearly the Amiga is totally foreign to you.

>> No.4009239

>>4009232
No other has had the longevity of the Amiga in music production, except maybe the ST.

>> No.4009245

>>4009238
>3rd world bullshit

Do give me some samples of what you consider to be the best synthesised music of the 80s and 90s.

>> No.4009247

>>4009245
I'm talking about the hardware and software of the Amiga. Are you illiterate?

>> No.4009250

>>4009247
>highest quality synthesised music of not only the 80s, but the 90s as well.
Lets here it retard. I can certainly tell you I do not give a fuck about the hardware in that shitpile early PC.

>> No.4009253

>>4009228
>Cherrypicking
When are you going to give me actual facts?

>> No.4009257

Many people falsely believe that Super Mario USA is Super Mario Bros. 2.

>> No.4009263

>>4008558
fpbp

>> No.4009264

>>4009250
It's not a PC, actually. PC refers to IBM compatibles. Sometimes you 00s kids forget this.
I suppose the program to start with is Ultimate Soundtracker, as it was probably the most widespread. However, there is a lot of software to look at, so consult your search engine for more examples, probably later examples would be best.

>> No.4009268

>>4009264
>more 3rd world ramblings
K. It's a PC also.

>> No.4009270

>>4009239
>No other has had the longevity of the Amiga in music production, except maybe the ST.
The amiga rarely was ever used in actual music production. When it was it usually was as a MIDI sequencer with additional hardware. Along with the ST, the Macintosh and PCs were more present in music production.
Very few musicians used internal audio chipset of computers for actual music production.
>>4009253
Oh you just wanna be spoonfed specs.
Megadrive :
- 4 graphic planes including a sprite plane and 2 tile-based plane
- Horizontal and Vertical hardware scrolling
- 80 hardware sprites, 20 per scanlines
PC :
- No distinctive plane.
- No hardware scrolling.
- No sprites.
>but with it's powerful CPU you can do it all
Yes and you get what was posted here >>4009228

>> No.4009275

>>4009270
>but with it's powerful CPU you can do it all
Unlike Mega Drive, PC is framebuffer based, so it's not the CPU which is the limiting factor but memory bandwidth. Memory bandwidth is a big deal when you're dealing with a framebuffer system.

>> No.4009276

>>4009270
>Very few musicians used internal audio chipset of computers for actual music production.
I think you're looking in the wrong places. The Amiga had quite a few musicians and producers work on it. There were many distinct scenes all based on the computer. Clearly I'm not referring to the most popular musicians, but they didn't produce their music anyway.

>> No.4009281
File: 1.25 MB, 1230x1080, mad3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009281

>>4009270
WHY IS IT SO FUCKING HARD TO YOU TO GIVE ME A FUCKING SOURCE YOU AUTISTIC SCUMFUCK DEGENERATE DOWN SYNDROME MANHOLE

>> No.4009286

>>4009275
Maybe, but your average early 90s PC specs were not enough to ensure fast action and smooth animation at the same time, unlike consoles which had graphic hardware made for such task. On computers like the Amiga you could, but not on PC.
>>4009276
If you're thinking about amateur musicians and the likes, don't worry, there's a still a sizeable musical scene for the C64, MSX and some other computers still going even today.
>>4009281
>call other autistic
>is the one sperging like a mad man

>> No.4009298
File: 968 KB, 1230x1080, mad2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009298

>>4009286
JUST GIVE ME A SOURCE

>> No.4009302

>>4009286
>If you're thinking about amateur musicians and the likes
Not necessarily, but mostly.
>there's a still a sizeable musical scene for the C64, MSX and some other computers still going even today.
They seemed to die out around y2k, but have made a resurgence. The Amiga is one scene that has constantly evolved.

>> No.4009315

>>4009302
>They seemed to die out around y2k
Naah just look at all the music disks for C64 made in the late 90s and early 00s, that's far from dying if you ask me.

>> No.4009317

>>4009315
I didn't see much. It definitely died out around here.

>> No.4009318

>>4009086
N64 did way less polys and worse textures than ps1, ps1 would be p200 and n64 would be the p100

>> No.4009321

>>4009098
I had a pc at the time, ps1 made my pc seem really outdated. Look at pc games from 95 and 96, they have lower settings compared to their the equivalent ps1 games.

>> No.4009332
File: 39 KB, 400x324, spiderman-takes-photo-neat-meme_35_paused.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009332

>>4009086
Neat. I knew N64 was the most powerful computer until the first 3D SFX cards came out in 2000, but I didn't know PS1 was more powerful than PC's too.

>> No.4009347
File: 2.88 MB, 480x360, conker4.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009347

>>4009318
>N64 did way less polys
Wrong
>worse textures than ps1
Wrong

Conker would have been impossible on PS1

>> No.4009349

>>4009332
Hey mate, the pc mags at the time absolutely raved about the graphics of NV1 video card since it let the pc have graphics as good as the saturn. Without a 3dfx you need at least a p200 to do what ps1 was doing.

>> No.4009359

is the webm supposed to be proof, it looks awful and runs terribly. ps1 could easily handle it.

>> No.4009365

>>4009332
>came out in 2000
What? N64 was out passed by end of 96/97. A Pentium II machine is far superior. Though for most people they wouldn't have a CPU and GPU combo to beat a N64 till later.

Once the voodoo came out in 96 it was an out of control series of huge leaps till about 02 when it slowed down a bit with geforce3 and 4. Was common for the next years CPU to double performance.

>> No.4009371

>>4009359
>ps1 could easily handle it.
No 3D PS1 game ever made shows the number of unique textures PER FRAME as Conker does.

Also, the PS1 has trouble rendering large areas with textures due to its affine texture mapping.

Of course I could also mention how Conker has the usual N64 special effects like perspective texture mapping, z-buffering, sub-pixel precision, bilinear texture filtering, anti-aliasing etc, no features of which the PS1 even supports, but you probably already knew that right?

>> No.4009393

>>4009365
Ah, thanks for the elucidation. Didn't know that if true.

>>4009347
Reminds me of the air carrier assault in Sin & Punishment. I still think that's the best-looking stage in any game until the Gamecube's release.

>> No.4009423
File: 13 KB, 196x228, Bismaru-1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009423

>the n64 sucks!

>> No.4009516

>>4009089
>The American Home Console Market crashed in 1983.

Fixed.

>> No.4009530

>>4009057
>PlayStation X

kek, nice bait

>> No.4009536

>>4009530
How is that bait? Everyone has always called it PSX.

>> No.4009576

>>4009536
>everyone

Just magazine publications in the mid 90s and some publishers.
The official abbreviation is PS.

>> No.4009601

>>4009576
Not everyone but many, many people did. It's like the S N E S vs "sness" debate. Different people said different things, trying to say it was one or the other makes it sound like you weren't even born then.

PS, PSX and Playstation were all common terms for it as I remember.

>> No.4009619

>the first sony console was the PSX

>> No.4009620
File: 2.53 MB, 1784x6512, 1494851255760.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4009620

>>4009073
Get fucked

>>4009536
It was either called Playstation or PSX.
You called it Playstation X.

>>4009576
Pic related shows forum posts from 90's where people call it PSX.
Of course, everyone called it Playstation IRL.

>> No.4009623

>>4009620
What do you think the PS in PSX stands for?

>> No.4009625

>>4009576
"My wikipedia diplomacy and I speak for everyone" guy

>> No.4009631

>>4009623
That doesn't mean you can call it Playstation X.
The X was added to the abbreviation probably because "PS" can be confused with something else. It was never a part of the actual console's name.

>> No.4009632

>This thread

It's like I'm really on /v/

>> No.4009636

>>4009098
No, NOBODY thought this.

>> No.4009645

>>4009636
I guess somebody did because there are millenials who legit think it was true.

>> No.4009652

>>4009620
Oh, sorry, I forgot about forum posts.

>> No.4009654

>>4009631
So call it X if you don't like the Playstation part.

>> No.4009656

>>4009652
People never called it "PSX" or even "PS" in real life. But on the internet, everyone typed "PSX". I guess people who deny PSX are the people who weren't online in the 90's.

>>4009654
Not an argument.
You're just shitposting at this point.

>> No.4009658

>>4009656
I say Playstation X because that is what the abbreviation means. Get over it.

>> No.4009661

No, you just wanted to add a new spin to the classic PS/PSX trolling.

Here's your (you)

>> No.4009665

>>4009656
>People never called it "PSX" or even "PS" in real life.

They absolutely did.

>> No.4009673

>>4009665
All my friends said the full name IRL but I'm sure they did type it as PSX on the internet.

Anyway, I guess I stand corrected.

>> No.4009681

>>4009656
We called it PS.

>> No.4009684

>>4009673
>All my friends
As I have tried to explain many, many times. We didn't all have the same friends. It's the same as "everyone I knew only said SNES" (or sness, super nintendo etc etc) What was common where you or I lived wasn't the same everywhere.

I personally remember PSX used irl.

>> No.4009743

>>4008603
PCs were obviously more powerful at any given time, but PC developers had to shoot for the lowest common denominator which meant VGA 8-bit color @ 320x200. 16-bit color, Sound Blaster 16, and CD-ROM were a luxury in the early 90's. The PlayStation had greater 3D capabilities than any consumer PC GPU at the time. It wasn't until the PC industry rallied around OpenGL and Direct X that things became drastically better.

>> No.4009753

>>4009743
>but PC developers had to shoot for the lowest common denominator
This is retro games we're talking about. Not modern games post 08.
>It wasn't until the PC industry rallied around OpenGL and Direct X
Which is right when the PS1 came out.

>> No.4009763

>>4009753
>This is retro games we're talking about. Not modern games post 08.
Think about what you wrote for a second. It's not a new practice.
>Which is right when the PS1 came out.
The 3dfx Voodoo1 wasn't even out yet. Devs used Glide for quite some time until OpenGL and Direct X matured.

>> No.4009769

>>4009763
>Think about what you wrote for a second. It's not a new practice.
It is a new a practice. Are you joking or just young?
>The 3dfx Voodoo1 wasn't even out yet. Devs used Glide for quite some time until OpenGL and Direct X matured.
PS1 in 95 and voodoo released in 96. Same time...

>> No.4009781

>>4009769
>wait he knows I'm an idiot
i troll u XD

>> No.4009793

>>4009781
No really how young are you? You're talking about a time were devs designed games for Roland equipment that cost over $1000 in today's money just for sound. In no way were PC games designed for the lowest common denominator back. Some were but big release want big, This was true all the way to and finally slowing down to a stop with Crisis.

Dumb kids.

>> No.4009803

>>4009793
Calm down. This is an anti-racist board.

>> No.4009805

>>4009803
>This is an anti-racist board.
I expect nothing less from reddit.

>> No.4009806

>>4009805
This is 4chan, actually.

>> No.4009810

>>4009806
Is it?

>> No.4009817

>>4009793
What developers made Roland GS capable sound card a requirement? The PC market was even more fragmented back then than it is now, and there were fewer gamers.

>> No.4009819

>>4009810
Yep! Check the URL and click on the banner at the top of the page to be redirected to the home page! Happy browsing.

>> No.4009821

>>4009817
>What developers made Roland GS capable sound card a requirement?
PC games have a feature of being able to adjust their quality to allow for a more broad range of system requirements that can run the game.

It's a pretty neat feature.

>> No.4009828

>>4009821
I see. This is the part where you ignore when I said they shot for the lowest common denominator in order to save face.

>> No.4009835

>>4009828
Just because the have an option for the Europoors to play the game doesn't mean they made the game for them. A game like Monkey Island was made for the Roland.

>> No.4009837

>>4009835
IBM® 16-Color PC, XT, AT, PS/2™, TANDY® 640K RAM VGA, EGA CGA, MCGA TANDY 16-Color. Joystick and mouse optional. Supports optional AdLib® and SoundBlaster™ cards. 3.5" disks enclosed. Hard drive recommended.

>> No.4009843

>>4009837
Yes you can copy paste.

>> No.4009858

>>4009843
I can shatter your argument and make you look foolish too.

>> No.4009863

>>4009858
Well kid you're failing if you think minimum system requirements mean anything.

>> No.4009938

>>4009769
PS1 and Voodoo were in fact released two years apart.

>> No.4009940

>>4009938
PS1 is 95.

>> No.4009942

>>4009940
PS1 came out at the end of 94 and Voodoo came out at the end of 96 (for OEMs anyway, it wasn't retail available until early 97).

>> No.4009948

>>4009942
If you want to count Jap release...

Voodoo had no oem.

>> No.4009973

>>4009948
>Voodoo had no oem.
Uh..yes it did. It was first sold to computer builders before it was sold as a retail product. That's because there wasn't any real software support until January 1997. Can't sell a retail product when the only thing that it can be used for is demos.

>> No.4009982

>>4008554
>The video game market crashed in 1983
Only the American market.
>inb4 wrongly used 3rd world insults

>>4008603
>Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s
Only IBM PC Compatible machines and only in terms of graphics until around 1996.
After that every PC would have better hardware released for itself at the same time as a console utilizing the same hardware came out.
Under hardware we are only talking about graphics, mind you.

>>4009086
You are comparing things in a wrong way.
You can't compare a RISC CPU to a CISC CPU like that, specially if they where released at different times and have different clocks, cache, buses.

>>4009332
This bait is cool. But that's how a typical /vr/ tech illiterate thinks for real.

>>4009047
>>4009057
>>4009085
The N64 was ahead of the PC only in graphics and for less than half a year.

>>4009159
>>4009127
OCS/ECS Amigas was ahead of the NES and AGA Amigas where ahead of the SNES. There's nothing to argue about. It's hardware was superior.
Unfair comparison anyways because it was released latter too.

>>4009948
>Voodoo had no oem.
This is wrong, 3dfx only focused on the glide API and their chips and didn't produce their own carts until Voodoo 3.

>> No.4009984

>>4009982
Mind you the "Consoles were more powerful than computers until the late 90s" only applies to consumer items and not workstations. Nobody seriously considered a consoles to be even close to a workstation of the related release time of each.

>> No.4009987

>>4009973
No you're confused with how it works today. Voodoo only made the chips. This is also why you have Voodoo cards that would otherwise be "reference" design but Voodoo card X is absolute garbage and Voodoo card Y is great since the companies had different drivers.

As for companies building computers they would had contacted a 3rd party oem and not Voodoo since they aren't an oem and never sold cards directly.

>> No.4010001

>>4009982
>This is wrong, 3dfx only focused on the glide API and their chips and didn't produce their own carts until Voodoo 3.
Ok I may be mistaken on the later cards. But the Voodoo and Voodoo 2 they never sold direct.

Imo after the Voodoo 2 they were done.
>OCS/ECS Amigas was ahead of the NES and AGA Amigas where ahead of the SNES. There's nothing to argue about. It's hardware was superior.
Scrolling and 60fps.
>The N64 was ahead of the PC only in graphics and for less than half a year.
Ehh you really needed a Voodoo to beat the N64 imo.

>> No.4010036

>>4009982
>Meanwhile the Amiga, released in 1985, is so far ahead of consoles of the time that it isn't even funny.
Yah but the Famicom was released in 1983.
If you mean the SNES, then that'd be AGA Amiga, and that was released in 1992, Super Famicom was released in 1990.

>> No.4010064

>>4010001
The Amiga was, sure. It had some decent AV capabilities. US PCs were a cluster fuck. It doesn't matter if you have a 33MHz 386 when your GPU can only display 16 colors. Now can you see why Americans believed consoles and arcade hardware to be superior? Most people didn't know or care about the underlying hardware in arcade machines. All they knew was that games had more color and better sound than the POS dad bought for work.

>> No.4010110

>>4009982
>After that every PC would have better hardware released for itself at the same time as a console utilizing the same hardware came out.
There is one other time, at least. Dreamcast's PowerVR2 was more capable than any 3D accelerator released in 1998, even more potent than Voodoo 2 SLi.

>You can't compare a RISC CPU to a CISC CPU like that, specially if they where released at different times and have different clocks, cache, buses.
I wasn't. I was comparing CPUs to vector units, with knowledge of their different capabilities.

>>4010001
>Ehh you really needed a Voodoo to beat the N64 imo.
In terms of real-world pixel fill, that is certain correct. Though, in terms of T&L performance, the N64 is still ahead, probably until Pentium 2. That wouldn't have implications for the number of polygons (since that's linked to fill and the N64 falls behind there) but quality of lighting, which is why Conker has better lighting than games designed for the first (even second) Voodoo card.

>> No.4010114

>>4009987
It's correct both ways

>> No.4010116

Does it matter? Bottom line is that in every other way PC Master Race dominated.

>> No.4010126

>>4010110
You're talking about a game with more ram also. Not stock N64.

The Voodoo2s do a lot the n64 can't do.

>> No.4010156

>>4010126
>You're talking about a game with more ram also. Not stock N64.
Conker does not use the Expansion Pak. Nor would it really matter if it did.

>The Voodoo2s do a lot the n64 can't do.
They're certainly faster, but they have fewer features than N64's GPU. There's no hardware T&L for instance.

>> No.4010163

>>4010156
>Conker does not use the Expansion Pak. Nor would it really matter if it did.
My mistake then.
>They're certainly faster, but they have fewer features than N64's GPU. There's no hardware T&L for instance.
You're talking about a far greater resolution, textures, and draw distance. Significant differences from the N64.

>> No.4010228

>>4010163
>You're talking about a far greater resolution, textures, and draw distance
But I wasn't. I was talking specifically about lighting. The L in T&L.

>> No.4010230

>>4010228
I'm comparing real games like Turok. Turok looks way better with a voodoo card.

>> No.4010250

>>4010230
You seem way too personally invested for the kind of conversation I was after. Sorry.

>> No.4010253

>>4010250
Comparing real games means I have a personal investment? Ok.

>> No.4010873

>>4010001
>But the Voodoo and Voodoo 2 they never sold direct.
Direct from 3dfx?
Did anyone imply they did? It was just said that after Voodoo 3 they did.

>Scrolling and 60fps.
Yes, Amiga wins.

>Ehh you really needed a Voodoo to beat the N64 imo.
Which came out half a year after the N64. Just like I said.

>>4010036
>Meanwhile the Amiga, released in 1985, is so far ahead of consoles of the time that it isn't even funny.
Did you just make that up? I never said that. I just said OCS/ECS was ahead of NES and AGA ahead of SNES, they where released latter too then the Nintendo consoles they where better of.

NES was released in '83
Amiga with OCS in '85
SNES in '90
Amiga with AGA in '92

You replying with that does seem like you didn't even read the post or heard something else in your head then what I wrote.

>>4010110
>There is one other time, at least. Dreamcast's PowerVR2 was more capable than any 3D accelerator released in 1998, even more potent than Voodoo 2 SLi.
By that time when the consoles actually hit the market, the same companies who made the 3D chips for the consoles also released them for PCs, usually it was even that the money to develop the GPUs for the consoles was not wasted and the same chip architecture was further enhanced for use with PC graphics cards, the N64 and Voodoo still had the biggest gap, after that it event out.
At the release of the PS2 though, consoles never even came close again to PC hardware at their release.

Not to mention, no, it does not beat two Voodoo 2's in SLI, not in performance and capabilities. Voodoo 2's in SLI also where able to run at a far higher resolution.
It's kinda unfair because ScanLine Interleaving is something that literally doubled the graphics performance on PCs and consoles didn't use it. But it still makes the PC better.

>> No.4011470

>>4010873
>the same companies who made the 3D chips for the consoles also released them for PCs
PowerVR2 was released for PC like a year later and it was a cutdown version of Dreamcast's chip.

>Not to mention, no, it does not beat two Voodoo 2's in SLI, not in performance and capabilities. Voodoo 2's in SLI also where able to run at a far higher resolution.
Yes it does. Voodoo 2 SLi had a fill rate of 180 MPixel/s and 360 MPixel/s, while PowerVR2 has 100 MPixel/s snd 100 MTexel/s. Slam dunk for Voodoo 2 SLi right?

Except Voodoo 2 is an immediate mode renderer while PowerVR2 is a tile based deferred renderer which has between 3x and 6x less overdraw on average. So the real world fill rate of the Voodoo 2 SLi will be something between 30-60 MPixel/s and 60-120 MTexel/s, and real world PowerVR2 fill rate will be 90 MPixel/s and 90 MTexel/s.

It also needs to be mentioned that the PowerVR2 chip supports full 32 bit z-buffer (Voodoo 2 only supports 16 bit) and also produces a nicer 16 bit framebuffer than the Voodoo 2. The PC version of PowerVR2 supports 1024x768 in games, much like Voodoo 2 SLI, though obviously the Dreamcast being designed for SD televisions doesn't.

The only two scenarios I can conceive of where the Voodoo 2 SLI would win is one that is extremely heavy in alpha blending (less overdraw penalty in that situation) or heavy in trilinear filtering (Voodoo 2 can do trilinear in a single cycle). Every other situation the PowerVR2 will win and with better image quality. Talking about the Dreamcast version here, not the somewhat gimped PC version.

>> No.4011526

>>4009298
>>4009281
Where's mad1.png?

>> No.4011598

>>4011470
Check your facts. you have several things wrong about the Voodoo 2.

Also, obvious Dreamcast fanboy is obvious.

>> No.4011606

>>4011470
powervr2 on the PC scored in benchmarks the same as a voodoo 3, while two voodoo 2's in sli score slightly more than a voodoo 3, go figure
also source on those "real world" numbers, maybe game benchmarks are more real than your (failed) math?

>PowerVR2 chip supports full 32 bit z-buffer (Voodoo 2 only supports 16 bit) and also produces a nicer 16 bit framebuffer than the Voodoo 2.
nah mate, voodoo 2 has a 32bpp z-buffer, just the framebuffer is 16 bit, also there's no difference between a 16 bit framebuffer from one card to another, it's literary 16 bit

>> No.4011632

>>4010873
>Amiga
>SCROLLING OR 60FPS
Nope

>> No.4011730

>>4010873
>Did you just make that up? I never said that.
I quoted the wrong post, sorry. I mean to quote this:
>>4009156

>> No.4011750

>>4008554

ITT: The blind leading the blind.

>> No.4011798

>>4011598
>you have several things wrong about the Voodoo 2
Like what?

>obvious Dreamcast fanboy is obvious
I wrote above about the N64. Not taking any sides with Nintendo, Sega, etc.

>>4011606
>powervr2 on the PC scored in benchmarks the same as a voodoo 3, while two voodoo 2's in sli score slightly more
Because the PC version of PowerVR2 is cutdown, and also the drivers have incredibly CPU overhead which brings down performance, not an issue on Dreamcast.

There's a source on their differences btw: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/reasoning-into-why-powervr-was-selected-instead-of-3dfx.2264/page-3#post-43267

>also source on those "real world" numbers
It's well known tile-based deferred renderers have much less overdraw than IMRs (that's the whole fucking point).

Here's a source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/735/13

Basically the GeForce 2 (an IMR) could only run at a third of its theoretically fill rate, while the Kyro (basically the successor to PowerVR2) could run at almost 100%.

Basically, take the fill rate of a deferred tile based renderer, times it by 3 and then you can compare it to a IMR like the Voodoo 2. But the less alpha blending you use, the tile based renderer's advantage goes up. Games in 1998 used less alpha blending than those in 2001.

>nah mate, voodoo 2 has a 32bpp z-buffer,
Wrong. Here's a source:

http://www.gamers.org/dEngine/xf3D/howto/3Dfx-HOWTO-6.html#6.13

>there's no difference between a 16 bit framebuffer from one card to another,
Wrong. 16-bit framebuffers are dithered down from 32-bit GPU pipeline pixels. The PowerVR2's pipeline is 32-bit at every single stage, including alpha blending so the only "lossyness" in the image quality occurs at the final 32-bit to 16-bit dither. The Voodoo 2 doesn't maintain 32-bit color throughout its pipeline - particularly the alpha blending stage (since the 32-bit pipeline pixel has to be blended with the already-written 16-bit pixel in the framebuffer).

>> No.4011824

>>4011798
>>4011606
>>4011598
>>4011470
>>4010873
>>4009982
How the fuck does comparing hardware specs matter in this situation? This shit is like bench racing but for ancient hardware.

Games like Turok look far better on a Voodoo than a N64.

A game like Quake looks like shit on the N64 compared to running on a Voodoo.

Voodoo 2s even beats DC. Quake III plays and looks like shit on DC compared to a pair of Voodoo 2s,

>> No.4011828

>>4011824
Because you are comparing the performance of PC hardware newer than those consoles...with those consoles.

>> No.4011831

>>4011828
I thought the argument was if the Voodoo had more capable performance than the N64? And the Dreamcast came out after the Voodoo 2.

>> No.4011838

>>4011831
>I thought the argument was if the Voodoo had more capable performance than the N64?
No, that was never the argument. The argument was whether there was still any area that the N64 could beat a Voodoo-spec'd 1997 PC. And there was: lighting.

>the Dreamcast came out after the Voodoo 2.
If you pair a PC with a CPU made in 1998 and a Voodoo 2 you're going to see worse performance.

Quake 3 is very CPU-bound. If you pair a Voodoo 2 (well let's say SLI) with a faster CPU (say one made in the year 2000) than that in the Dreamcast, then the performance will be better. I should also reiterate that I only believe the Dreamcast's GPU is "generally" faster than Voodoo 2 SLI. If trilinear filtering is used instead of bilinear, the Voodoo 2 SLI will probably win since trilinear filtering is a strength of the hardware.

>> No.4011846

>>4011838
>No, that was never the argument. The argument was whether there was still any area that the N64 could beat a Voodoo-spec'd 1997 PC. And there was: lighting.
That matters only for very specific areas. Like a small room.
>If you pair a PC with a CPU made in 1998
You're talking about the last year of the Pentium IIs and AMD K6 CPUs. Those are far more capable than you seem to think. Not saying a top end Pentium II like a the 400 and 450mhz versions were reasonable for everyone in 98 but it was there if you had the money. These CPUs weren't slouches either when it came to OCing.

Easily beats a DC. Very Easily.

>> No.4011849

>>4008554
>the Saturn wasn't intended to be 3D capable until the Playstation was announced

Said nobody ever. Even the 32X was intended to be capable of 3D despite having no hardware acceleration in that regard.

>> No.4011859

>>4011846
>That matters only for very specific areas. Like a small room.
Hah, no. Lighting can be applied to every vertex. Its range of application is enormous.

Should also note that Turok 2's original PC version has cutdown lighting compared to the N64 version. It's certainly better in every other way, but the reduced lighting quality is a notable difference.

>Not saying a top end Pentium II like a the 400 and 450mhz versions were reasonable for everyone in 98 but it was there if you had the money
The problem is these CPUs don't have the horsepower to beat Dreamcast's Hitachi SH-4's geometry engine at T&L. At the very least, you'd need a fast clocked Pentium 3 with its SSE instructions. Or the GeForce 256 with its T&L engine. Both are 1999/2000 parts.

>> No.4011864

>>4011859
Both Turoks have much greater draw distance. Lighting only matters up close if that's all you can render. One of the reasons N64 and 5th gen consoles in general didn't have many very open games.
>The problem is these CPUs don't have the horsepower to beat Dreamcast's Hitachi SH-4's geometry engine at T&L. At the very least, you'd need a fast clocked Pentium 3 with its SSE instructions. Or the GeForce 256 with its T&L engine. Both are 1999/2000 parts.
Man you really don't know how powerful the CPUs are you're talking about. A Pentium III blows out everything from 6thgen let alone a Dreamcast.

A late Pentium II like a 400 or 450 mhz runs Half Life with out issue.

>> No.4011881

>>4011864
>Lighting only matters up close if that's all you can render
No, not at all. Lighting is about modelling light, it's useful near and far.

>One of the reasons N64 and 5th gen consoles in general didn't have many very open games.
N64 had plenty of open games. That's argubably what the console is most well known for.

>A Pentium III blows out everything from 6thgen let alone a Dreamcast.
At single data integer and floating point, certainly. But at SIMD? Where is the Pentium 2 supposed to do that? MMX is half-arsed SIMD.

The Hitachi SH-4 has real SIMD support, and the Pentium 2 doesn't. SIMD is what powers T&L. It is a very common misconception for people to believe that CPU performance is monolithic (the CPU is equally good at everything). That is certainly not the case, and you only have to look inside of the CPU to determine its real capabilities.

>A late Pentium II like a 400 or 450 mhz runs Half Life with out issue.
Half-Life is not a demanding game, even for its time.

>> No.4011889

>>4011881
>N64 had plenty of open games. That's argubably what the console is most well known for.
In comparison to the PS1. Compared to the PC no.

>Half-Life is not a demanding game, even for its time.
You are dead wrong and spoiled by modern PC hardware. Half Life was one the most demanding games over the late 90. It was a big reason to get Voodoo2 sli.

>> No.4011892

>>4011881
Should just mention I misread your above post a little. The Pentium 3 does have real SIMD support in the form of SSE, but it is not as efficient per clock as the SH-4 since it only works on one vector at a time and is part of a longer pipeline.

The Pentium 2 only has MMX.

Now as for 6th gen, the PS2's Emotion Engine completely annihilates the Pentium 3 at SIMD. The GameCube and Xbox do T&L on their GPU's vector units instead so it's not a relevant comparison. Of course, by the time those consoles came out, PCs did the same thing.

>> No.4011893

>>4011889
>Compared to the PC no.
Unreal, Tribes and what else?

>You are dead wrong and spoiled by modern PC hardware. Half Life was one the most demanding games over the late 90.
Haha, no. Unreal was far more demanding than Half-Life and it came out earlier.

>> No.4011894

>>4011892
A Pentium III from 1999 is capable of running any port from 6thgen better than the console.

>> No.4011896

>>4011894
Not when paired with a T&L-free GPU like the Voodoo 3.

>> No.4011897

>>4011893
>Unreal, Tribes and what else?
Any adventure game/rpg? Really? How about Redguard?

>Haha, no. Unreal was far more demanding than Half-Life and it came out earlier.
Unreal was a demanding game. Though most of it was from people wanting high frame rates. Still if you're saying Half Life was an easy game to run I don't think you were playing on a PC in the late 90s. Or your memory is foggy.

>> No.4011898

>>4011896
Why compare it with any Voodoo to begin with? There are way better cards depending on which console release you want to make the cuttoff. And the Pentium is so good that I wouldn't bother switching it regardless if you're talking about a 99/00 cutoff for PS2 or a 01 for XBox.

>> No.4011903

>>4011897
>How about Redguard?
The fog ridden world doesn't draw out any further than the likes of OoT. Probably less, to be honest.

>Still if you're saying Half Life was an easy game to run I don't think you were playing on a PC in the late 90s
I never said it was easy. Just not particularly demanding. It was perfectly playable on a Pentium 200 with Voodoo 1.

>> No.4011905

>>4011903
>The fog ridden world
"Immersion"
>It was perfectly playable on a Pentium 200 with Voodoo 1.
At the lowest settings maybe...

>> No.4011909

>>4011898
Because the Voodoo 3 was also released in 1999 and is one of the last GPUs released without hardware T&L.

Once GPUs had hardware T&L, performance was no longer as CPU bound as it once was. The GPU did most of the work in games.

It's all well to say "hurr my Pentium 3 will play console ports better than consoles (when I pair it with a Radeon 9700 Pro from 2002)" but it doesn't say much about the Pentium 3 itself, other than it isn't bottlenecking the T&L equipped GPU from doing all the real work.

>> No.4011913

>>4011909
>It's all well to say "hurr my Pentium 3 will play console ports better than consoles (when I pair it with a Radeon 9700 Pro from 2002)" but it doesn't say much about the Pentium 3 itself, other than it isn't bottlenecking the T&L equipped GPU from doing all the real work.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying pair the Pentium III with a period correct GPU. Like a Geforce 256 or if you want to go by the XBox cutoff a GeForce2 Ultra or Ti500.

I'll admit I'm a Pentium fanboy but the Pentium III doesn't need a fanboy to show off how capable it was at the time. That CPU line was that last great one from Intel.

>> No.4011927

>>4011913
>Geforce 256
Won't run Silent Hill 2 as well as a real PS2.

>GeForce2 Ultra or Ti500.
Won't run Splinter Cell as well as a real Xbox.

If you want to beat 6th gen console consistently, nothing less than a GeForce 4 or Radeon 9700 Pro will do the trick.

>That CPU line was that last great one from Intel.
As I said, the single data integer/floating point performance from Pentium 3 was always great, better than consoles.

But its SIMD performance was nothing special, and that's what matters for games. There's a reason Nvidia put hardware T&L into its GPUs at that time. Because they knew CPUs were holding back or on the verge of holding back GPUs from extending their legs due to inadequate SIMD performance. Consoles had no issues in that area, since they had dedicated SIMD vector units already.

>> No.4011932

>>4011927
>Won't run Silent Hill 2 as well as a real PS2.
That's bullshit.
>Won't run Splinter Cell as well as a real Xbox.

>If you want to beat 6th gen console consistently, nothing less than a GeForce 4 or Radeon 9700 Pro will do the trick.
Also bullshit.

>> No.4011948

>>4011932
I know from experience. SH2 runs like shit in a GeForce 256. In particular the fog doesn't look too good.

Splinter Cell also runs terribly on a GeForce 3. Even at 640x480.

>> No.4011950

>>4011948
Probably a shitty patch. Or port issue.

>> No.4011954

At the time of the release of the PS1/Saturn/N64, these consoles WERE better than PCs as far as 3D games were concerned.
PCs were still better for 2D though.

However this didn't last very long, couple of years tops, not until 3D acceleration cards became common.

>> No.4011956

>>4011950
PS2's hardware is better than a GeForce 256.

Xbox' GeForce 3 is better than the PC GeForce 3, at least in terms of vertex performance.

>> No.4011959

>>4011956
See the PS2 GTA ports. Far better on the 256.
The xbox gpu is gimped hard.

>> No.4011960
File: 15 KB, 550x716, win98benches_image008.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4011960

>>4011927
>Because they knew CPUs were holding back or on the verge of holding back GPUs
I disagree benchmark shows cpu's bottlenecking top graphics cards. If you have a fast cpu, disabling hardware T&L can actually give you a performance boost

>> No.4011967

>>4011959
GTA wasn't exactly the shining paradigm of PS2 coding. It was uglier than everything else on the PS2 market. Fun though.

>The xbox gpu is gimped hard.
It has almost double the vertex performance of a GeForce 3 on PC.

>>4011960
Quake 3 does not use hardware T&L. It's not exactly a high poly game either.

>> No.4011987

>>4011632
Amiga did scrolling in hardware and was capable of doing 60 FPS in games, what are you talking about? Source?

>> No.4011994

>>4011798
>Because the PC version of PowerVR2 is cutdown, and also the drivers have incredibly CPU overhead which brings down performance, not an issue on Dreamcast.
This does not make the Voodoo 2 a worse card at any point, consoles are always custom chipsets made to do what they do, the graphics chip itself it still no better.

>Wrong. Here's a source:
Your source is wrong.

>Wrong. 16-bit framebuffers are dithered down from 32-bit GPU pipeline pixels. The PowerVR2's pipeline is 32-bit at every single stage, including alpha blending so the only "lossyness" in the image quality occurs at the final 32-bit to 16-bit dither.
Wrong because you already don't know how the Voodoo 2 works as you mentioned with your wrong source.

>> No.4011998
File: 501 KB, 800x800, 1491076493102.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4011998

>>4011838
>>4011859
>>4011881
You seem to be lacking on your PC side even when you try to be smart with your console arguments.
I see so much bullshit that I can't imagine where someone would even bull such shit out.

>> No.4012005

>>4011994
As I provided sources and explanations the onus is now on you to provide contrary sources and explainations.

Simply dismissing out of hand is not an argument.

>>4011998
Same goes for you.

>> No.4012013

>>4012005
>Same goes for you.
I haven't even posted anything but I'm still having a laugh at your logic, ignorance and lack of accurate information.

>> No.4012374
File: 28 KB, 300x253, 300px-315-5690_VDP2_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4012374

>>4009090
VDP1 is absolutely a 3D chip (it's pretty slow and full of issues as a whole, especially compared to the PS1, but it's also able to put a hell of a lot more polygons out than basically anything that isn't the PS1 that was on the home market at the time -- the PS1's performance blindsided Sega).
On the Saturn, you're literally just drawing untransformed quads for sprites.

So, as an illustrative example, let's look at why the Saturn beats the PS1 in 2D.
It's sure as hell not because of the Saturn's sprite ability (both machines can put thousands of polygons on screen each frame).
The actual answer is the VDP2.

VDP2 is a tilemapper chip like in the SNES (it's pretty similar in featureset, which is why I didn't say like in the Genesis) that can offload work that the PS1 would have to a: cobble together out of hundreds of triangles to emulate tiles (very doable, but that's spending a big portion of your polygon budget) or b: load big-ass textures into vram and use those (using a ton of vram, of course).

VDP2 is basically designed to keep VDP1 free to draw actual objects -- VDP2 takes care of tasks like drawing the sky/backgrounds (PS1 games use big textures mapped to a skybox or some big scrolling thing made of polygons), or drawing the floor (you can use it mode-7 style, PS1 has to draw a big-ass grid of polygons to do the same thing, spending a big portion of its polygon budget, which is the whole reason the PS1 isn't considered good with large, open spaces).

3D at home in 1994-1995 was expensive, and Sega had the most advanced 3D hardware in the arcade at the time, you couldn't reasonably bring ports of those home dead-on.
The Saturn was totally designed for 3D, it's just that doing 2D games isn't a challenge for 3D hardware, and thus 2D ports take advantage of that.

Even on the PS1, the biggest issue regarding 2D graphics is memory to hold backgrounds and the lot.

>> No.4012516

OH MY GOD, ALL THESE >GREEN TEXT

JESUS CHRIST!

>> No.4012782
File: 140 KB, 410x522, headcrab.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4012782

>>4009264
>PC refers to IBM compatibles
>term dates back to at least 1972
>refers only to IBM and clones

>> No.4012946

>>4012782
We designate terms like this so we can easily make distinctions. Any computer can be twisted into being personal.

>> No.4012951

>>4008554
>Video game market crashed in 1983
> Famicom is released in 1983
OK.

>> No.4012965

>>4012951
>Famicom is released as a toy in 1983 with a bunch of crap in a bundle

>> No.4013219

>>4012965
No, it was for games, just like the SG-1000. Face it, video games were booming outside of America in 1983.

>> No.4013237

>>4009183
>You're just a fanboy. Really. You have no idea what you're talking about, you speak through blind loyalty.
To be fair though, I'd rather play that Master System version of Outrun than the Amiga one.

>> No.4013263

>>4013237
The Amiga port of Outrun is notoriously bad.

>> No.4013302

>>4013237
Wow, it's almost like bad ports on other systems didn't exist

>> No.4013349
File: 243 KB, 709x709, 54466-Shining_Force_3_1st_Scenario_(J)-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4013349

best game trilogy to come from 1998

>> No.4013394

>>4013219
In the UK, PCs where booming more than video games in general.

>> No.4013446

>>4013394
Not really. Microcomputers, like the Spectrum, were far more affordable and were basically just games machines. But, thanks to government initiatives, parents bought them en masse.

>> No.4015318

>>4008554
The last one is true, though. Obviously in 1997 PCs were more powerful than the 1994 PS and Saturn and on par with 1996's N64, but consoles continually released with far more power than their contemporary home computers right until the most recent gen. Xbox 360 outclassed 2005 and 2006 PCs while the PS2 had better processing than any computer released before 2004.

>> No.4015360
File: 16 KB, 113x170, angkor.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4015360

>this thread
i've never seen a thread shit itself this fast on here

>> No.4015468

>>4008604
>>it's pronounced Segga
It is though. You're not one of those Sayga poofters are you?

>> No.4015497

>>4015468
It's Sea-guh, dumbass.

>> No.4015745

>>4015497
Everyone knows it's pronounced se-ha-ga

>> No.4015759

>>4015468
>>4015497
>>4015745
If you ever owned the console you know it actually says it's own name. Newfags.

>> No.4015769

>>4015759
No it doesn't. When would it do that?

>> No.4015773

>>4015759
If you ever owned the console you know it doesn't.
A tiny number of games have a voice clip at the start, but they pronounce it with a goofy asian accent. We're talking about how to say it English.

>> No.4015776

>>4015773
Isn't it usually a scream?

>> No.4015803

>>4015776
No. You're thinking of the ads.

>> No.4015812

>>4015803
I'm pretty sure some games had the scream.

>> No.4015823

>>4015769
See
>>4015773

>>4015773
Most first party games did pleb.

>> No.4015836

>>4015823
1. The games do that,not the console.
2. Name the games, besides Sonic,that do it.

>> No.4016426

>>4015823
Most first party games? Then why can't you name any?

>> No.4016470

>>4009089
Definitely not true.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzSNE49nBXk

>> No.4016475

>>4016470
>links some ecleb shit opinion
>video starts out with some bullshit in the background and arrogant statements.
K, kid.

>> No.4016746

>>4015823
The voice clip in Sonic 1 takes up more room than the game, which is why they just have a jingle or silent logo in most titles. Audio compression was still inefficient and carts didn't have space to waste. It was meant to be technically impressive but it was not a standard thing. Which you would know if you'd ever played more than just Sonic.
>>4015812
Only Sonic 3D Blast uses the Sega Scream.

>> No.4017252

>>4009105
>The Saturn has little to nothing from the arcade boards

It was literally a cut down System 32, like how the Megadrive was a cut down System 16.

>> No.4017274

>>4011956
>Xbox' GeForce 3 is better than the PC GeForce 3,

Xbox Geforce 3 wasn't a real Geforce 3, it was halfway between the Geforce 3 and the Geforce 4. The same way the X360 chip wasn't a Radeon x1900, it was halfway between that and the HD 2xxx series.

>> No.4017316

>>4009087
only america matters let me tell u about et

>> No.4017646

>>4016746
>The voice clip in Sonic 1 takes up more room than the game
False. I have extracted the sample from the ROM and it's only a few KB's.

>> No.4017692

>>4017646
My bad. It's about 1/8 of the space on the cart. A whole lot for something that lasts less than 2 seconds.

>> No.4020220

>>4017252
>cut down
pretty sure the Saturn shits all over the System 32 in basically every way -- it's faster, it's got more RAM, the video processor is more advanced, etc

The Saturn is designed a lot like a few of Sega's arcade boards though, where they'd just throw CPUs on there instead of using a single faster CPU (prime example: Sega's Y Board has fucking three 68k CPUs and a z80, and a DSP chip).
it's a fairly different design and chipset than the System 32 however, which is actually pretty simple compared to Sega's other designs (one V60, one Z80, no dsp -- the Multi 32 doubles up some of the components for obvious reasons)

IIRC, Sega did initially begin designing the Saturn with a similar setup to the System 32 in mind, starting with the V60 CPU, but I can't remember where I read that for the life of me, it was some old magazine scan.

>> No.4020340

>>4020220
System 32 and Model 1 both used a NEC V60 as the CPU. The VDP1 in Saturn was influenced Model 1's DSPs and VDP2 was a roided up Super Scaler. It blew the living shit out of System 32 in every way.