Quote:
Originally posted by Phire
And the X-Box is somewhat of an equivalent to that of a GeForce 4 TI4600.
GeForce 3, man.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally posted by Phire
And the X-Box is somewhat of an equivalent to that of a GeForce 4 TI4600.
GeForce 3, man.
I think the reason the GC only comes up a bit better looking than PS2 or DC is because a overwhelming majority of its games have been PS2 and DC ports. Hmmmmm...
I mean, it makes enough sense that it just may be the reason why...
Well, here's my take on things. I don't really know the details that went into the development of these games or the polys they push. If need be I will go look it up. A key factor is being overlooked though. I think some people are talking aout graphics and others are talking about presentation.
Graphics=the amount of power pulled from a system. For instance game A pushes more polygons and uses more proccessing power than game B.
Presentation=how developers use that power to impress the user.
A system doesn't have to be more powerful than another system to create a better presentation. Many games have good presentation but they have prerendered backgrounds and such that don't push the processor as much as a game with an engine rendered on the fly that may not look as good.
Once you have the difference down then you can get down to the real facts. If you're going to talk about graphics don't base it on what you think looks nice. Bring some facts about how many polygons they pushed. How many textures they used at once. How many frames per second does it run.
If you want to talk presentation. Then you can say this looks good.
Also keep in mind that the graphics of a game don't neccessarily determine the power of a system. Factors such as the knowledge of the developers and the effientcy(sp) of the code comes into play. So don't get so uptight about it. Both systems are new platforms which are still being explored. The time to get worried is when you start to see the improvement in graphics for the system slow down.
First of all, you are being redundant. ArtX is the original creator of the Flipper chip, all of ArtX's assets have been bought by ATI, therefore what was once ArtX's is now ATI's and only ATI's (legally). ArtX Technology = ATI Technology now, which is why there is an ATI sticker on a gamecube. And Resident Evil uses prerendered backgrounds so I don't see how that would be a good example of processing power. And I actually double checked the specs on gamecube and it's actually worse than the radeon, much worse in fact. A Radeon can push about 30 million textured polygons per sec, A Gamecube can only push 6-12 textured polygons per sec. Playstation 2 is often boasted as pushing 75 million a sec, but this is realistically more closer to 11 million, so in terms of poly pushing both are almost the same. But there are many more factors than just raw poly pushing so there is still will be a definite difference between the two.Quote:
Originally posted by Zondaro
*cough* bullshit *cough*
I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but ATI does not make the GC's "Flipper Graphics Chip." Another company made the chip, then after it was finished ATI bought that company. There is absolutly no ATI technology in the Gamecube.
The Gamecube has some solid hardware, the reason the games don't look to sharp yet is because of all the PS2 ports. When some games designed from the ground up on the GC start shipping, we'll see the true power of the Gamecube. I'm looking forward to seeing Resident Evil in action myself. Only a couple more days.
I think that GC Resident Evil and Wreckless: The Yakuza Missions have the best graphics in Console history at this time. If you have not seen Wreckless in motion, well than you are missing out. Sometimes it looks real, and thats not exageration. And yes Ralisport is just gorgeous, textures! Textures, not polys, make games look real. Sure polys are important, but you can make a real low poly count model look smooth and crisp if you got amazing textures. But really Wreckless is amazing, the heat effects, the realistic reflection of light on Tar, Metal, everthing! It all looks real. Being able to see the car behind you in the reflection on the bumper is just fantastic. Mmmmmmmm Wreckless.
I guess I'm talking about presentation then. I could care less what's going on behind the scenes. I'm only interested in what the final thing I'm seeing looks like. Rallisport looks nicer (by far) than anything I have seen on the Cube.
Ahem. Alow me to vere off subject here for a second. Am I a total chowda' head for not owning Halo yet? I'm thinking the next game I want is DoA3 because I loved 2 so much, but all of my friends who found out I just got an Xbox won't shut up about Halo. Is it really that good? I've always found FPS to be terribly annoying due to horrible controls, but I've never tried one on a dual analog pad. I'm thinking that might help the controll issue tremendously now that I would be free to move with my left hand and aim with my right as nature intended.
Quote from a news site on X-box:Quote:
Originally posted by Chojin
GeForce 3, man.
"Some of the possible features of the NV-25 (over the NV-20/GeForce3) are the inclusion of 6 pixel pipelines (up from four) and a second vertex processing unit. The GPU in the Xbox currently has two such units, while the NV-20 does not. "
Halo's great - I don't think it's quite so good that you should feel bad for not owning it, though. The game's almost more of a combat simulator than a FPS at times, though - it's pure gunfighting and driving, no puzzles, exploration, or adventuring. Good stuff.
I really like DOA1 and DOA2, and I was disappointed with DOA3. The game's almost too simple, now, and I prefer the feel of DOA2.
You sound like you have good taste in games, so I think you'd like GunValkyrie. Great, great game, as long as you're willing to learn the controls (MDK2 meets VOOT, basically).
Halo really is the bees knees. I have always found that a FPS plays just fine on a console if it had 2 Analog sticks. The DC pad of course being the single worst FPS pad of all time, well on a console that had FPS at least, I am sure the NES controller is worse. But anyways, it plays fantastic, and the Multiplayer is just a blast, it really is the new Goldeneye. Linking up Multiple Xboxs is just a blast, because your all in the same room usually and can talk the smack right to their face, not through a Keyboard. The one player game is really fun as well, a little bit repeatative at the end, but the enemy A.I. (if on Legendary) is amazing, its like fighting real soldiers. Not owning Halo and having an Xbox just seems odd to me. I need to buy an Xbox this summer.
Halo is pretty good, but I think it is overhyped. The level design is pretty nice and the monsters and other entities move and interact with each other and have good AI. But as you said, the control sucks. The way the story mode plays out is sorta like half-life cause alot of stuff goes in realtime. I'm not a big fan of FPS on consoles, and driving the car in Halo sometimes gets really annoying cause of the controller. Had Halo been on PC it would be a totally different experience, thats how much the controller matters. It's like trying to play a fighting game with a mouse, it feels awkward. DoA3 is good, the gameplay in it has not been upgraded much but the graphics and sound have had a major overhaul.Quote:
Originally posted by Chibi Nappa
I guess I'm talking about presentation then. I could care less what's going on behind the scenes. I'm only interested in what the final thing I'm seeing looks like. Rallisport looks nicer (by far) than anything I have seen on the Cube.
Ahem. Alow me to vere off subject here for a second. Am I a total chowda' head for not owning Halo yet? I'm thinking the next game I want is DoA3 because I loved 2 so much, but all of my friends who found out I just got an Xbox won't shut up about Halo. Is it really that good? I've always found FPS to be terribly annoying due to horrible controls, but I've never tried one on a dual analog pad. I'm thinking that might help the controll issue tremendously now that I would be free to move with my left hand and aim with my right as nature intended.