Why GC is more "powerful" than XBox

[MechDeus]

The point of that post was to prove the gamecube is infact more powerful, and as i see, esp. in conjunction with the posted link, QED.

The point of the other thread wasn't to prove that the GC was more powerful, it was to prove that it wasn't as underpowered as people think (as that guy kept saying multiple times in multiple posts). He brought up that there isn't really any normal viable way to prove which is more powerful; the Xbox has better specs but the GC has smoother architechure.

RE4 is going to be a huge factor in graphics demonstration for the GC.

GameCube: Resident Evil / Resident Evil Ø

It certainly proves how good 2D games look on this gen of systems.

[japtor]

CUBIVORE

[AaronChance]

Splinter Cell is one of the worst looking games on the xbox. They didn't even bother to texture all of the walls/items/etc for christ's sake. Especially when there's games like Orta that not only looks good but runs at a rock solid 60FPS.

Metal Arms might be a good benchmark because the devs tried to squeeze every graphical trick they could have out of each of the platforms, or at least so they claimed. The Xbox version comes out looking the best, but the differences from the GC one are distinctly minor. It's unfair to compare completely different games since you get conflicting styles and people have their own opinions about what looks good and what doesn't.

[SonofdonCD]

In all seriousness, I doubt that we're ever gonna find the definitive answer. You can go to a number of different sites who have their own tech people with their own biases (very few are totally objective) who will champion either side, saying their side is the more powerful.

Truth is that unless benchmarked side by side, we'll never truly know. Specs on paper can only tell you so much, and the two architextures in question are so unlike that it is really hard to judge simply by reading specs.

I knew once I first opened this thread that nothing would be resolved, since there is still a whole lot of people who claim Xbox is more powerful, and these people have tech backgrounds. I could go and find another analysis that contradicts kbuchanan's. But it's never gonna go anywhere, especially since this board in general (myself included) don't have the background needed to have a real discussion about this.

[Compass]

anyone ever read breakfast of champions? decent book.

Yeah, I read it. Its graphics sucked though compared to Xbox.

[MarkRyan]

If art made raw graphics better then Dreamcast would still be considered widely technologically viable based on its current library alone. It's not though. In any case, I think Resident Evil is far from stunning and certianly not beautiful. Despite its style I also call it boring and monotonous.

You must be completely delusional.

Awesome artists make awesome graphics. Which is why Capcom and Konami make some of the best looking games of our time--they have extremely talented artists.

Throwing together a bunch of effects like bump mapping, pixel shading, etc. etc. doesn't mean that a game will automatically look stunning. With less talented artists it usually makes games look super computer-ish. And often, using system library effects rips away individuality in a game's graphic style (I'm starting to see the blue Mercury water in quite a few PC / Xbox games these days).

Great artists pull shit like Resident Evil Ø, where every scene looks like a unique painting. Purposely placed lighting, consistent and moody color palette, and everything is artfully designed. How you can say that it's not beautiful and stunning is entirely beyond me, unless you're talking out of your ass and have never played the games before.

Artists make good graphics, not system specs. System specs just help let artists do their thing.

[Ginjuro]

The Gamecube and X-Box both have great games. If a person is not able to appreciate certain games that are considered to be of high quality among the majority, it's the fault of the person not being able to acknowledge the game, not the game itself. (Smash Bros. Melee is good stuff)

As for graphical prowess for each respective system, I would consider this offering:
PS2 - ZoE 2, Gran Turismo
GC - Rebel Strike, Resident Evil/0
X-Box - Panzer Dragoon Orta, Crimson Skies

Which system has the edge? I don't know? For those of you out there that are insane, please don't start jabbering about how Gran Turismo isn't impressive. That's serious issues right there.

By the way, Shenmue II on the DREAMCAST is better looking than all of those games. It has crazy boots on its feet. It can run better than any of those games. Recognize the shoes.

[MVS]

The above statement makes sense if you ignore the fact that the xbox has never once climbed ahead of the gamecube in terms of worldwide hardware sales.

But only a retard would ignore such facts.

-- Over the past year, Microsoft has successfully established the Xbox as the No. 2 console worldwide, surpassing the Nintendo GameCube. It has also attempted to establish its Xbox Live online service in all regions of the world. It has achieved initial online success in North America, but faces challenges in Europe and Japan.

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/s...ndo+sales+xbox

[Sl1p]

Best looking game on each system-

PS2: Gran Turismo 3 and Metal Gear Solid 2. Both games which baffle me as to how they can run on a PS2.
XBOX: Project Gotham Racing 2, Splinter Cell and uhh..NCAA 04? Im sorry, but that is the most amazingly rendered football game I've ever seen.
Gamecube: Umm...Wind Waker....And every other pretty game had weird stuff to ruin it. For example, Mario Sunshine was unusually plain in a lot of areas.

I thought we were to the point where no one gave a fuck about which system was "More powerful"? I suddenly have this board confused with Gamefaqs.

[MechDeus]

Both games which baffle me as to how they can run on a PS2.

They have FX chips built into the disc. It downloads into the PS2's secret mini-harddrive (ala Saturn's nonsecret one) and gives the PS2 the ability to make cool graphics.