DC is SO current gen.

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:01 pm

I'm sick of seeing people refer to the DC as a previous-gen console or something. The Saturn was then, the DC is now.

I've convinced at least a dozen people that the DC is not previous gen. It required me showing them a few games so that they could see that it is clearly up-to-par with today's standards (and would be more so, had it been commercially continued). Some of the best to show are Rez, Samba De Amigo, Resident Evil Code: Veronica, Quake III Arena, and the Shenmues.

How many of you guys still consider the DC previous-gen? Do you have a lot of friends that do?

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:07 pm

Previous-gen. Boot up Burnout Revenge, then boot up Crazy Taxi. 'Nuff said.

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:18 pm

Graphics have nothing to do with a gen.

That's just graphics whore-ism there. You want to compare some of the earliest DC games to games that're out like 6 years later? Uhhh... no.

Boot up Frogger's Adventure for PS2. Boot up Resident Evil Code: Veronica X for PS2. Dude, my N64 looks better.

(RE2 64 looks better than RECVX)

Gameholic · Post by **Gameholic** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:25 pm

The DC is current-gen.. it was intented to compete the PS2, GC, Xbox...

And the games are up par with current PS2, Cube or Xbox titles

Caboose · Post by **Caboose** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:47 pm

Gameholic wrote:The DC is current-gen.. it was intented to compete the PS2, GC, Xbox...

And the games are up par with current PS2, Cube or Xbox titles

I agree. It was just released too early. My friends consider the Dreamcast "old-school" and hate it. Except for one. Me and him are the only ones that appreciate older stuff, and it pisses us off how basically everyone else (except for a handful of people) hate the older games. My other friends are tired of hearing me tell them how awesome Shenmue is, and all the great games that the Dreamcast has to offer.

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:50 pm

My least favorite kinds of gamers are the ones who became gamers only because of Xbox and don't acknowledge any game that isn't Halo or Halo 2. Aka 1/2 the population.

Oh, and the oldschool thing. Hell, I don't even consider GBC, N64, Sega Saturn, or PSone oldschool yet. Just because it isn't "OMFG Teh top N0tch!" doesn't mean that it's automatically so far back that you can call it old.

lackofsense · Post by **lackofsense** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:01 pm

and what is wrong with old school anyway?
Anyoony who puts down the older games has obviously never played tham and has no right to put them down that's just my opinion.

Gameholic · Post by **Gameholic** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:15 pm

The pas six months i've been playing more on my DC than on my Xbox, PS2 or Cube... games like Street Fighter 3 Alpha, Zero Gunner 2, Ikaruga are all games that are more fun than anything on PS2 or Cube for example.

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:17 pm

lackofsense wrote:and what is wrong with old school anyway?
Anyoony who puts down the older games has obviously never played tham and has no right to put them down that's just my opinion.

Nothing. I'm just saying that just because a game doesn't have the best graphics ever doesn't make it automatically "oldschool."

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:38 pm

GyroVorbis wrote:Graphics have nothing to do with a gen.

That's just graphics whore-ism there. You want to compare some of the earliest DC games to games that're out like 6 years later? Uhhh... no.

Boot up Frogger's Adventure for PS2. Boot up Resident Evil Code: Veronica X for PS2. Dude, my N64 looks better.

(RE2 64 looks better than RECVX)

Then please provide me with your definition of "this gen." From all I know, you consider the NES "this gen" simply because it has some great games. Yippee. Dreamcast is not this gen, it's "middle gen." It died way before this gen got smoking.

And yes, I'm going to compare the games of today to games that came out six years ago. If it's current gen, then it should hold up. It doesn't. And there's nothing that's been recently released to suggest otherwise.

MetaFox · Post by **MetaFox** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:57 pm

Dreamcast was released in 1998. Playstation 2 was released in 1999.

If you were to say the Dreamcast was previous generation, Playstation 2 would be previous generation too.

Video game generations go by year and processing power (the general statistics of the hardware, not the quality of the games), not by the amount of time in the market.

Sega was in the video game market for every generation so far:

Generation 1 (the early consoles):
SG-1000/Mark I, SG-1000 II/Mark II

Generation 2 (the 8-bits):
Mark III/Sega Master System

Generation 3 (the 16-bits):
Sega Genesis/MegaDrive

Generation 4 (the 32-bits/64-bits)
Sega Saturn

Generation 5 (the 128-bits [and the end of 'bits' as a marketing technique to describe processing power])
Sega Dreamcast

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:37 pm

MetaFox said it.

However, dear Nick, it's not exactly fair to compare graphics because the development back in 1998 - 2000 (DC's main commercial life span pretty much ended 2000) was incredibly expensive and today it's a lot easier and -if compared- very very cheap to create a game with much more advanced graphics with an incredible level of details and nice effects.

When the DC was released it was the state of the art system. The most powerful system available, even compared to a PC or the Arcade. Far ahead of its time.
Now you can imagine why devving for it wasn't exactly easy nor cheap and why most Dreamcast games look like N64 or PS1 in 640x480 HiRes. I mean even ShenMue has its origin on the SEGA Saturn!
I think there really doesn't exist a Dreamcast game that uses more than 1 Million polygons per second... out of 5 Millions possible! - and that's with all effects supported by the PowerVR2-DC enabled!

The PlayStation 2 with its 175 Trillion or whatever polygons per second (according to Sony) is pretty much on par with the Dreamcast and you could easily look at one of the current PlayStation 2 games and see what Dreamcast games would look like if the DC production wouldn't have been discontinued that early.
I mean we never saw a second generation of Dreamcast games. All we got were some quickly thrown together, technically at best mediocre start-up games (Sonic Adventure, Sega Rally 2, Virtua Fighter 3 tb, etc, etc), then a wonderful, absolutly breathtaking 1st generation (ShenMue, MSR, Power Stone, etc) and then some below average "Good bye, DC" Model 3 ports (like Daytona USA, Dynamite Cop 2, Fighting Vipers 2 etc.). That's it.

However, that's all "if" and "when" you'd say, but if you compare a early Dreamcast game (say 1999) with a early PS2 game (2000) then you'll still notice how close both systems are technically.

GameCube and xBox are a little more powerful than DC and PS2. Rarely any games show it, I know, but some games definitly do

The Burnout series you mentioned surely does! And honestly it would really be a scandal if one today's best looking PS2 games (I'd say the Burnout Revenge PS2 version is in the PS2's Top-3 of the best looking PS2 games) would still look like a Dreamcast game from 1999.

Then again, if you'd have shown any of today's average brandnew PS2/xBox/GC game to a Dreamcast owner back in 1999, he'd have called you a liar and laughed his loungs out on the flour because he'd have expected the games to look a lot better than DC's games and not to be that similar looking.

Anyway, there's still some "if" and "when" to my points so I'll get back to play Dreamcast and continue to be happy with what I got

Gameholic · Post by **Gameholic** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:05 pm

Well said Metafox and Christuserloeser.. totally agree with you guys

Segata Sanshiro · Post by **Segata Sanshiro** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:10 pm

Current-gen, maybe the oldest looking games, with least eye candy, but definitely current-gen.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:16 pm

Christuserloeser wrote:I think there really exists no Dreamcast game that uses more than 1 Million Polygons per second... Out of 5 Millions possible!

According to developer Melbourne House, Test Drive Le Mans actually displays more than 5 million polygons per second - although Sega promised only 3 million.

Christuserloeser wrote:The PlayStation 2 with its 175 Trillion Polygons per second (according to Sony)

Promised: 66 million polygons per second. Achieved: around 13 million, at most, if you're a hell of a coder. THAT is what makes DC fans so resentful of Sony, they're CHEATERS!

Christuserloeser wrote:some quickly thrown together, technically at best mediocre start-up games (Sonic Adventure)

Hey, back then Sonic Adventure was the best-looking console platformer ever! And keep in mind, awesome-looking Soul Calibur was also an early Dreamcast game.

Imerion · Post by **Imerion** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:18 pm

The DC is current-gen.. it was intented to compete the PS2, GC, Xbox...

And the games are up par with current PS2, Cube or Xbox titles

Agree as well. Most of my friends are of the uncertain type. They know that DC aint sold here in Sweden (other than in used games stores) but they also know new games are made in japan. Usually all it takes is, as mentioned, to show of some good games are most people agree with the above statement.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:23 pm

@Stormwatch:

Test Drive Le Mans looks superb

The promised polygon count of the PS2 is that of a game that doesn't use any effects, hell maybe that number only applies in case you won't use any textures! I mean who needs textures ? or Anti-Aliasing ?

Sonic Adventure looks great. Don't get me wrong. I like its style too and I am aware of the time its been released. But compare it to Sonic Adventure 2, ShenMue or any other of the later Dreamcast games and you'll see what I mean...

Soul Calibur is a pretty straight System 11 ( = PlayStation1 ) port.

Vchat20 · Post by **Vchat20** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:47 pm

one game i always like to compare with: MSR. that game probably has some of the nicest graphics and lighting effects ive seen in a DC game to date.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:08 pm

Yes, MSR looks great - and it also SOUNDS great, thanks to Richard Jacques.

Green Ranger · Post by **Green Ranger** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:10 pm

To me it doesn't matter when the Dreamcast was released. It was designed as a 128 bit system, and was released early to get a leg up on the competition.

Is the PS2, XBOX and Gamecube 128 bit systems? Then guess what, the Dreamcast IS current gen.

As for the age-old question, do graphics define a game? Graphics are important don't get me wrong, but gameplay mechanics is what keeps a gamer playing. A game can look pleasing to the eyes, but if the gameplay is limited, or difficult to master then a player can be swayed against playing such a title. For instance, if the movement within a game is limited to what a player is not used to, the graphics won't keep them from playing, not if it's too frustrating to get from point A to point B.

Another note to add is this: Many gamers today regard 2d as ancient history. Well previous systems, including those of the 8bit, 16bit, 32bit and 64bit era, all have titles that are graphically impressive, even to this day. Perhaps the problem with younger gameplayers is that full 3d characters and environments are more appealing because they weren't around to appreciate the technical abilities offered by 2d gaming.

Examples of impressive 2d graphics are titles such as ASTAL for the Sega Saturn, TINY TOONS WACKY SPORTS CHALLENGE for the SNES, and the STREET FIGHTER games (too many to list). I am sure other members of this forum can contribute to the 2d list as well.