DC owns PS2 like the good ol' days:

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:23 pm

Double post.

Cid Highwind · Post by **Cid Highwind** » Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:37 pm

Ex-Cyber wrote:DScaler is a deinterlacer; it doesn't display the signal the way a TV would. I don't know how much effect this would actually have on jaggies, but there's more than blur missing from that shot.

True, it displays the truth behind the mask of a tv

Oh and to add to the list: Baldr Force Exe, Rayman 2 and Evil Twin.

I don't know about Baldr Force, but both Rayman 2 and Evil Twin utterly SUCK on PS2. I read articles on both websites and in gaming magazines claiming the PS2 version would be a graphical update and that it would totally pwn the DC and PC versions... Well instead Rayman 2 PS2 resembled its N64 brother more than the DC version. Blurry textures, non-transparent water, and a framerate of 30 fps, when lucky, cause it dropped to 15 at a lot of times. Another victory for the hype machine

Btw, the game also ran at 60 fps or at least way beyond 30fps on my AMD K6 333mhz with 32 megs of SD ram and a TNT2. Don't tell me they took half a year to record english voices?

Chrisuserloeser wrote:A game that's originated on a certain system usually makes best use of the hardware it's been meant for.

Then again it's also not fair to compare a original Dreamcast highlight from 1999 with a PS2 highlight from 2006 - simply because development engines and development tool have evolved a lot. Creating a Shenmue wouldn't take a 1/5th of the time nowadays.

I agree, being realistic here tells me that games like FF X and MGS2 showed what the PS2 can do. PS2 has proven itself a lot over the years, but I prefer to praise the developers instead. They are the ones who were able to implement some half decent AA and they were the ones able to cover up the pre 1998 textures with great looking effects. PS2 is definately a great console in certain departments, but at the same time it falls somewhere in between the N64 and DC in other departments. Sad... because it forces us gamers to accept textures that have the looks of a puddle of mud.

The best thing one can do is comparing an earlier original DC game with an earlier original PS2 game.

Like comparing GT3 with MSR or F355 Challenge?

Or when comparing Soul Calibur with Tekken Jag Tournament?

Come on, that would be unfair, we all know the PS2 can do better

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:53 pm

Evil Twin looks just great on DC. Really like it. Still, it drops a few frames here and there too. (can't compare with PS2 cause I don't own one)

Then again Evil Twin came out in late 2002, when the DC already was deader than dead commercially (guess it's really an awesome zombie of a console

) so I don't think they spend much time on optimizing and bugfixing it

Or when comparing Soul Calibur with Tekken Jag Tournament?

I never saw TTT, but the original Soul Calibur ran on an updated PS1-like arcade hardware IIRC - so it doesn't show 1/2 of the DC's power IMO

(Recently compared it with Soul Calibur II on GC and DoA2 on Dreamcast - I couldn't believe my eyes how much better DoA2 looks

)

Cid Highwind · Post by **Cid Highwind** » Sun Jul 02, 2006 3:56 pm

Soul Calibur II on GC looks pretty nice IMO, I wonder how it would've run on DC.

We've done a couple of comparisons last summer, including Evil Twin. And Evil Twin looked worse than the DC version, mainly in the texture and jaggie department. Also I don't think it had the same framerate, it was lower. At least the difference wasn't as bad as with Rayman 2.

Smurph · Post by **Smurph** » Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:07 pm

Cid Highwind wrote:Soul Calibur II on GC looks pretty nice IMO, I wonder how it would've run on DC.

Looks even better when run in widescreen in 480p using a component cable. = D

Morphv2 · Post by **Morphv2** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:45 pm

Unreal Tournament was on both.

-Johnick- · Post by **-Johnick-** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Congratulations, another Naomi to DC port that looks better on the DC then the Ps2, what an achievement

. I could have sworn this was 2006, yet I feel like im posting in a thread from 2002.

The X-Box port of MGS2-Substance has more slowdown then the Ps2 port, does that make the Ps2 more powerful then the X-Box ?. The Saturn port of Castlevania SOTN had awful tranparencies and worse slowdown then the Psone port, did that make the Psone better at 2d games then the Saturn ?.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:12 pm

I'm sure we already came to that conclusion... We're just posting for the fun of it.

evanft · Post by **evanft** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:34 am

Do we still really need a thread like this? I mean, it's 2006, and as others have said, theren't aren't many games available for both systems that really push either system graphically. And of course, ports are never a good way to see the graphical power of a system. I mean, look at all the PS2-->Xbox ports that look like crap.

Oh, and GC SC2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DC DOA2.

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:12 pm

Seriously, do we really need to be posting against stuff like this? Does it personally hurt you to see some people having a good ol' laugh at a shitty PS2 port? Nobody here takes this seriously. I mean c'mon now, it's just funny. Nobody is getting hurt, nobody is insulting the PS2, nobody is saying DC is better. There's nothing wrong with these kinda posts. It's not like I'm a n00b saying "zoMG DrMcSAt R betr TahN GAYstation 2s lawlalwlolololol."

It's funny. I laughed. I have no remorse.

Juan · Post by **Juan** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:35 pm

evanft wrote:Do we still really need a thread like this?

Did you have to bump it?