The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I think that the future of gaming is looking very good. The Playstation 2 is looking brilliant and just like the Playstation in a couple of years times game producers will be able to make the most of it's high quality. Also, both the X-Box and the Dolphin I'm sure will be excellent consoles. I think that Metal Gear Solid is the best game ever. It had brilliant graphics, gameplay, sound and best of all, the plot was fantastic and it kept me on the edge of my seat throughout the game. If makers like Konami can make more games like that, then gaming is definatly going somewhere. Imagine what consoles will be like in 20 years time! It will be like we're actually in the game playing the role of somebody like Solid Snake!
I can't wait for the Playstation 2 in the U.K and I'm sure loads of people can't either.
Ant
I can't wait for the Playstation 2 in the U.K and I'm sure loads of people can't either.
Ant
Page:
Hopefully this is the start of all those changes they've promised us, the site does generally seem to be getting better with each update (bar the last one where everything went horribly pear shaped!)
Shigeru Miyamoto said: "Polygon movement is essential in the creation of 3D games. Therefore, we are taking various steps to simplify polygon movement. Namely, this includes calculation of polygon display, properly shading and lighting the polygons, and applying the textures.
"Whenever new hardware comes out, the manufacturer always talks about how many million polygons it puts out, but never mentions that when textures are applied only half that can be handled. Then when you do the lighting calculations, that number halves again. So the actual number of polygons is half of half, or about 1/10th of what they say. So if the specs say the machine can do 80-100 million polygons, that really translates to roughly 5-8 million.
"Polygon-pushing power isn't enough; game machines have to be able to handle things like terrain and collision detection too. When the CPU handles these tasks, it can't do much else. With the Gamecube, we've divided the tasks up as much as possible to eliminate bottlenecks. If you simply look at the documented specs for existing systems, they may seem to be the latest and greatest things at the moment, but in a year or so they'll already be outdated. On the other hand, looking at the Gamecube, I think it will have a shelf life of many years. We wanted to make a piece of hardware that would free developers from worrying about technical stuff like polygons or bottlenecks."
I found this on ign, shame it doesn't go into more detail.
BTW you can start a new topic if you select this forum from the future and Retro list. If you come back to the front page after reading a post, the start new topic link disappears.
"Whenever new hardware comes out, the manufacturer always talks about how many million polygons it puts out, but never mentions that when textures are applied only half that can be handled. Then when you do the lighting calculations, that number halves again. So the actual number of polygons is half of half, or about 1/10th of what they say. So if the specs say the machine can do 80-100 million polygons, that really translates to roughly 5-8 million.
"Polygon-pushing power isn't enough; game machines have to be able to handle things like terrain and collision detection too. When the CPU handles these tasks, it can't do much else. With the Gamecube, we've divided the tasks up as much as possible to eliminate bottlenecks. If you simply look at the documented specs for existing systems, they may seem to be the latest and greatest things at the moment, but in a year or so they'll already be outdated. On the other hand, looking at the Gamecube, I think it will have a shelf life of many years. We wanted to make a piece of hardware that would free developers from worrying about technical stuff like polygons or bottlenecks."
I found this on ign, shame it doesn't go into more detail.
BTW you can start a new topic if you select this forum from the future and Retro list. If you come back to the front page after reading a post, the start new topic link disappears.
In the continued absence of a "Start new topic" link, I'm posting this here as it semed the most appropriate thread heading...
I've just looked at the GameCube specs on Freeola's GameCube section, and I am left feeling a little deflated - to say the least.
Any regular readers of my posts will know that, while I am a self-confessed PS2 fan, I was considering buying a GameCube and/or Xbox when they're released. So please don't view this as anti-GameCube - it's not, it's a general concern.
I hadn't checked the specs previously, as I had just assumed that - being a later release - it would have the edge. Now though, I'm not so sure.
The GameCube has a faster CPU, and more audio channels, but that seems to be the only advantages. The machine is still - according to the specs - a 32/64-bit hybrid, and appears to have a significantly lower polygon count.
PS2 has around a 77 million 'raw' polygon count, dropping to around 20 million when accounting for all FX and in-game physics etc. The figures in the GameCube spec quote between 6 and 12 million, depending on FX, physics etc. This would give a best-case scenario of an 8 million polys/sec difference, and a worst-case of a 14 million polys/sec difference.
Can this be right?
Sensible discussion only, please - no pointless mud-slinging, name-calling, console-slagging etc.
I've just looked at the GameCube specs on Freeola's GameCube section, and I am left feeling a little deflated - to say the least.
Any regular readers of my posts will know that, while I am a self-confessed PS2 fan, I was considering buying a GameCube and/or Xbox when they're released. So please don't view this as anti-GameCube - it's not, it's a general concern.
I hadn't checked the specs previously, as I had just assumed that - being a later release - it would have the edge. Now though, I'm not so sure.
The GameCube has a faster CPU, and more audio channels, but that seems to be the only advantages. The machine is still - according to the specs - a 32/64-bit hybrid, and appears to have a significantly lower polygon count.
PS2 has around a 77 million 'raw' polygon count, dropping to around 20 million when accounting for all FX and in-game physics etc. The figures in the GameCube spec quote between 6 and 12 million, depending on FX, physics etc. This would give a best-case scenario of an 8 million polys/sec difference, and a worst-case of a 14 million polys/sec difference.
Can this be right?
Sensible discussion only, please - no pointless mud-slinging, name-calling, console-slagging etc.
What the HELL is going on???? On every console forum, I can get into one old topic. On this one, I can't make a new topic!!! I reckon this new discussion system SR have got has mucked up!!!
It's worse than you think, try getting into any console, bar PS2, forum!
ARRRGGHHH!!! WHY CAN'T I MAKE A NEW TOPIC!!!! Ali, what has happened!?!?!?
I can't remember my LAST message.
At firts look I thought "DOLPHIN?!?!" and then checked the date. I can't remember my first message.
Wow. There were a lot of replies to subjects back then...
:)
:)
Page: