Viewing Thread:
"All the next gen consoles are slightly disappointing............"

And there is a very simple explanation for it too........

This time around, nothing new is being done by the guys who make the consoles, simply because nothing new has become available to the mass market. This will lead people to feel underwhelmed and disappointed in their new console. I do have examples to show this, so please just hear me out.

First we take the Playstation 2.

What exactly can the PS2 do, that the PSX can't? Emmm, not much really. In terms of graphics, yes there will be massive advances forward, and this is already visible, all you have to do is compare the original Ridge Racer, to Ridge Racer 5 on the PS2. Massive graphical difference between the two, and in terms of gameplay, well, RRV is just RRIV in disguise isn't it?? Yes, it is, and that's because the initial launch games of the Playstation 2 were no better than PSOne games with a higher frame rate, and nicer graphics, yes, that counts for SSX too. The big advances for the PS2 will come when MGS2 is released, simply because of the vastly accurate representation of real actions included in the game. This is possible because of the amount of math which the PS2 can churn through, which isn't to do with graphics. (Yes, for those of us who care little for how much better the GC or Xbox graphics look than the PS2, be content that it can handle the gameplay no bother at all.) But in terms of visual impact or presentable qualities, most people who don't appreciate the finer things in life, like melting Ice Cubes, the impact will be minimal.

As for the Gamecube, it will be more impressive visually than the Playstation 2, and it will support massive frame rates, so the F-Zero Next-Gen non-sequel, will run faster than ever before. But the system doesn't do maths at the drop of a hat. Listen to the same Ninties who told you that graphics don't matter to games a couple of years ago, and they have all becoma expert games developers, and know everything there is to know about texture compression, Hardware Transformation and Lighting, memory latency and disc buffers. All of which have everything to do with graphics, ask them about FPU calculations dedicated to AI, Physics and geometry, and that is now what doesn't count, the things which important to gameplay. Basically, what we will see from the NGC is exactly what Nintendo wanted the N64 to be, a bright, colourful and simple console, nothing too extravagent, nothing too complicated. N64 games at 60fps, some of us will be content would have been content with this a year ago.

As for the Xbox, well, it's a dark horse. People compare it to PCs all the time, but forget that Windows takes up more than 50% of your system resources at any given moment. The Xbox doesn't have Windows, so there are vastly improved levels of system resources available to the games developers. None of us can tell the capabilities of an Xbox. When you consider that the Dreamcast is no more than a PC based console without Windows, then Sega fans may begin to realise that the limited spec of the DC could produce marvelous things, what could the same console have done with a P3 733 and a geforce 3, under it's belt? You may begin to realise that the Xbox is a very exciting technical prospect. But it does have a major issue. It doesn't have any must have games, there isn't anything at the moment which will set it apart from any other system. Some will be attracted to it because of Shenmue and Jet Set Radio, but those same people can see Sonic and PSO heading for the Gamecube. So the best system has the worst games list.

So in the end, the new consoles can be narrowed down and compared to upgrading a PC.

The Playstation 2 is like taking yous PC and fitting a new processor and a not so top of the range graphics card, it will do maths like nothing else, but is limited in terms of graphical output.

The Gamecube is like spending most of your dosh on a geforce 2 graphics card, and a not so hot CPU. It will do as much math as you need, but it will struggle to do really advance calculations simultaneously.

The Xbox will be like buying the ultimate PC, better than anything else. Shame that it dosn't support PS2 software, or it would have won the console war no bother at all.

Bonus wrote:
> I didn't once say the Gamecube was crap at maths......

Well inferior, anyway.

It is good at maths,
> but the PS2 and the Xbox are better at maths, thats all. This, in the end will
> have little effect on most games, and if anyone ever gets the best out of the
> PS2, they deserve some sort of award. :D

Bah, that doesn't explain why...

Later he said:
Strafex wrote:
How is the maths irrelevant to the bit
> rating (the complexity of the binary codes - all next gen macines are 128bit),
> and the clock speed frequency (how many of these codes are processed and
> calculated per second).


Again, this is something which needs to be stamped out of console advertising. The bit length you are referring to does what exactly?? Not much........

The core CPU in the PS2 and GC as 128bit.......
The FPUs are 64bit..........
The Graphics chips are 256bit...........
The PS2 memory in/out bitrate is 2556bits (approx, I can't remember exactly).......

Bitrates count for squat unless you are comparing actual processor componeents.


I was talking about the processors, the ones in charge of AI.
Now if you're saying that the GC maths are short in the graphics department then I can go with that. That's where the small polygon count comes from and is made up by textures.

But AI is done in the main processor and the main processors performance is calculated by 2 things, the bit rate (which does have relevance as it's a measure of how the complex the binary codes are. In this case it's all even so isn't to be compared but still needs a sort of mention somewhere...)
And the clockspeed (how many calculations is pulls off per second).

If the main processor, which controls the AI can do more calculations per second, surely that gives the cube an advantage in AI...

(Even over the Xbox because some technical document which I half understand mentioned something about the Gamecube's Cache allowing it to use around 1 in of it's "ticks", while the clunky old Xbox could only use 1 in 20...

Bonus ought to know what I'm on about...)

Okay, Maybe the PS2 can handle these things better, but Nintendo and Rare are my two favourite developers. Only on GC are their games out so that's why I want one. I mean maybe PS2 can calculate all this stuff, but F-Zero X (N64) had 30 vehicles and all could be on screen at once, each has individual stats like grip, boost power, and its energy, as well as player defined acceleration/ top speed ratio AND a weight which affects damage done to enemies, speed,etc. and it managed fine and runs (I think) at 60 FPS constnt. now that soed seem a lot of calculating to me, considering each craft can also boost, which reduces health a set amount, recharge health on the pads, tkae damage from enemies and barriers, and, if travelling to fast can fly off the track when there is a (relatively small) bumb.

That seems a hell of a lot of stuff to me. and the Gc is more powerful. The point I'm saying is that does the PS2 NEED all the power? There were great games on 16 bit consoles even by todays standards, and games just as great going even further back. Will the PS2 ever use all that calculating power? I don't know. I don't know if the GC will use all its calculating power, but in the end it's not the complex calculations that make a game, it is playability. The calculations etc. may help make complex games but games do not have to be complex to be good. What I mean is PS2 may have all this potential, but it may never fully be used. In my opinion Nintendo and Rare (Sega too) are the top console developers, and also most versatile.

Ninty can make realistic racers (Wave Race, 1080), cartoony racers (mario kart), Platformers, Party type games, Adventures, shooters (space shooters eg. Lylatwars) and just about any other genre they tackle. Same with rare. They have made fighters (Killer Instinct), shooters (Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, Jet Force Gemini), Platformers, Misc games (Blast Corps) and again can make a good game from any genre they choose.

PS2 may have more POTENTIAL, but I think GC will exploit its potential to the fullest with great first and second party developers who will communicate to get best results for games. PS2 will only have third party developers, so they won't communicate to help create better games, as they are competing.

Also the Zelda example. Bad example. If the new final fantasy game had an ultra realistic movie released, that made it look virtually real, then it was changed to a cel-shaded cartoon look PS2 fans would be up in arms about it. The thing with Zelda on N64 was the worlds were so incredible to just look in wonderment at. People feel they are going to lose that sense of grandeur, etc. but after talking and discussing this a lot (I argued the point in Zelda forum in game forums) most people decided that they couldn't yet judge the game on purely graphics. And most who said stuff like 'I doubt I'll get the new Zelda now' then decided they probably would as long as gameplay wasn't affected.

There you go, again, feel free to disagree, or point out my arguments (many) weaknesses. (as I''m VERY sure you will)
:-)

Strafex wrote:
How is the maths irrelevant to the bit
> rating (the complexity of the binary codes - all next gen macines are 128bit),
> and the clock speed frequency (how many of these codes are processed and
> calculated per second).


Again, this is something which needs to be stamped out of console advertising. The bit length you are referring to does what exactly?? Not much........

The core CPU in the PS2 and GC as 128bit.......
The FPUs are 64bit..........
The Graphics chips are 256bit...........
The PS2 memory in/out bitrate is 2556bits (approx, I can't remember exactly).......

Bitrates count for squat unless you are comparing actual processor componeents.

haha, I knew Strafex would say something like that, dude in terms of hardware the Xbox beats both PS2 and Gamecube hands down, no questions asked.

I didn't once say the Gamecube was crap at maths......

It is good at maths, but the PS2 and the Xbox are better at maths, thats all. This, in the end will have little effect on most games, and if anyone ever gets the best out of the PS2, they deserve some sort of award. :D

One important point that needs to be remembered by everyone (including me), theory is nice and well, but practicality and probablility of success are much more important, and as far as consoles go, the PS2 is difficult, the Gamecube is easy, and the Xbox is familiar.

So the Gamecube has a better signal frequency on its processing chip, and with special cache RAM it uses it's ticks more efficiently that the PS2 and Xbox (according to some technical article that I sort of understand. Bonus seemed impressed by it...)

But at the end of the day, it's crap at maths?
I have no idea how this can be as all the maths are done through binary calculations through the ticks - so I thought.

I can hardly argue with Mr "I'm getting a degree in this sort of thing so nah, nah, nanah, nah!" Bonus, but an explanation wouldn't go amiss...

How is the maths irrelevant to the bit rating (the complexity of the binary codes - all next gen macines are 128bit), and the clock speed frequency (how many of these codes are processed and calculated per second).

Still, over 120 intelligent Pikmin (or Mario's in that ancient demo), seems more than strong enough for AI calculations - even if it can't calculate angles or gravity so well for some spoddy nerdy GT3 style ultra realistic driving simulator...

Sibs wrote:
with 10's (I think the figure was 50+,
> but I am unsure) of Tie fighters, Death Star turrets, etc. on screen all at
> once

Could very well be true, because Starfighter can do all thse things on the PS2 too, the graphics are just a bitty better on the Gamecube. It does look like an excellent game, I agree. One of the few things on the Gamecube which appeals to me.

Here is the point.
> Each and every Tie and turret had AI. That's over 50 different things with AI
> just on screen as well as all the others off screen. Now you may say that the AI
> then isn't too good. Wrong as far as I have heard.

As for as you have heard?? the thing is, each of the craft will be just looped through the same routines, it isn't as though the craft are all doing their each individual thinking, they will all be stuck to the same decision making criteria, meaning that the game doesn't require all that much to take care of AI. It's when you come to taking the AI, the physics, the real world manipulations into account you begin to build up a true picture of what the console has to go through, and that game in particular only has to really figure out AI, and when something has been blown up, not all that taxing on a processor. A game such as Wipeout fusion may begin to start to push the PS2 a little further with 16 vehicles on the track, eack with 42 different characteristics with handling, speed etc. All can be effected by crashing and being hit by weapons, the weapons all have trajectories etc, and 16 different weapons can be fired at once. some of the terrain is deformable, and the list goes on. That is when maths pushing power comes into effect, something the Playstation 2 does do better than the Gamecube.

I think you'll find most Ninties still believe gameplay is key.

Surely not, just look at the Zelda debate, no one seems to care that the game, if done properly could be the best adventure game of all time. Let's just hope it's not like OOT.

Also, The GC can do all these effects more easily than PS2 or Xbox (something like GC can do six effects and the processor only take one 'hit' to performance kinda thing) but the point is that it frees up more of the processor to do the stuff like AI, etc. that is important to gameplay.

Right, get this straight, the main CPUs in the Gamecube and Xbox don't calculate graphics descisions, the graphics processors handle all this, and the lighting effects. The effects which can be apllied, which you talk about is texturing. Basically the Gamecube can apply 8 different textures to a single model in a single clock cycle. These textures build up a picture of what the model will actually look like. So one texture will have a picture of what will appear on the surface, another will have bumps on it which makes the model appear to have a rough surface, or grooves etc. they can also be used to set how the model will reflect. The Xbox can also do this, so it has no advantage over the Xbox as the Nvidia ship in the Xbox is much better than the ATI chip in the Gamecube. The PS2 doesn't do this in hardware, but apparently there are algorithms which the PS2 can use to do it in software, and as it can do so many calculations already, it is barely making a hit on the performance of the CPU.

Yeah, the JAY Drive is sooooooooooo much better.

I'm not gonna go into technical stuff, but surely on Rogue Leader on the GameCube you have seen the shots, etc. with 10's (I think the figure was 50+, but I am unsure) of Tie fighters, Death Star turrets, etc. on screen all at once. The game is said to have been running smoothly too.

Here is the point. Each and every Tie and turret had AI. That's over 50 different things with AI just on screen as well as all the others off screen. Now you may say that the AI then isn't too good. Wrong as far as I have heard. The Ties (from what I've heard) move in squadrons, break away on their own when the squad is attacked, will speed up if you are on their tale, and will retreat and regroup if they escape you etc.

Now this doesn't seem like shabby AI or calculations to me, although I can't say I know the technicals of it. And anyway, I think you'll find most Ninties still believe gameplay is key. The visuals in the 'Mario Sunshine' didn't amaze me. Better than N64, but still not incredible. But yet it's one of the most anticipated GC games. Same for Pikmin.

Also, The GC can do all these effects more easily than PS2 or Xbox (something like GC can do six effects and the processor only take one 'hit' to performance kinda thing) but the point is that it frees up more of the processor to do the stuff like AI, etc. that is important to gameplay.

As you can tell I am a Ninty. But this doesn't mean my argument is biased, I am stating facts as I see them.

PS feel free to shout abuse at me and correct any of the blatantly stupid errors I have made.
;-)

At least post your reasons for disagreeing, I can't be bothered sitting reading a list of "well done, nice post Bonus" posts tonight. I'm in the mood for a good arguement.