The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Dreamcast. PS2. Gamecube. X-Box. etc etc etc
I'll make this as simple as i can:
Dreamcast came out to early and is obviously underpowered.
PS2, once superior now looks slightly less amazing.
Gamecube, it's ugly and a pointless compromise between the powerful X-Box and the commercial PS2.
X-Box-By the time this comes out Sony would have started breathing rumors of another console.
The truth is there are too many. None of them are going to domminate the market as playstation has. All will have their pros and cons, and i know that there are plenty of people who aren't going to bother with any of them.
I will be buying a PS2 purely because i have faith in Sony to satisfy, will i regret this move? We will see. I have a clear picture of the next couple of years in the games industry, consider all my points and i think you will see where i am comming from. Thanks for reading.
I'll make this as simple as i can:
Dreamcast came out to early and is obviously underpowered.
PS2, once superior now looks slightly less amazing.
Gamecube, it's ugly and a pointless compromise between the powerful X-Box and the commercial PS2.
X-Box-By the time this comes out Sony would have started breathing rumors of another console.
The truth is there are too many. None of them are going to domminate the market as playstation has. All will have their pros and cons, and i know that there are plenty of people who aren't going to bother with any of them.
I will be buying a PS2 purely because i have faith in Sony to satisfy, will i regret this move? We will see. I have a clear picture of the next couple of years in the games industry, consider all my points and i think you will see where i am comming from. Thanks for reading.
Page:
> I think that the PS2 will go the same way as the Saturn.
> It's not certain to happen but it share's all the same symptons...
Of course, it's possible with *any* machine; the X-Box and GameCube may not sell more than 10,000 units... it's possible, but not very likely.
The problem with the Saturn was that no-one developed for it, almost from the start; the same simply cannot be said of PS2.
The developers expect it to be huge, so they will develop for it. Because they will develop for it, more people are likely to buy it. The more people buy it, the more games will be developed... and so on.
If there were only, say, ten launch games and only a handful in development, I would agree with you in an instant - but it's not the case. PS2 may not be the greatest console on the market in a years time, but I believe it will hold its fair share of the market.
> It's not certain to happen but it share's all the same symptons...
Of course, it's possible with *any* machine; the X-Box and GameCube may not sell more than 10,000 units... it's possible, but not very likely.
The problem with the Saturn was that no-one developed for it, almost from the start; the same simply cannot be said of PS2.
The developers expect it to be huge, so they will develop for it. Because they will develop for it, more people are likely to buy it. The more people buy it, the more games will be developed... and so on.
If there were only, say, ten launch games and only a handful in development, I would agree with you in an instant - but it's not the case. PS2 may not be the greatest console on the market in a years time, but I believe it will hold its fair share of the market.
> But what about the fractal thingumygigs ie backgrounds clouds
> ,wind/smoke/dust ,etc not behaving the same way twice(excluding
> chaos effect which our puny brains can't percieve)?
Same kind of thing - the power of the new chips means that they can be calculated in real time, and so don't have to follow pre-programmed parameters.
It all comes down to raw processing power and number-crunching ability, just as with any other processing - graphics, sound, etc. The more you can do in the same amount of time, the better things get.
> ,wind/smoke/dust ,etc not behaving the same way twice(excluding
> chaos effect which our puny brains can't percieve)?
Same kind of thing - the power of the new chips means that they can be calculated in real time, and so don't have to follow pre-programmed parameters.
It all comes down to raw processing power and number-crunching ability, just as with any other processing - graphics, sound, etc. The more you can do in the same amount of time, the better things get.
I think that beachpad has been reading to much digitiser.
He now thinks that none of the consoles are really worth getting. (then again, if he had been watching digitiser then he wouldn't have ANY faith in Sony!)
I think that the PS2 will go the same way as the Saturn.
It's not certain to happen but it share's all the same symptons...
He now thinks that none of the consoles are really worth getting. (then again, if he had been watching digitiser then he wouldn't have ANY faith in Sony!)
I think that the PS2 will go the same way as the Saturn.
It's not certain to happen but it share's all the same symptons...
Oh so your here as well Babylonian, where's Grix and Ghostface?
ghostface wrote:
> So whats the difference between that and what the emotion chip does?
Assuming that you're talking about the PS2's Emotion Engine chip, it actually does nothing - on its own.
Like any other chip, it needs the code to tell it what to do. The 'advantage' it has is that it can process huge amounts of data very, very quickly; in theory, *any* chip can do the same job - it's just that the Emotion Engine does it quick enough to make it worthwhile.
For example, Gran Turismo 1 & 2 on PSone process a lot of physics data to achieve the 'realistic' handling of the cars, but the results are limited by the overall speed of processing on the PSone - for example, only sampling controller input every 1/30th of a second, and applying it to what's happening in the game.
With GT2000/GT3 on PS2, the Emotion Engine handles twice the amount of data - every 1/60th of a second, and so controller input and physics modelling is performed at twice the rate, giving smoother, more accurate control, calculating better physics responses, and making the car much more 'realistic' in the game environment.
Err... hope that makes sense!
> So whats the difference between that and what the emotion chip does?
Assuming that you're talking about the PS2's Emotion Engine chip, it actually does nothing - on its own.
Like any other chip, it needs the code to tell it what to do. The 'advantage' it has is that it can process huge amounts of data very, very quickly; in theory, *any* chip can do the same job - it's just that the Emotion Engine does it quick enough to make it worthwhile.
For example, Gran Turismo 1 & 2 on PSone process a lot of physics data to achieve the 'realistic' handling of the cars, but the results are limited by the overall speed of processing on the PSone - for example, only sampling controller input every 1/30th of a second, and applying it to what's happening in the game.
With GT2000/GT3 on PS2, the Emotion Engine handles twice the amount of data - every 1/60th of a second, and so controller input and physics modelling is performed at twice the rate, giving smoother, more accurate control, calculating better physics responses, and making the car much more 'realistic' in the game environment.
Err... hope that makes sense!
I don't know, but i went to Pdark and saw a spooky new picture of Joanna, the game has been changed since it went to Japan! Imagine what the speech is like!
Page: