Graphics: Gamecube vs. Xbox vs. PS2 vs. Dreamcast

[TheBardsSong]

dahuman said:

TheBardsSong said:

I think they looked impressive, for a machine like the PS2, I still remember MGS3 FPS dropping like a bitch all the time too, it was a shitty thing for me who was so used to PC gaming, but it's still my 2nd fav MGS, and really, you can't compare those to xbox and cube games at their peak, it just didn't look as good.

I don't know. I think MGS3 looks better than most of the GC library. The game really had so much going on screen at the same time (like individually rendered blades of grass, tons of trees, etc.), and the faces were incredibly detailed. They also continued to look damn impressive during extreme close-ups in the cinematics (which I'm assuming weren't FMV).

There are very few GC games I would say look better than MGS3.

Also, sorry for chopping your name. Not too familliar with this site.

The problem is that the trade off of FPS was a big mood breaker for me in that game, I'm all good with the pretty and effects, but crappy FPS is generally a deal breaker, I keep telling myself to deal with it on consoles for the most part due to them being weaker but I get super pissed off if a game can't run 60+ FPS on my PC lol, like that mother fucker TERA with their shitty coding that drops me to 30FPS at times, it's like come on, you are using UE3, modified yes, but it's fucking UE3, and you even refuse to work with AMD to make crossfire work, fuck you Blue Hole! Off topic, anyways, if that thing ran at a constant 30FPS, sure, not the 60FPS that I want, even the 30FPS would have made me happy, but no, even most current gen console games can't do that shit properly, what shit.

The performance didn't seem that poor to me, but I do recall a few rare instances of frame drop while pushing aside grass. I'm also not used to 60FPS of course :P