By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 23 October 2014
Edit Thread
fatslob-:O said:
curl-6 said:

I own both games, bump mapping is not rare, is it abundant, covering the entire surface of levels like Hoth and the Death Star, as well as character and vehicle models. As for the vids, their excessive video compression obscures half the bumpmaps.

And Rogue 2 pushes 12-15 million polyons a second, (http://au.ign.com/articles/2001/08/29/rogue-leader-chat-transcript ) Rogue 3 I recall pushed 20 million though I can't find the original source for that. They were high poly games in addition to pulling an obscene amount of (for the gen) high end effects.

The depth to surfaces you get from bumpmaps was missing on PS2, which in conjunction with the lower res texures made its games look comparatively flat.

Video compression does almost nothing to bump maps seeing as how their not SUB PIXEL effects ... 

Per SCENE means nothing. I want to know per FRAME since that's the most important metric for visual fidelity and the models in rogue squadron look really simplistic in comparison to some PS2 games and a lot of xbox games.

In terms of pixel quality, the PS2 did leave some more to be desired but it didn't exactly make the GC score with a home run against the competitor when it could do whatever it wanted with the power ... 

They don't need to be sub pixel to be blurred over.

There is no PS2 game  know o that does as much technologically as Rogue 2 and 3, because PS2 was less capable hardware. It wasn't massively weaker, but the Gamecube did have a noticeable advantage.