fazz on 20 April 2008
| dsoverpsp said: y is the PS2 potential and actual difference so great? |
Because it's a twisted real number. That number can be achieved if you use flat polygons with no lighting at all. But who would make a game like that anyway? Also, the CPU on the PS2 was very good for that kind of things, but as it did pretty much everything else too, better results could never be achieved. It was a faulty design.
OT:
Nintendo never revealed the raw polygon output of the GC, and calculating the real-world performance of all of them, depends on many factors. It's estimated that the Xbox had a very similar real-world polygong count to the GC, a bit higher probably. The PS2 in any case was the lowest (plus everything else looked worse)
