Pemalite said:
JackHandy said:
I didn't say it was as powerful. I said there were a few things that it could do better, which is true.
As for the games, well... that's just my opinion. I did think, for the most part, that the best-looking Xbox games looked better (graphically speaking) than the best looking Gamecube games but not by a huge margin. It wasn't night and day like it was between PS2 and Xbox. Now those two systems were a gap apart. If you don't believe me, go find a comparison video of the first Splinter Cell on PS2 and Xbox and see for yourself.
|
Every device has aspects where they can beat the competition in regards to their fundamental hardware nuances.
I.E. The Playstation 2 had superior optical disks over Gamecube.
Or the PS2 had higher system memory bandwidth.
But at the end of the day... A single aspect isn't the sum of it's parts.
OG Xbox games like Morrowinds pixel-shader water and truly open world... Doom 3's heavy use of stencil shadows, Half Life 2's texture work, Chronicles of Riddicks amazing character animations/facial work which could arguably beat some early 7th gen attempts, FarCry's heavy foliage and HDR lighting...
And even Conker with it's incredible fur shader and it's single ray-traced cone light model.
If you had an OG Xbox... You knew you were playing on hardware that would provide a glimpse of what 7th gen was going to be about... Sadly the console didn't make sales records so it's games support could have been better to show the hardware off... But same could be said about the gamecube.
Where Nintendo's strengths lay is that it generally didn't pursue hyper-realistic graphics, so it's games tended to age better, even if they were technically inferior.
|
Nintendo arcade roots always put playing in the first place.
Last edited by Agente42 - on 22 September 2021
