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

lilbroex

Banned

23,724

2137 posts since 27/12/10

Recent Badges:

Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Hit And Run 15 comments posted on VGChartz news articles.
Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Congratulations on Pressing Start! Score your first game in your collection.
Open For Business Earned 10 badges.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.

lilbroex on 18 August 2012

Jazz2K said:

I'm sorry but the Xbox was without a doubt the most powerful and it showed. Although GC could put really beautiful games it couldn't handle the best Xbox could offer. Framerates was better and jaggies were less apparent on Xbox. Also there was some particles effects not possible on other platforms and some blur effects. Everything was so smooth and like someone said they could output at a higher resolution.

Only on Xbox could you get graphics like these

Project Gotham 2

Rallisports Challenge 2

Black

Ninja Gaiden Black

Kakuto Chojin

Conquer Live and Reloaded

Chronicles of Riddick

Some of the geometry on Xbox games weren't even possible on other platforms, games like Splinter Cell Chaos Theory had landscapes different from both GC and PS2 because they weren't powerful enough. Some lightning found in games like Doom, SC, Riddick couldn't be found in competitors games. Every multiplat games were far better on Xbox. There were impressive games like F-Zero GX on GC but nothing that could surpass the best Xbox had to offer... damn I even remember games like Burnout 4 which were simply stunning (IGN gave a better graphic score for the PS2 version simply because it was impressive for a PS2 title eventhough it wasn't on par with the Xbox version).

False. Don't post bullshots to someone who knows the score. Most of the geometry in Xbox games was extremely "FLAT" with bump mapped textures, and empty evironments.

All of the indentions on the armor are completely flat. They just look like they have depth because of the texture effects.

The xbox couldn't touch the GC when it came to pushing geometry. These surfaces aren't bump mapped on.

They tried to port this game to the Xbox but it couldnt handle it without sever downgrades so they scrapped it. On a technical level, this game pushed more last gen than any game on any console in existence. No other game on the GC, PS2, Xbox or Dreamcast technically outperfomed this.

ghost_of_fazz

Currently Offline

4,398

1113 posts since 18/06/10

Recent Badges:

3 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 3 years.
50 in One Add a total of 50 games to your collection.
Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Site Veteran Has been a VGChartz member for over 5 years.
Mirror Image Awarded for uploading an avatar.
Everything's Falling Into Place Add a total of 100 games to your collection.

ghost_of_fazz on 18 August 2012

lilbroex said:

Nem said:
I had all 4 systems and the gamecube had the best graphics in my opinion.

I remember beeing very impressed by starfox adventures and mario sunshine.

Indeed. Peaches castle says it all. It didn't tell people what the GC could do. It showed them.

It's the first time I've seen this, really interesting

lilbroex

Banned

23,724

2137 posts since 27/12/10

Recent Badges:

One Piece at a Time Add your first game to your collection.
Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Hit And Run 15 comments posted on VGChartz news articles.
'Ello Princess! Awarded for signing up.
50 in One Add a total of 50 games to your collection.
One Small 'Splosion Author of 100 forum threads.

lilbroex on 18 August 2012

ClassicGamingWizzz said:

lilbroex said:

ClassicGamingWizzz said:

gamecube to me has the better graphics overall , xbox have nice graphics too but artstyle of the game was horrible , from those shots only concker to me is apeling but you forgot jinx the cat .

you miss from the ps2 final fantasy 10 and 12 , blown away when i saw those, ratchet and clanck silent hill 3

etc...

Ah, my friend, let me introduce you to a phrase known as "cutscene graphics". You see, in cutscenes a lot of games(especially those made by Square Enix) used a different set of modals and environment textures that they can't actuall use while the game is playing normal.

See this face for Yuna in FFX-2

Now see the one of her standard character modal while you are playing the game. The square hair, the pointy nose, the eyes, the flat mouth ...just the hole face is far lower in quality. Her arms are much more blocky. And the biggest thing of all(even though you can't see it) in the top screenshot, she has 5 fingers.

The modal on the left is the one you see most of the time in the game. You never actually play with the one on the right.

Them breasts...

Yes and your point is ? did you spend 20 minutes building a quote to tell me a thing i know , i beat both of the games 3 times you know

still think is one of the best looking games last gen and with a great artstyle.

You just proved my point about peoples understanding of tech in tech discussion. This thread is discussing the technical capability differences not what you think it the prettiest or has a great artstyle, unless I am mistaken about what the first post says.

novasonic

Currently Offline

9,396

1573 posts since 27/11/08

Recent Badges:

10 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 10 years.
Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Everything's Falling Into Place Add a total of 100 games to your collection.
The Nuts & Bolts Add a total of 25 games to your collection.
13 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 13 years.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.

novasonic on 18 August 2012

If you want to compare pure horsepower, it goes Xbox > GameCube > PlayStation 2 > DreamCast. How good the games end up looking really depends on developer talent though.

8th gen predictions. (made early 2014)
PS4: 60-65m
WiiU: 30-35m
X1: 30-35m
3DS: 80-85m
PSV: 15-20m

lilbroex

Banned

23,724

2137 posts since 27/12/10

Recent Badges:

Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Hit And Run 15 comments posted on VGChartz news articles.
Don't Forget To Save 10 status updates.
It's a Start Bank a Total of 2,000 VG$.
Congratulations on Pressing Start! Score your first game in your collection.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.

lilbroex on 18 August 2012

ClassicGamingWizzz said:

yes yes

"God of War only looks incredible to people who don't know what they are looking at and Sony fans"

now is this

"Final Fantasy X only looks incredible to people who don't know what they are looking at and Sony fans"

lol dude give me a break ...

You give me a break.

I said nothing of the sort about Final Fantasy. All I did was explain a technical aspect of the game. Don't make up things and say that I said them.

What was it they call people who resort to personal attacks when they can't think of a way to win an argument again?

lilbroex

Banned

23,724

2137 posts since 27/12/10

Recent Badges:

50 in One Add a total of 50 games to your collection.
First Rung Of The Ladder Earned 10,000 gamrPoints
The Nuts & Bolts Add a total of 25 games to your collection.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.
One Piece at a Time Add your first game to your collection.
Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.

lilbroex on 18 August 2012

novasonic said:
If you want to compare pure horsepower, it goes Xbox > GameCube > PlayStation 2 > DreamCast. How good the games end up looking really depends on developer talent though.

No the GC is stronger as far as pure horsepower goes. This has been proven in practice.

The only areas the Xbox exceeded the GC in were storage capacity and anti aliasing which apparently made all of the difference to most people.

tonymarraffa

Currently Offline

11,758

1063 posts since 05/12/11

Recent Badges:

10 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 10 years.
Watch Your Back! Received 10,000 profile views.
MasterRater Score a total of 250 games in your collection.
First Rung Of The Ladder Earned 10,000 gamrPoints
4 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 4 years.
Open For Business Earned 10 badges.

Currently Playing:

The Outer Worlds (XOne)
Gears 5 (XOne)
Halo: The Master Chief Collection (XOne)
Ecco the Dolphin (XBL)

tonymarraffa on 18 August 2012

Looking at pure system specs it's Xbox, Gamecube, Ps2,Dreamcast.

novasonic

Currently Offline

9,396

1573 posts since 27/11/08

Recent Badges:

6 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 6 years.
Completed Persona 100% completed profile.
7 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 7 years.
Back of the Net Score a total of 100 games in your collection.
16 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 16 years.
Everything's Falling Into Place Add a total of 100 games to your collection.

novasonic on 18 August 2012

lilbroex said:

novasonic said:
If you want to compare pure horsepower, it goes Xbox > GameCube > PlayStation 2 > DreamCast. How good the games end up looking really depends on developer talent though.

No the GC is stronger as far as pure horsepower goes. This has been proven in practice.

The only areas the Xbox exceeded the GC in were storage capacity and anti aliasing which apparently made all of the difference to most people.

Yes, the Xbox was a crudely build beast that couldn't reach its full potential and the GameCube was a finely tuned machine. But if you strickly line up the numbers on paper, the Xbox has the edge.

8th gen predictions. (made early 2014)
PS4: 60-65m
WiiU: 30-35m
X1: 30-35m
3DS: 80-85m
PSV: 15-20m

lilbroex

Banned

23,724

2137 posts since 27/12/10

Recent Badges:

First Rung Of The Ladder Earned 10,000 gamrPoints
'Ello Princess! Awarded for signing up.
Congratulations on Pressing Start! Score your first game in your collection.
One Small 'Splosion Author of 100 forum threads.
It's a Start Bank a Total of 2,000 VG$.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.

lilbroex on 18 August 2012

tonymarraffa said:
Looking at pure system specs it's Xbox, Gamecube, Ps2,Dreamcast.

No, the GC had higher specs. Most don't know how to read the specs.

The Xbox has a 32-bit 733 MHz Pentium 3 based celeron which does 1 process per cycle like all Intel processors.

The GC has a 64-bit 486 Mhz PowerPC processor that does "3" processes per cycle. It also has other enhancement features that the Xbox processor does not possess.

The processor in the GC is over twice as strong as the one in the Xbox.

The Xbox uses a 233 MHz GPU with a shader modal 1.1 variant

The GC uses a 162 MHz GPU with an 8 stage TEV

TEV's can produce much higher level effects at a fraction of the resource cost compared to a standardized Shader Modal. The thing is that TEV's have to be manually programmed with custom made shaders. This is complex, time consuming and expensive to do. That is why most devs didn't use it.

The Wii also posess an 8 stage tev with twice the bandwith. The Wii suffered from the same problem with devs. Most didn't know how to program it and didn't want to spend the money figure it out.

The Xbox had 64 MB DDR SDRAM at 200 MHz

The GC has 24 MB MoSys 1T-SRAM at 324 MHz, 64-bit bus, 2.7 GB/s bandwidth| A 3 MB 1T-SRAM cache| 16 MB DRAM for framebuffer and audio

The GC could load data at a speed that was around 3 time what Xbox could. It simply couldn't load as much which is where the first storage limiation comes in.