WOW that looks awesome. Perhaps it is time for me to acquire another DCBootaaay wrote:Theres a game coming out later this month infact, a horizontal shooter called Dux;kingmohd84 wrote:This is very interesting...
Since DC is now considered is an old system and probably around the only good console that never was, you think some people in the future might release games for it?
http://www.blog.hucast.net/
http://www.hucast.net/
It's a fan made game that comes on CD-R - but theres very little chance of fully-fledged companies releasing anything for the DC as SEGA no longer produce or licence GD-ROMS.
dreamcast graphics
-
nocturnalnerd
- 64-bit
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 11:51 pm
- Location: Gaffney, SC
-
The Apprentice
- 128-bit
- Posts: 960
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 3:52 pm
- Location: Wishing I was in California again
While this statement is likely correct, it's important to realize that the game was invisioned, developed, and released for Xbox, PS2, and PC hardware. So yes, if you look at the required specifications for the PC version, you'll see that the Dreamcast is simply out of its league.nateup2 wrote: GTA3 would not run on a DC like it does on XBOX.
However, you'll also notice that many of us in the past few pages agree that Shenmue is also a graphically stunning game. It is amazing what can be accomplished if the developer uses the smallest specifications available and pushes the system to its limits.
By that logic, if the developers had focused on a Dreamcast port from the begining, it might have been possible to duplicate the game on Dreamcast hardware.
Since none of us are developers, nobody can truly say whether or not the system could have handled GTAIII.
EDIT: Whoops, just realized that while I was busy tackling the issue of the moment, I didn't really talk about the purpose of the thread, which of course is the graphical capabilities of the Dreamcast. While I did talk about this earlier on in the thread, I can also apply the above I wrote a few minutes ago's logic to the concept I support on the whole.
The Dreamcast was never pushed to its limits. Developers never had the chance to show what the machine could really do. Although the specs show the Dreamcast as slower and weaker than the competition, sometimes true feats of programming are accomplished when developers use the weaker hardware because the limits are more obvious.
For example, take a look at Metal Gear Solid and compare it to Metal Gear Solid 2. MGS pushed every limit of the PS1 in so many ways that at some points I honestly couldn't believe my eyes. However, MGS2 came out kind of early in the PS2's life, and when you compare that to MGS3, MGS2 looks terrible. Once again, MGS3 pushed the limits of the PS2, and it was mind blowing.
My point is that the more a developer understands its limitations (not just "how many polygons I can create at once" but "how many objects with this behavior can I have moving while event x is happening") the more the developer can wow its audience. I think that if the Dreamcast could have stayed in the race, It would have kept up with the competitors in tearms of graphics.
It's lot like developers see what they can do with the machine in 1999, and in 2008 they're continuing to mae games that stay withen those limits. As time goes on, developers will find a way around limitations, and the weaker systems will look just as great as the slightly more powerful ones.
That's a long-winded way of saying that if the Dreamcast was still around, it would look like how the PS2 looks compared to the Xbox and Gamecube.
Hatta wrote:Die Hard Arcade has Deep Scan in it. That's like retro inside retro. They must have heard we liked retro (dawg).
Jrecee wrote:What I like to do is knit little sweaters to put on the games.
i dunno , all this show that dreamcast had more in it that people gave it credit.
If I was sega, i would really think about releasing a dreamcast handheld...maybe its a way to make them put a leg in the hardware business (and kick sony out , what goes around comes around)...
there is 2 handhelds only, i would say it can compete with psp....
since ds is so popular, i say go against psp....its like difference of wii and 360 in a way
and dreamcast name turns a lot of heads!
If I was sega, i would really think about releasing a dreamcast handheld...maybe its a way to make them put a leg in the hardware business (and kick sony out , what goes around comes around)...
there is 2 handhelds only, i would say it can compete with psp....
since ds is so popular, i say go against psp....its like difference of wii and 360 in a way
and dreamcast name turns a lot of heads!
Are you sure? Look at the draw in that already exists pretty heavily in games that attempt to display long distances.(really not that long) I can't think of any games on DC that show as many objects at as far of a distance as GTA on Xbox... or even remotely close to it.GagaMan wrote:The only thing that's stop a game like GTA 3 running on the Dreamcast is the space capacity of the discs. If the Dreamcast ran DVDs though, who knows?
I agree that programming can make a very large difference, but as we see evident in the long lifes of other systems... it is most likely not limitless. To say that, with the right programming and the simple addition of a DVD rom, 360 and PS3 games could run just as good on a DC is a bit outlandish. Get together some programmers from 2050 who like to accomplish feats like this for liesure and bragging rights, and sure... anything is possible.
I personally think the early release titles like Sonic Adventure and Soul Cal did a pretty good job of pulling the most out of that system.
-
The Apprentice
- 128-bit
- Posts: 960
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 3:52 pm
- Location: Wishing I was in California again
Good point, I didn't think of that. I don't think the Dreamcast disk could handle the size of GTAIII without some serious reworking. I'm not saying it can't be done, large game worlds have been accomplished on DC hardware (Jet Grind Radio comes to mind).GagaMan wrote:The only thing that's stop a game like GTA 3 running on the Dreamcast is the space capacity of the discs. If the Dreamcast ran DVDs though, who knows?
The Dreamcast running 360 is not what I meant in my earlier post. I was saying that if the developers knew how to work around the system's limitations, they could produce games as graphically advanced as any modern PS2 game.nateup2 wrote:I agree that programming can make a very large difference, but as we see evident in the long lifes of other systems... it is most likely not limitless. To say that, with the right programming and the simple addition of a DVD rom, 360 and PS3 games could run just as good on a DC is a bit outlandish. Get together some programmers from 2050 who like to accomplish feats like this for liesure and bragging rights, and sure... anything is possible.
I personally think the early release titles like Sonic Adventure and Soul Cal did a pretty good job of pulling the most out of that system.
Also, the original Sonic Adventure doesn't even come close to pushing the DC to its limits. Remember that Sonic Adventure 2 also came out on the system, and as much of a step up as it was, it still doesn't truly push the system to its limit.
Soul Caliber is a brilliant looking game, and I can agree that it probably took advantage of every hardware trick namco had ever dreamed up, but if you look at other games of the generation, you can see that programmers moved past their original limitations.
Soul Caliber may not have been the system's true limit. I think Jet Grind Radio may have come closer to the Dreamcast's true limit.
Hatta wrote:Die Hard Arcade has Deep Scan in it. That's like retro inside retro. They must have heard we liked retro (dawg).
Jrecee wrote:What I like to do is knit little sweaters to put on the games.
Yeah keep in mind also most consoles don't see their limits pushed to the wall until the 4th year or so. PS2 got jaggy control on software, just imagine what dreamcast could've done.
Afterp laying PSO for a long time, and being a long time player of Final Fantasy the grapics aren't much different. Honestly There isn't much on the ps2 that I don't think could've been done on the dreamcast, just likely more disc swapping a'la Gamecube.
As for the Xbox vs Dreamcast, compare xbox to ps2.
Afterp laying PSO for a long time, and being a long time player of Final Fantasy the grapics aren't much different. Honestly There isn't much on the ps2 that I don't think could've been done on the dreamcast, just likely more disc swapping a'la Gamecube.
As for the Xbox vs Dreamcast, compare xbox to ps2.
-
lisalover1
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 4960
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:50 am
- Location: Redmond, WA
- Contact:
-
bustaballs
- 24-bit
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:16 am
- Location: Claremore, OK
- Contact:
Re: dreamcast graphics
People seem to forget that the PS2 isn't all that much more powerful than the DC. If developed properly, I'm sure the DC could handle the majority of the PS2 library. Remember that the GC also had limited storage.
Re: dreamcast graphics
Always been a what if for me: what would Dreamcast games look like if the system lasted a few more years? Considering all the Sonic games after Adventure 2 were downgraded graphics-wise based on the fact they started to go multi format, taking the PS2 into consideration, that and Gun Valkyrie on the X-box started development as a Dreamcast game..
