Mozgus wrote:Like I've said in other threads, Rez is superior on PS2. Savor it, because nearly all other DC-to-PS2 ports are crap.
superior? how?
DC version is locked at 30fps. PS2 runs at the full 60. Makes a huge difference in a game like this. Also the analog control just works better. Don't ask me how.
thats a first... never seen the ps2 actually out perform dreamcast on any games that came out on both systems. (especially since they couldn't figure out how to do anti-aliasing until late in its life)
game is on rails i dont see how fps would matter. but yeah i can see how ps2 analog is better.
gennss wrote:thats a first... never seen the ps2 actually out perform dreamcast on any games that came out on both systems. (especially since they couldn't figure out how to do anti-aliasing until late in its life)
game is on rails i dont see how fps would matter. but yeah i can see how ps2 analog is better.
FPS makes a difference. Play it and see for yourself. Maybe Rez runs better on PS2 because Dreamcast was known for having more RAM for textures than PS2, and Rez is virtually texture-less.
gennss wrote:thats a first... never seen the ps2 actually out perform dreamcast on any games that came out on both systems. (especially since they couldn't figure out how to do anti-aliasing until late in its life)
game is on rails i dont see how fps would matter. but yeah i can see how ps2 analog is better.
FPS makes a difference. Play it and see for yourself. Maybe Rez runs better on PS2 because Dreamcast was known for having more RAM for textures than PS2, and Rez is virtually texture-less.
i've played dc and xbla versions, but im kinda blind so that may be it. plays smooth to me.
The Dreamcast supposedly had a better sound card than the PS2, so the DC version has better sound, and with a VGA cable, better graphics. Also, you could have 2 rumble packs in the DC version, when even one DC pack was better than the PS2's wimpy Dualshock. Also, I still think the DC analog is better than the PS2's. It just feels smoother. I don't like the PS2 version; it's harder to get into the game when most of the stuff has been toned down.
lisalover1 wrote:The Dreamcast supposedly had a better sound card than the PS2, so the DC version has better sound, and with a VGA cable, better graphics. Also, you could have 2 rumble packs in the DC version, when even one DC pack was better than the PS2's wimpy Dualshock. Also, I still think the DC analog is better than the PS2's. It just feels smoother. I don't like the PS2 version; it's harder to get into the game when most of the stuff has been toned down.
Have you actually played both versions, or are you just talking out of your ass? The only fact you got right was the VGA support. And it's not a "sound card", it's the sequencing engine in the game. I have a good setup, and I was able to notice an extremely small difference in the music on PS2, but I wouldn't call it worse. Just different. 99% of the players would never notice, or give a shit. It still sounds better than nearly all other PS2 games, which is a minor miracle. PS2 is notorious for down-sampling audio (due to ram constraints I assume). Even the latest GGXX Accent Core Plus sounds fucking gross compared to the old GGX on Dreamcast.
Now I have played both, and the cursor moves faster in the ps2 version vs the DC. Does that make it better? No, it's just seems to move quicker. As far as the sound goes. I didnt notice much difference. But i guess I didnt listen to it that closely. Doesn't matter either game sounds great! hail to REZ. One of the best shooters ever!
gennss wrote:thats a first... never seen the ps2 actually out perform dreamcast on any games that came out on both systems. (especially since they couldn't figure out how to do anti-aliasing until late in its life)
game is on rails i dont see how fps would matter. but yeah i can see how ps2 analog is better.
FPS makes a difference. Play it and see for yourself. Maybe Rez runs better on PS2 because Dreamcast was known for having more RAM for textures than PS2, and Rez is virtually texture-less.
FPS does matter a great deal, I have trouble playing the original Panzer Dragoon over the 2nd one due to framerate. The first one makes my head hurt w/ some of the slowdown it gets.
I own and have played both the DC and PS2 version. I honestly don't notice the framerate difference, and actually, on the same display, the lines look less 'jagged' to me on the DC version. It could be because the PS2 is on component video and that dreamcast is only hooked up S-video, but I really feel that the graphics are smoother looking on the DC. I have played it VGA as well but not extensively, I like playing rez on a display larger than my 21 inch monitor (which gets used for my 2nd dreamcast exclusively)
edit- played them again, ps2 does look better on a normal TV, and seems to run faster.
Need FreeMCboot? I'll install it on your PS2 Memory Card for free if you cover postage both ways.
Consoles: I have too much stuff
Arcade: No seriously, I have too much stuff. Someone grab a shovel and dig me out of my basement.
I was just playing this last night switching back and forth between the dreamcast and the ps2 (well ps3 accuatly). My ps3 displays the game brighter then the dreamcast. Both are hooked up via s-video. The dreamcast might be a bit more difined in the jaggies. Ill still favor the ps2 version.
