Printable View
Lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
http://s21.postimg.org/sn260q1w7/Untitled.png
http://s7.postimg.org/w7ic45qxn/Untitled.png
can you ever say there are Saturn games that look like the saturn shenmue video?Quote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Occasional? It happens enough times for it to be noticeable. I didn't own an N64, but I borrowed it for a year from my brother. I played the crap out of Zelda, include my little brother-in-laws who'd come over to play it. Sub 20's might be an exaggeration, but "occasional" isn't accurate either. I do own an N64 now, but I've never powered the thing up since I only have one cart for it.Quote:
Those games don't usually run at "sub 20 fps"; that's just an occasional thing.
As for the Shinmue on the Saturn; has anyone ever played it (found prototype)? Or is it just that one video? The character faces look great, but outside of that it doesn't seem too impressive. The frame rate looks low too.
soulis: Those shots look pretty good.
what's the point in that? saturn showed it could do that with just 6 months of development time in 97 according to yu suzuki himselfQuote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
They'll fight you for the corners in Gran Turismo 2. You'll often rub a little paint if you drive too close to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barone
The amount of cars don't matter. They all pretty much drive their path until you come into their zone. Nascar 98 had cars that reacted to you being near them, and you can even upset their rear draft that'll make them lose control and drop out from in front of you. The Nascar games have a ton more cars on the track.Quote:
IDK if the 5th gen consoles had enough CPU resources to implement really aggressive AI at that level of complexity. I really don't know. And WDC has two extra cars on track compared to GT2.
Do you watch a lot of Nascar?Quote:
That's not really a bad thing, though. Yes, I'd like the AI to be more aggressive than it is, but the AI cars do some beautiful, realistic looking racing lines.
GT racing is very different from, let's say, NASCAR (or stock car in general) racing (I'm talking about non-oval circuits, of course). There's faaaaaar less blocking and contact.
GT cars are not supposed to sustain a lot of damage. Once you touch another car, you're very likely to have thrown your entire race out of the window.
The cost of those cars is also a factor; they're FAR more expensive than the stock car ones. FAR more advanced technologically speaking.
I know that WDC doesn't implement car damage, but to say that its AI is not complex because it doesn't try to block you when you're significantly faster than the AI car; it's a bad stretch IMO.
There's a lot more than just blocking and driving a line. You have 40 cars jockeying for position, not only for the front of the line, but also for push/pull drafts and avoiding side drafts. Yeah, Nascar has its road courses with lots of cars fighting (not a whole lot of bumping) for position on the track. You'll have cars that are many laps behind, because of the limited passing opportunities. You should try out Nascar 98 on Playstation.
A stock car costs around $150,000 per build, with tires costing about $20,000 per race. Each team has about 4 cars they use, with different setups for different styles of tracks. They spend the entire off season building and testing each car, which really adds up to costs in the millions. They are not trying to intentionally run into each other, because the loss of a car can be a major setback for a team.
Nascar 98 on the Playstation and Saturn.Quote:
Now watch this at 27:55 and on, see the contact which happens there and how the AI reacts to it:
There's not many 5th gen console games which implement AI like that. To begin with, none of Saturn games do. None of them AFAIK.
On the PS1, IDK if anything other than the GT games have that. Maybe NFSIII and NFSIV but they're a bit simplified on that one aspect IMO.
It may seem like a simple thing but it's not. You have the AI reacting like a real driver to a pretty substantial impact, with realistic car weight, traction and suspension model affecting the whole thing.
You can skip ahead to @ 8:40. You can see how several cars react to being bumped into and will slow down when you cut in front of them.
Sega Rally's weight shift is not simple. The first track has a jump where if you land wrong, it will cause the rear to sway hard and you'll have to adjust to get your car back into a straight line. You'll sometimes your car have one rear tire lifting off of the surface in a hard corner. You really don't see much, if any body shift in WDC. The whole car turns, as if it had a pin in the middle of the roof and it was spinning off of a center axis, unlike what a real car would do. Sega Rally, you can see that the front wheels dictate the direction of the body sways, and that they are the center of the cars movement.Quote:
That's not true. It's the opposite.
Sega Rally has weight shift and terrain-sensitive traction but the weight transferring to the traction is far simpler than WDC's. WDC also implements 4-point suspension and Sega Rally doesn't have it AFAIK.
It doesn't go against logic. Every one of those racing games try to put walls, buildings, or banners above/in front to obstruct the far off view, where the pop-up happens. The closer objects use more polygons and better textures. The far off stuff uses less polygons and less detailed textures. The side stuff that is farther away doesn't really change much in size or texture quality as it come closer.Quote:
Well, your argument goes against logic IMO.
WDC has to pack more objects per frame than Sega Rally, just for the fact that the tracks are wider and also offer a wider view most of the time.
Even in the more similar-looking landscapes you have more being rendered on WDC. You'll rarely see just pure abyss after the fence/guard rail portions of a WDC track and that's kinda common on Sega Rally.
Look at Nascar 98. It has nothing to block the far off view. Notice how the track doesn't show pop-up on the flat-plane stuff from the sides and that the draw distance is much farther than the stands that use slightly more complex polygons.
Now, here's the N64 (emulator) running Nascar 99. Notice how much more pop-up it has on the stands, while the track draw is nearly the same, but it doesn't have as steep of a bank on the curves. The N64 version has less cars on the track and a more simplified AI.
I think that WDC sacrifices geometry detail on the surrounding objects, for better detailed cars. While Sega Rally on the Saturn is doing a fine job of representing a game (they rarely cut down the geometry of the surrounding scenery) that was designed to run on hardware that was far more powerful than either of those consoles.Quote:
I see a lot more sacrifices on Sega Rally.
Yeah, WDC has nice lighting and shadows, that neither the Model 2 hardware or the Saturn could do, without it being faked.
Yeah, I'll readily admit there's a lot of things being done with WDC that I know the Saturn would struggle with, or couldn't do at all. But, I also think that there's no way that the N64 could handle the amount of textures being thrown at the Saturn hardware in Sega Rally, and that it would probably have a lot of pop-up when trying to draw those huge (high polygon count) rocks that are being displayed in the game.
Just a fun bit to drop in here. Looking at Daytona USA Circuit Edition, I'm counting anywhere from 8-15 cars on screen at a given moment in the Beginner track:
It doesn't appear to have an impact on frame rate or draw distance. So I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the framerate and draw distance are capped to always have the ability to draw those cars regardless of if they're actually there or not. So if Daytona USA didn't have to worry about the possibility of drawing 15-40 cars at once, I bet you could use those polygons for increasing the draw distance.
And if we look at the new tracks added for CCE, we see they're wide and open more like what we see in WDC, but they still have more detailed trackside details with more AI cars on screen:
And while the Draw distance isn't quite up to par with WDC, it's still very good for a 1996 Saturn game. Again if we lowered the number of cars to WDC levels that might free up enough polygons to get that draw distance up there.
Apart from the roller coster ride at the left side of the track, which looks cool, the rest of it is pretty plain compared to what WDC renders.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
And yeah, i wasn't aware of this before Barone mentioned it but many side rails in WDC have height/width/length and aren't flat, cardboard objects. Which is impressive because it's a very subtle "low priority" detail that most people wouldn't even notice if not looking closely. But it's still there, consuming polygons for something so small when they could easily get away with just cardboard rails like most devs were doing.
http://static2.gamespot.com/uploads/...srally_061.jpg
Like in this image.
We've got more trees and Streetlights than what we typically see in WDC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
We have signs and cones that can actually be hit and destroyed. Does WDC have those? I honestly don't know.
We have buildings that are more than just boxes with tents/pyramids on top.
We have Rocks and Mountains that are more detailed.
We have banners and signs that actually move in the wind.
We have a Roller Coast and Ferris wheel that are not only cool looking, but actually move/have cars on them moving accurately through the track.
It's doing all of that while not only pushing better textures but also drawing and handling AI for more than 2x the cars. I'd say that's pretty impressive for the Saturn considering it still has a good draw distance and it's running at a good framerate.
The Arcade Tracks aren't too bad either, but the Draw Distance seems to suffer more on them. But then again those tracks are pushing a lot more trackside details and more cars than the two new tracks:
Honestly, I'd say the Expert Course in CCE is pretty darn impressive with all the trackside details it has. Yes the Draw Distance is worse than WDC and those two newer tracks, but it's again doing that with 30 AI cars and some pretty hefty Trackside details.
Um, Sega Rally, Sega Touring Car, and Daytona USA CCE do that with their concrete/stone/brick walls...Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Heck even the original AM2 port for Daytona USA does that:
These are mostly carboard objects with very few polygons. There are some levels in WDC that also have lots of trees with actual 3D geometry (like palm trees in one track i have no access to). Also streetlights? There's a level in WDC that has 3D street lights on the whole track almost. I already posted a pic with plenty of 3D street lamps left and right on another track. "We" also have power line poles and actual power lines.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
The few levels i played don't have those. I'll give you that.Quote:
We have signs and cones that can actually be hit and destroyed. Does WDC have those? I honestly don't know.
"We" already proved that WDC have even more complex structures and buildings overall. Check the Vegas track.Quote:
We have buildings that are more than just boxes with tents/pyramids on top.
No actually "we" have that. "You" mostly have corridors.Quote:
We have Rocks and Mountains that are more detailed.
"We" have windmills and wind generators (whatever these called)Quote:
We have banners and signs that actually move in the wind.
I don't have access to all levels but Barone mentioned that "we" have trains and vehicles moving on background bridges as well.Quote:
We have a Roller Coast and Ferris wheel that are not only cool looking, but actually move/have cars on them moving accurately through the track.
Overal i think "our" game is more detailed than "your's". WE will prevail, hail our dear leader WDC.
I believe you'll find the street lamps in Daytona are 3D as well...Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The Trees in some cases are not 2D Cardboard cut outs either. The pine trees for example typically have many polygons/sprites crisscrossing with each other.
And in many cases those are one building sticking out in a sea of duplicated boxes. Look at those Daytona videos, we have shit like Trains, hot air balloons, boats, space shuttles, etc. that aren't just static, they actually move and do stuff. Does WDC have anything like that? Serious question, I'm not seeing it in any of the videos I'm watching.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
If those rocks count as corridors, then so do the ones in WDC. Come on now. The rock and mountain faces in Daytona are all unique and different shapped. Look at the Advanced track, that's pretty unique and detailed rock face there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
We have those in the videos I posted...Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I'm not seeing it in any of the videos I'm watching. Do you know of any off the top of your head?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I will say that WDC does seem to do city scapes with overpasses really well. But the Expert Track in Daytona does that fairly well too even though the draw distance isn't as good as WDC. But then it's doing it with significantly more cars on track and on screen.
As far as animated stuff goes, what i have personally seen on the levels i played, there is the usual helicopter, some guy on a flying kite and some windmills and wind generators than spin smoother and look better than the ones i've seen in your video. Honestly, this game has lots of tracks and i have access only on 4. Since i don't like sims, i'm too bored to play the game to unlock stuff and the few cheats i found don't work for some reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
But anyway, structures are far more detailed in WDC. There are more buildings overall of various different styles and designs, there's this video with the Sidney Opera, the coloseum, Vegas has all sorts of weird shaped buildings and huge hotels/casinos, with impressive signs like the one picture i posted with the huge 3D guitar shaped sign, multiple highway bridges that cross each other, airports and all sorts of cool things to see. There's also a level where you cross a huge metal bridge that has a very complex structure and even casts shadows on the road, which reminded me a similar impressive scene in Grand Tourismo 3.
Anyway, lots of sight seeing in the game, i just wish it was more arcade-ish than a sim. I really wanted to play it and unlock all the levels just to see them.
Edit: That kind of bridge:
http://www.diversity.as.pitt.edu/sit.../hotmetal2.jpg
Imagine something like that, with all those metal poles rendered and casting shadows. It looked much better in WDC than other games of that generation.
Again though, the buildings really don't look that complex to me. I'm seeing in many videos the same 2 or so buildings duplicated that are all giant boxes, trapezoids, pyramids, etc. The Vegas stage is nice, but again it seems to be one or two unique and nice buildings, with a bunch of basic boxes around them. Take a look at the Expert Track in Daytona. You have a lot more complex looking buildings and trackside objects than I'm seeing in most of these WDC videos.
Though one way we could put this to rest would be to look at wireframe footage. Unfortunately I can't seem to get it to work in Project64. I can get it working in 1.6, but WDC doesn't seem to work with that version. Maybe you can figure it out. Then we'd need to figure it out in a Saturn Emulator.
Though Wipeout XL did have a wireframe mode:
I don't know what you are seeing, the pictures i posted so far alone shows many more building designs and shapes and some look more complex than what i saw on Sega Ralli (it was a vs Sega Ralli argument originally). I don't know about Daytona and so far it doesn't look like it has more complex buildings at all. I guess we see different things and feel differently. No point arguing for this, unless someone else counts the polygons on all buildings and give some numbers, which is not going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Newer version of PJ64 works along with the latest Jabo plugin but it's too buggy. I posted a picture already to get an idea but it shouldn't be very accurate. But it has to be a video, to see a bigger picture of what the game pushes, but it gets too garbled and messy when it moves.
There's also another thing to consider. I remember a picture somewhere in these forums that showed a scene from one multi platform game on PS1 and N64 in wireframe mode. The scene was the same exactly but the N64 was able to do it with less polygons. It wasn't less detailed because of it however. It was a big, flat wall that for some reason, the PS1 needed more polygons to render. The N64 had the same exact object but it could do it with much less polygons.
So, my point is, even though the scene does use more polygons on PS1, can you say that this is a bad thing for the N64? If the N64 could do it with less polys then why shouldn't it? If there's something that forces the PS1 to use more polys for larger flat surfaces, something the N64 can do with less, is this a good enough reason to conclude that the PS1 is more able? Maybe it doesn't mean that the N64 couldn't use as many polys, maybe it means that in the particular scene it can do the same job with less so they didn't bother using all the available polys or something. But something like this doesn't really show which console can actually render more polygons.
Anyway, from what i have seen so far, there are games that make the PS1 look like a better polygon pusher but N64 VS Saturn, there is no doubt for me the N64 is ahead in this aspect. And i just saw that Sonic-R video of yours. I couldn't believe it was released with this kind of pop up. It's almost Turok level of pop up right there (Turok had the fog at least to hide it) and my question is how such a thing doesn't bother you and you use this game as a good Saturn example. It only makes it look bad IMO. Textures are nice but textures alone is not the only thing that makes the visuals.
This is how I look at that generation's graphics, 3D and 2D. Some people have asked during this recent tangent, which ways does the N64 have a clear advantage or is best at? They real answer is that it has a sweet spot for a balance of resolution, polygons, texture, effects, etc. Talking about things like 3D rails is a good example. It really is a waste to add extra dimensions to objects that will rarely be seen from multiple sides, especially in a fast moving game. It's still neat when notice little details like that, but it would also be nice to have had 2 or 3 times as many of those kinds of objects in a scene. Model 3 hardware is a fully generation beyond the 32-bit consoles, but even it uses sprites for spectators.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
N64 games shouldn't use every effect and push a lot of polygons if the framerate is going to be crippled. Look at some of those chugfests and then look at WDC. Saturn games shouldn't use dithered transparency effects in most cases and if a developer didn't know how to do them in different ways, then they should have opted for different effects. Playstation graphics in general proved how most people could get over so many imperfect aspects like warping, seams, etc, if there was just lots of every type of thing. It became the standard for the generation and the median of what was considered "normal". The Saturn and N64 are strongest in select ways and concentrating on those strengths produced some cool unique visuals. But stupid developers totally take this mentality in the wrong direction with crap like Toshinden URA.
If a talented Saturn developer were to do a version of WDC, it shouldn't try to recreate everything accurately. If tinting a car while it passes through a shadowed area frees up a bunch of resources, then use them for more of what the Saturn doesn't have to try harder to pull off. I think that the flat shading in the Model 2 Virtua Fighter 2 makes some aspects (like Jeffery's belly) look noticeably worse than the Saturn version. If Sega Rally were to be ported to N64, it shouldn't waste texture space on superfluous stuff like skid marks on the roads and if a balance can be struck, then maybe add shading. What's most impressive about both of these console racing games is that they found a solid balance while still looking good.
Ok, let's take a look at your pictures:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...ps9u5zd1yo.png
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...ps7gpt9dxb.png
Not only are those buildings boxes, they look to be the same boxes for a lot of them. Now, the buildings in Sega Rally could be described as boxy too. But let's take a closer look at them. Some have awnings on them, some have balconys and overhangs. Some have very unique looking roofs (the church in the Mountain stage), and overall there's just a lot more variety. The Rock faces are a lot more unique looking as well.
That's better luck than I had to be honest. I couldn't even find out how to enable the wireframe mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The Saturn can fall into that realm too though. It can use Quads to draw things with 1 polygon that the PS1 and N64 would need at least 2 to draw. There's also the possibility that the PS1 version may have had subtle details like bumps and what not that the N64 didn't have that weren't very obvious. I've noticed a lot of PS1 games tend to do this with ground and terrain where the Saturn and N64 tend to opt for flatter surfaces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I think this is kind of what we're getting at here though with the Saturn and WDC. Yeah it wouldn't be able to replicate the transparencies and lighting, but I think from what we see in Sega Rally and Daytona CCE, two games pushing more cars on screen as well as other pretty intricate trackside objects, the Saturn could pull off something very close or similar to what we see in WDC in terms of draw distance, frame rate, cars, and track detail. Especially if we use those exact same textures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Very simple really. Sonic R's draw distance is still better than Turoks. Sonic R was actually praised when it came out for using a very N64 like effect to hide the pop up. It uses VDP2 to draw a transparent layer a little closer to the player than the actual draw distance. Polygons are rendered behind this layer and as they get closer they fade into view. However since VDP2 is not affected by this we can still see the background and plane clearly. Personally I kind of like this better than the hide everything with fog approach Turok and other N64 games use. Instead of the entire game looking like it takes place on a dark foggy, gloomy day, we can still see bright blue skies, the horizon, and other things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So yeah, I'd put Sonic R in the good list for Saturn 3D. Draw distance it's on par with a lot of similar games on the N64 and PS1, it does some nice VDP2 trickery to hide pop-up and do pseudo transparencies, it has very nice textures that show no signs of warping or pixelization, and it's still pushing more geometric detail than some games on the N64 you've brought up like Turok.
I love how you ignore ANY OTHER object in this scene, like the weird shaped building on the right or the bridge on the left, that are all rendered in the same scene and only focus on the big building. Nice. Also look at the other picture. You are ignoring other 3D details that are rendered at the same time. Like all those 3D lamp posts. Basically, you ignore everything else that is rendered in these pictures.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
you like balconies?
http://s22.postimg.org/ci677drq9/Untitled.png
These houses on the right have them. And there are plenty more houses like that before those.
More balconies:
http://s23.postimg.org/yyf6mlau3/Untitled.png
And nicely shaped houses too. Keeping count of how many different buildings you've seen so far in all the pictures i posted? I can count then if you want. I will go into a great detail, just for you.
It was the same flat surface.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
.....Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
It's not like we mentioned 10 times already that WDC has 8 cars on screen = MORE cars than Sega Rally. It's like you don't read posts at all. And i have to do the same reply over and over again, in hopes that you will see it. Also, you still push the track side objects being more detailed in those games as a fact, when i never actually agreed to that and you also never proved me wrong because i'm still waiting for a Sega Rally picture that looks more complex than some of the ones i posted. And i can post more but it's really a waste of time because you ignore most of the details anyway.
So you put it on par with bad looking PS1/N64 games?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Never claimed it's one of the better looking N64 games technically.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Anyway, more WDC pictures incoming (youtube rips) found a longplay series and i'll do this just for you.
Turok was a terrible game for me. I just couldn't get into it.
BAD QUALITY YOUTUBE RIPS INCOMING!
http://s12.postimg.org/5mptfkli5/Untitled.png
More buildings and balconies! I count 10 buildings here, in 4 different shapes, at lest 6 of them have balconies. There are more of course as you drive by.
http://s8.postimg.org/4kj3alf1h/Untitled.png
Here's the bridge i was talking about
http://s22.postimg.org/dsmuorvz5/Untitled.png
Even casts shadows on the road
http://s14.postimg.org/tfxjmg001/Untitled.png
Here, you actually drive on a road under that bridge
http://s23.postimg.org/ov48vny8r/Untitled.png
You can even see the whole bridge from a distance here
http://s17.postimg.org/d2gmwn8hr/Untitled.png
A huge moving zeppelin can be seen here
Like how you ignored the 3D Street Lights in Daytona? The birds in Sega Rally? The spectators? Yeah that one building in that scene is unique, but it's still not that complex. It's just at tube. It falls right in with what I said, one unique building in a sea of boxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
This is literally the same house copy pasta'd around the track. And while it is a unique shape, it's still rather boxy. It's just now it's a trapezoid instead of a cube.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Not bad, but again I'm seeing a lot of repetition here. Not to mention Sega Rally has houses and buildings while also having spectators, flags, trees, banners, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again not bad, but Daytona USA has a pretty nice looking bridge in it's expert stage as well. Is it a metal lattice bridge? No, but it is a suspension bridge with some decent detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
You do this constantly in the Expert stage for Daytona. Yes it's draw distance isn't as good, but again it's also keeping track and calculating AI for 30 cars on the track and is clearly holding back polygon counts for the freak chance it has to draw a bunch of them if not all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
And in Daytona you can see a hot air balloon that moves and a roller coaster with a train accurately moving on it on the same track. And an extra bonus is the track doesn't look bland, empty, and lifeless while doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Without any evidence I'll just have to take your word for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Go backwards in Sega Rally, You'll probably see more cars on screen. And then there's Daytona CCE which right in the beginning of the race has about 15+ cars on screen and has to keep track of up to 40 AI cars. It's using the same engine as Sega Rally too. Heck the original Daytona port actual drew all 40 cars on screen during the victory lane sequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
As for a Sega Rally picture, one was already posted a few pages back by someone else. I've posted videos as well that show more complex scenery, buildings, as well as having a lot more objects like trees, waving flags (unlike the static ones in WDC), flying birds, spectators, billboards, flying helicopters, animals, etc.
But here's some pictures for you. I apologize for the quality, they're taken off youtube videos as I don't feel like hooking up my capture card:
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...psbicg4cmk.png
Notice all those flags and banners? They all move like they're waving in the wind.
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...psf5uafwqa.png
Yeah these buildings might be boxy, but notice some of the details they have. There's balconys/overhangs, awnings, etc. on them. And they all look unique and different.
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...ps3n5ju8ed.png
Again notice the variety.
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...psugt2cf2m.png
Again more variety.
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...psiu14mxes.png
I count roughly 11-12 onscreen cars.
As you like to say textures aren't everything, the same can be said for draw distance. Sonic R's draw distance isn't great, but it isn't terrible either. I can still see far enough ahead to know what's coming and where I need to go. However I can look past that because it does have the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Extremely nice textures
Transparencies (Real and faked with VDP2 trickery)
Really nice Geometric Detail
I can still see the sky and horizon despite the foggy fade in effect being used.
Very intricate and detailed track designs
Runs at a rather solid 30fps.
Has tons of on track objects when you start counting things like all the rings and what not.
3D is very solid looking with no warping, seaming, or flickering in sight.
So yeah, while it's draw distance isn't the best on the system, in light of all the things it's doing I'd say that's acceptable considering the draw distance is still decent.
But others have tried to make that claim...Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The main reason I still put Sonic R in the good category despite it's lackluster draw distance is because it's still pushing other categories well. A lot of those poor PS1/N64 games you speak of aren't really showing anything for their sacrifice to draw distance.
You must be kidding me with those buildings Trekkies. You seriously must me trolling be right now and i feel kind of stupid doing all this work posting all these pics. Apart from the one with the Cathedral like structure, just about every other building you show me is even less detailed and way more boxy than the ones i posted in my first examples.
Do you want me to post more pics or not? Because i don't think you care much with this constant denial. And i feel really stupid arguing that much for a couple of games.
No it's not. Look again.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Look again.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
3D Geometry > Flat objects+2D sprites. I heard the Saturn is really good with those.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
It's terrible. Its unbelievably bad and awful. Simply disastrous. It can cause cancer. Should be illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
He's either a hopelessly blind Saturn fanboy (to turn a phrase he likes to use against me), or he likes trolling. I'm not sure which; maybe it's both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Now, I do think that WDC has really bland-looking environments, but that's the point -- it's supposed to look realistic, and not exaggerated and 'cool' like Daytona or Sega Rally. The point is a realistic look, and it achieves it, for a 5th-gen console game. The impressively high polygon count is disguised beneath the "bland" environments and "boring" tracks with the significant amount of detail in everything in the game world. As far as gameplay goes I'd far rather play Sega Rally or Daytona, I like those kinds of games way more. I like their art style more than WDC's as well, but there's no denying that technically WDC is the more impressive game. It's a newer game on newer hardware by one of the N64's most accomplished third party developers in terms of graphics. Visually I like their last game, Stunt Racer 64, more, since that's much more my style, but WDC, visually, does exactly what it sets out to do, and is one of the more technically impressive games of the generation regardless of what you think of the gameplay.
On another note though, does the Saturn have a flight combat game that gets anywhere near Battle for Naboo's graphics? Technically, I mean, not art design.
The buildings you've posted do have better looking roofs for the most part, but again in many cases it's the same building being copy pasted around the track. Each building in Sega Rally looks unique and different from the one beside it. Some have awnings, some don't. Some have people on top of them, some don't. And again it's doing those while still drawing things like spectators, waving flags, trees, etc. Are some of those details 2D? Sure, but what do you think is being used to draw them? Polygons. You don't think for one minute if you got rid of all those details to take it down to WDC levels that would free up some polygons to have those angular roofs? You don't think reducing texture and model variety down to WDC levels wouldn't free up resources to draw those extra details?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
That's pretty much been the point here. For the few areas where WDC has a more detailed buildings than Sega Rally or Daytona, it's also lacking a lot of the other details those games have. And there's also the fact we're comparing a 1995 game to a 1999 game. But considering the Saturn was dead by 1998 and the next best racer after Daytona is a rushed outsourced port that was released in an unfinished state, it's really the best we have to go by.
As far as I can tell it's a tube, kind of like those covered walkways you see in cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I see two orange houses that are 1:1 identical right next to each other in the first shot. It's literally the exact same house.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
In the later shot, there's two different houses, copy pasted around the track.
Again what do you think is being used to draw these? It's effectively polygons. If you're going to call them sprites, I may as well point out that technically everything on the Saturn is a sprite due to how it's set up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The point is, it still takes polygon rendering resources to draw those 2D objects. Eliminating them would free up resources that could be used to add those pointy roofs you like to the buildings.
So then do those N64 and PS1 games that are even worse and aren't even using good textures, or nifty effects cause AIDS?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again, we're comparing a 1995 game to a 1999 game. There's going to be some differences. However, WDCs buildings are still suprisingly boxy, and the game doesn't even have the amount of "simple" 2D objects littering the sides of the track that Rally and Daytona have. If they're so simple and the N64 is so powerful why doesn't it have those?Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
What part of Sega Rally looks exaggerated? Daytona doesn't look that exaggerated either. You have a Tri-oval track that has some stands and a stone arch, a canyon, and a city scape. What about that is exaggerated?Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Seriously ABF give up you're just looking dumb as hell.
In my book, so far Turok 1, Sonic R and Nights have the worst pop up i have ever seen in a 5th gen game. They should all be banned. And cancer is worse than AIDS.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
No, it really is not. There are a few houses being copy-pasted and some unique ones to mix things up. Some have other details, others have other details. Do you expect me to post every single frame this game has? If you are so interested, go play it yourself. Drive slowly and look at the scenery at your own pace, even count all the polygons. If you want to see it, its right there.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Your question is wrong. You can't "go down" to WDC levels. From Sega Rally you can only go up to WDC levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Nice choice of words here. Let me do the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
The 8 cars in WDC are extremely beautiful with an incredible amount of more polygons than the very low poly Sega Rally cars while having real time polygonal shadows and environmental reflection on the body, instead of just a texture on a white object.
I'm confused. You say WDC is more detailed because it's a later game? I thought you said Sega Rally is more detailed. So why you bring that up as an excuse?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
So now WDC has been upgraded to just surprisingly boxy buildings (i'm going to assume for the time of it's release?) instead of more boxy buildings than Sega Rally and you now move your goal posts and start comparing the flat 2D objects on screen?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Marvelous.
And I'd say Turok is worse than those two for the following reasons:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Sonic R is actually pushing good geometry, good textures, nice effects, runs at a good frame rate, and still has a better draw distance that comes off as looking better due to the fact you can still see the sky and horizon.
NiGHTS is actually rendering not only ground terrain but very intricate ceiling terrain as well. You don't think if you got rid of that ceiling terrain you could get a better draw distance? Fun fact, the PS2 ports draw distance isn't that much better. Does that mean the PS2 is crappy?
I don't own the game, so the best I can do is watch real hardware captures. And looking at those I'm seeing some nice detailed buildings, but a lot of copy pasting going on as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So getting rid of all the trees, waving flags, banners, spectators, etc. is an improvement? You don't seem to get what I'm talking about here. Those 2D assets still count as polygons here. WDC doesn't have any of them as far as I can tell. If you were to eliminate those objects in Sega Rally, you could use the freed up polygon resources to draw more of those building details you like. That's what I'm talking about when lowering WDC levels. WDC has very barren environmental objects. As far as I can tell from the footage I've seen there's no spectators, the few banners I see are static and unmoving, the trees are a lot more sparse, etc. That's pretty significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
As I already said, reflections, lighting and transparencies would suffer on the Saturn. No one is debating that with you. As for car polygon counts, Sega Rally may not draw a lot of cars due to how the game is set up, but the engine clearly is designed to handle drawing more cars since Daytona CCE uses the same engine. Not to mention both games are keeping track of more AI cars than WDC. Daytona USA draws not only 8 cars but a whole lot more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The cars in WDC are nicer looking, but not all 8 of them. Beyond the players car and the one or two near the player the rest appear to be significantly lower quality, which would make sense because that's how LOD modeling works. From what I can tell, the cars in WDC are a combination of flat/gouroud shaded polygons and texture shaded polygons. Sega Rally and Daytona use all texture shaded polygons as far as I can tell. So using that kind of mix would probably also allow for more polygons.
Becuase it is something that should be considered. Sega Rally in the arcade isn't that much more detailed either. When looking at them side by side other than one being lower resolution and at a lower frame rate, they're almost 1:1 identical:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Does this mean the N64 is more powerful than the Model 2 board or that WDC is more impressive? No. That would be a very stupid stance to take. The point here is that we're comparing two games from two different points in the generation with different standards. WDC may have really pretty cars and effects. It may have some houses with pointy roofs and a few really neat buildings here and there. But look at how lifeless the track is in comparison. That's the point myself and others are bringing up here. Sega Rally is using those extra polygons to give us things like spectators, trees, banners, flags, birds, animals, etc. Things that WDC severely lacks. That's the extra details we're talking about here.
All those things when added up still require polygons and probably would require quite a few polygons when we consider the sheer amount of them we have in Sega Rally. Again I ask, do you not think eliminating those would free up resources to give us a bit more building detail and a bit more draw distance? You don't think reducing the amount of unique textures and reusing the same ones over and over again on most buildings wouldn't free up resources as well? You don't think lowering the number AI cars in half for Sega Rally or by a factor of 5 for Daytona USA wouldn't free up CPU resources to draw more? Another thing to take into consideration is number of buildings. In your WDC shots I'm counting about 8 buildings as the most I've seen in a frame. Some have even less. In the Sega Rally shots I posted I'm counting roughly 11-13 unique buildings. Not only that, each one is unique with different textures. You don't think reducing the number of buildings wouldn't free up polygons?
Daytona and Sega Rally still look comparable in parts to WDC, but they are older games and in some cases are doing a little extra. They both handle more AI cars, they both have more trackside details like trees, spectators, banners, flags, etc. And not only that but some of them have pretty complex movements like the roller coaster in Daytona. They also have better textures and more texture variety. If we were to lower all of those aspects down to WDC levels, you don't think that wouldn't free up some resources to do things like boost car models, increase the draw distance, and add in a few more complex buildings?
Yawn... comparing whatever with Turok. An early and pretty average N64 looking game. Neeeeeeeext.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Here's another fun fact. It's not PS2's best looking game. Or among the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
And i see some progress. Well done :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Probably because WDC goes for a softer/more realistic look? And because the N64 isn't as sharp, those 2D elements would look like shit? Because 2D stuff need sharp textures to look nice? And the Sega Rally ones don't look great either?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
There would allow for 1 or 2 more buildings at most. But i'm not a programer so i don't know. And neither do you.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
The parts in Sega Rally that don't have spectators (finishing lines for instance) are just as barren. WDC at least looks more realistic with more details and polygons on those "barren" environments. So basically barren = no spectators.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
There are other levels that have A LOT of trees. But IMO they don't look as good as the ones i posted. Because 3D objects > 2D flat objects. Although, there are some 3D trees in another level. I think the one with the bridge. And no, i'm not going to post a picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
All cars have the same effects on them and all look just as "shiny" and all have 3D shadows. You really need to play this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
WAIT WHAT?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
NO YOU DIDNT
Nice one!Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Jesus Christ! :D i just..... can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Lifeless = no spectators? Ok then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Also others? Like who? Barone disagreed with you on this as far as i remember. Difference being that i'm continuing this argument with you to the extreme. Which makes him look smart and me like an idiot.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
You're the one who threw it in that pile. Not me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
You missed the point. The point is it's doing something out of the ordinary that few N64 or PS1 games do. Show me a PS1 or N64 game that is constantly rendering a low ceiling that is equally as detailed as the ground with a good draw distance at a solid 30fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I didn't say there weren't any good looking buildings. I said there were a few in a sea of boring boxes/duplicates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
That didn't stop them from using a few 2D trees here and there. Why not throw in more to get that nice lush look Sega Rally has?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Those objects are all their own unique sprite and there's a buttload of them. Those buildings we're seeing really aren't that complex either. If we were to eliminate those objects we'd probably free up quite a few more polygons. Probably enough to enhance the buildings we have and add a few more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Sega Rally still has more trees in those segements. The terrain geometry doesn't seem to be a step down either from what I'm seeing. Sure WDC might have some higher rocks and ledges, but it seems to be doing them with very little polygons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I've been watching quite a bit of footage of this game. I'm not seeing levels with more trees than Sega Rally. I'm seeing a lot of levels with a flat wall of trees with a few random trees here and there. That's really not the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again, I am not debating that the Saturn would suffer on those effects. I'm talking about polygon counts here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Did you watch the video? The detail in Saturn Sega Rally is almost 1:1 identical to the Arcade. That's why the port was so damn impressive back when it came out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So I take it at this point you're just going to be snarky instead of trying to actually understand the point being made.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Not only that, no trees, no birds, no animals, no moving signs, flags, or banners, etc. That's pretty significant. Sega Rally's levels look lush, WDCs look barren. You can try to claim this is to be realistic all you want, but in the world I live in people actually show up to watch races and there's actually trees and shit growing along the side of the road. There's also wind that causes flags and banners to move.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Yes because Barone is the only one who has posted in this thread. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Barone and I agree on some things, we disagree on others. Do I think the Saturn could handle WDC exactly as the N64? No, that's never been my stance. It would suffer in the department of GPU effects the N64 natively has that the Saturn doesn't. Do I think though that if the Saturn was still being supported well in 1999 with teams like AM2 still trying to push it that we could have seen racers with polygon counts and draw distances on par with WDC? Possibly.
So you think calculating AI for 2-5 times as many cars, drawing more cars (in the case of daytona), drawing a lot more trackside details like trees, spectators, flags, banners, birds, animals, etc, having them move and animate, having an intricate roller coaster with accurately moving cars, a large train that accurately moves along it's track and is actually moving on it's own and not just a repeated animation, having not only better textures but more texture variety, etc. doesn't require more CPU and rendering power? Wow, that's a pretty bold statement. I guess that means all that stuff is just free and requires no CPU or GPU power to do. Gee I wonder why every N64 racer isn't pumping that shit out constantly? I wonder why Sega Rally isn't going "fuck it more spectators and trees!"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I see a sea of objects and 3D polygons, some being way more detailed than anything on Sega Rally.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
There are parts with a lot of trees. Other than that, i don't know, i'm not a part of Boss graphics design department, neither their art director.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Possibly. But forget about reaching WDC levels of overall scene detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
It's a pretty noticeable step down.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I have both games. And i play them more the last few days because of this stupid conversation. Trust me, WDC is a much more complex looking game. There is a level that has some parts with lots of trees (not just the wall) with different colors and shapes too, but they look uglier than SR. So yeah, Boss Studios can't draw nice looking trees. Maybe Ben said to George: "George, i can't make those trees look good man". "It's ok Ben, we wont use too many of them then".Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Who cares, it's just a bunch of flat objects anyway. Boss Studios cares more about pushing actual 3D geometry and it shows. BTW, Check Stunt Racer if you are interested.
Which is much higher in WDC. Or at least it looks like it is, or else it wouldn't look more detailed.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
How accurate is the Model 2 emulator? If it is then i'd say the arcade game looks 8 or 9 times better than the home port. I'm not sure, maybe it's closer to 9.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
This is what i do when i detect someone is trolling me. I posted my GUTS here and all you saw were some "buildings with pointy roofs"??? Right. You say stupid things, you expect stupid replies.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
How do you know if there are no animals? You played all the levels?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
SR has no... lets see... windmills? Power line posts? Power lines? Zeppelins? Those things in the snowy mountains that transport you on the top of the mountains? Kites? Airports? Fighter Jets that zip above you? Nice looking, shadow casting metallic bridges and other bridges above others? Guitars? Colosseums? Sidney Operas? Castles?
Sure but until such a game exists, stop pretending the ones that already exist are more detailed.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Bridges, airplanes, castles, Sidney operas, yadda yadda yadda. I gave up and didn't see all the levels. The game has too many, i'm not going to make a complete list of things it has that SR doesn't. It's pretty stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Well said!Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Tiger
With a lot being equally boxy as Sega Rally. However Sega Rally seems to be drawing more of those boxy buildings, which again would result in using more polygons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Nice dodge there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Without actual polygon counts we don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Is it? I'm not really seeing significantly more rocks, bumps or curves. If anything Sega Rally and Daytona's terrain seem to be more curved and rounded while WDCs seems to be more rough and abstract.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
From the footage I've been seeing even the levels with "lots" of trees are still significantly lower than what we see in Sega Rally. From what I've seen WDC looks more in line with the new stages added in Daytona CCE, but with better car models and nicer GPU effects that the Saturn can't do. Daytona CCE also has less trees, spectators, etc. than Sega Rally. But we have much wider tracks with more trackside objects like what WDC has. The draw distance and cars aren't quite up to WDC levels, but Daytona is also dealing with 5 times the cars WDC is dealing with. That's pretty significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Those flat objects are still technically 3D and still technically polygons and still count as geometry. Let's say you have 2 houses made up of 10 polygons each on the side of the track. That's 20 polygons. Let's say you have 20 flat objects representing spectators, trees, etc. That's still 20 polygons. How accurate that is to actual polygon counts I don't know. But from the buggy wireframe shot you posted earlier it does look like some of those buildings are made up of large polygons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I have, while it does look decent, the geometry looks pretty low polygon from what little I've seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Yet it loses out on all the trackside things like trees, spectators, banners, flags, etc. Yes those are flat objects in Sega Rally, but they still require polygons to draw.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
It's running at 1080p when the original ran at something like 496x384. Obviously that will make it look a lot cleaner. That again falls into the resolution department which I mentioned was worse on the Saturn. Looking at geometry and track details though, the Saturn port is surprisingly accurate with very little if anything cut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
If I was trolling you it would be blatantly obvious. I'm well aware that Sega Rally looks dated next to WDC, but it's the best racer we have to compare. So I'm looking at things it does that are different. One of those things is trackside details like trees, spectators, animals, animated flags and banners, etc. WDC isn't doing any of those things, and while the car models and draw distance is improved, I'm not seeing a lot of other improvements. Yeah we have some nice buildings here and there, but we have that in Daytona CCE and it's dealing with a lot more AI cars. There's also the texture quality and variety issue which again would have impacts on things like fillrate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I've been watching quite a bit of gameplay, I've yet to see any. Know of any levels I should look at?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
But Daytona USA CCE does have those kind things and uses the same engine. And it's drawing more cars and handling AI for 5x the cars WDC has. It also has destroyable scenery. Does WDC have that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I'm not saying they are more detailed in all areas. I'm saying they are more detailed in some areas which would require still require resources to do. It's more of a balance. WDC sacrifices having tons of trees, spectators, etc. like Sega Rally to instead boost it's car models and give us some nice scenery models every now and then. Sega Rally sacrifices draw distance and car models for giving us more trees, spectators, etc. But again we'd need some way to actually look at this to figure it out. Unfortunately the only Saturn emulator that will show wireframes does this with Sega Rally:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again, these are single objects that are not frequent. We have stuff on par with that in Daytona CCE which is using the exact same engine as Sega Rally while drawing more cars, handling AI for more cars has more trackside obejcts like trees, banners, etc, has objects you can collide with and knock over, etc. Sega Rally also has a ton of more 2D objects like trees, spectators etc. Again, those are still considered polygons here. When we're talking about mostly boxy buildings here, you don't need a ton more polygons. The ones freed up by getting rid of those 2D objects like what WDC does would probably help boost things. And again, Sega Rally's buildings while not as intricate as some of WDCs best buildings, it does appear to have more of them. In those shots you posted the most buildings I counted was 8. In the Sega Rally shots I counted in the 11-13 range. And again each of those buildings is different and unique, while most of WDCs buildings are duplicates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
But again because I feel I need to reiterate this.
I AM NOT SAYING THE SATURN COULD REPLICATE WORLD DRIVING CHAMPIONSHIP 1:1 IDENTICALLY TO THE N64!
There are effects like lighting, transparencies, reflections etc. that the Saturn flat out can't do. Polygon wise though I see some really nice looking cars and some unique buildings here and there in WDC that are nicer than what I've seen in any Saturn racer. This seems to be what has you guys wowed the most. I'm not disagreeing that those things look nice. However, I'm also seeing a few areas where things are worse than the Saturn's older racers. Things like Trees, spectators, waving flags and banners, etc. are either significantly reduced or completely nonexistant. I notice for every nice building, there's quite a few bland and generic looking ones that are being duplicated. I notice that the texture quality is a significant step down. I also notice that WDC has less AI cars to handle and that Daytona CCE actually draws more cars than WDC does. When we're talking about a hypothetical Saturn version of WDC and using existing Saturn racers for a baseline, those are differences that must also be considered, because reducing them would help free up resources.
So, the point here is that no, I don't think the Saturn could handle WDC exactly as the N64 does it. However, if the same sacrifices were made, could a Saturn racer use those freed up resources to get similar benefits like more trackside objects and better models? Possibly. We see in Daytona CCE that while reducing the 2D objects, we also got wider tracks and more interesting trackside geometry. However we still have a buttload more AI cars than WDC so we don't know if reducing that could help with draw distance.
Turok is actually making massive environments on a scale previously not seen in a console FPS (and Turok 2's are even bigger!), with decently good AI, lots of enemies and weapons, fantastic audio-visual presentation fog aside, and really nice effects too. And then Turok 2 one-ups it with a huge (for the time) persistent world which keeps track of every enemy location, enemy corpses which permanently stay around and don't vanish, and more. The Turok games really pushed boundaries for the time, and are quite impressive for it, in ways that Sonic R didn't even try. But yes, the first two games have a lot of fog. But on that note...Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Similarly, Turok was designed around having exactly the draw distance it has. The enemy placements, the level designs, obstacles, the path you follow, everything is designed around the fog distance being exactly where it is. This is why the PC ports of Turoks 1 and 2 that released in the '90s have exactly the same amount of fog as the N64 versions do -- the games look wrong with no fog, apparently. Without fog you can see the extremely unnatural-looking level designs that the close fog hides; a Turok with better draw distance would need to be completely redesigned. The game works perfectly with the draw distance right where it is.Quote:
NiGHTS is actually rendering not only ground terrain but very intricate ceiling terrain as well. You don't think if you got rid of that ceiling terrain you could get a better draw distance? Fun fact, the PS2 ports draw distance isn't that much better. Does that mean the PS2 is crappy?
If you care about 5th-gen graphics, you should have WDC. It's very cheap.Quote:
I don't own the game, so the best I can do is watch real hardware captures. And looking at those I'm seeing some nice detailed buildings, but a lot of copy pasting going on as well.
They aren't "getting rid" of anything; WDC was not competing with Sega Rally or Daytona. It was made to compete with Gran Turismo. That's the game that it should be compared to. Gran Turismo 1, as far as I know, doesn't have stuff like waving flags and moving banners either, and while it has crowds, they look static and are only at certain points in the tracks. WDC has a very similar style. The Saturn has no game like either GT or WDC, gameplay-wise. It's not supposed to be a flashy arcade game with somewhat over-the-top presentation like Sega Rally or Daytona, it's a down-to-earth, more realistic game. The result is blander-feeling environments, but turn off those crazy Saturn blinders of yours and you'll notice the innumerable ways that the game pushes polygons. Look at those amazing car models, first. They look really, really nice. And in a driving game, the first thing you look at is, of course, your car. Now almost all reviews agree that GT is a better game than WDC in terms of gameplay, but visually WDC probably looks better. I wouldn't know myself, I don't find this kind of game fun.Quote:
So getting rid of all the trees, waving flags, banners, spectators, etc. is an improvement?
Comparing WDC to Gran Turismo, GT has crowds in stands while WDC doesn't have much of that, but GT's crowds looks static and unmoving like most everything else in that game, so that's not much of a loss. And environmental detail is improved in WDC vs. GT. Compare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJRPX02A9yY (N64 real-hardware capture) As for GT... argh, can't find any long videos that isn't emulator footage. Can anyone link some? I guess CGR's review will have to do... it's short, but is real hardware: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSV4IBa1pMIQuote:
You don't seem to get what I'm talking about here. Those 2D assets still count as polygons here. WDC doesn't have any of them as far as I can tell. If you were to eliminate those objects in Sega Rally, you could use the freed up polygon resources to draw more of those building details you like. That's what I'm talking about when lowering WDC levels. WDC has very barren environmental objects. As far as I can tell from the footage I've seen there's no spectators, the few banners I see are static and unmoving, the trees are a lot more sparse, etc. That's pretty significant.
Hah, are they really keeping track of every detail for every car which is not on screen? I don't think that's how that kind of game really works. I'm sure that only the one or two cars on screen are being fully modeled; the rest probably have some more basic system, taking up a lot less resources. All you need is for the AI cars to be about the right spacing apart as you try to catch them, after all, so just have them follow a default line when not on screen or something. It needs nothing more than that, and that's no comparison for WDC's larger number of fully-modeled cars on screen, not even close.Quote:
As I already said, reflections, lighting and transparencies would suffer on the Saturn. No one is debating that with you. As for car polygon counts, Sega Rally may not draw a lot of cars due to how the game is set up, but the engine clearly is designed to handle drawing more cars since Daytona CCE uses the same engine. Not to mention both games are keeping track of more AI cars than WDC. Daytona USA draws not only 8 cars but a whole lot more.
As for that they reused the engine, they had some time to work on the engine between Sega Rally and Daytona CCE. It's the same engine, but not the same version of it -- Daytona's is surely improved on. For example, Daytona CCE and CE are actually playable in two player splitscreen mode, and don't have the insanely close popup of Sega Rally's splitscreen mode. Sega Rally in two player is pretty much unplayable unless you have already memorized the track. Maybe Daytona has less detailed environments or something too? I don't know.
No, that's just good programming. All of the 5th-gen consoles look better with flat-shaded polygons than textured ones, but relatively few developers after the early years of the generation used them. Boss did a good job there using the system's power well. PS1 games like Crash Bandicoot show the advantages of flat-shaded polygons on that platform, and the Saturn has examples of it as well. As for level-of-detail stuff, most 3d games do LOD stuff of course. There are still lots of polygons in those cars, way more than in the cars on the Saturn.Quote:
The cars in WDC are nicer looking, but not all 8 of them. Beyond the players car and the one or two near the player the rest appear to be significantly lower quality, which would make sense because that's how LOD modeling works. From what I can tell, the cars in WDC are a combination of flat/gouroud shaded polygons and texture shaded polygons. Sega Rally and Daytona use all texture shaded polygons as far as I can tell. So using that kind of mix would probably also allow for more polygons.
For cars, once again, no, they do not "both handle more AI cars". Sega Rally handles two AI cars at once. No more. The rest are basically just following their default times, to appear once you catch them.Quote:
Does this mean the N64 is more powerful than the Model 2 board or that WDC is more impressive? No. That would be a very stupid stance to take. The point here is that we're comparing two games from two different points in the generation with different standards. WDC may have really pretty cars and effects. It may have some houses with pointy roofs and a few really neat buildings here and there. But look at how lifeless the track is in comparison. That's the point myself and others are bringing up here. Sega Rally is using those extra polygons to give us things like spectators, trees, banners, flags, birds, animals, etc. Things that WDC severely lacks. That's the extra details we're talking about here.
All those things when added up still require polygons and probably would require quite a few polygons when we consider the sheer amount of them we have in Sega Rally. Again I ask, do you not think eliminating those would free up resources to give us a bit more building detail and a bit more draw distance? You don't think reducing the amount of unique textures and reusing the same ones over and over again on most buildings wouldn't free up resources as well? You don't think lowering the number AI cars in half for Sega Rally or by a factor of 5 for Daytona USA wouldn't free up CPU resources to draw more? Another thing to take into consideration is number of buildings. In your WDC shots I'm counting about 8 buildings as the most I've seen in a frame. Some have even less. In the Sega Rally shots I posted I'm counting roughly 11-13 unique buildings. Not only that, each one is unique with different textures. You don't think reducing the number of buildings wouldn't free up polygons?
Daytona and Sega Rally still look comparable in parts to WDC, but they are older games and in some cases are doing a little extra. They both handle more AI cars, they both have more trackside details like trees, spectators, banners, flags, etc. And not only that but some of them have pretty complex movements like the roller coaster in Daytona. They also have better textures and more texture variety. If we were to lower all of those aspects down to WDC levels, you don't think that wouldn't free up some resources to do things like boost car models, increase the draw distance, and add in a few more complex buildings?
For trackside details, once again, that kind of flashy background is an arcadey style of game design which WDC and Gran Turismo intentionally stay away from. Both games were designed to be more serious than a Sega arcade games, and that means fewer flashy flying flags, over-the-top background music, etc. WDC has better environments than GT does, and almost certainly has more polygons on screen than Sega Rally for the Saturn. The car models alone ensure this. The point is to focus on the cars and the driving, not the environment and style.
Oh, and seriously. One flat polygon for a flat sprite object, and a full 3d model, are VERY different things. Yes, that sprite is "technically using a polygon too", but it's ONE polygon, versus many. There is a huge, huge difference there.
You're mostly right here, yeah. Each of the three systems is very different, and straight ports from one system to the others don't turn out well most of the time. You need to redesign things to fit each platform to make games work as well as they can. It was a much more interesting time than now, when the major consoles third parties support are nearly identical...Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Tiger
Must resist..... I'm tired...
God damn
You are delusional sorry. Or it's a case of extreme denial. Get a second opinion though.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
If you say so. All i see is more detailed enviroments.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
You sure? I'm not good at math.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
WDC has more actual 3D objects, with more complex designs. Which is what i prefer.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
First of all, i'm not running it at 1080p. I'm running it at 640x480 on a CRT. So it's more accurate. And it still looks miles better with higher screen AND texture resolution, 60fps, much better draw distance and solid 3D objects with no warping and minimal pixellation. Saturn SR looks like it's gimped brother, sorry man. Still a good port for Saturn though.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Ok so let me get this straight. All this time you imply that both WDC and SR use equal polys or even that SR uses more. But WDC uses it on 3D objects, cars and draw distance while SR uses it on 2D trees, spectactors and banners? HOLY PRIORITIES BATMAN!Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
No, it doesnt. Damn.... can you teach me denial pls?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
And you know you are wrong because no developer in their right mind would prioritize 2D shitty looking trees and spectactors if they could do better draw distance, better cars and better 3D scenery. Which means that all these 2D objects you are blabbing about all this time non stop, use so few polys that they wouldn't really help in those aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Holy Priorities Batman?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
That's it, can't do this anymore, wont quote the rest of your post, need to recharge. Have the last word if you like. Go on.
I really don't care. None of that is worth not being able to see 2 feet in front of your nose. Yes Sonic R's draw distance isn't great, its still better than Turoks.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
So basically the game is designed around a polygon count limitation? It still looks awful if you ask me.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
I may after this, as it does look like a fun racer.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Again, I'm not denying the cars are great looking and that there are some really nice buildings in a few of the levels. I'm simply pointing out that for each of those nice things, there's some pretty bland and boxy buildings in a lot of levels, there's not a whole lot of trees or spectators. It just feels like you have these nice buildings every now and then in a lifeless world.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
And again I'll ask, what races have you been to in the real world where there were no spectators? What wooded road courses have you seen that don't have significant vegetation on the sides of the tracks? What world do you live in where there's no wind. Yes Sega Rally is an arcade game, but there's nothing over the top in presentation when it comes to having spectators, flags blowing in the wind, and lots of trees. If anything that's more accurate to reality.
This is an issue with PS1 games. Finding real hardware captures is getting pretty difficult. But still, even if the crowds aren't moving, it would still be nice to have them in WDC.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
In Daytona the AI cars will actually wreck each other even if you're not really close to them. This is why you can sometimes come around a corner and see cars spinning out and get hit by them. They're not just following a basic line and waiting for the player to get close. And again, we have a very large amount of cars on screen in Daytona. Sure they're not as detailed as WDC, but if you reduced it to WDCs levels you could use those polygons to bump up your details a bit. It might still not be 1:1 identical, but you could probably get something comparable.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
I'd say it looks improved in the new tracks. In the Daytona Arcade tracks you can see the engine is strained in parts like the Tri-oval in the beginner circuit. But then again that's also where you tend to see the most cars. Daytona does lower the amount of 2D objects though, so that probably helps.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
I agree with you here. And again, the Saturn's racers are from the earlier part of the generation when developers were more inclined to use texture shaded polygons. It would be interesting to see what kind of car models could have been achieved with more flat-shaded cars like you see in WDC.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
I'm not sure about Sega Rally, but Daytona's cars will race each other and wreck each other even if you're not that close to them. There's been numerous times I've come around a corner and to find cars spinning out and had to dodge. So yes, i would say it's doing calculations for those cars, the ones really far away may be more basic, but it's still keeping track of position, speed, line, etc for significantly more cars. That still requires more CPU resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Again though, the details I'm talking about aren't flashy or over the top. They're the details that reflect reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Go count the number of buildings in the shots we posted. I counted roughly 11-12 in the one Sega Rally shot I posted. The most I saw in any of the WDC shots was 8, and many were duplicates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
In some cases yes, in others no. In the areas where there's not really any buildings or trees in both games, I'm not really seeing anything dramatically more detailed, just different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Technically those trees and what not in Rally are still 3D objects with height, width, and depth. And again, the complex designed buildings are few and far between. We see quite a few boxes as both Gamevet, myself, and others have pointed out. Not to mention you can still see pop-up on those rather basic looking buildings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Yes, the arcade does have better resolution. I already pointed that out earlier. Everything else though looks pretty much spot on in the Saturn port. The draw distance is only worse in a few brief spots and it's only noticeable if you go looking for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
My comment about it being 1080p was on the video I posted. Did you actually watch it? It shows both versions running side by side and you can see the draw distances are almost identical. The 3D looks equally solid in both of them as well.
This whole thing spawned from talking about raw polygon counts. Polygons are still polygons you know. And I'm not saying they are exactly equal. That would be stupid, we're talking about a 1995 game vs a 1999 game here. I'm saying I'm seeing differences between them with one giving more details in one area while they other gives more details in another area. Both systems had a game that made the same sacrifices and made the same things priorities, it is possible we could have something on the Saturn that is very comparable. Unfortunately we don't have that. So the best we can do is look at games like Sega Rally and take guesses with things like "Well maybe if Sega Rally didn't have all those trees, spectators, etc. it could push some more interesting buildings or increase the draw distance." That's all I've been trying to say here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So WDC does not have signs and cones you can hit and knock over and send flying down the track into other cars like Daytona does?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So I guess Sega was insane since they did that for not only the Saturn ports of Sega Rally and Daytona USA, but for their original arcade versions as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Notice something interesting in that? The Arcade version has noticable pop up as well. In fact while CCEs still isn't 1:1 identical with it, it's actually pretty damn close to the Arcade versions draw distance. When we're talking about polygon count this low, those 2D objects definitely could add up. Especially when you look at the sheer number of them in Sega Rally and take into consideration things like LOD. Again look at the Wipeout wireframe footage. Notice how the polygons far away are pretty big compared to the ones up close. You wouldn't really need that many more to increase the draw distance. A few more polygons could give you just enough more track to hide the rest of the pop up behind the next corner for a game like Sega Rally.
And that brings up another point that Gamevet brought up. The tracks in WDC are designed for a console with limited polygon counts. Sega Rally's and Daytonas are designed for very expensive arcade boards that can pump out oodles of polygons. So it's very likely that WDC is designed in a way to better hide it's draw distance with buildings, curves, etc.
I'd gladly sacrifice some of those buildings in WDC if it meant I could get some spectators or trees around the track and make it seem a bit less sterile and dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Ok one last reply i promise (god damn it seriously) Nah, not really. This is actually fun.
Because what you see in that picture is what you get. There is no way that there could be scenes with more buildings. No way you could you turn the car in such way for more of them to be visible. You saw a frame with 8 (which was 10 actually in the pic). So it has to be the maximum. Even though i said there are many more buildings in that part of the track in general. Kay.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Hell no. Listen TrekkiesUnite, the arcade version isn't just a little better. Saturn port isn't worse in just a few brief spots. Neither you have to "look" for the differences. And honestly i can't believe we even debate this.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
No, i play both myself so i don't care.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Yes. This is a very reasonable reply. I would agree to that. But i still doubt that whatever you would swap in SR, it wouldn't reach WDC levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
If i remember correctly we had addressed this issue yesterday and i said no, or that i haven't seen any.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
The arcade version has all the draw distance and detail it needs. But if the Saturn had to make sacrifices, well, it did the wrong ones IMO. But that's only assuming what you say it's true.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Even though i'm not a programmer i can tell that you are 100% wrong. Because if you only needed so little to not having pop up then.... no freaking game would have pop up. And yet it was the one thing that plagued most racing games in that gen. And devs had to use tricks, like use more twists and turns than they would want, just to hide it a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
You are telling me that it was so easy to fix but everyone would rather just use those 10 polygons to render a few more spectators? Well, sorry but this sounds INSANE to me.
The world of Sega racing games like Outrun, Sega Rally, or Daytona is an exaggerated reality. The games are fast, often crazy music is playing in the background, you're drifting around the curves at high speed, flashy backgrounds pop around distracting you, etc. Those things are not there just to be realistic, but to help create that exaggerated world of arcade Sega racing games. That is a style that GT or WDC are trying to be the opposite of.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
C'Mon its a big difference more so in those days when they didn't upscale the difference. N64 suffered from a lot of low res and basic texture mapping lefts face itQuote:
640x480 vs. 704x480 really is not a significant difference
Well Perfect Dark had to use a Add on and also its suffered from frame rate issues . Saturn Quake feature much better textures and lighting than N64 quake . Sure the N64 handles 4 player mode and all that and that's fair enough.Quote:
I know I said this already in this post, but you have some of the thickest Saturn blinders imaginable. Sega Rally doesn't have a higher poly count than World Driver Championship! That's absurd. And there's no way Saturn Quake has a higher poly count than Perfect Dark, either. Not even close. Come on. Among other things, regardless of environmental detail, PD can do 4 player splitscreen! Saturn Quake can only do 1 player on screen
I'm sorry in terms of gammings running in high res and 30 fps or 60 fps the Saturn and PS leave the N64 standing .Quote:
The N64 is not a step back in framerate. The N64 is a 5th-gen console, and its games have higher framerates than just about any 4th-gen 3d game, and framerates that are in the same ballpark as the other 5th-gen consoles. And for polygon counts, well, we'll get to that. At least you admit that it was a step forward for 3d graphics, though! Nice to hear
It's SEGA and Model 1 or Model 2 didn't support hardware 3D transparent effects so there is a history of SEGA not seeing transparent 3D effects - You going to call Model 2 rubbish boards ? . Saturn did do transparent effects and hardware ones at that shame it was just 2D planes ones and using the VDP II . Sure a mistake on SEGA part, but all systems have their plus and minus points . I mean the N64 had plenty of them with poor textures low res display and no seprate sound hardware; which was a backward step to the Snes and MD, never mind the PS and SaturnQuote:
Seriously, how did Sega not realize that transparencies are important? The SNES has them, and they look great there! Sega had years to figure it out... and they failed. It's one of the most frustrating things about the Saturn.
Yeah, you had CD quality audio coming from the soundchips in the Playstation and Saturn, while N64 had sound that was quite dated in comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
The frame is the final thing that's being drawn. Those shots aren't the only ones I've noticed this on. Looking at gameplay footage I'm seeing a lot less buildings, but the buildings are more detailed. Sega Rally and Daytona when they have buildings we have a whole bunch all really close together. In WDC when we have buildings we have fewer buildings that are further apart, but some have more detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Then point it out specifically. Show evidence and proof. From what I've seen in comparisons the Arcade is better in Resolution and frame rate mostly, with a few spots where the draw distance is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Do you play them both side by side in sync? If not maybe you should watch the video, it might surprise you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
In Sega Rally as it stands in 1995? Probably not. But a new game using the engine after 4 years of modifications and improvements with tracks specifically designed to hide pop-up like WDC? Possibly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
So again that's something that would not only require polygons to draw it would also require CPU resources to calculate the physics for hitting it. Something WDC doesn't even bother with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again watch the video I posted for Sega Rally. The draw distance is almost spot on with the arcade in most spots while retaining most if not all of the trackside details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Again we fall into a realm of trade offs here. Sure if you had a completely barren race track with no details, buildings, minimal bumps, etc. you probably could get a really good draw distance. But that would be boring. Most devs probably said "You know, let's throw some stuff along the tracks to make this more interesting, the draw distance still looks ok when we do that."Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I'm not saying a few more polygons would get us an infinite draw distance. I'm saying it could help in a situation like Sega Rally or Daytona where we need just a tad more to draw the rest of that curve to hide the draw distance. This again falls into the realm that Sega Rally isn't designed to hide it's draw distance because it was originally on a system that could pump out oodles of polygons. This is true for almost all of the Saturn's big racers. Changing those courses to hide the draw distance wouldn't be an option for those games because then they'd no longer be the same games.
The other side of this is resolution. Eventually you will hit a point where you can't draw more polygons in the distance because they'd be smaller than a pixel. These games are all running at 240p for the most part. I wouldn't be surprised if this was being hit just as frequently as the actual polygon limit.
In a case of Sega rally where you really only need a few more to fix the pop up in a few spots, yeah a small amount of polygons could probably help. I count on average about 50 spectators and trees in the more densely populated parts of Sega Rally's forest stage. When we're talking about at most a couple thousand polygons per frame for this generation, that's a significant amount.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
You may think it's insane to have those spectators there, but clearly Sega felt the slight reduction in draw distance in some spots was worth it to get the same level of trackside detail as the arcade.
What part of Sega Rally's scenery is extremely exaggerated?Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Is Daytona USA fast? Yes. But surprisingly enough, going 200mph around a tri-oval is actually pretty freaking fast:
The exaggerated part of Daytona isn't the sense of speed, it's the handling.
And many times these buildings in SR are merged together so they use less polygons.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
People in Sega 16. Trekkies is saying that Sega Rally Arcade is the same as Saturn except for screen resolution and frame rate. He asks for proof otherwise. And i don't see anyone reply to him. What is this place? I feel like i'm i into the mouth of madness.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
We are comparing WDC with SR. WDC has more geometry. That's a fact. Anything else is just assumptions. Possibly yes, Possibly no. And we will never know.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I see 2 games that graphically are seperated by a whole generation almost. Sega 16 plsQuote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
So I downloaded the latest PJ64 emulator (vers; 2.2.0.3), and WDC still runs terrible. Music is all garbled, and graphics are glitchy enough. Just wondering if any of you guys figured out how to run this game better?
You need to use z64gl Zerolodfrac as graphics plugin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief
Also Azimer's audio 0.70 wip 4
Still far from perfect but it's the best you can get. This game never got emulated properly and probably never will.