Originally Posted by
tomaitheous
I had to go back and double check that I was clear in my question, which is basically not how valuable the VDP2 plane(s) can be for the saturn, but does it make up for the difference in polygon power between these two systems (again, assuming the PS1 has the lead here for three reasons I listed). And not, "does it have clever and effective usage depending on the game?" I already understand some the benefits of using the VDP2 layer as a floor (which are visually nice, btw). It was my understanding that the PS1 could do flat planes just fine, but the problem on the PS1 side is 2D games where tiled segments needs to be simulated by piece/patch work. And that it's the cpu that gets bogged down by simulating this. That is a 2D problem, not a 3D one.
In my point of view, it's kinda useless speculative unless you can at least throw some numbers to back this up. And not specifically just game examples. What is it going to take on the PS1 side to equate what the VDP2 is doing in these games (3D, not 2D). Is it advantageous for the PS1 to go about it differently? And does that result in more complex geometry afforded at the same price? Things need to be looked at in context.
I want specifics. For example: what percentage of processing polygons is in the transform phase for this generation? If the VDP2 is simulating a flat floor/ground, what is the savings in transforms? What is the saving in pixel fill rate? Does that advantage over come any disadvantages the Saturn has to the PS1? If not, how much does it close does it come? If we're gonna be speculative about this, at least be speculative by crunching numbers in typical setup scenarios, etc.