"Sonic Adventure", ten years later. (December 23, 1998)

I've never tried this game, so I don't have anything to say about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iron Lizard

I sorta felt like that as well until I went over to my friends house and played his PS1 after I become used to the Dreamcast. It was difficult going back.

---

not me, the second I played Dreamcast I instantly heralded it as lightyears better than PSX or N64. I still think Dreamcast is completely on par with PS2, XBOX, and Gamecube and had it stuck around we would've seen the games to prove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMatthews

I agree with nearly everything you just said tanegashima. Today's games are more immersive experiences (for the most part), but they suffer horribly in replay value. I may have enjoyed every second of a 20 hour zelda game, but I'm not too keen to invest that time a second time.

By the way, are Saturns expensive these days? I think it might be time to add one to my collection. Thing is, I haven't even seen one since 1998, let alone the games.

---

they cost about 20$ to 30$

People here seem really emo about this and the Dreamcast; it is a good game. I would consider it the last good Sonic game on a console that was new (not collections and so on).

Most 3D platformers are either clunky, slow crap (Mario) or just weird shooting stuff (those Sony ones). This is the only 3D one I can think of that is still fun, the rest all aged badly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 17daysolderthannes

not me, the second I played Dreamcast I instantly heralded it as lightyears better than PSX or N64. I still think Dreamcast is completely on par with PS2, XBOX, and Gamecube and had it stuck around we would've seen the games to prove it.

---

Actually I agree. Dreamcast especially compares favorably to PS2. IMO Dreamcast games tended to have significantly better texturing than PS2 games; this may have something to do with the fact that PS2 has half the VRAM. I don't believe the PS2 hardware supports anti-aliasing or bump mapping (except in software of course), and only a fraction of PS2 games support progressive scan. In terms of pure power, the Dreamcast makes up for its comparatively weaker CPU/GPU by using deferred rendering.

And even though the DC's life was cut short, I can only think of a small number of Gamecube and Xbox games (and no PS2 games) that are really significantly beyond what had been done on Dreamcast. I remember when technical details of the PS2 port of RE4 were leaked, the poly counts were comfortably within what had been done in released Dreamcast games.

Is there a Dreamcast game in particular that is a "graphical showcase?" Most of my GameCube/PS2 games look a lot better than any of my Dreamcast games . . . but I really only have the "cartoony" games for the DC.

you people and Shenmue...

*stands beside Tanegashima, crosses arms, and shakes head disapprovingly at the rest of the forum.

Shenmue is one of my all time favourite games, I should have never sold my dreamcast all those years ago... just as well I plan on buying another soon and starting a new collection!:D

Love it or hate it, the Shenmues are arguably the best-looking Dreamcast games, and still amaze me 7-8 years later........of course, seeing as I've essentially missed out on most of the last console generation and have yet to get into this one I'd say that. But those game's graphics were FAR above anything seen on the N64 or PS1.

Now then, Tanegashima, MrMatthews, get up..........I'll allow you to die, like a warrior.

*has never played the Shenmue series past the first disc of part 1, and doesn't like it much either*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aarzak

Now then, Tanegashima, MrMatthews, get up..........I'll allow you to die, like a warrior.

---

Don't mind me - I've never even played Shenmue. I just like to take a stand on something, whether I know what everyone's talking about or not. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aarzak

But those game's graphics were FAR above anything seen on the N64 or PS1.

---

This is an interesting direction this conversation is taking. I've gotten in a *friendly* argument with someone on this forum about whether the Dreamcast was part of any generation at all, or if it was more or less stuck between the PSX and PS2 generations. With all this talk about how the DC compares to either console, what is everyone's opinion?

I've always heard that the DC was a middle child, but didn't it come out only six months or so before the PS2? As far as graphics go, nothing I've really seen on the DC compares too favorably with the GameCube or PS2, but all looks much better than the N64 & PSX.

When Ps2 first came out it compared very well and better in some cases. We didn't really get to see much past that. Instead of a middle child I like to think of the Dreamcast as a still born child of that generation. I don't think we will really know what could have been done with it.

Well, here's foundation of my opinion of the graphics of the DC compared to the GameCube

GC - Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader / Metroid Prime > DC - Sonic Adventure

I am not much of tech guy but both the Gamecube and Xbox are supposed to be stronger then Ps2 and Dreamcast right?