Jump to content

Photo

Atari Jaguar VS Sega Saturn


256 replies to this topic

#51 sd32 OFFLINE  

sd32

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 571 posts
  • Location:Mexico

Posted Thu Aug 2, 2007 10:12 PM

The Saturn is a quad based system....it will smoke the PSX in 2D.
Could you please explain this a little bit Gorf, i have always heard that the Saturn is better at 2d than PSX, i just never got to know exaclty why, besides having a bit more video ram.

#52 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 3:20 AM

But see....I'm trying to get you all to see past the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" and focus on the games actually released for the systems! We can talk about what ifs until we are blue in the face! :P I appreciate your knowledge of hardware specs and everything, but what I think it boils down to the average gamer is "talk is cheap"... Games speak louder than specs! I mean, the Jag is what it is, a system ahead of its time power-wise with some serious design flaws holding it back. Until mr. money bags comes along and releases the Jag 2, I guess all we can do is talk about what ifs with the Jag. But to me, the talk gets old. Now I dont want to sound like a jerk or whatever cus I know you've put in lots of hard work on the ole Jaggy, but I'm just trying to be realistic on where the Jag stands in the scheme of things. I'm sure If I put in my time to code on the Jaggy I'd be just as passionate as you about it.

I mean, you can say the Saturn is more capable than the PS at 3d, but I think I'm safe in saying that if you had a poll at say....Digitpress, the PS would win by a lot if asked which systems 3d games looked better... And as far as the Jag being better at 2d than the PS...saying the Jag would smoke the PS at 2d just doesnt compute to me because I'm going off the games I've seen and I'd say from the games put out, they are very close in 2d. I know i know...that spec wise the Jag has the upper hand...but again, im going off the games and not speculation. But I think ive said too much already...lol I'm a little fish in a small pond when it comes to this tech talk, and I think the Great white Gorf is gonna eat me up real quick lmao. :P But hey, I still love the Jag! :P I just try to be a realist in this crazy classic gaming world.



PSX wins in polls becasue the majority of people are clueless on the technical aspects and abblities
of even the very systems they own. I wont argue libraries with oy becasue we are arguing facts
about hardware. Saturn, N64, PSX are not nearly the world above the JAguar as you want to belive.

PSX 132 megs/sec
Saturn 120 megs/sec
Jaguar 106 megs/second


Gamers opinions aer useless in a hardware vs hardware debate. Im being realistic..I have nothing to gain
by beingdeceptive or inaccurate for the purpose of crowning JAg king. What I tell you about these systems
are from technical experience.

You are not being realistic....Polls are opinions and opinions NEVER over ride the facts.


I dont need Jagaur II. Im telling you that the JAg is plenty capable and much more flexible.
I wont put as many polies on the screen in one frame...A good level designer makes those
counts unoticable. Saturn will kill the PSX in 2D and so will the Jaguar.

RS vs BM argument.....go read it... I dont repeat myself whe I can help it.

Edited by Gorf, Fri Aug 3, 2007 3:22 AM.


#53 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 9:08 AM

But see....I'm trying to get you all to see past the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" and focus on the games actually released for the systems! We can talk about what ifs until we are blue in the face! :P I appreciate your knowledge of hardware specs and everything, but what I think it boils down to the average gamer is "talk is cheap"... Games speak louder than specs! I mean, the Jag is what it is, a system ahead of its time power-wise with some serious design flaws holding it back. Until mr. money bags comes along and releases the Jag 2, I guess all we can do is talk about what ifs with the Jag. But to me, the talk gets old. Now I dont want to sound like a jerk or whatever cus I know you've put in lots of hard work on the ole Jaggy, but I'm just trying to be realistic on where the Jag stands in the scheme of things. I'm sure If I put in my time to code on the Jaggy I'd be just as passionate as you about it.

I mean, you can say the Saturn is more capable than the PS at 3d, but I think I'm safe in saying that if you had a poll at say....Digitpress, the PS would win by a lot if asked which systems 3d games looked better... And as far as the Jag being better at 2d than the PS...saying the Jag would smoke the PS at 2d just doesnt compute to me because I'm going off the games I've seen and I'd say from the games put out, they are very close in 2d. I know i know...that spec wise the Jag has the upper hand...but again, im going off the games and not speculation. But I think ive said too much already...lol I'm a little fish in a small pond when it comes to this tech talk, and I think the Great white Gorf is gonna eat me up real quick lmao. :P But hey, I still love the Jag! :P I just try to be a realist in this crazy classic gaming world.



PSX wins in polls becasue the majority of people are clueless on the technical aspects and abblities
of even the very systems they own. I wont argue libraries with oy becasue we are arguing facts
about hardware. Saturn, N64, PSX are not nearly the world above the JAguar as you want to belive.

PSX 132 megs/sec
Saturn 120 megs/sec
Jaguar 106 megs/second


Gamers opinions aer useless in a hardware vs hardware debate. Im being realistic..I have nothing to gain
by beingdeceptive or inaccurate for the purpose of crowning JAg king. What I tell you about these systems
are from technical experience.

You are not being realistic....Polls are opinions and opinions NEVER over ride the facts.


I dont need Jagaur II. Im telling you that the JAg is plenty capable and much more flexible.
I wont put as many polies on the screen in one frame...A good level designer makes those
counts unoticable. Saturn will kill the PSX in 2D and so will the Jaguar.

RS vs BM argument.....go read it... I dont repeat myself whe I can help it.


I KNOW average gamers are clueless on technical aspects...they tend to judge games on fun factor and eye apeal, and not the technical side of things. That's kinda the point I'm trying to make! I guess it would be like... Liking a good looking girl over a knock-out girl because the good looking girl is nicer... Or something. Even though the knockout is technically the better choice :P And I know that you know the capabilities of the Jag inside and out, but capabilities are one thing and actually having the means to produce a killer software title showcasing the Jag's true power is another! Which was my other point. I wish the Jag devs did get together and make a large team to produce such killer software, but it seems Jag devs for the most part don't like each other!!! :P

#54 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 295 posts

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 11:20 AM

Big deal, the Saturn had a few extra frames than the PS in the same game...to the human eye it's barely noticeable, unless you are a hardcore 2d/sega fanatic fighting game freak (and i know the type to a t :P) ;) ... Obviously you are in this catagory and are extremely biased towards Sega...whereas I am a fan of many consoles from many makes so...ya.



So you ask a question, it is answered truthfully, but because it goes against what you believe then I'm a fanboy.

Wow.

Way to stretch it there.

Yes, I'm a hardcore fighting game fan, or at least I was. And the fact that there are missing frames of animation don't just have to do with what the player could see, but more importantly what they can do.

Example: Say a character's punch animation can be cancelled (comboed) into a special only on the 3rd frame of animation. But that animation frame is cut.

Guess what?

That combo is right out the window.

Now cut animation frames for all characters in that way, and, well, you have an absolutely butchered game with less possible combos than the arcade.

Hence it's a bad port.

PSone 2D fighting games were bad ports. Saturn 2D fighting games were good ports.

And we can, in fact, judge systems based on their ability to pull off such arcade ports.

Saturn is better at 2D than PSone. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Now, go ahead. Call me a Sega fanboy. It is you who simply cannot deal with the fact that PSone wasn't up to par against Saturn in the area of 2D sprite games. Notice I don't call you a Sony nuthugger, even though you're acting like one.

Not to mention I read almost every single videogame mag back in the mid 90's cover to cover and nowhere did I ever read anyone say the Saturn was "so much better at 2d than the PS".........


Then you obviously don't have great reading skills.

Because EGM clearly stated recently that Saturn was a 2D powerhouse. All the review scores in the past from that mag and others, with very, very few exceptions, always rated Saturn versions of 2D fighters higher than PSone versions.

Ah the Shenmue demo for saturn ...which was worked on for how many years? lmao


And that's pertinent to the discussion of power how, exactly?

Especially since Saturn games take longer to develop than PSone games based on the very nature of dual CPU and VDP development vs. single CPU, single GPU development, in addition to Saturn games having to be programmed in assembly to get good results while PSone had simple to grasp C based tools.

Ya it's impressive but I'd hope so with what how much work was put into it........ But again, that game was never released on the Saturn now whas it? ;) Nor does anyone own it except a handfull of people. So really, it doesn't count...


It doesn't count because you don't want it to count.

Because you seem to want to give PSone more credit than it deserves (in terms of 2D) and take away from Saturn credit that it deserves (in terms of 3D).

Its more a tech demo than a game anyways, and everyone knows tech demo's for a system usually look twice as good as an actual game because tech demo's focus all the hardware power on the graphics whereas an actual full game needs power in the AI, sound and control department...So ya. :)


The game was nearly finished, actually. Why do you think the game wound up being one of the more expensive games ever made? It was nearly finished for Saturn from all indications, including those from Yu Suzuki himself.

Furthermore, WTF is it with the "lmao" and "so ya" with you?

What are you? Five?

Grow up. This is a discussion on the comparitive power of video game consoles. Not a life or death thing, y'know, and nothing to have "bragging rights" over.

Unless, of course, you're a fanboy.

And in your case, it's looking quite possible.

Me? I've given PSone credit where credit is due. It could push more polys than the other consoles. It had the easiest to grasp dev tools of all those consoles from that gen, and thus the games looked really good because it was a dream for developers in many ways (simple architecture, simple tools, and a nice bit of power to boot). But it still had a low resolution compared to the other consoles (except 3DO, which had the same resolution). It had some of the worst, if not the worst, texture warping problems in its games. It couldn't pull off many of the same effects that N64 could pull off. And due to limited VRAM and the differences in their graphics processors it couldn't pull off what Saturn could in terms of 2D games.

I own it and a ton of games, and own the rest of that gen as well (as I buy nearly all consoles every gen being a multiconsole gamer). Great console, great games. It's just not as great as the fanboys think in terms of power, that's all.

When you can post facts to counter my claims (and you won't be able to, as my claims are based on the facts themselves), then you will add something to the discussion. Until then, deal with the facts as they are.

And they are: PSone was not as good as Saturn at 2D, Saturn was nearly as good as PSone at 3D if programmed properly (and in some cases, better than, except where it came to effects).

#55 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 295 posts

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 11:32 AM

Ironic thing is that you say you're going off the games themselves and not the specs, but yet don't want to see that hardcore 2D gamers complained all the time about PSone ports of their favorite fighting games because the games themselves (on PSone) had animation cuts that had a direct effect on the combo system.

And, for the most part, the combo system in the Saturn versions was left completely intact.

Let me put it to you this way:

Hardcore gamers version of Street Fighter Alpha 3 of choice?

Saturn version. Yes, even over the Dreamcast version. Why? Not because Saturn is more powerful at such games than DC (it wasn't). Rather, the DC version is based off of the PSone version, which had animation cuts due to it not being that great at 2D. These are animation cuts that they didn't put back in the DC version for some stupid reason. Saturn version is based off of the arcade original, has all the animations and thus has all the combos. Thus the Saturn version is the best compared to all the ports based off of the PSone version because Saturn can run the arcade version well while PSone can't.

And that's going by the game itself, which seems so important to you.

#56 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 5:39 PM

Big deal, the Saturn had a few extra frames than the PS in the same game...to the human eye it's barely noticeable, unless you are a hardcore 2d/sega fanatic fighting game freak (and i know the type to a t :P) ;) ... Obviously you are in this catagory and are extremely biased towards Sega...whereas I am a fan of many consoles from many makes so...ya.



So you ask a question, it is answered truthfully, but because it goes against what you believe then I'm a fanboy.

Wow.

Way to stretch it there.

Yes, I'm a hardcore fighting game fan, or at least I was. And the fact that there are missing frames of animation don't just have to do with what the player could see, but more importantly what they can do.

Example: Say a character's punch animation can be cancelled (comboed) into a special only on the 3rd frame of animation. But that animation frame is cut.

Guess what?

That combo is right out the window.

Now cut animation frames for all characters in that way, and, well, you have an absolutely butchered game with less possible combos than the arcade.

Hence it's a bad port.

PSone 2D fighting games were bad ports. Saturn 2D fighting games were good ports.

And we can, in fact, judge systems based on their ability to pull off such arcade ports.

Saturn is better at 2D than PSone. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Now, go ahead. Call me a Sega fanboy. It is you who simply cannot deal with the fact that PSone wasn't up to par against Saturn in the area of 2D sprite games. Notice I don't call you a Sony nuthugger, even though you're acting like one.

Not to mention I read almost every single videogame mag back in the mid 90's cover to cover and nowhere did I ever read anyone say the Saturn was "so much better at 2d than the PS".........


Then you obviously don't have great reading skills.

Because EGM clearly stated recently that Saturn was a 2D powerhouse. All the review scores in the past from that mag and others, with very, very few exceptions, always rated Saturn versions of 2D fighters higher than PSone versions.

Ah the Shenmue demo for saturn ...which was worked on for how many years? lmao


And that's pertinent to the discussion of power how, exactly?

Especially since Saturn games take longer to develop than PSone games based on the very nature of dual CPU and VDP development vs. single CPU, single GPU development, in addition to Saturn games having to be programmed in assembly to get good results while PSone had simple to grasp C based tools.

Ya it's impressive but I'd hope so with what how much work was put into it........ But again, that game was never released on the Saturn now whas it? ;) Nor does anyone own it except a handfull of people. So really, it doesn't count...


It doesn't count because you don't want it to count.

Because you seem to want to give PSone more credit than it deserves (in terms of 2D) and take away from Saturn credit that it deserves (in terms of 3D).

Its more a tech demo than a game anyways, and everyone knows tech demo's for a system usually look twice as good as an actual game because tech demo's focus all the hardware power on the graphics whereas an actual full game needs power in the AI, sound and control department...So ya. :)


The game was nearly finished, actually. Why do you think the game wound up being one of the more expensive games ever made? It was nearly finished for Saturn from all indications, including those from Yu Suzuki himself.

Furthermore, WTF is it with the "lmao" and "so ya" with you?

What are you? Five?

Grow up. This is a discussion on the comparitive power of video game consoles. Not a life or death thing, y'know, and nothing to have "bragging rights" over.

Unless, of course, you're a fanboy.

And in your case, it's looking quite possible.

Me? I've given PSone credit where credit is due. It could push more polys than the other consoles. It had the easiest to grasp dev tools of all those consoles from that gen, and thus the games looked really good because it was a dream for developers in many ways (simple architecture, simple tools, and a nice bit of power to boot). But it still had a low resolution compared to the other consoles (except 3DO, which had the same resolution). It had some of the worst, if not the worst, texture warping problems in its games. It couldn't pull off many of the same effects that N64 could pull off. And due to limited VRAM and the differences in their graphics processors it couldn't pull off what Saturn could in terms of 2D games.

I own it and a ton of games, and own the rest of that gen as well (as I buy nearly all consoles every gen being a multiconsole gamer). Great console, great games. It's just not as great as the fanboys think in terms of power, that's all.

When you can post facts to counter my claims (and you won't be able to, as my claims are based on the facts themselves), then you will add something to the discussion. Until then, deal with the facts as they are.

And they are: PSone was not as good as Saturn at 2D, Saturn was nearly as good as PSone at 3D if programmed properly (and in some cases, better than, except where it came to effects).


Well most people that bought these fighting games WEREN'T hardcore fighting game freaks I guarantee you. So most people didn't give a shit if it was arcade exact...They were still fun, unless you're a super nit-picky...well you know. ;) PS arcade fighting games weren't "BAD" ports as you say, that's ridiculous...they were plenty GOOD, just maybe not as exact as the Saturn ports... OK? And lol @ you think you're bursting my bubble by saying the Saturn is better at 2d than the PS...NO DUH! I've never said the PS was better...I just said the PS isn't as far behind the Saturn at 2d than people like yourself like to dream up. "OMG Saturn fighting games have barely more frames of animation, even though the actual graphics are exactly the same!!! But the Saturn is light years ahead of the PS in 2d... " :roll: You Saturn guys tend to be really fanatical about 2d Saturn games cus you know the PS just kicked the Saturn's ass all over the place in the majority of games... ;)

It all boils down to this:

The Playstation's 3d games' graphics were a much bigger leap in quality over the Saturn than the Saturn's 2d games were over the PS's.....Hence why the Playstation obliterated the Saturn in the sales department and Sony became the new Nintendo in 1995 until now! Maybe now Sony's time at the top has run out, but the fact remains the Playstation pummeled Sega into the shithouse. ;) Hardcore guys like you only like to see the hardcore side of things. But the majority of gamers only care about lots of fun games, and the PS had a lot more fun games than the Saturn. Atleast in the US. I know the Japanese were/are crazy for the Saturn, but anyways thats another story. And you're retarded for calling me childish because I say LOL...gimme a break. You need to lighten up mr. hardcore saturn fighting game FREAK! ;) Most fighting games get old real quick anyway... :P Not my fav genre.

#57 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 5:47 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P

#58 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 6:19 PM

You'd have to be blind to not notice the differences between X-men Cota, Megaman 8, and Megaman X4 on Saturn and PSX.
Add in the ram carts, and then compare King of Fighters 95, Vampire Savior, and the Capcom Vs. games that were released on both systems.
One systems library featured smaller sprites and almost half the animation, I'll let you guess which one.

#59 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 7:05 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P


The Saturn is NOT ahead of the Jaguar in 2D not even a little bit.

#60 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 10:14 PM

You'd have to be blind to not notice the differences between X-men Cota, Megaman 8, and Megaman X4 on Saturn and PSX.
Add in the ram carts, and then compare King of Fighters 95, Vampire Savior, and the Capcom Vs. games that were released on both systems.
One systems library featured smaller sprites and almost half the animation, I'll let you guess which one.


Another blow it out of proportioner! lol Yes, I admit the Saturn versions look """SLIGHTLY"""better...BUT NOT """GREATLY""" AS YOU SEGA DRONES WOULD LEAD PEOPLE TO BELIEVE!!! Just go look through gaming mags from the mid to late 90's....none of the experienced reviews EVER claimed the differences were in any way VAST...but only usually... MINUTE...!!! :P

#61 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 10:16 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P


The Saturn is NOT ahead of the Jaguar in 2D not even a little bit.


From the games out there? I'm just talking about the actual games out there for the systems, not the technical possibilities.

#62 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Fri Aug 3, 2007 10:17 PM

hey jesusc..didn't you buy some stuff from me not too long ago? We are supposed to be buddies! lmao... ;) :P

#63 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 11:08 AM

Another blow it out of proportioner! lol Yes, I admit the Saturn versions look """SLIGHTLY"""better...BUT NOT """GREATLY""" AS YOU SEGA DRONES WOULD LEAD PEOPLE TO BELIEVE!!!


Yes, you hit the nail on the head. Reality has nothing to do with it. The games only look and perform better because I am a sega drone.

Just go look through gaming mags from the mid to late 90's

Sreenshots in gaming mags, yes, a great way to identify frames of animation

....none of the experienced reviews EVER claimed the differences were in any way VAST...but only usually... MINUTE...!!! :P


That is quite untrue, but being that I am not about to go digging through my old mags to prove it, I guess we'll just have to rely on conjecture and anecdotal evidence.

Edited by jesusc, Sat Aug 4, 2007 11:09 AM.


#64 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 11:49 AM

Another blow it out of proportioner! lol Yes, I admit the Saturn versions look """SLIGHTLY"""better...BUT NOT """GREATLY""" AS YOU SEGA DRONES WOULD LEAD PEOPLE TO BELIEVE!!!


Yes, you hit the nail on the head. Reality has nothing to do with it. The games only look and perform better because I am a sega drone.

Just go look through gaming mags from the mid to late 90's

Sreenshots in gaming mags, yes, a great way to identify frames of animation

....none of the experienced reviews EVER claimed the differences were in any way VAST...but only usually... MINUTE...!!! :P


That is quite untrue, but being that I am not about to go digging through my old mags to prove it, I guess we'll just have to rely on conjecture and anecdotal evidence.


LMAO Way to take my words out of context. I never said "Look at screenshots in mags" I SAID "READ WHAT THE EXPERIENCED WRITERS WROTE ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES IN GRAPHIC QUALITY BETWEEN THE SATURN AND PLAYSTATION" I never ever said look at screenshots in mags and that's definitely not what I was referring to. ALTHOUGH Gamefan had great paper and their screenshots would probably be good enough and infact they did compare the Saturn and PS side-by-side many times and 2d games looked nearly identical while 3d games like Toshinden, Resident Evil, and Tomb Raider looked like crap on the Saturn compared to the PS............................... Yes, the AM2 developed games looked good, but the rest were pretty bad when compared to the PS...

#65 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 12:28 PM

while 3d games like Toshinden, Resident Evil, and Tomb Raider looked like crap on the Saturn compared to the PS............................... Yes, the AM2 developed games looked good, but the rest were pretty bad when compared to the PS...


NO YORE WRONG!!!1!!
Actually, we are not discussing 3D.
We are discussing 2D.
I never said the Saturn 3D games looked better.
Even a sega drone could not make that argument.
Well, I suppose one could if one detached himself from reality.
If that were the case, then one could say that 3D games on Saturn looked better than their PSX counterpoints.
But for one to make that statement, and believe it would be laughable.
Almost as laughable as one saying the opposite was true when comparing 2D games.

#66 A Sprite OFFLINE  

A Sprite

    Stargunner

  • 1,062 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 12:38 PM

Sometimes the Saturn was better at 3D.

#67 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 12:47 PM

Sometimes the Saturn was better at 3D.


Lol. When I was typing that up, I was thinking "watch someone bring up Powerslave."
I want to guess that that was one of the few times where a game was ported from Saturn to Playstation, and not the other way around.
I miss Lobotomy, they definitely knew how to make the Saturn shine when it came to FPS.

#68 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 1:20 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P


The Saturn is NOT ahead of the Jaguar in 2D not even a little bit.


From the games out there? I'm just talking about the actual games out there for the systems, not the technical possibilities.


Then again you are off topic! ;)( and so am I really.... :P )

Here is the original question...


"Whats harder to code for?!! "



I say the Saturn is even with the better tools it has. Nine processors
leaves quite a lot to plan for and think about.....not to mention
it was completely unecessary. One SH3 would have been much better.

#69 kevincal OFFLINE  

kevincal

    Quadrunner

  • 5,662 posts
  • Location:Fairfield, California

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 3:27 PM

Seems like over the years most everyone has said the Jag and Saturn are a real bitch to program for! :P

#70 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 4:00 PM

For the Saturn at least, I don't think there was ever any doubt.
That was one of the funny things about Dreamcast vs Playstation 2. All the developers who were whining about how hard it was to develop for Saturn were now saying that Dreamcast was a breeze, and PS2 was a bitch.

#71 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Dragonstomper

  • 547 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 4:10 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P


The Saturn is NOT ahead of the Jaguar in 2D not even a little bit.


yeah tell us how the saturn can't do trevor.

#72 jesusc OFFLINE  

jesusc

    Dragonstomper

  • 648 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 4:30 PM

yeah tell us how the saturn can't do trevor.



A cold hard fact that makes this particular sega drone cry himself to sleep at night.

#73 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Dragonstomper

  • 547 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 5:22 PM

yeah tell us how the saturn can't do trevor.



A cold hard fact that makes this particular sega drone cry himself to sleep at night.

lol

#74 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 8:03 PM

And now for the rebuttle. :P :P But hey we are off topic, the topic is Jag Vs Saturn. ;) Even though I like the Jag more than the Saturn, the Saturn obviously sold much better and the general gaming population obviously think the Saturn is better. On the tech side of things, I think it's pretty obvious the Saturn is ahead of the Jag in 2d and 3d, not significantly! but the games are the proof. Ok, I do like the look of the Jag's 3d textures more than the Saturns ugly 3d textures..though. ;) Anyway all these darn versus arguments are getting seriously olddddddddddddddd anyway and all they do is stir up shit! But that's nothing new in Jag forums cus people get bored cus nothing new is hardly coming out for the Jag so meh........ :P Flame away! :P


The Saturn is NOT ahead of the Jaguar in 2D not even a little bit.


yeah tell us how the saturn can't do trevor.




24 bit?

#75 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Sat Aug 4, 2007 9:20 PM

yeah tell us how the saturn can't do trevor.



A cold hard fact that makes this particular sega drone cry himself to sleep at night.


I did say the game sucked. :)

Again my statements are being misinterpreted. Im telling you that a reworked
BM or HS engine that runs on the RISCs only, will do a decent version of any
of those games. Less polies perhaps but a 30 FPS frame rate. RS is actually
using speedier microcode too and the polycounts do look a bit higher than the
typical N64 game. They are definitely two of the nicer games for the N64.

The microcode also corrects a lot of lighting issues and it really is a nice job
by the dev team. They also did a really good job of overcomming the 4k
texure ram limits..a big reason all the N64 games textures for the most part
are horid ly blurred.

RS uses a texture streaming technique which allows cart space to act (kinda)
like extra texture ram(its a steaming kind of set up the way the do it.) Kudos
to the developers all the way. this is not at all a put down on them. It's not even
such on the N64...Im just telling you what I know based on the information easily
finable all over the I-net.

The Jag wont EVER push as much on the screen but I can be clever and do
something similar enough to make you see that for all the technological
advances inside the N64 the end result is not all that impressive.

It could have competed closer to the DC ( not real close though) if Nintendo
allowed the Turbo 3D microcode which would have allowed 300-500,000
polies with a few less effects. That is the code they should have gone with.

Why they did this, I'll never know. I think Nintendo may have held this code as an
ace in the whole to kick the N64 incase of stiff comp. I think also that blew this idea
off realizing that the Cart nature of the N64 was greatly limiting what developers
could do and hence went on to the GAME CUBE instead. My guess only.

Also, if you look a good deal of the N64 games you will see a lot of sneaky G-shading
going on that tends to go unoticed becasue it is done tastfully and in the right places.
The reason for this is that the texture buffer is only 4 kilobytes. High color textures
eat that up very fast and is why you see all that stretching and blurring.


So everyone chill...the N64 is a superior machine but a disappointment in many ways.
The Jaguar is 5 years older tech, almost one quarter the system clock, and no tools
useful to pull the real power from it remember.


You've not sen the best on the Jaguar yet. we'll do out best...hey come on, tell me any of
you guys would not like to see a much improved game on the Jaguar? hang tight.
We're working on it.


Also remember, in the Jaguar, you have full acess to micro code. There is no top layer
like in the nintendo.

Edited by Gorf, Sat Aug 4, 2007 9:22 PM.





0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users