COULD Jag have competed with the Playstation Graphically?

[Vigo]

Why do you always refer to the Playstation being released 3 years later? The Jaguar was released in 1993, the Playstation in 1994, so there isn't really much time between those 2 machines.

 

Gouraud shading is nice, the style fits perfectly to Tron, and those demos easily surpass anything 3D seen on the Jaguar, but quite frankly, I really much doubt you can achieve the same 3D Performance of the Playstation on the Jaguar. I'm talking about 3D in 512x480 in smooth 60fps (Tekken 3), with texture mapping AND gouraud shading.

 

2D performance, I don't know. Did gamers care for this anymore in 1995?

[DracIsBack]

Why do you always refer to the Playstation being released 3 years later? The Jaguar was released in 1993, the Playstation in 1994, so there isn't really much time between those 2 machines.

 

You sure that wasn't 1995?

 

I always remember a two year lead with the Jaguar and actually bought my Jaguar in 1995 when the PSX was in short supply, along with RAYMAN, which had just come out on both systems.

[DracIsBack]

Ok, that got me curious.

 

According to Wikipedia, it was out in Japan in December of 2004 and then other markets in September 2005 (which is what I remembered). Jaguar was released in November of 1993.

 

So, 13 months difference.

[Gregory DG]

In addition to the release date being about 1 1/2 years apart, we're talking about SONY here. One of the richest companies in the world with practically unlimited cash resources to develop a game system. Then you have Atari on the other hand... Doing things on a shoestring. Buying up pretty cool technology from small companies and branding it as their own.

 

Frankly, I find it amazing that we're even having this discussion. The PlayStation should have been SO much better that there's no question. Instead, we're still wondering. "Could the Jaguar compete graphically with the Playstation?" Even if it isn't as powerful as the PSX, that question alone tells me the Jaguar hardware is pretty amazing for what it is.

[Gorf]

Ok, that got me curious.

 

According to Wikipedia, it was out in Japan in December of 2004 and then other markets in September 2005 (which is what I remembered). Jaguar was released in November of 1993.

 

So, 13 months difference.

 

 

Which is still a large amount of time in the world of chip and console tech. And you forget that the Jaguar and its development was started 3 years before Sony even was thinking about the PS1...which was a Nintendo add on

originally for the SNES. PS1 was sony's payback blow to Nintendo for blowing them off. I would have blown

of Sony too with the deal they were looking for. Only difference is if I were Nintendo, I would have been

watching my back a lot better than they did. Nintendo had to know that was comming and should have

prepared for it.

 

Jaguar was done tech in 92. I remember reading about the Jagaur in late 91. The Playstation technology did

not even get reworked from the Nintendo add on to the PS1 untill december of 93. Jaguar was started in 91.

Its plenty of time for a large difference in performance.

 

In some areas that was clear..yeah the PS1 will put more textures on screen and more polies but they

will not look as nice as all the effects you can do with the Jaguar blitter and GPU in combo. There is no

dedicated hardware to dictate what you can and cant do. The PS1 can only texture and shade. The GPU

in concert with the blitter can do much more than that but you need lower poly counts and you also need

to lay off the 68k completely in the game loop. The 68k would have been a great idea had they given it its

own 64k bus for doing AI. This way it would never slow down the rest of the system and only need to talk to

the main bus to tell the GPU or DSP time to draw or sound off. You would have seen cojag like performance.

 

The T&J chipset was crippled by the 68k and would have done WORLDS better had they spent the

money on adding more memory tot he Jag insted of the unecesary 68k. Most people dont relize this

but it is the GPU that actually boots the system. It is how the encrytion works. It authenticates the

game then it hands control over to the 68k to do boot up stuff like setup the video and stop the GPU

and DSP from running. The GPU could have handled all of this and the 68k could have been left in the

ST once and for all!!!

 

The blitter and the OPL with the GPU is way more flexible that anything the PS1 can do. Yeah the saturn

does it with polies but that has its limits and what a waste of 3D hardware. The MAIN issue is that the

Jaguar had 2 megs of ram. After the screen buffers you have about 1.5, then there is the game code

and sound, and you have essentially under a meg of ram to load in graphics. That is not that many

paralax scroll planes.

 

The Saturn and PS1 has about 2.5 more megs of ram so naturally it would be able to display more graphics.

Again..go see Area 51. that is the jaguar chips set at the same clock speed with a REAL host processor.

That has 8 megs of ram and it is still not coded properly nor is it even working that cojag system. They

essentially use the GPU and DSP as sound and graphics chips. The coJag is a better example of what the

same two chips in the Jag can do. The Jaguar should have been the cojag in a console box.

 

The PS1 wont out perform a cojag and niether will a Saturn. The only differnce between cojag and Jag is

more memory and a better host.

Edited June 19, 2007 by Gorf

[Gorf]

Why do you always refer to the Playstation being released 3 years later? The Jaguar was released in 1993, the Playstation in 1994, so there isn't really much time between those 2 machines.

 

Gouraud shading is nice, the style fits perfectly to Tron, and those demos easily surpass anything 3D seen on the Jaguar, but quite frankly, I really much doubt you can achieve the same 3D Performance of the Playstation on the Jaguar. I'm talking about 3D in 512x480 in smooth 60fps (Tekken 3), with texture mapping AND gouraud shading.

 

2D performance, I don't know. Did gamers care for this anymore in 1995?

 

The way the machine was coded is why you see the results you do. You wont get the amount of polies

the playstation will at the same frame rate but you will out do them in quality. Go check out HoverStrike

CD if you have a means and pull up real close to some of the mountains..or better yet the planet areas

where the land 'breaths'....see the mip mapping going on? you cant do that with PS1 with out slowing it

down considerably. The Jag was using the 68k for its game loop. Hoverstrike is a shadow of what could

be done on the Jaguar. And there were still places 2D was popular back then. id, Scat-O-Logic, Eclipse

and we at 3DSSS agree that the Jags power has not yet been exhausted by a long shot. It's never had

the tools necesary to do so. We are working on and trying to correct that now.

 

No the Jaguar will never throw up as many polies as the PS1 or the Saturn at the same frame

rate but it will out class it in quality.

 

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the

Jaguar.

[Trip_Cannon]

Gorf, you mentioned earlier that Battlesphere was the best effort on the Jaguar thus far... Was that using 68k or was it working without it?

[+remowilliams]

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the Jaguar.

100% agree

[Gorf]

Gorf, you mentioned earlier that Battlesphere was the best effort on the Jaguar thus far... Was that using 68k or was it working without it?

 

 

According to Doug and Scott they are using it wisely. I assume that means they keep it off the bus

at crucial times in the game loop and use it to do other minimal things.

[Gorf]

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the Jaguar.

100% agree

 

 

2 SH2's should be able to to give one MIPS R3000 a run for its money.

[Paolo]

Hi hate to break this extremely interesting conversation, but I had to chime in just to say:

WAY TO GO, GORF!

[+remowilliams]

2 SH2's should be able to to give one MIPS R3000 a run for its money.

I think so, and I believe the Saturn suffered from difficult development (in some ways) just like the poor Jag.

 

And that movie you posted looks f*ing awesome!! Hope to see that game playing on a Jag near me one day

[Gorf]

2 SH2's should be able to to give one MIPS R3000 a run for its money.

I think so, and I believe the Saturn suffered from difficult development (in some ways) just like the poor Jag.

 

And that movie you posted looks f*ing awesome!! Hope to see that game playing on a Jag near me one day

 

 

It is my hope to get back to that and all the other jag projects.

We want to se them finished too. Especially the game formerly

known as Gorf 3D.IT will have a different name and a different

look but it will remind you of that other one... only in 3D!!!

 

[Gorf]

Hi hate to break this extremely interesting conversation, but I had to chime in just to say:

WAY TO GO, GORF!

 

 

Thanks!

[sd32]

Gorf, really, thanks for taking your time to post about stuff like this, i know a lot of people, who arent coders, love to read about hardware comparisions. I have always been intersted on this type of talk, even if i dont understand much. I am a console collector because, to me, every console takes you to a diferent world, they all have their own way of looking, sounding, and because of their diferent controllers, they have their own way of playing.

Oh, and reading what you said, about the Saturn and Dreamcast being more powerful that the PS1 and PS2, brought a tear from my eye, haha, after the Jaguar, the Saturn is my favorite piece of hardware, because they were su bitches to code for!

Gorf whats your take on the FM Towns Marty, from a hardware point of view?.

[Gorf]

Gorf, really, thanks for taking your time to post about stuff like this, i know a lot of people, who arent coders, love to read about hardware comparisions. I have always been intersted on this type of talk, even if i dont understand much. I am a console collector because, to me, every console takes you to a diferent world, they all have their own way of looking, sounding, and because of their diferent controllers, they have their own way of playing.

Oh, and reading what you said, about the Saturn and Dreamcast being more powerful that the PS1 and PS2, brought a tear from my eye, haha, after the Jaguar, the Saturn is my favorite piece of hardware, because they were su bitches to code for!

Gorf whats your take on the FM Towns Marty, from a hardware point of view?.

 

 

I dont even know what one is....ok....after taking a lookat some web info...it seems to be

nothing moe than a PC with a sprite engine. nothing special. Definitely no jaguar. The Jag

would beat this system up like a cat beating a mouse. I would rate it over the SNES and

Sega Gen but below(well below) the 32x, 3d0, and Jaguar.

[+LS650]

I had never heard of the FM-Towns before either, so when I searched I found this interesting summary:

http://www.old-computers.com/museum/comput...?st=1&c=968

[Vigo]

In addition to the release date being about 1 1/2 years apart, we're talking about SONY here. One of the richest companies in the world with practically unlimited cash resources to develop a game system. Then you have Atari on the other hand... Doing things on a shoestring. Buying up pretty cool technology from small companies and branding it as their own.

 

You are looking at it from a 2007 perspective.

 

It was a VERY risky business for Sony back in 1993 to enter the videogame market. Back then, it was dominated by 2 different companies: Nintendo and Sega, with Sega having failed miserably due to making very poor choices (Sega CD, 32X, complicated cost ineffective Saturn design). Sony had no name back then. Nintendo, Sega and Atari all had their foot in the market. The Playstation would have failed miserably if Sony didn't do the software AND hardware design choices.

 

Now we can have it the other way around, and look at the failure of the Playstation 3. Now it is Sony, who made the wrong hardware choice, and produced a machine which doesn't find the mass audience.

 

Frankly, I find it amazing that we're even having this discussion. The PlayStation should have been SO much better that there's no question.

 

Such discussions are always triggered by fanboys of a certain system (no matter if Atari, Sega, etc...), without knowledge of technical specifications.

 

In 3D, there is no question which machine performs better. Sure, there are poor PSX games, but there are also many games out there, which run smoothly in high resolution graphics (512x 16bit). And, you forget that Atari was still using expensive cartridges. And no, add-ons like the Jaguar CD don't count. They always fail (see Sega CD).

 

Instead, we're still wondering. "Could the Jaguar compete graphically with the Playstation?" Even if it isn't as powerful as the PSX, that question alone tells me the Jaguar hardware is pretty amazing for what it is.

 

Sure, Atari did a great effort on the Jag Hardware (as they did on the Lynx, although it had some fatal design flas like the size and the battery useage). I was pretty impressed when I played Alien Vs. Predator on it. It looked great for 1994, and the framerate was very good. But it was too little too late. The very first PSX games coming out in late 1994 already crushed the Jaguar in graphics. This was the time when the 2D generation was over. This is the reason why the videogame giant Nintendo lost to Sony.

[Vigo]

Why do you always refer to the Playstation being released 3 years later? The Jaguar was released in 1993, the Playstation in 1994, so there isn't really much time between those 2 machines.

 

Gouraud shading is nice, the style fits perfectly to Tron, and those demos easily surpass anything 3D seen on the Jaguar, but quite frankly, I really much doubt you can achieve the same 3D Performance of the Playstation on the Jaguar. I'm talking about 3D in 512x480 in smooth 60fps (Tekken 3), with texture mapping AND gouraud shading.

 

2D performance, I don't know. Did gamers care for this anymore in 1995?

 

The way the machine was coded is why you see the results you do. You wont get the amount of polies

the playstation will at the same frame rate but you will out do them in quality.

 

It's not hard to outdo the PSX graphics quality. The machine doesn't even have perspective correct texture mapping. But, you can easily have smooth, fully textured 3D enviroments with a high framerate. What good is a game if it runs on a low framerate? I don't care if textures look slightly better when the gameplay is seriously affected.

 

Go check out HoverStrike

CD if you have a means and pull up real close to some of the mountains..or better yet the planet areas

where the land 'breaths'....see the mip mapping going on? you cant do that with PS1 with out slowing it

down considerably.

 

There are games on the PS1 which also use mip-mapping (Kula World, which ironically runs at 50fps (PAL)). There are even some attempts at motion blur in some games, like Metal Gear. You also have lots of Alpha Blending in most PS1 games, which is even a rarity on the Saturn.

 

The Jag was using the 68k for its game loop. Hoverstrike is a shadow of what could

be done on the Jaguar. And there were still places 2D was popular back then. id, Scat-O-Logic, Eclipse

and we at 3DSSS agree that the Jags power has not yet been exhausted by a long shot. It's never had

the tools necesary to do so. We are working on and trying to correct that now.

 

No the Jaguar will never throw up as many polies as the PS1 or the Saturn at the same frame

rate but it will out class it in quality.

 

I take your word for it because, although the Tron demo is very impressive, it hardly is an argument of rendering quality against the PS1. Also, to me, quality is also how smooth the game flows, and frankly, if you have a gorgeous looking game, but it is hardly playable due to low frame rates, all development efforts have been wasted. You always have to make a compromise between speed and features, and I think the PS1 was the architecture which nailed it best. When you look at the PS1, you can clearly see the designers asking themselves: what do the gamers want, how can we achieve it most efficiently?

 

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the

Jaguar.

 

Now then, Sega had lots more resources on their hands than Atari to prove it, which they also failed. The Saturn is a blown up, costly , inefficient hardware architecture. It deserved to fail. Unlike the Dreamcast, which should have won over the blown up PS2 architecture. But then, it was too late...

Edited June 20, 2007 by Vigo

[Vigo]

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the Jaguar.

100% agree

 

 

2 SH2's should be able to to give one MIPS R3000 a run for its money.

 

A MIPS R3000 and one Geometrical Transfer Engine (which could be referred today as a vertex shader, since it also performs vector and matrix operations without CPU intervention) should give 2 lower clocked SH2's a run for its money. Oversimplifications might work for the most people here.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Vigo

[Vigo]

Ok, that got me curious.

 

According to Wikipedia, it was out in Japan in December of 2004 and then other markets in September 2005 (which is what I remembered). Jaguar was released in November of 1993.

 

So, 13 months difference.

 

 

Which is still a large amount of time in the world of chip and console tech.

 

Yeah, it caused Sega to panic and hatily redesign their Saturn architecture, which originally was also designed with "best 2D, a little bit 3D" in mind.

 

And you forget that the Jaguar and its development was started 3 years before Sony even was thinking about the PS1...which was a Nintendo add on

originally for the SNES. PS1 was sony's payback blow to Nintendo for blowing them off. I would have blown

of Sony too with the deal they were looking for.

 

But Nintendo agreed, and broke the deal behind their back because of their greedy attitude in their cartridge monopoly, and they paid for it dearly.

 

You know the draconic deals Nintendo used to make with game developers? Don't come me with this hypocratic "Sony is evil!" attitude, because in the end, everyone who participates in business has his stiffs in the cellar....

 

Only difference is if I were Nintendo, I would have been

watching my back a lot better than they did. Nintendo had to know that was comming and should have

prepared for it.

 

But they didn't. And they paid for it. Now, in this console generation, Sony is rightfully paying for their attidude.

 

Jaguar was done tech in 92. I remember reading about the Jagaur in late 91. The Playstation technology did

not even get reworked from the Nintendo add on to the PS1 untill december of 93. Jaguar was started in 91.

Its plenty of time for a large difference in performance.

 

Well, you do realize that in the end, you gave an argument that they did an amazing effort on the PS1?

 

In some areas that was clear..yeah the PS1 will put more textures on screen and more polies but they

will not look as nice as all the effects you can do with the Jaguar blitter and GPU in combo. There is no

dedicated hardware to dictate what you can and cant do. The PS1 can only texture and shade.

 

Since 3D is the main purpose of the PS1, Texturing and Shading is what it can do fastest. Again, what is the sense behind a general purpose GPU when in the end, the result will lack a lot due to slow speed?

 

The GPU

in concert with the blitter can do much more than that but you need lower poly counts and you also need

to lay off the 68k completely in the game loop. The 68k would have been a great idea had they given it its

own 64k bus for doing AI. This way it would never slow down the rest of the system and only need to talk to

the main bus to tell the GPU or DSP time to draw or sound off. You would have seen cojag like performance.

 

More complex architecture, more components: more expensive.

 

The blitter and the OPL with the GPU is way more flexible that anything the PS1 can do.

 

A PC with a 386, 16Mhz CPU and a VGA 1024x768 32bit framebuffer is also more flexible at what the 3D part of the PS1 can do. You get the point?

 

Yeah the saturn does it with polies but that has its limits and what a waste of 3D hardware. The MAIN issue is that the

Jaguar had 2 megs of ram.

 

...and expensive cartridges, or a very expensive CD add-on.

 

After the screen buffers you have about 1.5, then there is the game code

and sound, and you have essentially under a meg of ram to load in graphics. That is not that many

paralax scroll planes.

 

It is much more Ram than all other systems had in 1993.

 

The Saturn and PS1 has about 2.5 more megs of ram so naturally it would be able to display more graphics.

 

...and no expensive cartridges.

 

Again..go see Area 51. that is the jaguar chips set at the same clock speed with a REAL host processor.

That has 8 megs of ram and it is still not coded properly nor is it even working that cojag system. They

essentially use the GPU and DSP as sound and graphics chips. The coJag is a better example of what the

same two chips in the Jag can do. The Jaguar should have been the cojag in a console box.

 

The PS1 wont out perform a cojag and niether will a Saturn. The only differnce between cojag and Jag is

more memory and a better host.

 

And much more money in hardware. You know what 8MB did cost in 1994/1995? And still, we have to believe your claims until they are proven.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Vigo

[Gunstar]

Why do you always refer to the Playstation being released 3 years later? The Jaguar was released in 1993, the Playstation in 1994, so there isn't really much time between those 2 machines.

 

Gouraud shading is nice, the style fits perfectly to Tron, and those demos easily surpass anything 3D seen on the Jaguar, but quite frankly, I really much doubt you can achieve the same 3D Performance of the Playstation on the Jaguar. I'm talking about 3D in 512x480 in smooth 60fps (Tekken 3), with texture mapping AND gouraud shading.

 

2D performance, I don't know. Did gamers care for this anymore in 1995?

 

The way the machine was coded is why you see the results you do. You wont get the amount of polies

the playstation will at the same frame rate but you will out do them in quality.

 

It's not hard to outdo the PSX graphics quality. The machine doesn't even have perspective correct texture mapping. But, you can easily have smooth, fully textured 3D enviroments with a high framerate. What good is a game if it runs on a low framerate? I don't care if textures look better when the gameplay is seriously affected.

 

Go check out HoverStrike

CD if you have a means and pull up real close to some of the mountains..or better yet the planet areas

where the land 'breaths'....see the mip mapping going on? you cant do that with PS1 with out slowing it

down considerably.

 

There are games on the PS1 which also use mip-mapping (Kula World, which ironically runs at 50fps (PAL)). There are even some attempts at motion blur in some games, like Metal Gear. You also have lots of Alpha Blending in most PS1 games, which is even a rarity on the Saturn.

 

The Jag was using the 68k for its game loop. Hoverstrike is a shadow of what could

be done on the Jaguar. And there were still places 2D was popular back then. id, Scat-O-Logic, Eclipse

and we at 3DSSS agree that the Jags power has not yet been exhausted by a long shot. It's never had

the tools necesary to do so. We are working on and trying to correct that now.

 

No the Jaguar will never throw up as many polies as the PS1 or the Saturn at the same frame

rate but it will out class it in quality.

 

I take your word for it because, although the Tron demo is very impressive, it hardly is an argument of rendering quality against the PS1. Also, to me, quality is also how smooth the game flows, and frankly, if you have a gorgeous looking game, but it is hardly playable due to low frame rates, all development efforts have been wasted. You always have to make a compromise between speed and features, and I think the PS1 was the architecture which nailed it best. When you look at the PS1, you can clearly see the designers asking themselves: what do the gamers want, how can we achieve it most efficiently?

 

I feel the Saturn is a better system then PS1 but it takes a lot to get it to do what it can, not unlike the

Jaguar.

 

Now then, Sega had lots more resources on their hands than Atari to prove it, which they also failed. The Saturn is a blown up, costly , inefficient hardware architecture. It deserved to fail. Unlike the Dreamcast, which should have won over the blown up PS2 architecture. But then, it was too late...

 

I think what Gorf was trying to say was that, for example, lets say there is this 3D polygon game on both the PS1 and Jaguar, now, the PS1 has lets say, 256 polygons per model, with it's standard 256 color textures in the usual Tomb Raider Resolution, running at 30fps. Now, on the Jaguar lets say the 256 polygon number has to be lowered to 200(to maintain the frame-rate). So you have less detailed PLAIN POLYGON models, but then, you add in 65,000 colors per texturemap, with textures at twice the resolution and still running at 30fps. Which do you think would look better in the end? The Jaguar version of course, becuase although it's pushing less polygons, the textures of a much higher res and color depth HIDE the fact there are less polygons. That's what he means by quality over quantity. Not that the game would necessarily suffer in the frame-rate department (though the Jag does have examples that do suffer...so far), as you are thinking, with the higher res and color textures..

Edited June 20, 2007 by Gunstar

[Vigo]

I think what Gorf was trying to say was that, for example, lets say there is this 3D polygon game on both the PS1 and Jaguar, now, the PS1 has lets say, 256 polygons per model, with it's standard 256 color textures in the usual Tomb Raider Resolution, running at 30fps. Now, on the Jaguar lets say the 256 polygon number has to be lowered to 200(to maintain the frame-rate). So you have less detailed PLAIN POLYGON models, but then, you add in 65,000 colors per texturemap, with textures at twice the resolution and still running at 30fps.

 

How do you want to achieve this, considering the Jaguar has less memory than the Playststation, and 16bit Textures take twice as much memory as 8 bit Textures?

 

I could also give you the other extreme: the PSX also supports 4 bit CLUT textures. Let's say we have a more detailed Polygon model than the Jag can display, and on top of that, due to the fact that the textures can be compressed to 4 bits, we can have MORE textures, for example for a much more detailed face and body appearance.

 

Which do you think would look better in the end? The Jaguar version of course, becuase although it's pushing less polygons, the textures of a much higher res and color depth HIDE the fact there are less polygons.

 

The PSX also supports 16bit Textures. And has more memory than the Jag. And, will most probably still outperform the Jag in this configuration.

 

That's what he means by quality over quantity.

 

Nope. What he means is that the PSX has certain rendering flaws and lacks certain features. Features which you could add by having somehow a general purpose GPU, but, since it is a general purpose GPU, it will suffer in Performance compared to a highly dedicated hardware solution. For example, the PSX can not display perspective correct textures, does not support mip mapping, there can be pop ups because the hardware does not support fogging, and the hardware doesn't have a Z-buffer, instead, it uses Z-sorting which can also cause glitches. Don't worry, I know what I am talking about.

[Atari_Owl]

For example, the PSX can not display perspective correct textures, does not support mip mapping, there can be pop ups because the hardware does not support fogging, and the hardware doesn't have a Z-buffer, instead, it uses Z-sorting which can also cause glitches. Don't worry, I know what I am talking about.

 

Ugh.. thats unfortunate... still if you split up your polys small enough the z sorting might not be too obvious i guess.

Pity about the (lack of) fogging and mipmapping too.

 

PS is not my area of know-how though.

[Gregory DG]

In addition to the release date being about 1 1/2 years apart, we're talking about SONY here. One of the richest companies in the world with practically unlimited cash resources to develop a game system. Then you have Atari on the other hand... Doing things on a shoestring. Buying up pretty cool technology from small companies and branding it as their own.

You are looking at it from a 2007 perspective.

 

It was a VERY risky business for Sony back in 1993 to enter the videogame market.

Not really. They had been eying the market for years and researching it, trying to form partnerships, etc. We look back now and see that Sony had very few stumbles. They knew what they were doing and had the cash to be successful.

 

You don't find the Jaguar to be amazing hardware considering the differences in cash resources between Atari and Sony?

 

Frankly, I find it amazing that we're even having this discussion. The PlayStation should have been SO much better that there's no question.

Such discussions are always triggered by fanboys of a certain system (no matter if Atari, Sega, etc...), without knowledge of technical specifications.

Gee, it's pretty easy to peg me as an Atari fanboy. I wouldn't have created The Atari Times if I wasn't.

 

However, even fanboyism must give way to facts. Yes, the PSX undeniably had better 3D hardware as I said in my previous post. (But then, *ANY* newer technology will be better than older tech!) Sony had the money and time to develop something better than the Jaguar. And certainly the differences seemed larger back then, but today... They don't seem all that different. Gorf's games/demos, BattleSphere, Skyhammer, Rayman, etc. are good examples.

 

Unfortunately, this debate will never end. So, until Gorf or someone else does Tomb Raider on the Jaguar we fanboys will keep pushing the Jaguar while the haters keep attacking it.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Gregory DG