AdawgDaFAB
Member
Ten-Song said:
I was planning on doing a marathon of all the Sonic games (besides 2006) soon. Should I play the DC version or the GC port?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sonic Adventure confirmed for the Xbox Live Arcade
- Thread starter Shard
- Start date
I was planning on doing a marathon of all the Sonic games (besides 2006) soon. Should I play the DC version or the GC port?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Willy105 said:
The GC version was worse than the DC one IMHO... Changing texture filtering from bi-linear to tri-linear was the only nice graphical update performed... shadows were worse (IIRC no self-shadows on Sonic), frame-rate was worse (instead of mostly 30 fps with some drops you got seldom 60 fps with MANY drops at 30 fps or below...).
Azure Dream
Member
AdawgDaFAB said:
DC version.
AdawgDaFAB said:
Sorry it fit so well.Truthfully I am looking forward to S4 so I hope it turns out great.
DO NOT BE FOOLED, this avatar is not Sonic 4 logo or anything,
The Official Sonic 4 screen is WAY WORSE!
I guess this game is the proof that Sonic can't be good on psn/xbla :lol :lol
Seriously though why did they bother with this? Better not do it than doing it wrong, but I guess this is indeed Sega.
Pissing over their former glories seems the way to go for them now...
Ten-Song said:
You do realize we're talking about a company that cancelled a game from the American division because they thought it would create too much competition for a game from the Japanese division. Did I mention that the American game at best would come out 6 to 12 months later?
Just be cautious.Kulock said:
Many of the early copies of the game will not run on most Dreamcasts. My copy of SA1 used to ONLY work on my launch DC while all other systems would reject it. Now it doesn't even run on that one! There were a lot of copies made during the DC launch (which is when I purchased mine) and a lot of them were affected by this odd issue. So, if you hunt down a used copy, but sure that it isn't an early launch copy as it may not work.
Mael said:
Well I only know the same pieces about this that anybody can google but I'm talking about Eternal Champions for the Saturn. Apparently SoJ though it would cause too much competition for VF2 so they simply cancelled EC3. Like I say the most mind blowing thing is that given that they finished EC2 in mid 1995 there was no way EC3 would have made the same Christmas season as VF2. At best we're talking mid to late 1996. So the only VF game it could have competed with was Fighters Megamix. (There wasn't even another VF game released on the Saturn. Hell, VF3 didn't even come out in the arcades until Sept 1996 so EC3 and VF3 would have been released months apart at best.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_Champions#Cancelled_third_game
jetsetfluken
Member
Yes, yes, this was known to be the PC DX version, two bad things combined...of course this won't be close to playing the DC version plus 60 fps and all, but it's something.:lol
Let's hope for a PSN version too, as the rumors were pointing at that...however I can easily see it not making it to PSN, just like the other Sonic ports.
Let's hope for a PSN version too, as the rumors were pointing at that...however I can easily see it not making it to PSN, just like the other Sonic ports.
dave_d said:The funny part is when I first heard this story back in the 90's I didn't believe since it was so crazy. Of course after years more of craziness I have no problem believing it
That's the thing with Sega though, the crazier it gets the more likely it is to be true, the whole Sonic Xtreme is like the textbook example of 'corporate shit on a project'.
Heck the whole way they handled anything after the megadrive is a clusterfuck of funny and extremly sad.
ChackanKun
Member
Some of you guys are bitchin about a game I would love to see on the PSN
jetsetfluken
Member
So, any estimated release dates? Has it even been ESRB rated?
Ryu Hayabusa
Member
Chu chuuuuuu
Diablohead
Member
I think the xbla limit is 2gig anyway.jobber said:
If any of you have yet to play SA and want to try it, DO NOT buy this version, it's like buying sonic the hedgehog genesis for GBA if you never played sonic 1 before.
Azure Dream
Member
Diablohead said:
It's nowhere near that bad. But everything we've seen says it's a disappointment. It's the ancient PC port of an even older Dreamcast game, that they couldn't even be bothered to get working at 720P and widescreen (even though you can do that on the PC version), with some of the extra content cut out and being sold for extra. And Achievements. Nothing to applaud, but that's not even close to the trainwreck that was Sonic Genesis GBA.
Arpharmd B
Banned
Diablohead said:
I'm buying it. For a few reasons.
I love the first Sonic Adventure. On Dreamcast. Yes, 30 fps, in 480p with framerate drops, pop-in, and some buggy sections.
I enjoy the original Sonic Adventure more than Sonic Adventure 2, even though 2 had full 60fps, very clean gameplay and far less bugs.
I agree though the least they could have done was 720p. I mean 1080p and 60FPS is too much to ask, obviously, because this is Sega and all, but 720p and an enhanced framerate is not asking for much.
Kulock said:
Is the PC port any better than the GC one in the framerate department? I absolutely hated Sonic on GC because it spastically jumped to 60 then back to 30 and lower. The DC had a much better framerate because it was a locked 30fps (for the most part).
I AM JOHN!
Banned
If your system can handle it, then most definitely. PC SADX still has my biggest problem with the GameCube version, though, where all the character models are super shiny and look awful and then as soon as you hit an in-engine cutscene it looks just like the Dreamcast version.Arpharmd B said:
God, DX is such a terrible remake.
Hypertrooper
Member
I liked Sonic Adventures DX on the Game Cube. If i play this today, i will get eye cancer. I hope the XBLA Version get 720P Support.
btw. Easy 200GS in 2 Hours.
btw. Easy 200GS in 2 Hours.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
You can get all 130 emblems in 2 hours?Hypertrooper said:
Arpharmd B
Banned
I AM JOHN! said:
Yeah, I would have been happy with a straight Dreamcast port, as flawed as it was. Similar to what Namco gave us with Soul Calibur. That would have been fine. They can't even get that right :/
If it's as bad as the Gamecube version, then even I'm passing. That's just not acceptable.
Aaron Strife
Banned
well at least if you skip all the cut scenes you should be able to clear the adventure modes (the bulk of the achievements) pretty quicklyI AM JOHN! said:
each level is only about 2-3 minutes long on average
BlazeHedgehog
Member
Just as a reminder from the last SADXBLA thread, this is what the PC version of Sonic Adventure can do:
(click to enlarge)
Widescreen HD at 60fps, on a PC significantly less powerful than an Xbox 360 (I can barely run TF2 on low-to-medium settings). Compared to the XBLA port (in itself apparently based on the PC version) which is 640x480 and 30fps.
(click to enlarge)
Widescreen HD at 60fps, on a PC significantly less powerful than an Xbox 360 (I can barely run TF2 on low-to-medium settings). Compared to the XBLA port (in itself apparently based on the PC version) which is 640x480 and 30fps.
Diablohead
Member
I always wanted to play the SA games on live with achievements and sometime last year raised the question about SA2 being ported, lol. But seriously you have to wonder why the power of this gen's consoles can not run a "PC" port of an old game good enough, even my 6 year old pc played the SAdx pc demo when it first came out at 1024x768 much better then we hear about so far on xbla. WTF are they doing with it?Arpharmd B said:
It's why I stick it alongside sonic genesis, it's that bad.
*edit* sega1991 said it well.
Sega1991 said:Just as a reminder from the last SADXBLA thread, this is what the PC version of Sonic Adventure can do:
(click to enlarge)
Widescreen HD at 60fps, on a PC significantly less powerful than an Xbox 360 (I can barely run TF2 on low-to-medium settings). Compared to the XBLA port (in itself apparently based on the PC version) which is 640x480 and 30fps.
The PC port also looks terrible, thanks to terribly done high-def textures. The DC ones may be somewhat blurry but the high-res ones are an eyesore. I much prefer the DC/GCN version to the PC one, and I have played them all (and finished two).
riceandbeans
Member
Diablohead said:
Gotta blame Sega and the developer they chose. It's obvious they want a quick and cheap port.
It's funny because they delivered a kick-ass port of Outrun 2 with amazing HD graphics, but they shit all over their mascot.
Arpharmd B
Banned
Sega1991 said:
Sega has the code right there, already written on PC which, IIRC, is supposed to be easy as hell to port to Xbox.
Sega fails again.
Dead Man Typing
Member
Remember that a lot of these impressions are based off of an unannounced game, which is on Partner Net and may not be the final version. In fact, it almost certainly isn't. Well, I certainly hope it isn't.
We shouldn't be condemning it until it's available to buy and we can judge how much it sucks for ourselves. I'm hoping for a miracle.
We shouldn't be condemning it until it's available to buy and we can judge how much it sucks for ourselves. I'm hoping for a miracle.
OutlawSamurai
Banned
better be in HD and widescreen or no buy since I have it on DC
graywolf323
Member
before any IGN hate starts up 1UP also gave it a D
To Far Away Times
Member
shwimpy said:
To be honest that's probably too generous. The game is an abomination and directly responsible for Sonic going from a AAA platformer to a running joke without a punchline.
Man, Sega should put the PC version on Steam. They just added Sonic Spinball.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
ShockingAlberto said:
Fixed.
