• 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.

6'th gen hardware wars: Game Cube vs Xbox OG vs PS2 vs Dreamcast

Larsowitz

Neo Member
Mar 2, 2018
21
15
120
God Of War 1-2 looks amazing considering it's running on PS2, but indeed texture quality was far from good. I hope we will see GOW 1-2 remakes someday :)





But it's hard to emulate it correctly on PC, in hardware mode resolution is very high but characters shadows and postprocessing effects are missing. Only in software mode everything is rendered correctly, but only in native 512x384 resolution.

And now some GC screenshots
















I really just cant tell why people consider Metroid Prime 2 the most detailed (polygon wise) game on 6'th gen. To me it looks like standard game on Q3 engine.







Also texture quality isnt the best, maybe even half life 2 on xbox has better textures for the most part

F-Zero GX













Metroid Prime 1/2 both run at 60fps (locked). F-Zero GX as well.

I really like the original xbox and think that NGB and Panzer Dragoon Orta might be the best looking games of that generation, but Metroid 1/2 are very very close (RE4 obviously as well).

There might be a few technical differences on paper but looking at the hardware and games today I think that they are indeed very close.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Griffon

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
12,163
21,717
1,185
USA
dunpachi.com
Not certain if it has already been mentioned, but Dreamcast supports VGA for almost all of its titles. Zero Gunner 2 and Ikaruga look sick on a CRT PC monitor.
 

Journey

Member
Aug 18, 2014
1,606
232
340
The OG Xbox was severely underutilized.

PS2 dominated the 6th gen by a huge margin, that was the dev's bread and butter, there was almost no incentive to build an engine for Xbox, only games that were designed for something like the GeForce 3 on the PC, like Splinter Cell or Doom 3 could really show what Xbox was truly capable of, and at the time, PC gaming wasn't as popular.

There was so much headroom on Xbox that they were able to build a game like Enter the Matrix on PS2, and without any compromise in texture quality or scope, run the same game on Xbox at 1920 x 1080

Picture this, gamers were outraged when Destiny ran at 1080p on Xbox One as well as PS4, the thought process is that more emphasis could have been put on the PS4 version since most 1080p games that were on par, ran at 900p on Xbox One, this must mean that the PS4 version could've been tweaked to look better. Now imagine Enter the Matrix running 640 x 480 @ 30fps on one platform, and with improved texture work running at 1920 x 1080 @ 60 fps on the other, holy COW was Xbox underutilized.
 
Feb 15, 2018
1,415
911
370
United States
The OG Xbox was severely underutilized.

PS2 dominated the 6th gen by a huge margin, that was the dev's bread and butter, there was almost no incentive to build an engine for Xbox, only games that were designed for something like the GeForce 3 on the PC, like Splinter Cell or Doom 3 could really show what Xbox was truly capable of, and at the time, PC gaming wasn't as popular.

There was so much headroom on Xbox that they were able to build a game like Enter the Matrix on PS2, and without any compromise in texture quality or scope, run the same game on Xbox at 1920 x 1080

Picture this, gamers were outraged when Destiny ran at 1080p on Xbox One as well as PS4, the thought process is that more emphasis could have been put on the PS4 version since most 1080p games that were on par, ran at 900p on Xbox One, this must mean that the PS4 version could've been tweaked to look better. Now imagine Enter the Matrix running 640 x 480 @ 30fps on one platform, and with improved texture work running at 1920 x 1080 @ 60 fps on the other, holy COW was Xbox underutilized.
Matrix was 1080i in other words same pixels as 720p
 

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
Not certain if it has already been mentioned, but Dreamcast supports VGA for almost all of its titles. Zero Gunner 2 and Ikaruga look sick on a CRT PC monitor.
Graphics

"Incredible. Absolutely incredible. Under Defeat has some of the best graphics you’ll ever see, and I will go as far as to say that they rival the graphics you’ll see on a PS360, and blow the Wii away. "
:dreamfag:
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
691
658
295
Metroid Prime 1/2 both run at 60fps (locked). F-Zero GX as well.

I really like the original xbox and think that NGB and Panzer Dragoon Orta might be the best looking games of that generation, but Metroid 1/2 are very very close (RE4 obviously as well).

There might be a few technical differences on paper but looking at the hardware and games today I think that they are indeed very close.
I think if more devs would have gotten behind specific engines built for Xbox, we'd see even more of a difference, as said above. Having said that, pushing multiplatforms to 720p that only ran at 480p back then with better framerates is a massive gulf. Hulk Ultimate Destruction being a great example and one of the better games that gen to boot.

Also, there weren't any games on the competition like halo's that could run split screen with massive scale, vehicles, and tons of effects. Even 4 player splitscreen online.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck
Feb 15, 2018
1,415
911
370
United States
Have you played Fzero GX on real GC hardware? I'm using emulator and analog sticks on my xbox one gamepad are too sensitive to the point I cant even stay on track. I wonder if controls on real GC were also so bad or it's just emulator to blame. Game looks fun and also music is very good, but controls ruins everything for me.
You need a gamecube controller, plus the emulation could give you trouble
 
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
The OG Xbox was severely underutilized.

PS2 dominated the 6th gen by a huge margin, that was the dev's bread and butter, there was almost no incentive to build an engine for Xbox, only games that were designed for something like the GeForce 3 on the PC, like Splinter Cell or Doom 3 could really show what Xbox was truly capable of, and at the time, PC gaming wasn't as popular.

There was so much headroom on Xbox that they were able to build a game like Enter the Matrix on PS2, and without any compromise in texture quality or scope, run the same game on Xbox at 1920 x 1080

Picture this, gamers were outraged when Destiny ran at 1080p on Xbox One as well as PS4, the thought process is that more emphasis could have been put on the PS4 version since most 1080p games that were on par, ran at 900p on Xbox One, this must mean that the PS4 version could've been tweaked to look better. Now imagine Enter the Matrix running 640 x 480 @ 30fps on one platform, and with improved texture work running at 1920 x 1080 @ 60 fps on the other, holy COW was Xbox underutilized.
Indeed, like the 2 others contenders.(NGC/DC)
That's a shame :/ but X Box OG had a second life with 4K BC on the One :)
 
Feb 15, 2018
1,415
911
370
United States
I actually always thought 6th gen should have lasted longer ; all 3 consoles had a bit more left in the tank. And most of us were still on CRTs so it's not like we desperately needed HD.

360 and ps3 looked long in the tooth before 6th gen did.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
  • Like
Reactions: Romulus and SonGoku

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
12,163
21,717
1,185
USA
dunpachi.com
Graphics

"Incredible. Absolutely incredible. Under Defeat has some of the best graphics you’ll ever see, and I will go as far as to say that they rival the graphics you’ll see on a PS360, and blow the Wii away. "
:dreamfag:
I have the PS3 version and the Dreamcast version does indeed blow the later console ports away, if that's worth anything. Not only are the visuals clearer, but the performance is better. I do like the 16:9 "New Order" play mode, but it's a different game compared to the arcade original in terms of slowdown.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fat Frog

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
I have the PS3 version and the Dreamcast version does indeed blow the later console ports away, if that's worth anything. Not only are the visuals clearer, but the performance is better. I do like the 16:9 "New Order" play mode, but it's a different game compared to the arcade original in terms of slowdown.
I think the reviewer was comparing Under Defeat to regular PS360 games and not to the later ports. That's why he mentioned the Wii (no Under Defeat on Wii).

He is right, Under Defeat looks like a PS360 game :)
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
12,163
21,717
1,185
USA
dunpachi.com
I think the reviewer was comparing Under Defeat to regular PS360 games and not to the later ports. That's why he mentioned the Wii (no Under Defeat on Wii).

He is right, Under Defeat looks like a PS360 game :)
Ahh, gotcha. I didn't check the date of the review compared to the later ports. He's definitely right about those smoke effects and the audio.

As an aside, I was first introduced to this game by someone who owned the NAOMI version, plugged into his Astro City. Quite the eye-candy.
 
Last edited:

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
Ahh, gotcha. I didn't check the date of the review compared to the later ports. He's definitely right about those smoke effects and the audio.

As an aside, I was first introduced to this game by someone who owned the NAOMI version, plugged into his Astro City. Quite the eye-candy.
It's even more impressive when you know there are only 8 employees at G Rev and that Sfx are not the biggest strenght of the console... Imagine a Final fantasy team game with modern tools on the system.
 

Esppiral

Member
Nov 19, 2018
216
248
240
The fact that you can patch Xbox games to run in native 1280x720 on a modded Xbox speaks for itself of how much powerful (and underutilized) the original Xbox was.

This games run on a stock xbox @ 1280x720 it you patch them, the screenshots are taken directly from my Xbox.

Gun Valkyrie ( it runs at 60 fps @ 1280x720, slowdowns when tons of alpha effects on screen)




Silent Hill 2 (flawless 30 fps @ 1280x720)






Metal Arms

Stays 30-north 20's fps @1280x720




Voddo Vince

Perfect 30fps @1280x720




GTA III North 30 fps, better performance than the ps2 version. 1280xx720. ( on top of the insane graphical overhaul over the original ps2 version

)




Don't remember the name of this game lol ( it runs fine but it often hangs due to the game running out of ram running at 1280x720.






Nightcaster Another game perfectly patched @ 1280x720




PGR- this one is quite unplayable since when the game can't keep 60 fps in runs in slow motion.




PGR2- (Sadly this one can only rin on 128mb Xboxes) on a stock Xbox (64mb) you can only navigate the garage it hangs loading a race.

Video running on a 128mb Xbox it does so quite well.




Kameo (unrealeased) it hangs a lot since it is unfinished material but ir runs at 1280x720 incredible stable






And the list goes on, MS planned the original Xbox to ship with 128mb but they ultimately released it with 64 mb, and that is what holds it to run more games patched @720p on a stock Xbox.

People really underestimate how much powerful the XBox is compared to the rest of the consoles of that generation.

And just to be clear this are NOT emulator screenshots.
 
Last edited:

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
546
481
285
Esppiral amazing screenshots, I didn't know it was possible to patch xbox games to run in 720p, and if performance is still acceptable in a lot of games then it means xbox hardware was indeed extremely underutilized. I remember RAM was very expensive back in 2001 so 128MB was probably out of question anyway, but if xbox would have 128MB plus improved bandwidth then probably all PS2 ports would run at 720p. NV2A (xbox GPU) was even faster than GeForce3 (it had a second vertex shader pipeline and higher clocks like in Geforce 4), but even Geforce 3 was running some games at 1600x1200, not to mention 720p at 30fps.




Esppiral Thanks for yo
X-Men Legends, Legends 2, and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance all ran at 720p on Xbox

Tons of action onscreen with physics and semi destructable environments.
I have never played X-Men Legends, but it looks really good on your screenshots, I can even see bump mapping. Edit- it looks like you have linked x360 screenshot :messenger_beaming:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Romulus

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
691
658
295
The fact that you can patch Xbox games to run in native 1280x720 on a modded Xbox speaks for itself of how much powerful (and underutilized) the original Xbox was.

This games run on a stock xbox @ 1280x720 it you patch them, the screenshots are taken directly from my Xbox.

Gun Valkyrie ( it runs at 60 fps @ 1280x720, slowdowns when tons of alpha effects on screen)




Silent Hill 2 (flawless 30 fps @ 1280x720)






Metal Arms

Stays 30-north 20's fps @1280x720




Voddo Vince

Perfect 30fps @1280x720




GTA III North 30 fps, better performance than the ps2 version. 1280xx720. ( on top of the insane graphical overhaul over the original ps2 version

)




Don't remember the name of this game lol ( it runs fine but it often hangs due to the game running out of ram running at 1280x720.






Nightcaster Another game perfectly patched @ 1280x720




PGR- this one is quite unplayable since when the game can't keep 60 fps in runs in slow motion.




PGR2- (Sadly this one can only rin on 128mb Xboxes) on a stock Xbox (64mb) you can only navigate the garage it hangs loading a race.

Video running on a 128mb Xbox it does so quite well.




Kameo (unrealeased) it hangs a lot since it is unfinished material but ir runs at 1280x720 incredible stable






And the list goes on, MS planned the original Xbox to ship with 128mb but they ultimately released it with 64 mb, and that is what holds it to run more games patched @720p on a stock Xbox.

People really underestimate how much powerful the XBox is compared to the rest of the consoles of that generation.

And just to be clear this are NOT emulator screenshots.

Wow, I did not know that. I found a list of games that can patch that guy test each one of them.

Xbox was damn near a 720p machine, probably almost across the board with some work. But I'm guessing most people didnt have TVs to support it then so it wasn't worth it.

Tab to "results"


Lol Half Life 2 runs at 720p "with some lag" amazing. Some big time games on there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
691
658
295
I would really want to know what "some lag" means because the game could drop to low 20s, high 10's in 480i...
Me too. I'll try it.

To be fair, its 480p compatible stock though. Massive difference in image quality over 480i but nowhere near 720p.

For me, the game had bad drops but they weren't that often thankfully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
546
481
285
You need a gamecube controller, plus the emulation could give you trouble
I have found solution for thumbsticks sensitivity
I have 2 Dolphin emulator builds. In old dolphin build I have to change analog range to max 75% instead of 100%. In new build however all I need to do is run thumbstick calibration. Everything works correctly now :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chozofication_
Feb 15, 2018
1,415
911
370
United States
128mb is the last thing xbox needed ; even 8.0 GB/s ram with no eDRAM would've been much more beneficial, plus a little front side bus tweaking.

The fact that metal arms goes from a 60fps target to 20-30 is telling

GameCube could've ditched the 16mb slow audio ram, and 1tsram in favor of maybe a 48mb pool of 4.8gb/s ddr. The 1tsram was nice but wasn't really needed since GameCube had tons of CPU cache.

Then give 1mb more for the framebuffer (eDRAM) to allow for HD output and get rid if the image dithering.

Cube could've done hd as well, but you HAD to keep the framebuffer in the eDRAM, so that is why wii and cube arent HD.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
691
658
295
lol he literally pointed out the worst scenario from posted above with Metal Arms and ignored the other games that jumped to 720p(massive difference) with minimal change to the framerate. It could have been something to do with Metal Arms extra visuals effects over the Gamecube version. They might have been able to match the GC visual state and been fine at 720p or get it very close. Again, alot of these games are hitting close to their framerates at 720p... with ZERO optimization, that's key.



The Xbox version is far and away the best looking of the three--it features lots of nice dynamic lighting and some subtle textural effects on its surfaces, such as highlights on metal. The GameCube version is actually not too far behind the Xbox version--it looks almost as good in terms of effects, though its frame rate is noticeably lower.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2018
7
3
90
Because they look like shit
Conker is beatiful. Halo looks very dated though.

Anyway, different question. How much potential was still left in the Dreamcast? Given it had done better and would have seen '02-'04.
There were quite a lot of cancelled games for the system, and despite lacking many effects of other games of the same generation, late Dreamcast games usually look great.
What do you think?
 

SonGoku

Member
Aug 16, 2018
3,500
3,309
550

CyberPanda

Banned
Mar 4, 2019
8,817
13,309
1,130
Compared to starfox i meant, I was way more impressed by it before even factoring the frame rate gap.
That said i think Metroid prime looks like dog shit, i seriously don't get the praise the game gets. Factor 5 games were way more impressive
So much swearing my goodness. Shit this, shit that.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: SonGoku

CyberPanda

Banned
Mar 4, 2019
8,817
13,309
1,130
I Loved Ninja Gaiden, Ninja Gaiden Black, DOA3 and DOAU on the Xbox. Team Ninja ruled back then. The Ninja Gaiden Master Ninja Tournament and online fighting in DOAU on Xbox Live was epic.

The intro for Dead or Alive Ultimate was heavy.
I loved DOAU.
 

Journey

Member
Aug 18, 2014
1,606
232
340
Matrix was 1080i in other words same pixels as 720p

That is incorrect. 1080i is just a method of displaying. The i and p represent interlaced or progressive and has nothing to do with the amount of pixels. As far as the GPU is concerned, it needs to render 1920 x 1080 pixels at the frame buffer, how it's sent out to be displayed is a different story

Resolution
Both 1080p and 1080i have 1080 horizontal lines of vertical resolution which with a widescreen aspect ratio of 16:9 results in a resolution of 1920 × 1080 pixels (2.1 megapixels). It is not true that 1080i has a lower vertical resolution than 1080p.
Frames vs. fields
1080p is a frame-based or progressive-scan video where you are dealing with frames. You have frame rate and it is expressed in frames per second.
1080i is a field-based or interlaced or interleaved video where you are dealing with fields. You have field rate and it is expressed in fields per second.
A field contains half of the lines of the frame, either even lines or odd lines, and if one field is composed of even lines, then the next one will be composed of odd lines and so on.

But let's play Devil's advocate and pretend 1080i is the same resolution as 720p, we're still comparing 640 x 480 resolution vs 1280 x 720, that's a MASSIVE - MASSIVE boost, one is true HD and the other is just plain SD, it's basically the difference between the standard of 6th gen vs 7th gen, so in essence, Xbox was almost a generation ahead.
 
Last edited:

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
Conker is beatiful. Halo looks very dated though.

Anyway, different question. How much potential was still left in the Dreamcast? Given it had done better and would have seen '02-'04.
There were quite a lot of cancelled games for the system, and despite lacking many effects of other games of the same generation, late Dreamcast games usually look great.
What do you think?
Quite enough, especially if developpers use the same ps2 tricks to save ressources(corridors, fixed cameras...)
The screenshots you're showing are from tiny studios like No Cliche, Climax Graphics. Dreamcast games from Kojima, Square would be exciting to imagine...
 
Feb 15, 2018
1,415
911
370
United States
That is incorrect. 1080i is just a method of displaying. The i and p represent interlaced or progressive and has nothing to do with the amount of pixels. As far as the GPU is concerned, it needs to render 1920 x 1080 pixels at the frame buffer, how it's sent out to be displayed is a different story




But let's play Devil's advocate and pretend 1080i is the same resolution as 720p, we're still comparing 640 x 480 resolution vs 1280 x 720, that's a MASSIVE - MASSIVE boost, one is true HD and the other is just plain SD, it's basically the difference between the standard of 6th gen vs 7th gen, so in essence, Xbox was almost a generation ahead.
1080i is the same resolution in pixels, but at effectively half the processing cost.

Xbox was most certainly not almost a generation ahead of ps2 in processing capability, that is a ridiculously hyperbolic statement. Ps2 had higher fillrate and waaaay higher memory bandwidth, two things i wouldn't equate with being a generation behind lol.

Likewise, ps2 is still overall weaker than cube despite gt4 running in 1080i.
 
Last edited:

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
546
481
285







Yeah Sure it looks bad....

More direct framebuffers dumps from xbox games...














Awesome screenshots, these xbox games looks amazing in 720p. But what's interesting Riddick is using dynamic resolution, so if you run it at 720p most of the time resolution will be much lower anyway.

When it comes to Splinter Cell 3 screenshot at 720p it looks like an early x360/ps3 game. I wanted to make screenshot comparison between xbox, PS2 and GC but after playing PS2 and GC versions I'm discouraged because they both look extremely bad compared to xbox version. In PS2/GC levels are just corridors like in PS1 game, and everything besides character models is low poly. What's strange PS2 version has way better water rendering than GC and even Xbox version but that's just one possitive thing.
 

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
546
481
285
1080i is the same resolution in pixels, but at effectively half the processing cost.

Xbox was most certainly not almost a generation ahead of ps2 in processing capability, that is a ridiculously hyperbolic statement. Ps2 had higher fillrate and waaaay higher memory bandwidth, two things i wouldn't equate with being a generation behind lol.

Likewise, ps2 is still overall weaker than cube despite gt4 running in 1080i.
1080i looks razor sharp on my 1920x1080 plasma screen, but 1080i in GT4 looks like subHD (native resolution looks way worse than even subhd games on x360). IMO it's upscaled picture, while these moded xbox games run in real 720p.

When it comes to PS2 vs Xbox comparison, PS2 hardware had indeed better memory bandwidth so alpha effects were faster on PS2. For example I have played lately San Andreas on PS2, when there's fire and smoke framerate is solid on PS2 (30fps) while on xbox there is literally 15-20fps then. But without alpha effects on the screen it's the opposite, PS2 dips like crazy to 22-25 fps frequently during entire time and there are also streaming pauses, while framerate on xbox is really smooth. So game run MUCH BETTER 99% of the time on xbox.

Although alpha effects were indeed xbox classic hardware weak point, but xbox had also MANY strong points compared to PS2. That's why xbox games like splinter cell 3 on PS2 looks like generation behind.
 
Last edited:

Esppiral

Member
Nov 19, 2018
216
248
240
Gran turismo 4 runs nowhere near 1280x 720 let alone 1920x 1080 in fact the actual frame buffer is something around 512x 224, or 640x 224 don't remember exactly, (someone correct me if a I'm wrong) people confuse upscalinng and image to a certain resolution with rendering a picture at one specific resolution.

Also IIRC the ps3 has less bandwidth than the ps2 and no one is gonna deny that the ps2 is a generation behind it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

EightBit Man

Member
Jun 13, 2019
450
735
355
The Netherlands
dc soul calibur was a quantum leap

i was playing quake 3 / hl on pc at the time, good as those games looked they didn't come close to the shit that little machine was cranking
Indeed, and same here as a PC owner. It was also very impressive that the game was beyond arcade perfect (the home version surpassing the original arcade one in terms of visual fidelity and features). Great times!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Esppiral

Fat Frog

Member
Mar 21, 2019
105
79
185
These are bullshots but still...DOA3 raped Tekken 4, Virtua Fighter 4 graphics. To come (a little)close the PS2 had to wait VF4 Evolution in 2003 and Tekken 5 in 2005.

IQ was so clean on X Box, so dirty on PS2 :/ (i was so jealous)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EightBit Man

Doczu

Member
Aug 17, 2012
2,351
379
520
Poland
Dead or Alive 2 for the Dreamcast was also incredibly impressive for that time. Soulcalibur was even more impressive than that (at least in my book)...
Soul Calibur was the game that made me drool when i saw the Dreamcast. I was a god damn poor fag when it launched and i bought one in 2011 but even then the game made me go "wow" when i launched it.
When i saw it originally in motion and compared it to my Tekken 3 i couldn't believe it was possible. Smooth, pretty. For me it was the biggest generational leap - EVER.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightBit Man

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
691
658
295
The same 6'th generation

GC vs Xbox

PS2 vs Xbox














HUD glitch, but the Xbox can even run at native 720p with a just a 64mb RAM upgrade, the superior textures and lighting over the other versions popped even more here and truly looks almost a generation ahead. But it really goes to show how much headroom the XBox had I think. With some optimization, it could have likely hit a middle ground resolution between 480-720p with the same graphic quality on a stock Xbox. So, on top of all the added features the Xbox version had, despite teams working specifically with the other versions, the Xbox could still have some headroom beyond the extras.

 
Last edited: