They are hard to compare.
The Dreamcast is more like a like a mini-PC and does things the "honest" way compared to the PS2 which is a typical Sony proprietary freak show.
Yes, I am biased towards SEGA.
I think a lot of people don’t realize that the Dreamcast launched in Japan almost a year earlier than the famous 9/9/99 North American launch date. So you’re comparing hardware from 1998 to the PS2’s 2000 launch.
Mega drive also launched 2 years before Snes and its more powerful. PS2 Quake 3 looks a lot worse than Dreamcast version and it had more development time.
Certain games look and run better if they were purposely programmed/coded for either system. Otherwise you get lazy ass shitshows that are missing graphical effects and sounds.
Genesis:
Nobunaga’s Ambition - menus have transparencies and it just plays really well; sounds good too but don’t expect miracles in a conquer-fuedal-Japan game from Koei
Mortal Kombat II - colors are ugly and so is the dithering(?); the sounds are bad too cuz no one in the US can properly utilize the Yamaha sound chip. I still only play the Sega versions if I’m not emulating the actual arcade roms
SNES:
Nobunaga’s Ambition - menus are solid so you can’t see the territorial map of Japan behind them and a certain menu button looks odd
Mortal Kombat II - colors, shading, etc. look far better and the sounds are good on that Sony sound chip but the resolution is way off compared to other ports
The SNES does suffer from a goofy default resolution though so again, if the game wasn’t purpose built for it then it can look bad.
I love the Sega Genesis, Sega CD, and Saturn although I do have favorites on the SNES and NES (which has so many cool recently translated rpgs and more nowadays).
I have seen SNES ports of games that have additional transparencies and effects that the Genesis ports lack but if the programmers were shit then they were shit and dumb management, expectations, budgets, and timeframe also bring ruin to what can be good ported games (look at what those guys recently did with the 32x version of DOOM which is amazing). Granted, hardware limitations do apply but so does the human element.
The Dreamcast version plays flawlessly, the arcade version was on Naomi hardware. The PS2 port is fricked.
The Dreamcast also has slowdown and its near arcade perfect. It is not an issue as almost all capcom fighting games had this. I owned PS3 MVC2 and my god that version fricking sucked.
hard to tell >Both have 233 Mhz CPU >Dreamcast has a 128 bit cpu while ps2 was a 64 bit cpu. >Dreamcast has 32 MB ram,ps2 had 12 MB ram >Dreamcast gpu depends on country,while ps2 was emotion engine (a chipset with lower specs then dreamcast GPU)
is hard to tell.
Was there even a single game that was primarily developed for PS2 and then later got a Dreamcast port?
It would have had to come out during a very brief window. Maybe one of the sports titles.
Yes. The CPU was clocked 50% higher for example. I'm sure the graphics department was more powerful too, but that's more difficult to just assign a number value to.
I liked the Dreamcast graphics better, they had a clean look and usually ran fast, the PS2 graphics looked more detailed, but also looked more muddy and dark.
I look at it like this:
Resident Evil Code: Veronica was developed for the Dreamcast and it looks like it does. The PS2 got a port of Resident Evil 4, and while it’s inferior to the GameCube version, it’s at least in the same ballpark. Not a chance in hell a Dreamcast port of RE4 would come even close.
The NES was more powerful than the Playstation 2. Dumbass.
They are hard to compare.
The Dreamcast is more like a like a mini-PC and does things the "honest" way compared to the PS2 which is a typical Sony proprietary freak show.
Yes, I am biased towards SEGA.
Gee I couldn't tell
I can't pick a favorite from that generation yet but it's obvious Sony had the most games by a Longshot
They have 5x the library but supposedly they all play different. The mechanics look the same but maybe they do
We're only talking about the hardware in this thread, bud.
why didnt the PS2 have 4 controller ports when fricking N64 had it and goldeneye was such a big hit?
Probably because the Dreamcast and N64 underperformed in Japan, and Sony execs saw that as a bad sign.
because the PS1 didn't and it BTFO the competition anyway, they didn't care.
because everyone outgrew that shit. playing on 1/4th of your tv and having all your friends see where you were stunk. PS2 had online multiplayer
>ps2 had online multiplayer
soulless
graphically yes, dreamcast just had less ram so technically no.
t. know nothing about this shit
I think a lot of people don’t realize that the Dreamcast launched in Japan almost a year earlier than the famous 9/9/99 North American launch date. So you’re comparing hardware from 1998 to the PS2’s 2000 launch.
Mega drive also launched 2 years before Snes and its more powerful. PS2 Quake 3 looks a lot worse than Dreamcast version and it had more development time.
>Mega drive also launched 2 years before Snes and its more powerful.
Highly debatable. At any rate, the PS2 had more advanced hardware. The Dreamcast never would’ve been able to keep up.
Go ahead and explain how the SNES is more powerful when every single multiplat looks and runs worse on snes.
Such as?
>when every single multiplat looks and runs worse
You know this isn’t true, fricking idiot
Tendie you know it is true. For every superior snes multiplat you can probably name 25 better on Mega Drive.
Certain games look and run better if they were purposely programmed/coded for either system. Otherwise you get lazy ass shitshows that are missing graphical effects and sounds.
Genesis:
Nobunaga’s Ambition - menus have transparencies and it just plays really well; sounds good too but don’t expect miracles in a conquer-fuedal-Japan game from Koei
Mortal Kombat II - colors are ugly and so is the dithering(?); the sounds are bad too cuz no one in the US can properly utilize the Yamaha sound chip. I still only play the Sega versions if I’m not emulating the actual arcade roms
SNES:
Nobunaga’s Ambition - menus are solid so you can’t see the territorial map of Japan behind them and a certain menu button looks odd
Mortal Kombat II - colors, shading, etc. look far better and the sounds are good on that Sony sound chip but the resolution is way off compared to other ports
The SNES does suffer from a goofy default resolution though so again, if the game wasn’t purpose built for it then it can look bad.
I love the Sega Genesis, Sega CD, and Saturn although I do have favorites on the SNES and NES (which has so many cool recently translated rpgs and more nowadays).
I have seen SNES ports of games that have additional transparencies and effects that the Genesis ports lack but if the programmers were shit then they were shit and dumb management, expectations, budgets, and timeframe also bring ruin to what can be good ported games (look at what those guys recently did with the 32x version of DOOM which is amazing). Granted, hardware limitations do apply but so does the human element.
Are these worse looking multiplats in the room with us right now?
>looks
?
>every
??
specs? yes.
library? depends.
soul? no.
dreamcast wins.
/thread
>library? depends.
on paper yes, just like how the PS3 was better than the 360 on paper. didn't matter though as games ended up looking shit on PS2 anyway
The PS3 was not better than the 360, even on paper
Did the DC version of Marvel 2 had slowdown issues? I have noticed this game gets laggy sometimes.
The Dreamcast version plays flawlessly, the arcade version was on Naomi hardware. The PS2 port is fricked.
PS2 was a shit port which is why you typically see it sell for a lot less than the Dreamcast and Xbox versions.
The Dreamcast also has slowdown and its near arcade perfect. It is not an issue as almost all capcom fighting games had this. I owned PS3 MVC2 and my god that version fricking sucked.
Capcom are lazy porters
Why is everyone but spider man doing so.yface?
You know he's doing it behind the mask
The PS2 was powerful enough to launch missiles, remember?
They claimed that the PS2 would be able to render Toy Story in real time.
It could render FFVIII fmvs in real time
PS2 was unable to run Shenmue. Put it together.
PS2 could push more polygons on screen and had better grafics, but CPU wise was a toaster.
Would the 2003 Metal Gear Solid 2 version for Windows PC set to the lowest settings be similar to what a Dreamcast version would have looked like?
hard to tell
>Both have 233 Mhz CPU
>Dreamcast has a 128 bit cpu while ps2 was a 64 bit cpu.
>Dreamcast has 32 MB ram,ps2 had 12 MB ram
>Dreamcast gpu depends on country,while ps2 was emotion engine (a chipset with lower specs then dreamcast GPU)
is hard to tell.
Man, you have no idea what you are talking about. Try reading sometime!
Those richgays at digital foundry should pay someone to write a benchmark for the whole sixth generation of systems and see what they each score.
Was there even a single game that was primarily developed for PS2 and then later got a Dreamcast port?
It would have had to come out during a very brief window. Maybe one of the sports titles.
Yes. The CPU was clocked 50% higher for example. I'm sure the graphics department was more powerful too, but that's more difficult to just assign a number value to.
Yeas the ps tsu wuz moar powerfuller but onry teh dc is powered by powah vr
It could of been twice as powerful but without that DVD drive it was always going to fail
I liked the Dreamcast graphics better, they had a clean look and usually ran fast, the PS2 graphics looked more detailed, but also looked more muddy and dark.
I look at it like this:
Resident Evil Code: Veronica was developed for the Dreamcast and it looks like it does. The PS2 got a port of Resident Evil 4, and while it’s inferior to the GameCube version, it’s at least in the same ballpark. Not a chance in hell a Dreamcast port of RE4 would come even close.