30 replies to this topic

[silverismoney]

after looking up some gc and wii physics i was wondering what other people wanted and expected and ofcourse what wiiu will offer once we know the specs

GC AND Wii have amazing physics way above what the average neogaffer (idiot) told us it could have

elibits, mario galaxy 1/2 ,boom box,wii sports resort ,mario 128 and many more there be some grand physics on those two systems with powerpc out of order and a compute shader gpu the skys the limit

[Hinkik]

I don't actually see where they used a physics engine in Super Mario galaxy actually. The jumps may just been a simple animation. But since nintendo is so talented it looks like they use a high tech physics engine.

[Desert Punk]

High memory bandwidth was the main good feature of gamecube for its time, its about the only area it excelled above the original xbox. I don't remember any GC or wii games with a good physics engine like something like Half LIfe 2 on original xbox. In that game you could interact and throw, drop, push objects around you and they would act in a realistic way, they had their own gravity effects etc and vibration or explosions could move them. Quite an achievement for the original xbox and not something I've ever encountered on gamecube or wii in a similar way.

[3Dude]

High memory bandwidth was the main good feature of gamecube for its time, its about the only area it excelled above the original xbox. I don't remember any GC or wii games with a good physics engine like something like Half LIfe 2 on original xbox. In that game you could interact and throw, drop, push objects around you and they would act in a realistic way, they had their own gravity effects etc and vibration or explosions could move them. Quite an achievement for the original xbox and not something I've ever encountered on gamecube or wii in a similar way.

Nintendos licensed havok since the gamecube. Though they dont typically use it in its traditional fashion, but tweaked the settings on the engine to all kinds of cartoony levels, see smash bros brawl.

On gamecube, the game gheist used the havok physics engine in a realistic manner like hl2.

Was particularly fun when going into slow mo ghost mode after setting off a chain reaction of explosions and just watching all the debris and guards floating around, especially when the breakable doors blow apart peice by peice.

Like on the xbox, when too many objects are set in motion they are removed at random.

Wii has elebits, which absolutely rapes anything on the xbox, with several hundreds and possibly thousands of simultaneously animated physics routines. Everything from desk pens to the house itself can be picked up and manipulated. Level editor was a popular physics playground for a while.

3ds can run havok, and a splinter cell game does, but looks like poo poo. Havok stated their engine is not a good fit for the 3ds, as it doesnt leave a lot of room for the overhead of auxilerry middle ware like havok.

Proprietary in game physics engines seem to be much more viable on the 3ds, as shown by luigis mansion.

Mario galaxy had a very sophisticated heavily customized havok physics engine, as havok was not designed to support such.... imaginative uses of gravity. Gamecube could.not.perform galaxies physics.

I wouldnt say the wii had fantastic physics, really all things considered it had crap physics compared to what its contemporary consoles were capable of....

Yet... Bizarrely.... The wii often had.some.of.the.smartest, most impressive uses of physics systems, emulating a dmm like physics dependant ai routine that the other systems were not only capable of, but to a much better resolution.... Yet just didnt make.much use of, and when they did it was purely cosmetic.

Something i found most frusterating to be honest.

First use was in wii sports, one of the tennis minigames that had targets on a brick wall. The targets would shatter according to point of impact of the ball, with the broken peices being made on the fly according to collision data, instead of pre drawn.

Excite truck made fantastic use of tesselation, deformation mapping, and real time.physics, as truck destruction damaged trucks in real time according to variables like the size and shape.of the impacting object, direction of travel, velocity, point of impact.

Trucks could be observed crumpling like a tin can in real time, and with smooth animation. An amusing glitch would be to pause a replay directly after an impact. The impact data has already been calculated, and it gets applied even though the game is paused, so you get to watch the car magically crumple.

Thanks to the sophisticated damage engine, The impacts are quite accurate to what causes them. If you smash into a tree, youll.find a dent the size and shape.of the tree. When a coconut from said tree.falls on top of your truck, it leaves a little coconut sized dent.

No crash was ever the same in the original excite truck. (excite bots got rid of this awesome damage system)

Which made it all the more frusterating to look at motorstorm and its psx era damage system of pre made asset swapping.

sports resort combined Nintendos proprietary dmm solution with physics data to allow players to carve objects up with swords in any manner they desired in the quick slice mini game.

This concept was the core foundation of skyward swords gameplay. Even just random slicing of reeds made a little game of physics and dmm, if you could keep the reed balanced while slicing it down to the glowy part you got rupees.

Frusteratingly, Ive found the use of physics in game to have, for some reason, be relegated to nothing more than eye candy post hl2.... With precious few games doing more than cosmetics...

And the ones that did the most with it... Had by FAR the least ability to do it. WTF?

Almost as frusterating a dissa
pointment as only having two full scale scale (ie not minigame) games out of an entire system library make proper use of motion controls.

Man this gen was a dissapointment.

Edited by 3Dude, 19 July 2012 - 02:47 PM.

[Nollog]

Nintendo has had the best looking water effects since Mario Sunshine.

[Alianjaro]

Nintendo has had the best looking water effects since Mario Sunshine.

cf. Pikmin 2

Oh and MH3's physics were awesome.

[3Dude]

cf. Pikmin 2

Oh and MH3's physics were awesome.

Monster hunter 3 huh.

I take it you are referring the extremely rare phenomenon of jiggle physics in a video game being used on something other than breasts.

[Alianjaro]

Monster hunter 3 huh.

I take it you are referring the extremely rare phenomenon of jiggle physics in a video game being used on something other than breasts.

Oh wait! My bad, I was talking about motion animation. Sorry. These were good in MH3, not the physics...

[kris1206]

Some of red steel 2's physics are pretty good similar to Skyward Sword.
Realistically speaking, Galaxy's physics are not perfect, some planets have a black hole right next to them, but nothing but mario gets sucked into them.
But I don't think realist physics are needed look at banjo kazooie a bird that can carry a bear that is probably more than 10 times its weight, that is technically impossible unless it has a wingspan the size of a small house

[3Dude]

Some of red steel 2's physics are pretty good similar to Skyward Sword.
Realistically speaking, Galaxy's physics are not perfect, some planets have a black hole right next to them, but nothing but mario gets sucked into them.
But I don't think realist physics are needed look at banjo kazooie a bird that can carry a bear that is probably more than 10 times its weight, that is technically impossible unless it has a wingspan the size of a small house

Thats because black holes were a specific gameplay mechanic soley for killing mario. They didnt have ANY physics at all. When mario fell from a platform he wasnt supposed to, once he passed a particular assigned y cordinate, a canned death animation was activated.

Red steel 2 had no real pysics engine in that regaurd.... Nor skyward swords 'dmm'.

All Red steels slicing animations were model swaps. Everything that could be sliced, had sliced up models already made, for every configuration of the 8 possible slicing directions and the combinations therof.

When you sliced something, like say those fun little human shaped boards, it removed the whole one, and replaced it with the pre made models of the cut version of the board. And a scripted animation sent the cut peice to the ground.

Thus, the boards always cut down the same line and always fell the same way everytime.

Skyward sword, takes into account where the sword makes contact with a cuttable object, and the direction, and utilizing an asset creating ai, draws two new assets, one for the cut off peice and one for the cut from peice.

Then the cut off peice is animated via a physics engine for its fall to the ground.

This is why, in skyward sword you can literally cut a sign as many times as you want, you can cut it in half, in quarters, you can shave off paper thin slices, and it never falls exactly the same twice.

[Desert Punk]

@silverismoney

Your not educating anyone, again you post complete rubbish about the specification of Nintendo consoles that has no relationship to the reality of these consoles. You hype up the performance of Nintendo's consoles and yet I can see for myself owning both wii and original xbox the performance. I use a projector upstairs that unfortunately when it comes to more dated consoles like wii and original xbox shows every deficiency visually of these consoles be it aliasing, low resolution textures, colour issues whatever.

You've stated 16bit colour for xbox above when of course the original xbox has 32bit colour which allows for a greater range of clever transparency effects etc not present on gamecube/wii. It also adds much improved 5.1 sound which the gamecube and wii don't have.

Games like Soul Caliber II were 720p on original xbox with no loss of frame rate.

Many xbox games are visually upgraded compared to gamecube. The idea that the powerpc chip is more powerful than the Celeron is pure nonsense because both consoles have been hacked and have homebrew emulators and the xbox emulators easily outperform gamecube and wii emulators.

I do know the gamecube and wii has some memory bandwidth advantages. The fact the original xbox has both the cpu and gpu sharing the same memory means you have a limitation there because the gamecube and wii have a dedicated 2 meg frame buffer with higher bandwidth and an additional 1 meg of texture cache.

Sometimes you just have to sigh at the posts in these forums of people that don't let reality get in the way of their arguments.

Clearly the gamecube has huge limitations compared to the original xbox, it has a more dated 24bit colour gpu, only 2 channel sound, 24meg main memory, 3 meg total video memory and 16 meg of very slow buffer memory to cache the optical drive and for sound storage. The original xbox has a more advanced gpu running about 50% faster which is capable of supporting 720p and 1080i games of which it has quite a few, instead of a weak 2 channel sound chip it has a dedicated 5.1 sound chip. Not only does it have a full size dual layer dvd drive it has the huge benefit of a hard drive that enables far more complex games. The cpu easily beats the gamecube and also goes beyond wii probably by a factor of 20-25%.

At the end of the day results speak for themselves.

Rare are incredibly competent programmers and I think a fair comparison would be something like starfox adventures on gamecube and conker's bad fur day on xbox. This I feel would be very fair comparison as they are similar games and would have been programmed to the same level of competence making the most of which each console offers. No manipulation, no low quality videos just both consoles producing the best graphics they are capable of thereabouts and both using similar gameplay mechanics.





I can tell you when I have played both games the amount of visual improvement in the xbox game is quite staggering, be it shadows, clever lighting effects not forgetting the full 3D sound effects you get that while playing Conker. It practically feels like Next gen comparing the original Xbox to Gamecube. Its clear those gamecube graphics for starfox are excellent on gamecube, some of the best I've seen on the system, excellent water effects apart from the waterfalls, and the detail on the characters is excellent. It does repeat textures a lot more though but generally they are very good.

If the original xbox did Starfox adventures the improvements it could have done, more lighting effects, larger levels, quicker loading, full surround sound, improved textures, a superior physics engine for manipulating objects, improved transparency effects, shadows and anything else I haven't thought of that a superior gpu and cpu, more memory and the benefit of a hard drive could have bought to the game.

[andodel]

Physics are based on the game Engine, so yeah. I mean, the game engine needs specs to run, but the physics themself are only as good as the engine. Great example is Source.

[Grooseland]

Rare are incredibly competent programmers and I think a fair comparison would be something like starfox adventures on gamecube and conker's bad fur day on xbox. This I feel would be very fair comparison as they are similar games and would have been programmed to the same level of competence making the most of which each console offers. No manipulation, no low quality videos just both consoles producing the best graphics they are capable of thereabouts and both using similar gameplay mechanics.





I can tell you when I have played both games the amount of visual improvement in the xbox game is quite staggering, be it shadows, clever lighting effects not forgetting the full 3D sound effects you get that while playing Conker. It practically feels like Next gen comparing the original Xbox to Gamecube. Its clear those gamecube graphics for starfox are excellent on gamecube, some of the best I've seen on the system, excellent water effects apart from the waterfalls, and the detail on the characters is excellent. It does repeat textures a lot more though but generally they are very good.

If the original xbox did Starfox adventures the improvements it could have done, more lighting effects, larger levels, quicker loading, full surround sound, improved textures, a superior physics engine for manipulating objects, improved transparency effects, shadows and anything else I haven't thought of that a superior gpu and cpu, more memory and the benefit of a hard drive could have bought to the game.

You forgot to mention that Starfox Adventures runs at 60FPS has bump mapping, self-shadowing, motion blur, no loading screens etc...

Also the fur shading in SFA for me looks more realistic than Conkers:



See the individual hair effect? Also the fur moves while Fox walks and when the wind is blowing. Again this is at 60FPS.



The fur shading on Conker looks teddy bear like, but I think that's part of the art style.

I think what these two games tells us is that the Gamecube was more efficient than the Xbox. The developer could put more
graphical enhancements at 60FPS while the Xbox could do more at 30FPS.

That's why the best graphics for Xbox are always at 30FPS like Doom or Riddick to name a few. Of course there are 60FPS good looking Xbox games like Ninja Gaiden or Panzer Dragoon but I don't think they look any better than Metroid Prime or Starfox Adventures.

I don't think the Xbox can do Rebel Strike at the same 60FPS, polygons and effects:






But I may be wrong.

Damn... those graphics are awesome

[Desert Punk]

The gamecube certainly couldn't do more than xbox at 60fps, you simply have a console with more limited memory resources and a weaker gpu which ultimately created a limit on what you could display. The videos speak for themselves. You can see where the game repeats textures, has fogging effects for distant detail and how generously it is with shadows. You don't need to do anything else than look at those 2 videos to see what each console was capable of. The frame rate on Conker is superb on xbox. I seem to remember there was a lot of loading on starfox adventures probably due to pushing the envelope with regard graphics and the limited memory of the gamecube.

Again the xbox gpu is far more advanced than the gamecube it is capable of many effects the gamecube can't do and this is clearly evident in the comparison above.

Please also note if you want to make a case that the gamecube is more powerful than the xbox you need to tackle head on the fact the xbox has a hard drive, more memory, a 8GB+ dvd drive, true 5.1 sound, more advanced gpu, faster cpu. You can't just ignore those features and expect to be taken seriously. You have to explain why those features aren't important. It staggers me how many people just come in with ultra biased comments who just ignore the bits they don't like.

Did you notice the way I accepted the gamecube and wii had superior memory bandwidth because they do, because thats a fair position to take?

Rogue Squadron is an impressive game but its a simple game, not much gameplay variation but a visual treat. Clearly I don't know how the xbox would perform in comparison because it never got that game hence why I've used 2 games by Rare that pushed the hardware of both consoles. I could have put a video of Half Life 2 on xbox and then compared it to some sort of basic fps game on gamecube again not really a valid comparison. These 2 rare games really represent what both consoles are capable of pushed close to the max.

[3Dude]

You forgot to mention that Starfox Adventures runs at 60FPS has bump mapping, self-shadowing, motion blur, no loading screens etc...

Also the fur shading in SFA for me looks more realistic than Conkers:



See the individual hair effect? Also the fur moves while Fox walks and when the wind is blowing. Again this is at 60FPS.



The fur shading on Conker looks teddy bear like, but I think that's part of the art style.

I think what these two games tells us is that the Gamecube was more efficient than the Xbox. The developer could put more
graphical enhancements at 60FPS while the Xbox could do more at 30FPS.

That's why the best graphics for Xbox are always at 30FPS like Doom or Riddick to name a few. Of course there are 60FPS good looking Xbox games like Ninja Gaiden or Panzer Dragoon but I don't think they look any better than Metroid Prime or Starfox Adventures.

I don't think the Xbox can do Rebel Strike at the same 60FPS, polygons and effects:






But I may be wrong.

Damn... those graphics are awesome

Pretty good observations.

The biggest difference between the cube and the box is that the cube was just designed so much better as a gaming machine... While the xbox had a certain trump card. And it wasnt anything remotely close to higher clocked processors.

Namely the differences can be broken down to ram, processor communication, and fixed function vs. programmable shaders.

The Xbox had more ram than the cube. At 64 MB to the cubes 40 MB. Unfortunately, this didnt mean much since the ram was poor quality ddr sdram clocked at 200 MHz. The cpu was 733 mhz, and the gpu was 233mhz. This alone is very poor design. Bottleneck city.

See, hz is the measure of cycles performed a second. Since all three of these important components are clocked differently, One component could be ready for data to crunch for a new cycle, but the other component it needs is busy in the middle of one of its cycles.... And so cycles are wasted.

Now, the first thing a normal human being thinks of is to synchronize the clocks of all components. Well, this just isnt practical, or possible for a variety of rea--

Go away 3ds you are the freakish exception to the rule.

Reasons, like thermal considerations power management etc.

But, what can be achieved practically, is getting your processors and ram in phase.

for example, the cube has a cpu at 486 MHz, and a gpu at 162 MHZ.

Well, 486 can be evenly divided by 162. By a factor of exactly 3. This means the amount of times the processors and ram 'line up' their cycles is at a much greater ratio on the cube than on the box.

In other words, the gamecube was FAR more capable of sustaining a usable number of cycles at a frequency closer to its clock speed than the xbox was.

Does that mean the xbox comoletely squandered away its 300 mhz advantadge? Well plenty of teams who made poopy games did, but for the most part, no, the bottle necks didnt reduce the system below the cubes capabilities, and while both were capable of running cpu intensive middleware like havok, the xbox did so far more frequently.... With the only game of note that comes to mind for the cube that can match physics with the likes of games like riddick or or doom iii being gheist.

Further helping out the cubes cpu, is nintendos love of using dsp's to handle all audio, so the cpu doesnt have to like on the xbox. The cube had an audio dsp, with a pool designated A mem, 16 MB of ddr ram pretty much all to itself, as super fast ram isnt exactly a necessity here, though devs could dip into it if they wanted/needed too.

The cubes big kicker though, was its seemingly tiny pool of main ram 24 MB of it. But this stuff was special, Mosys 1tsram. This stuff could sustain latency below 10ns. That runs CIRCLES around the 360's main ram, which, at standard ddr sdram of the time had a sustainable latency of about 30-40ns.

In other words, the cube could fill, use, clear, and refill 24MB of data 3-4x in the amount of time the Xbox could access its main ram once (assuming it doesnt have to wait on latency or out of phase cycles)

whats 24x4? Yup. 71MB. The cube was a dirt cheap multi pass beast, it could move data like a bat out of hell, it could stream content like no ones business.

On the cubes gpu side, it was fixed function, which means the processor was hardware equipped to seriously accelerate a chosen set of functions, like embm, emboss mapping, 8 hardware lights, self shadowing (criminally underused being it was used extensivy in a launch game) specular maps etc....

This made for incredibly fast use of effects with seriously reduced overhead, and the cube could outlayer the box in putting textures on models, 8 to the xbox's 6.

So far it sounds like all gravy for.the cube while the box sits in a pile of terds huh?

Well its NOT all gravy.

The cube optical disc was made very small to try and avoid piracy, thus rendering the cubes rom size pathetically tiny, this made things like videos, sound, and textures compete horribly for uber compressed space. For instance, Gheist, which makes excellent use of the cubes s3 texture compression and an lod system, had textures that remained sharp even if how stuck your face into them. Highest resolution textures of the generation hands down no contest. However, this left very little room for audio, which made gheist very stilted on the vo and sound effects front.

The xbox had a trump card. Its gpu featured the first programmable shader pipeline for home consoles. While its more or less the miserably designed machines (its literally put together from off the shelf components) only ace in the hole, its a WHOPPER. As it was the future of real time computer graphics.

Unlike the cube, which was fixed function, developers on the xbox could program their own shader routines into the pipeline, this means, they could use any effects their little hearts desired, while the cube was limited to what was put into it the day it was made.

This is why the xbox was able to acheive unified lighting and shadowing environments and make games that looked like doom 3, or chronicles of riddick, something the cube could never hope to emulate, and to that extent, because Nintendo didnt update the functions the cube had when they put out the wii, neither could the wii.

The only obstacle was the box's horribly slow ram bottleneck compounded by processor commo bottlenecks (missed cycles). A solution found around the end of the systems life by installing large amounts of level data onto the hard drive, making access to needed assets much quicker and easier.

So yeah, the levels were tiny, the models were low poly, the textures low res, the enemy count minimal...

But the games were designed around it, and were slathered in dot3 normal mapping and unified real time lighting and real time shadowing, and it looked sexy as all hell, and was something that was VERY easily noticable that no other systems of the time could do, or for that matter, the wii as either.

Oh, the cube could have bigger environments, push more polys (a real shocker to most everyone thanks to Nintendos incredibly conservative estimate they gave for the spec sheet), less loading, higher framerates, many games with no loading screens at all....

But things like this just didnt stand out as much as the slick shaderwork of the xbox. Dues ex iw, chronicles of riddick, doom iii, the cube had no chance of doing graphically what those games did.

It didnt have a programmable shader pipeline.

[Grooseland]

The gamecube certainly couldn't do more than xbox at 60fps, you simply have a console with more limited memory resources and a weaker gpu which ultimately created a limit on what you could display. The videos speak for themselves. You can see where the game repeats textures, has fogging effects for distant detail and how generously it is with shadows. You don't need to do anything else than look at those 2 videos to see what each console was capable of. The frame rate on Conker is superb on xbox. I seem to remember there was a lot of loading on starfox adventures probably due to pushing the envelope with regard graphics and the limited memory of the gamecube.

Again the xbox gpu is far more advanced than the gamecube it is capable of many effects the gamecube can't do and this is clearly evident in the comparison above.

Please also note if you want to make a case that the gamecube is more powerful than the xbox you need to tackle head on the fact the xbox has a hard drive, more memory, a 8GB+ dvd drive, true 5.1 sound, more advanced gpu, faster cpu. You can't just ignore those features and expect to be taken seriously. You have to explain why those features aren't important. It staggers me how many people just come in with ultra biased comments who just ignore the bits they don't like.

Did you notice the way I accepted the gamecube and wii had superior memory bandwidth because they do, because thats a fair position to take?

Rogue Squadron is an impressive game but its a simple game, not much gameplay variation but a visual treat. Clearly I don't know how the xbox would perform in comparison because it never got that game hence why I've used 2 games by Rare that pushed the hardware of both consoles. I could have put a video of Half Life 2 on xbox and then compared it to some sort of basic fps game on gamecube again not really a valid comparison. These 2 rare games really represent what both consoles are capable of pushed close to the max.

"The gamecube certainly couldn't do more than xbox at 60fps"

So, Ninja Gaiden and Panzer Dragoon (some of the very few Xbox 60FPS games that look good) look better than Metroid Prime, Rogue Leader, Rebel Strike, F-Zero GX and SFA?

"repeats textures, has fogging effects for distant detail"



???

First of all: Fogging effects...? I think you're nit picking at some insignificant things. Second: The game has a day and night system in real time meaning that shadows change position. Also the fogging is more apparent at dawn. Third: The video you posted is from a very small area, actually the game takes you to different environments that look unique. Also the game has grass, I mean real grass:



Again, all of that is going on at 60FPS, how can you say that Xbox can do more at 60FPS? Now imagine if RARE did Starfox Adventures at 30FPS they would've added a lot more.

"I seem to remember there was a lot of loading on starfox adventures probably due to pushing the envelope with regard graphics and the limited memory of the gamecube"

LOL!!! your memory failed you my friend. Starfox Adventures DOES NOT have any loading screens, you should need to play the game. Conker on the other hand, has loading screens:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0lRwFYzenk"]]

"Please also note if you want to make a case that the gamecube is more powerful than the xbox you need to tackle head on the fact the xbox has a hard drive, more memory, a 8GB+ dvd drive, true 5.1 sound, more advanced gpu, faster cpu."

Well, I didn't say the Gamecube was more powerful, I said it was more efficient. If you got "Gamecube more powerful than Xbox" from what I said, well, that's only you. I don't know if the hard drive helped Xbox's graphics I thought it was only to save games and MP3s.

Also the media in which a game is stored doesn't improve graphics. And about the CPU, that's debatable.

"Rogue Squadron is an impressive game but its a simple game, not much gameplay variation but a visual treat"

Millions of polygons which the Xbox couldn't do, Multi texturing, self shadowing, bump mapping, dynamic lighting advance AI etc...
All of that and more at 60FPS?

And that's simple to you? Can you name a game on Xbox that is like that?

I know you like your Xbox, but it does not crush the Gamecube in graphics like you seem to be implying. Both crush the PS2 but I digress

But things like this just didnt stand out as much as the slick shaderwork of the xbox. Dues ex iw, chronicles of riddick, doom iii, the cube had no chance of doing graphically what those games did.

Let me refresh your memory:

http://www.stagesele...-to-the-pc.aspx

This is how Doom 3 on Xbox really looked:





Deus Ex:



It has physics, but unrealistic ones at that.

Riddick how it really looks on Xbox:



Many people don't consider this game to be the best of what the Xbox can do.

The on foot missions of Rebel Strike would lead me to believe that all of those games are possible on Gamecube:



If factor 5 was the developer...

[3Dude]

The only thing you have done is proven your misunderstanding of what you are responding too, and cherry picking particular scenes to make xbox games look bad. Which isnt necessary. All the flaws in the screens you presented, the same ones I wrote in the post you responded to, would be just as visible in screens from the same game that showed off the programmable shaderwork the xbox had that the cube and wii dont.

All you have done is provided fanboy ammunition to undermine your well prepared argument for those who would use it.

[Grooseland]

The only thing you have done is proven your misunderstanding of what you are responding too, and cherry picking particular scenes to make xbox games look bad. Which isnt necessary. All the flaws in the screens you presented, the same ones I wrote in the post you responded to, would be just as visible in screens from the same game that showed off the programmable shaderwork the xbox had that the cube and wii dont.

All you have done is provided fanboy ammunition to undermine your well prepared argument for those who would use it.

LOL!!! what? "cherry picking"? Really? LOL

Look, I think this all comes to preference. You and Desert Punk obviously like Xbox graphics more. I like 60FPS games with no loading times and lots of effects.

Believe me, I do like the Xbox but saying that those games that you listed aren't possible on Gamecube is just not true. Also those screens are how the games look like, many people post PC screenshots, I'm not cherry picking.

Just calm down

Edited by Grooseland, 24 July 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[3Dude]

LOL!!! what? "cherry picking"? Really? LOL

Look, I think this all comes to preference. You and Desert Punk obviously like Xbox graphics more. I like 60FPS games with no loading times and lots of effects.

Believe me, I do like the Xbox but saying that those games that you listed aren't possible on Gamecube is just not true. Also those screens are how the games look like, many people post PC screenshots, I'm not cherry picking.

Just calm down

LOL!!! what? "cherry picking"? Really? LOL

Look, I think this all comes to preference. You and Desert Punk obviously like Xbox graphics more. I like 60FPS games with no loading times and lots of effects.

Believe me, I do like the Xbox but saying that those games that you listed aren't possible on Gamecube is just not true. Also those screens are how the games look like, many people post PC screenshots, I'm not cherry picking.

Just calm down

Sigh. You have single handedly removed all credibility from your once solid argument.

Which is EXTREMELY irritating since its correct, until you dragged it through the mud undermining your credibility with incredibly immature behaviour, and began making wild knee jerk claims like hoe a fixed function pipeline can do everything a programmable shader pipeline could.

I suggest reading next time instead of automatically reacting to fictional arguments based on preconcieved notions of only xbox fanboys bothering to respond to you.

Edited by 3Dude, 24 July 2012 - 11:31 AM.

[Grooseland]

Sigh. You have single handedly removed all credibility from your once solid argument.

Which is EXTREMELY irritating since its correct, until you dragged it through the mud undermining your credibility with incredibly immature behaviour, and began making wild knee jerk claims like hoe a fixed function pipeline can do everything a programmable shader pipeline could.

I suggest reading next time instead of automatically reacting to fictional arguments based on preconcieved notions of only xbox fanboys bothering to respond to you.

So, I was right?

Don't take this too seriously, those are just opinions. If you get irritated by something posted on a forum then... well.

Edited by Grooseland, 24 July 2012 - 11:44 AM.