PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Living-In-Clip on July 21, 2001, 11:04:13 PM
-
I stole this one from Ryu.;)
If Sony never existed who would of won the 32/64bit era?
I am including in this the 3DO and Jaguar, even though we know they didn\'t really have a chance.
Personally, I think Sega would of.
They would of ended up with titles like RE/Silent Hill / and other great games. Not to mention I think the netplay would of caught on alot more.. Would Square stayed with Nintendo? Or would they of chose Sega because of the CD-FORMAT? I think there would of been a huge chance Square would of still left Nintendo, due to the cd-format. Not to mention 2D gaming would still be very much alive, because the Saturn was a 2D powerhouse.
Nintendo would be in the same exact position they are in now.
-
Nintendo
-
Originally posted by Bobs_Hardware
Nintendo
Why though?
Sheesh, its like pulling teeth tryin\' to get people to explain things, around here..I\'ll tell ya\'..
;)
-
First of all Clip, you\'re crazy. Moving on... ;)
The Saturn would have won simply due to the luxury of time. Nintendo would be in the same predicament as they are in right now. I\'d add more, but I want to hear the side of things from a person who claims Nintendo would won first. Can\'t debate unless you have people representing the other side after all. :)
-
i think the reason Nintendo woul dhave won is the same reasons Sony won...first and fore most, developers were looking for an alternative to the unfriendly Saturn.
there are other reasons, but im busy...and Ryu is a bastard
-
Originally posted by Bobs_Hardware
i think the reason Nintendo woul dhave won is the same reasons Sony won...first and fore most, developers were looking for an alternative to the unfriendly Saturn.
there are other reasons, but im busy...and Ryu is a bastard
But if developers went with the N64 they would of had to deal with the many downsides of the cartridge format. Not to mention they couldn\'t of put out titles like Silent Hill, Resident Evil, and other games for the N64 really. Alot of the adult titles that the 32/64 bit generation saw the birth of, just couldn\'t of been on the N64. With the 32/64 bit generation games we clearly aimed to a new age group. The people who had been playin\' them since the NES had grown up and wanted more adult titles. Something Nintendo\'s system wasn\'t exactly home to.
-
well, i see it as a repeat of the Gensis/Snes
an even split...i really dont see Nintendo having too much weight, or sega having much more than Nintendo
-
hard to say really, but I\'ll take Nintendo here. One of the main reasons you\'re saying it would be sega is that the games that were eventually given birth to could not have been done on the N64. One point I should make is that these games didn\'t exist before they were created. That is to say, we can say that now, because the final products have been made on the PSX, but if developers didn\'t have that, then perhaps they never would have estimated they could do those projects.
Just one point, but i think overall it would be a tight race. I\'m taking nintendo to win because of their exclusives, and a lot of their 3rd parties ended up with sony, perhaps they\'d have stayed if sony didn\'t exist
-
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
I stole this one from Ryu.;)
If Sony never existed who would of won the 32/64bit era?
I am including in this the 3DO and Jaguar, even though we know they didn\'t really have a chance.
Personally, I think Sega would of.
They would of ended up with titles like RE/Silent Hill / and other great games. Not to mention I think the netplay would of caught on alot more.. Would Square stayed with Nintendo? Or would they of chose Sega because of the CD-FORMAT? I think there would of been a huge chance Square would of still left Nintendo, due to the cd-format. Not to mention 2D gaming would still be very much alive, because the Saturn was a 2D powerhouse.
Nintendo would be in the same exact position they are in now.
I disagree. I think the saturn was crap under a box. Sega was struggling business wise. And games like silent hill and Re would not have come to life because I DON\'T think saturn would have sold as huge as psx and developers would not have made as much porfit and took the chances they took bye spending lots of money on franchises. I say nintendo would have won basicly because they kept there same business strategy and plus sega had too many past failing deals. And many like me saw that saturn for what is was as crap under box. Saturn would have died just like it did. Developers would not have spent huge amounts on games to make them on system for company that was struggling to come up with a decent product.
-
Without SONY Sega would have won, IMO. The N64 would be what it is today anyways. :D Developers with a choice over cartridge - CD would have gone to Sega IMO.
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
I disagree. I think the saturn was crap under a box. Sega was struggling business wise. And games like silent hill and Re would not have come to life because I DON\'T think saturn would have sold as huge as psx and developers would not have made as much porfit and took the chances they took bye spending lots of money on franchises. I say nintendo would have won basicly because they kept there same business strategy and plus sega had too many past failing deals. And many like me saw that saturn for what is was as crap under box. Saturn would have died just like it did. Developers would not have spent huge amounts on games to make them on system for company that was struggling to come up with a decent product.
Crap under a box? Where did you come up with this? And why would of Resident Evil never came to life? Hell, Capcom ported it over to the Saturn - so it evidently sold enough to warrant porting the game. If Sony wouldn\'t of been around, Sega would of sold even more because they would of had the market to themself for over a year while Nintendo worked on the N64.
That "crap under a box" was way more powerful then the PS by all accounts. Sega\'s main problems was the early launch and price tag ($400). Sony took advantage of those mistakes. But, if Sony never existed- no one could of taken advantage of the mistakes and it wouldn\'t of hurt Sega that much.
The RPG fans would of HAD to go to Sega. Because more and likely, Square would of went to Sega due to the cd-format. Square could not do what they wanted with Final Fantasy 7 because of the cartridge format. Fans of the fighting genre would of went to Sega also. Capcom\'s 2D fighters was best on the Saturn and that would of remained true. Not to mention, Virtua Fighter 2, Last Bronx, Fighters MegaMix and so on. 2D fans would of also went to the Saturn (which they actually did..) . EA would of went with Sega due to the CD format also. Sega would of had ever genre covered really.
I can\'t wait to see what Altered says about your "crap under a box" statement..
;)
-
Originally posted by Toxical
Without SONY Sega would have won, IMO. The N64 would be what it is today anyways. :D Developers with a choice over cartridge - CD would have gone to Sega IMO.
Just because saturn was cd does not mean sega would have won. Developers would not have created the games they did on a struggling sega product. Just like sega cd they did not know what to do with saturn. Plus when psx first came sony gave developers free range to create the games they wanted. I just don\'t see developers investing lots of money into a struggling sega product. The sega saturn was a system built strickly for 2d gaming. I don\'t see how ppl call the psx crap when compared to saturn it trounces it.
-
Nintendo... Just because. :alien:
-
Nintendo would of won, duh?
The Saturn was just too much of a ***** to develop for. Young and new developers would of had an extremely hard time developing for the system, most of them would of choose the N64 instead. Plus, it costs 399, 100$ more than the N64 did. That\'s simply a ridiculous amount of money for a game system.
And didn\'t the Saturn have online capabilities? That was a dumb move. People wern\'t ready for it then and I still don\'t think they\'re ready for it now.
At that time, people didn\'t trust Sega because of the 32X and SegaCD. They were still uncertain.
Also, does anyone remember how many games got cancelled for the N64 early on? A LOT of them went to PSX instead.
In America, I think the Saturn would be getting annhilated in 97-98, N64\'s best years IMO. Games like Mario Kart, Star Fox, Goldeneye, and Zelda:OOT, and possibly FF7 would of been too much for Saturn. Star Fox sold around 3 million, Mario Kart and Zelda, sold 9 million, and Goldeneye sold 7 million(I\'m positive about all of these numbers). The American public didn\'t accept the Saturn at it\'s launch, and it probably wouldn\'t of accepted it later on.
But in Japan it was the other way around. If I remember correctly then Saturn was doing great in Japan. But I remember that the N64 has an extremely successful launch, and with PSX gone then they might of had a fairly large piece of the market in Japan. Tho Saturn would of still been doing better.
My final assumption- N64 would of destroyed Saturn in America, but Saturn would of owned Japan. However, N64 would of sold more units world-wide and would of been the clear winner.
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
I don\'t see how ppl call the psx crap when compared to saturn it trounces it.
You really need to find yourself some Saturn games. Later Saturn games was alot better lookin\' then the best of Ps games. Hell, Virtua Fighter 2 looks better then Tekken 3.
And what abought Nights! ? I have never seen a PS game that can compare with the beatuy of Nights! .
Yes, the Saturn was hard to develop for. So is the PS2. Whats your point? Everyone keeps goin\', "oh the PS2 is hard to develop for - which means, developers will have to work extra hard and we\'ll keep seeing better games". The same applies to the Saturn and did apply. The games kept looking better and better all the time.
Jumpy brings up the best point. People had problems trusting Sega after the 32x and Sega CD.
-
Originally posted by Jumpman
Nintendo would of won, duh?
The Saturn was just too much of a ***** to develop for. Young and new developers would of had an extremely hard time developing for the system, most of them would of choose the N64 instead. Plus, it costs 399, 100$ more than the N64 did. That\'s simply a ridiculous amount of money for a game system.
And didn\'t the Saturn have online capabilities? That was a dumb move. People wern\'t ready for it then and I still don\'t think they\'re ready for it now.
At that time, people didn\'t trust Sega because of the 32X and SegaCD. They were still uncertain.
Also, does anyone remember how many games got cancelled for the N64 early on? A LOT of them went to PSX instead.
In America, I think the Saturn would be getting annhilated in 97-98, N64\'s best years IMO. Games like Mario Kart, Star Fox, Goldeneye, and Zelda:OOT, and possibly FF7 would of been too much for Saturn. Star Fox sold around 3 million, Mario Kart and Zelda, sold 9 million, and Goldeneye sold 7 million(I\'m positive about all of these numbers). The American public didn\'t accept the Saturn at it\'s launch, and it probably wouldn\'t of accepted it later on.
But in Japan it was the other way around. If I remember correctly then Saturn was doing great in Japan. But I remember that the N64 has an extremely successful launch, and with PSX gone then they might of had a fairly large piece of the market in Japan. Tho Saturn would of still been doing better.
My final assumption- N64 would of destroyed Saturn in America, but Saturn would of owned Japan. However, N64 would of sold more units world-wide and would of been the clear winner.
WOW I agree with jumpman:eek: ;)
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
Nintendo would of won, duh?
Crap under a box? Where did you come up with this? And why would of Resident Evil never came to life? Hell, Capcom ported it over to the Saturn - so it evidently sold enough to warrant porting the game. If Sony wouldn\'t of been around, Sega would of sold even more because they would of had the market to themself for over a year while Nintendo worked on the N64.
That "crap under a box" was way more powerful then the PS by all accounts. Sega\'s main problems was the early launch and price tag ($400). Sony took advantage of those mistakes. But, if Sony never existed- no one could of taken advantage of the mistakes and it wouldn\'t of hurt Sega that much.
The RPG fans would of HAD to go to Sega. Because more and likely, Square would of went to Sega due to the cd-format. Square could not do what they wanted with Final Fantasy 7 because of the cartridge format. Fans of the fighting genre would of went to Sega also. Capcom\'s 2D fighters was best on the Saturn and that would of remained true. Not to mention, Virtua Fighter 2, Last Bronx, Fighters MegaMix and so on. 2D fans would of also went to the Saturn (which they actually did..) . EA would of went with Sega due to the CD format also. Sega would of had ever genre covered really.
I can\'t wait to see what Altered says about your "crap under a box" statement;)
[/B]
Well maybe interms of raw poly counts it is maybe. But the saturns processors were so quirky I mean the system already ran slower than psx. I mean the dual process caused the system to run even slower. Second it had No hardware video compression. It all had to be condec from software. Third No hardware audio compression shale I go one? Saturn was simply a 2d gaming dream and that is all. It had large amount of VRAM for texture storage and frame buffers. Which made for huge improvemnts in 2d gaming.
-
IMHO, Nintendo would\'ve won. The N64 had a better 3D capabilities than the Saturn. I know the SATURN was a 2D Powerhouse but eventually games like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark would have become available. As far as Square goes that\'s a tough decision. Square saw that the PSX was a stronger 3D system than Saturn (w/ CD format) and chose Sony.
-
QuDDus, your information is the product of mind-numbing zombies pretending to know the truth.
First of all, you can\'t really call SegaCD a failure when it had nearly 200 games and sold 3 to 4 million consoles, when it was nearly the first of it\'s kind. Developers were not scared away from it, it was that their were still so much life left in Genesis and SNES, the FMV games just didn\'t fit.
Saturn has 3 32-bit processors. 1 was for Sound, the other 2 were the cpus. The 2 for cpu\'s were never used in unison, but even with just ONE processor, it was still faster than PSXs 1. Heck, even the sound processor for Saturn, which is a beast, is as fast as the PSX cpu.
I have an early Saturn video wisely sent to me by Sega int he early days of Saturn. It clearly state Saturn can push 300,000 polys/sec. More than the 260k provided by PSX. This is a little known fact, because people think Saturn had less because it had less features like hardware Gourad Shading, etc. But it was a much better machine.
Several games look better on Saturn than on PSX. Shall I name some, oh mindless one? Marvel Super Heroes, Street Fighter Alpha 3, Grandia, Vandal Hearts, Thunderforce V, and so on.
Saturn was a godsend to 3rd parties because it was something INNOVATIVE, which is something all of you seem to claim when dealing with PS2. Saturn was a right push into a new direction in game development.
That said, I can finally deal with the topic:
Saturn would\'ve trounced on N64, and laughed while doing it.
Saturn sold 5 million consoles first year in Japan and was the RPG king. it sold more consoles in a year than any before it. In America, due to a rushed launch, it sold 1 million in about 2 years. Wuite a bit different. But they rushed it because PSX was coming out with the stellar Twisted Metal and Destruction Derby. Sega would not have launched early if PSX weren\'t around.
Also, lookng at games that unfortunately never made it to America for Saturn kick the N64\'s butt by themselves.
Shining Force 3: 2 and 3
Deep Fear
Virus
Street Fighter Zero 3
Panzer Dragoon Saga (mass release)
Burning Rangers (mass release)
Shining Force 3 (mass release)
Grandia
Radiant Slivergun
Vandal Hearts
etc.etc.etc. N64 cannot compete with many of these titles.
Add in the fact that online play would\'ve become a reality and it makes for one quite successful console. You also have games that were announced that never came out would\'ve thrived on the popular Saturn. Virtua Fighter 3 with the 8meg RAM cart (drool!), NiGHTS 2, Burning Rangers 2, Sonic X-Treme, Fighting Vipers 2, etc!
Saturn would\'ve kicked butt, seriously. Even if Square would\'ve stayed with N64 through their own unexplainable hatred for Sega, Saturn would\'ve still had much more quality RPGs. N64 win? that would be next to impossible for Nintendo.
Eric Jacob
-
ignore this.
-
Nintendo. SONY didn\'t really beat the 64 that bad, N64 was Nintendo\'s best console so far if you ask me. :)
-
uggghhh. Do I have to explain this again?
Rushed launch, rushed games, high price tag, etc.
All would\'ve been avoided if PSX were not around. And All of those games you put up are worse in my mind with the exception of Mario kart, then the ones I put up.
Eric Jacob
-
Eric, you talking some crazy stuff here.
It clearly state Saturn can push 300,000 polys/sec. More than the 260k provided by PSX.
Actually, PSX could do well over 300,000PPS.
Also, lookng at games that unfortunately never made it to America for Saturn kick the N64\'s butt by themselves.
Shining Force 3: 2 and 3
Deep Fear
Virus
Street Fighter Zero 3
Panzer Dragoon Saga (mass release)
Burning Rangers (mass release)
Shining Force 3 (mass release)
Grandia
Radiant Slivergun
Vandal Hearts
etc.etc.etc. N64 cannot compete with many of these titles.
Funny, Goldeneye, Mario Kart, Mario, and Zelda:OOT, individually, sold more copies than Saturn\'s whole userbase!
It\'s debatable whether the titles I listed are better than the ones you listed, but it\'s a cold fact that Nintendo\'s key franchises would of walked all over all of those in the sales department.
Add in the fact that online play would\'ve become a reality and it makes for one quite successful console.
That was back in 96\', the internet was still pretty new at that time, peolpe would not of been ready for online gaming back then. I seriously don\'t think they\'re ready for it now either.
Saturn would\'ve kicked butt, seriously. Even if Square would\'ve stayed with N64 through their own unexplainable hatred for Sega, Saturn would\'ve still had much more quality RPGs. N64 win? that would be next to impossible for Nintendo.
Quality never wins a war. (example- the DC is dead)
I don\'t understand how you think Saturn could beat the N64. Saturn costs 399, 100$ more than N64. BIG factor. People would uncertain of the quality of Sega after 32X and SegaCD. Another big factor. Nintendo\'s franchises are unstopable. Another huge factor. How could Saturn possibly overcome all of this?
-
I don\'t understand how you think Saturn could beat the N64. Saturn costs 399, 100$ more than N64. BIG factor. People would uncertain of the quality of Sega after 32X and SegaCD. Another big factor. Nintendo\'s franchises are unstopable. Another huge factor. How could Saturn possibly overcome all of this?
You keep saying cost was the key factor, however, time is a much bigger factor. The Saturn had 2 full years on the N64 and if the PSX was not the main competition for Sega, like altered already stated, the launch would have been delayed a year for a 299 price tag while still having a full year on Nintendo\'s release. One year to improve upon the Sega Saturn games that already looked stunning right off the bat? Franchises are fine and all, but time is a much more important factor. Example: the PS2 launch. Nuff\' said. You can\'t tell me Nintendo didn\'t lose a lot of fans mostly in part by the fact that the N64 was continuously delayed from year to year.
-
That "crap under a box" was way more powerful then the PS by all accounts
Not hardly. For both LiC and Beasty... I have gone through tons of Saturn games (had a friend who would import everything) and have played the best of what the Saturn had to offer. Aside from 2D, the Saturn could not do anything better than the PSX. The PSX had much more polygon-throughput, real transparencies, much better lighting, and tons more effects that the Saturn could never dream of doing. The Saturn was an atrocity in most 3D games. I don\'t see how you can say VF2 looked better than Tekken 3. It doesn\'t. Tekken\'s models are pushing more polygons, and well, the backgrounds in both games sucked.
Also, while the Saturn supposedly had the superior sound, it didn\'t. Need me to name all the games with horrible sound effects and muffled voices? C\'mon people, I love Sega as much as the next guy, but the Saturn was a mess next to PSX. Everyone can have an opinion, but being a SEGA fan doesn\'t automatically mean each one of their system was superior. I know neither of you will agree, and this will be a never-ending argument. Oh well. So be it.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
You keep saying cost was the key factor, however, time is a much bigger factor. The Saturn had 2 full years on the N64 and if the PSX was not the main competition for Sega, like altered already stated, the launch would have been delayed a year for a 299 price tag while still having a full year on Nintendo\'s release. One year to improve upon the Sega Saturn games that already looked stunning right off the bat? Franchises are fine and all, but time is a much more important factor. Example: the PS2 launch. Nuff\' said. You can\'t tell me Nintendo didn\'t lose a lot of fans mostly in part by the fact that the N64 was continuously delayed from year to year.
2 full years? In America the N64 was released in Oct 96\'. I\'m pretty sure that the Saturn wasn\'t released in 94, wasn\'t it released in summer or spring 94?
Let\'s say they did delay it to make it more suitible for the market- who says the hardware would of been just as powerful and maintained a 299 price tag? It could of been a whole different machine. It may not of been so stunning in the end. But I\'ll let that slip, for now.
Saturn wasn\'t alone in the market when it was released, they had some small competition with the SNES. DKC3, Super Mario RPG, and if I remember correctly your favorite game of all time Chrono Trigger were released around then, all big sellers. Small competition, but it was clearly there.
Nintendo wouldn\'t of lost too many fans. Most of them were started to abondon them after the N64 launch when they got bored of Maroi 64. If the PSX didn\'t come alone, then N64 probably would of had 4-8 launch titles, satisfying the casual gamer.
-
Actually, the N64 came out in September of \'96 and the Saturn was *secretly* released in May of \'95. (not 100% sure of the Saturn\'s date but it was near May if anything)
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
First, a little bit of gaming history that I am clarifying for the general thread. This should be edited into LiC\'s original post.
The Sega Saturn launched in Spring of \'95. ($399, dropped to $299 by the time the PSX Launched)
http://ic.net/~craig/games/consoles/sega/saturn/history.html
Technical Specifications:
http://www.austinvideogames.com/FAQs/FAQ_SegaSaturn.htm
The Sony Playstation launched in Fall of \'95. ($299 from the beginning and dropped to $199 at the N64 launch)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A197174
Technical Specifications:
http://www.gamedude.com/psx-specs.html
The Nintendo 64 launched in fall of \'96. ($199)
http://ign64.ign.com/hardware/297.html
Technical Specifications:
http://www.gamedude.com/n64spec.html
This is PURELY for reference and not meant to rebuttle anyone\'s posts. This is just for clarification, I know how clouded all these specs and release dates are since these consoles are just a tad bit aged.
-
N64 would of definitely won.
The Saturn\'s first conception was that of a 2D gaming system. Sega was going to bring 2D gaming into the 32-bit generation and the N64 would of been a true 3D powerhouse that would of easily blown the system away. It was the PSX that forced Sega to upgrade to 3D. Thus the multi chip set that was thrown in the last minute.
Although the N64 was in a cartridge format it wouldn\'t matter. If Sony didn\'t exist, CGI graphics wouldn\'t be common place in videogames. If you take Final Fantasy 7 and strip away all the FMVs, the game wouldn\'t be any bigger than Zelda and it would fit perfectly on the N64\'s cartridge format. In fact, Square already began working on the system even before it was launched. They showed preliminary art, and game shots. Keep in mind the games such as Final Fantasy, Metal Gear and such would be created with the N64\'s capabilities in mind and not the PSX. In fact, I think the games would be much better considering more emphasis and funding would be placed on gameplay and not long, minute CGI graphics.
-
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
QuDDus, your information is the product of mind-numbing zombies pretending to know the truth.
First of all, you can\'t really call SegaCD a failure when it had nearly 200 games and sold 3 to 4 million consoles, when it was nearly the first of it\'s kind. Developers were not scared away from it, it was that their were still so much life left in Genesis and SNES, the FMV games just didn\'t fit.
Saturn has 3 32-bit processors. 1 was for Sound, the other 2 were the cpus. The 2 for cpu\'s were never used in unison, but even with just ONE processor, it was still faster than PSXs 1. Heck, even the sound processor for Saturn, which is a beast, is as fast as the PSX cpu.
I have an early Saturn video wisely sent to me by Sega int he early days of Saturn. It clearly state Saturn can push 300,000 polys/sec. More than the 260k provided by PSX. This is a little known fact, because people think Saturn had less because it had less features like hardware Gourad Shading, etc. But it was a much better machine.
Several games look better on Saturn than on PSX. Shall I name some, oh mindless one? Marvel Super Heroes, Street Fighter Alpha 3, Grandia, Vandal Hearts, Thunderforce V, and so on.
Saturn was a godsend to 3rd parties because it was something INNOVATIVE, which is something all of you seem to claim when dealing with PS2. Saturn was a right push into a new direction in game development.
That said, I can finally deal with the topic:
Saturn would\'ve trounced on N64, and laughed while doing it.
Saturn sold 5 million consoles first year in Japan and was the RPG king. it sold more consoles in a year than any before it. In America, due to a rushed launch, it sold 1 million in about 2 years. Wuite a bit different. But they rushed it because PSX was coming out with the stellar Twisted Metal and Destruction Derby. Sega would not have launched early if PSX weren\'t around.
Also, lookng at games that unfortunately never made it to America for Saturn kick the N64\'s butt by themselves.
Shining Force 3: 2 and 3
Deep Fear
Virus
Street Fighter Zero 3
Panzer Dragoon Saga (mass release)
Burning Rangers (mass release)
Shining Force 3 (mass release)
Grandia
Radiant Slivergun
Vandal Hearts
etc.etc.etc. N64 cannot compete with many of these titles.
Add in the fact that online play would\'ve become a reality and it makes for one quite successful console. You also have games that were announced that never came out would\'ve thrived on the popular Saturn. Virtua Fighter 3 with the 8meg RAM cart (drool!), NiGHTS 2, Burning Rangers 2, Sonic X-Treme, Fighting Vipers 2, etc!
Saturn would\'ve kicked butt, seriously. Even if Square would\'ve stayed with N64 through their own unexplainable hatred for Sega, Saturn would\'ve still had much more quality RPGs. N64 win? that would be next to impossible for Nintendo.
Eric Jacob
Maybe you need to study the saturn architecture a little bit more because you don\'t know what your talking about. THE SATURN HAD TWO VDP 32-BIT PROCESSORS. ONE WAS FOR SPRITE GENERATION AND THE OTHER WAS A BACKGROUND PROCESSOR. AND THEY BOTH RAN DUAL. AND BOTH VDP CHIPS HAVE direct ACESS to the both SH-2s, as well as
direct memory access DMA to both the main and Video RAM. THUS limiting the ability of both CPUs to directly access memory at the same time. SO THAT CAUSES THE SATURN TO RUN VERY SLOW.
-
Both cpus are never on at the same time, go look at any Saturn FAQ on the web and they will tell you.
That said, the 1 processor that IS on is still faster (Mhz) than PSXs 1.
Anyone who looks at some of the games that came out exclusively in Japan, or barely at all in America can safely say that many games on Saturn look better than stuff being released today for PSX.
Take a look a Panzer Dragoon Saga (good luck). The textures in that games are still unmatched by any other 32bit game I have seen, And trounces over anything N64 could dream of putting out. Transparencies werent done in hardware, along with Gourad shading,etc. but these features could all be done in software. Point to The Duck Company\'s MPEG player that was devised in software. And Burning Rangers clearly shows transparencies, et al.
Saturn was ahead of it\'s time, and everyone knows it. It had the unfortunate luck of being released along side a well made, but underpowered PSX. One that was easy to program for.
Saturn would\'ve trounced over N64 without hesitation. You forget that Sega has IT\'S franchises, too. One of those being Sonic, which was canceled.plus it had some of the most successful arcade games ever, like Dayotna (most successful deluxe cab. ever), Sega Rally, 2D fighters, shooters, etc.
Here are games you see in abundance on Saturn and are hardly seen on N64:
fighting games (2D or 3D)
arcade racing
2D games
RPGs
Strategy
war sim.
arcade games period.
shooters (not FPS)
there are probably more, but you get the idea. Saturn had variety and quality to boot. Also, you gotta add in the fact, that without PSX, 32X would\'ve lasted alot longer (look at it\'s announced games that never came out! wow!) as would\'ve SegaCD. Saturn would\'ve been cheaper and had more games at launch.
Eric Jacob
-
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
Both cpus are never on at the same time, go look at any Saturn FAQ on the web and they will tell you.
That said, the 1 processor that IS on is still faster (Mhz) than PSXs 1.
Anyone who looks at some of the games that came out exclusively in Japan, or barely at all in America can safely say that many games on Saturn look better than stuff being released today for PSX.
Take a look a Panzer Dragoon Saga (good luck). The textures in that games are still unmatched by any other 32bit game I have seen, And trounces over anything N64 could dream of putting out. Transparencies werent done in hardware, along with Gourad shading,etc. but these features could all be done in software. Point to The Duck Company\'s MPEG player that was devised in software. And Burning Rangers clearly shows transparencies, et al.
Saturn was ahead of it\'s time, and everyone knows it. It had the unfortunate luck of being released along side a well made, but underpowered PSX. One that was easy to program for.
Saturn would\'ve trounced over N64 without hesitation. You forget that Sega has IT\'S franchises, too. One of those being Sonic, which was canceled.plus it had some of the most successful arcade games ever, like Dayotna (most successful deluxe cab. ever), Sega Rally, 2D fighters, shooters, etc.
Here are games you see in abundance on Saturn and are hardly seen on N64:
fighting games (2D or 3D)
arcade racing
2D games
RPGs
Strategy
war sim.
arcade games period.
shooters (not FPS)
there are probably more, but you get the idea. Saturn had variety and quality to boot. Also, you gotta add in the fact, that without PSX, 32X would\'ve lasted alot longer (look at it\'s announced games that never came out! wow!) as would\'ve SegaCD. Saturn would\'ve been cheaper and had more games at launch.
Eric Jacob
Well I am refering to the 2dual vdp processors.(Not cpu) You need to research those two then you will see what I am talking about.
You may think the saturn was a great system. As for me only game I liked on it was VF2 and that\'s basicly it.
-
It doesn\'t really matter when you look at it.
The Saturn GPU can pump out 500,000 flat shaded polys.
The PSX CPU can pump out 1.5 flat shaded. BUT, on the GPU specs, it says 360,000 and that is without gourad and texture mapping. As I gather from this FAQ http://db.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/file/sony_psx.txt
All ya gotta do is look at Panzer Dragoon Saga, just go do it, and compare to other 32-bit or 64-bit games.
Eric Jacob
-
Tshirts,
Put the crack pipe DOWN and back away.
Final Fantasy 7 and MGS would have been better on the n64 cause more time and money could have been spent on things over than CGI?
What else could they have done to make FF7 better?
No random battles?
Thats about it.
And maybe Ive been droppen acid to much, but I dont remember any CGI in MGS.
They could have spent more money and time on what?
The gameplay, the story?
I thought they were the best in their genre.
-
The best in their genre? Go back and play Final Fantasy 3 and Chrono Trigger. Now tell me if theres no need for improvement.
-
I have played Chrono Trigger, and while I thought It was good, I wasnt blown away by it.
And Both of those are RPG\'s.
What about MGS?
What adventure game has a better mix of story and gameplay?
-
Dang, I\'m gone for one day and I miss this whole argument. :( I pretty much agree 100% with Ryu and Altered. The Saturn had what it took to defeat the N64, and if it wasn\'t for the easier-to-develope-for PSX, the Developers would have spent the time to learn the Saturn architecture all before the N64 even came out.
I want to add this: Can you imagine if FF7 came out on the N64?! "Come buy FF7 -- the N64\'s first 20 cartridge game. Only $200." LOL. :)
-
Take a look a Panzer Dragoon Saga (good luck). The textures in that games are still unmatched by any other 32bit game I have seen
I\'m sorry man, but what funky stuff have you been smoking? PDS is a marvelous game, but its textures are not that amazing. Look, the saturn is a wonderful system that not many people appreciated, but like I said, in 3D power the PSX trounces it. Burning Rangers might have had transparencies, but @ what cost? The framerate in BR was unstable. The Saturn couldn\'t even do real transparency in 2D. Sure, some developers eventually faked it, but it didn\'t look as nice. Play Guardian Heroes and get behind a pillar, that checkered-dithered junk don\'t cut it. If you ask me, I wish everything on the Saturn was 2D.
On topic though, while I *think* Nintendo may have won the war, I would have prefered to stick with the Saturn. Surely SEGA would allow all kinds of content on the Saturn while the big N .. well you know. And perhaps we would have seen more 2D goodness along with all the great imports that never made it here. (damn stolar)
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
It doesn\'t really matter when you look at it.
The Saturn GPU can pump out 500,000 flat shaded polys.
The PSX CPU can pump out 1.5 flat shaded. BUT, on the GPU specs, it says 360,000 and that is without gourad and texture mapping. As I gather from this FAQ http://db.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/file/sony_psx.txt
All ya gotta do is look at Panzer Dragoon Saga, just go do it, and compare to other 32-bit or 64-bit games.
Eric Jacob
Hey alter that link is about psx not saturn. I mean of corse there are some pro\'s to the saturn architecture. But the con is the way the architecture was set up it caused the system to run slow. I am not going to dispute the content of the games. Because you enjoyed them more than I did. And that just how it is. But I still say that the saturn was built for 2d gaming and not 3d. Does that make the saturn bad? As far as I am saying i wanted too see some 3d games but saturn was excellent at support 2d not 3d. It didn\'t even support 3d light sourcing and transparency.
-
for the Saturn faq, in which I am referring, you\'ll have to look at Ryu\'s Saturn link.
Also, Saturn could do those things, but they had to be done through software, like FSAA for PS2.
Eric Jacob
-
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
for the Saturn faq, in which I am referring, you\'ll have to look at Ryu\'s Saturn link.
Also, Saturn could do those things, but they had to be done through software, like FSAA for PS2.
Eric Jacob
AHH I found another flaw see that is the big problem with saturn right there. ALL that has to be done on software. Developer would have trouble generating those effect in 3d games because aong with lightsourcing, three dimensional transparency must be generated through software routines. And seeing how saturn was so hard to program for that make 3d rendered background in saturn almost impossible to look decent.
-
What is decent to you?
How do you define good looking?
Here are some screens that show ya even with what looks to be the worst screen captures ever:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fpds%2Fmedia1%2Fpds18.jpg&hash=b1b742f1e4189a6f09d378c91811b91163c36a01)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fpds%2Fmedia1%2Fpds17.jpg&hash=00692f10983f401d84bdc924c11ba3c64a07cedd)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fpds%2Fmedia1%2Fpds13.jpg&hash=2cb2532b4fad3538b617928758f4f526a5ecd85c)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fpds%2Fmedia1%2Fpds08.jpg&hash=6fc7b04abdfd04b7823b20cdd8734ccfed98c0f9)
whats that I see? It looks like transparencies and proper shading! All this from the game many people regard as the best RPG of all time. No COMPETENT developer would have too much trouble learning the intricatcies and make a game look as good or better than this. hmmm. great textures, graphics, and all at 60fps :) and remember, this is 1998, compare this to PSX games of 1998 in similar genres and you will see.
and you have Sakura Taisen, one of my favorite import games for Saturn, compare the screens to Final Fantasy Tactics on PSX to see what I am talking about:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fsakura%2Fmedia1%2Fbattle04.jpg&hash=3cd17da5e0d1cdce628e057850a051c4fd0aecfa)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegia.com%2Fsat%2Fsakura%2Fmedia1%2Fbattle06.jpg&hash=055959e1d7563bf5bd38803a6f92401ced92aacf)
I can put up more if you want. I just put up some of those to let you know that developers with comptence can make excellent looking games for Saturn, 3 years ago. Imagine what they would look like today.
Eric Jacob
-
I beg to differ. That looks like crap on a stick. What PSX games are you comparing these shots to (specifically)?
-
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmrclean.gethits.net%2Fbr-sf.jpg&hash=38e3082eccef0e5cc9b6f9a441d81f73e9f4ad26)
Buh? The game\'s transparencies look damn good to me, unless you guys are talking about something totally different. In which case, I\'d like to see an example of it from a PSX game performing it.
-
I think the site used like a 20 dollar capture card for those pics, but you get the idea.
Ryu has the right idea, though. Look at Burning Rangers. It may have been 30fps and a tad jumpy, but it is a great looking, hard game! I still haven\'t beaten it!
it shows proper light sourcing, shading, and transparencies. All done FINE through software, while still maintaining a high polygon count and frames per second.
Eric Jacob
-
here are some bigger shots for you nitpickers out there:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.videogames.com%2Fsat%2Fpltfrm%2Fburning%2Fscreen.html%3Fpage%3D5&hash=eeab5bd31d255934f3c7ed37c7132805fa6a5237)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.videogames.com%2Fsat%2Fpltfrm%2Fburning%2Fscreen.html%3Fpage%3D7&hash=dea9bed3decb1f473d4daf8b1f0609dbdfd086ca)
here are some cleaner PDS shots too, to illustrate what I meanby amazing textures. they are a little dark, but you see.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzer_saga-22.jpg&hash=8c03c09fb1a4578b7b833ee2523141d01090564a)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzer_saga-23.jpg&hash=997134c27bb8e23acdf73126421e84df4a685032)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzer_saga-24.jpg&hash=a4ff2e8b1a29a25471217c3cf0e9c9632f91246a)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzer_saga-26.jpg&hash=2cf6e593ab6532d70ac79c31072a781bfa8d5653)
Is that light sourcing!?!!?!
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzer_saga-30.jpg&hash=a9835ed10ff825c94b13c60a40ab7622f8e67692)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sega-saturn.com%2Fsaturn%2Fpics2%2Fpanzersaga-09.jpg&hash=cc205c10d0fdade75fb362dbd66adf430a6900de)
satisfied?
I rest my case. :)
Eric Jacob
-
I just noticed that graphically, Silent Bomber and Burning Rangers shared a lot of the same graphical touches while still being incredibly different, yet fun as hell games. Amazing isn\'t it? Here\'s a quick comparison:
Silent Bomber
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgamespot.com%2Fgamespot%2Fimages%2Fscreenshots%2F0%2F198640%2Fsilent_screen004.jpg&hash=67ea99eec92ea53827102c0223421f5e628e3304)
Burning Rangers
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.consoledomain.com%2Fsaturn%2Freviews%2Fbr5t.jpg&hash=6b04d7a308633f05657664c4f854c5f3c1970a6c)
Heh, pretty trippy. :)
-
I have never played it. what is the premise of the game?
Eric Jacob
-
Basically, you just go around level by level placing your bombs on enemies and blowin\' em up. It has some small platform jumping elements in it, but it is still incredibly fun in its own way. The amount of bombs you throw at first is limited by a specific number, but over the course of the game and with more and power-ups you recieve, the more damage you can do and the more bombs you can toss and detonate at once. I\'m not sure how available the title is now, but I love just the simplicity in the design while it still maintains that level of thrill of just blowing the sh|t out of everything. It\'s a fairly decent looking PSX game for its time and it\'s pretty damn fun as well. IGN as a review on it and state it to be an "Editor\'s Choice" pick.
http://psx.ign.com/reviews/11837.html (8.0)
http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters/products/0,11114,198640,00.html (8.2)
Respectable Scores.
-
Well did you expect less from panzier dragon?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.game-revolution.com%2Fgames%2Fsaturn%2Ffightmega3.jpg&hash=dbe95cec8a6cdd58c42e9dc0db28ee6471d8a41c)
This pic speaks for itself
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.game-revolution.com%2Fgames%2Fsaturn%2Faction%2Fhouse_of_the_dead3.jpg&hash=b5ffce82c108446f20435ec761c17036cd433a81)
I don\'t see how they tried to make this game 3d with those models
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.game-revolution.com%2Fgames%2Fsaturn%2F3dbaseball3.gif&hash=9fb32a6c020319b45c6a573890284ee69664572d)
And this is supose to be 3d baseball.
I still say for the most part sega saturn is still not meant for 3d gaming. Yes I do agree with you that panzier dragon has great graphics. But others have suffered lots of other saturn games.
-
you can\'t put up first year pics of Saturn and try and pass them off as waht is regular on the system, otherwise I could dig up some hilarious PSX games that also speak for themselves.
Note: MANY games released in 1998 looked as good as Panzer Saga. MANY. Saturn was and still is untapped power, waiting to be dealt with!
Eric Jacob
-
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
you can\'t put up first year pics of Saturn and try and pass them off as waht is regular on the system, otherwise I could dig up some hilarious PSX games that also speak for themselves.
Note: MANY games released in 1998 looked as good as Panzer Saga. MANY. Saturn was and still is untapped power, waiting to be dealt with!
Eric Jacob
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: I knew you would jump on that first pic. Too funny man. I am tired now I debate with you later.
Later
-
You can\'t assume that the N64 would have been delayed as long as it did w/out a SONY system. Remember market competition played as big a role in the delay of the N64 as did developing games and other things that pushed the system back so long. The N64 would\'ve been out by 1995 had their been no SONY, Miyamoto wouldn\'t have had to spend all that time developing Mario 64 to be the N64- Killer App. They could\'ve launched with a weaker title or 2 ...then dropp MARIO 64 (as we know it) later on when the battle got a bit more heated. I agree that the SATURN would\'ve grown a lead but eventually it would\'ve ended a sort of 50/50 Genesis-SNES split because ZELDA would have eventually come out.
-
Nintendo ALWAYS launches with a Mario game of some type. I don\'t think Sony had anything to do with the N64 being delayed, but Miyamoto had all the reason for it being delayed. Miyamoto is Nintendo and vice versa. The N64 controller was designed with Mario64 in mind and the system was designed with Miyamoto\'s personal preferences. When Miyamoto says "the game is not done yet, we need an extra year" Nintendo will move boulders to make sure he HAS that extra year. Miyamoto is great, but the fool is one slow motherfu*ker.
-
And Nintendo systems are always delayed to high heck.
SNES was still selling great (as was Genny) in 1995, so why would they release it then? There would be no point to release N64 when DKC and Chrono Trigger are selling the way they did, looking the way they did.
N64 still would\'ve been delayed, and Saturn would still come out on top.
Eric Jacob
-
Rushed launch, rushed games, high price tag, etc.
All would\'ve been avoided if PSX were not around.
Judging from your opinion on the launch games they didn\'t seem to be that rushed. How long would they have waited then? A year? No way. They put a bunch of powerful stuff in at the end I thought. Maybe they wouldn\'t of out it in if the PSX wasn\'t there? Tshirts made a great point for once, it was meant to be the ultimate 2D machine until PSX came along.
And All of those games you put up are worse in my mind with the exception of Mario kart, then the ones I put up.
In your mind, but those games would of trampelled all over Sega\'s games in the sales.
Saturn would\'ve trounced over N64 without hesitation. You forget that Sega has IT\'S franchises, too. One of those being Sonic, which was canceled.plus it had some of the most successful arcade games ever, like Dayotna (most successful deluxe cab. ever), Sega Rally, 2D fighters, shooters, etc.
Those games were never 20% as popular as Mario or Zelda with the obvious exception of Sonic. Like I said, Nintendo\'s franchises would of crushed them.
-
Nintendo only had so many franchises before N64.
Many series on N64, started on N64. Like many of the Saturn franchises on Saturn.
The launch games were EXCELLENT. but half of them show signs of being rushed. Especially Virtua Fighter and Daytona. Both have plain bad issues in them. But both are still excellent titles.
Publicity elevates, you forget, Jumpy. Saturn had a surprise launch. Nobody knew about it. Not retailers, not hardcore gamers, and certainly NOT casual public. There were no adds in the beginning, no fancy FMV ads at all, etc. Saturn launch games would\'ve sold spades with a few more in there ( a WSB game?) and with some publicity.
Eric Jacob