I am kind a dissapointed that VF4 doesn\'t live up to the hype in terms of graphics, but then, that
was expected as it is
1. a
port and
2. AM2s first attempt on a new console.
Newer libraries, talented developers - what ever. It still doesn\'t change the fact that the PS2 forces developers to rethink their ways and makes it even for the talented developers a challenge. Just look at what Namco did in just about 4 months with Tekken Tag (Japan) and how they enhanced it in another few months to what it looked like in the US and PAL version.
As to Fast\'s reasoning: I agree with him completely. People fail to realise what the PS2 (and the EE in mind) were designed for. As BizioEE already pointed out numerous times before; the EE does support less effects than a standard GeForce 1 card - but that doesn\'t limit its potential at all, since the PS2 was made to do those effects that other consoles already have implemented in hardware through software. I think Fast got his point across very clear - it\'s just too bad that it\'s always the same people who have problems accepting the obvious.
Software is optimise-able but you\'re limited to the overall power you have...the pixel-shaders of the NV2a are program-able and run a lot faster than the Vus of PS2...the EE is not the magic you think.
I would be very interested to hear your explenation to why the NV2 pixelshaders run faster than the VUs of the PS2 - especially since both work so different and I wouldn\'t know how to even compare them. But who knows, I\'m sure Bizio has an excellent knowledge in this field and I have no doubts in my mind that he can\'t wait to back his statement up so that we can all follow his logic and see the light.
