Constant PS2 problem (even with Bouncer !!!)

Go back from where you came Fan@X ! all you said has already been said and i don\'t feel like explaining to you everything !

By the way I have no time for gamers... any serious ppl here?

so gamers arnt serious? your not seroius. we are serious and if you continue posting stuff like this you will get banned.    
                 

[Evi]

This topic is going nowhere fast...:sconf:

nevermind...

[Edited by CygnusXI on 12-21-2000 at 03:44 PM]

Now why would somebody do this?  I mean, why come out of nowhere and just get downright nasty like that.  "Gee, I don\'t like PS2.  I know!  I will go to a PS2 forum and insult the machine!".  Why?  Why would anybody voluntarily want to alienate people like this; particularly fellow gamers?  The only thing your polite thread was missing was the final statement: "And that\'s why I\'m waiting for XBox."

Polygon-count is really fine! No probs on that. But that damn video memory... how the hell could thet blow it !? Grrr..

Well, I\'ll try to be polite.  Let me ask you a better question: Why did Sony spend millions of dollars hiring Software Engineers and System Architects to design a more robust system when they could\'ve asked somebody like you what would work best?  I\'ll tell you why: because they are more experienced and more educated in their line of work than you are.  Streaming textures and environments off of the CD/DVD allows a much higher ceiling than a pathetic 4mb, 8mb, 64mb, or even 200mb of Video RAM.  Streaming is out of date?  Streaming was done on the PSX for games like Driver.  Streaming was done on the Dreamcast for MDK2 and Crazy Taxi - to allow massive worlds.  It\'s downfall: a bitch to pull off.  Sony\'s PSX accomplished one import thing - it made gamers aware of Sony in a BIG way.  With the PS2, they are able to take chances and make some innovations.  Streaming data is one such innovation; the system was designed specifically around streaming the data.  Dreamcast is Sega\'s PSX this generation; they took no chances and released a machine that was easy to develop for.  Besides, unlike the streaming DC and streaming PSX, the PS2 has huge bandwidth.  You can either drink out of a big class with a skinny straw (DC, PSX) or you can drink out of a little glass with a massive straw (PS2).

Again, this argument is old news.  The textures on the PS2 look damn good to me.  I suppose next week we\'ll be treated to a "jaggies" thread.  Thank you for making such a nice first impression.

Hello and Goodbye to FAN@X...
 

 FAN@X YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK...GOODBYE!

oh my god i can\'t belive how nasty you guys can be, a guy comes on and states HIS OPINION and you guys all huddle and throw a ton of elitist suck my d**k kind of attitude, didn\'t i read a thread about being nicer to newbies about a week ago ????

ALSO ITS ABOUT THE GAMEPLAY NOT GRAPHICS!!!!

Also happy Xmas Fan@x, don\'t worry the board ain\'t always like this, just when one "hero" says something the rest can tend to follow.

If theres any mods reading this, im not slating the board simply stating my opinion, this thread is really dumb, its basically insults now, why don\'t you do the board a favour and close the thread

lol, thats funny, I cant see the pixels on the textures of my ps2 games.  Well, we expect MGS2 to be good because MGS was good, we expect ZOE to be good cause Hideo Kojima makes it, we expect GT3 to be good cause GT2 was good, etc.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Originally posted by FAN@X
I was prepared for some answers, but I think you don\'t understand in general. The problem is not the generation of games. Yep, PS1 games changed much 100-1000%, amazing! But the video memory (texture memory) is STATIC! IT\'s 4MB at all and there\'s no texture compression! There\'s an older console out there with 8MB AND texture compression (guess you know what it is...) It can store up to 16MB texture! And as we speak of PS2 as a NEW console it would be the minimal (I mean 16MB here too). There will be no revolution in MEMORY, only in code! Pheeew.. don\'t get me writing on coding ! )) It\'s a hell of a bitch on PS2! I\'m a fan of the PS but I work in the game industry, and I KNOW WHAT I SEE!!!

Sorry, happy X-mas!

 

This is a uneducated person. Now.. I\'m gonna have some fun.
1. PS2 streams in REAL time. The DVD is easily fast enough too do this. If u had ANY idea on its speed you would know this..
2. The MPEG decoder can be used as a decompressing tool.
The developers can easily make the textures JPEG format.
Textures are normally smaller then 100x100 so u won\'t lose any detail goin from BMP too Jpeg. Only LARGE pictures lose quality.

3. The ps2 can stream too the VRAM 4mb. Which has EXTREMELY high bandwidth. Then stream back and forth between the MAIN men and VRAM. Using only WHAT IS NEEDED. Not wasting mem on **** that doesn\'t get used.

4. Did i say it has a HUGE bandwidth..

The system is a streaming powerhouse. Streaming is the future... It ALSO takes down loading time. Less mem more streaming means LESS MONEY. Sony made the ps2 in a very cost effective way.

The PS2 has HUGE BANDWIDTH. ALOT MORE THAN XBOX. it\'s always Sony that comes up with innovation. The Ps2 doesn\'t hold textures in the memory like other consoles, it STREAMS THEM with the HIGH BANDWIDTH. Sony only included 4MB VRAM. I however do blame Sony for not instructing there developers how to use this method, or including the appropriate libraries. Developers have been storing the textures in the VRAM. that =JAGGIES. It will be fixed in the future. Remember those Tech demos sony showed that featured streaming textures? and in house developed Sony games will feature this too...

Can someone explain to me how exactly the bandwidth works.
Is it like RAM in that information(up to 48 gigs) can be stored in the bandwidth and then moved out?
If that is so then that is way better than RAM.

P.S. How did summoner fail you PowerToold. I think that game is great.

Actually it was Toshiba who invented the emotion engine.  But Sony is an early adopter, so point taken, Animal Mother.

Originally posted by Animal Mother
The PS2 has HUGE BANDWIDTH. ALOT MORE THAN XBOX.

Unfortunately that\'s not true. Both the XBox and GC have more bandwidth than the PS2 (read on).

 it\'s always Sony that comes up with innovation. The Ps2 doesn\'t hold textures in the memory like other consoles, it STREAMS THEM with the HIGH BANDWIDTH.
[/B]

That\'s the point, whilst the embedded VRAM in the GS has a bandwidth of 48Gb/s, textures can only be streamed to VRAM over a bandwidth of just 3.2Gb/s (and half of that is needed for vertices).

Sony only included 4MB VRAM. I however do blame Sony for not instructing there developers how to use this method, or including the appropriate libraries[/B]

That\'s where I agree , but I also feel that the lack of texture compression on the PS2 is Sony\'s biggest error.