I showed MGS2 for PC fanboys.

Originally posted by Bossieman
The bandwithproblem is not solved.
With only 1,3 Gflops there is no way possible to run MGS2 on a PC, I guess that MGS2 uses about 4-4,5 Gflops, that is a very high number.

Firstly, you cannot really measure a game in terms of GFlops used (and were do you get your *incorrect* figures from anyway! ).

Anyone who\'s seen the REALTIME graphics demonstrated in 3DMark2001 (especially the realistic nature scene and Max Payne), and the incredibly detailed model seen in the Evolution demo, as well as Doom3 and Unreal2 etc, will know that the PC can not only handle MGS2, it can do it better! (But let\'s not fight over that point ).

In terms of bandwidth, the only real bottleneck is AGPx4, which is just about sufficient for the GeForce3. Remember, textures are uploaded and stored in the massive onboard memory of PC graphics cards, so MOST of that bandwith is for vertices only!

Soon the PC will have AGPx8 and beyond, hence bandwidth problems are not a real problem anymore.

man mgs2 is the best lookign game coming for ps2, its grapics kill everything on the market, and yes, it runs at 60 fps. all thie time.
i have recently played black and white.... the fps are like ... crap! even with a 32mb nivida. 600 mhz processor, and direct x 8, the game runs under 30fps all the time!!! i thought they would fix that by now...
all this upgrade **** is lies... all lies.
its the games.
and thats why i like consoles, the games rock.!
:D:D:D:D:D

Anyone who\'s seen the REALTIME graphics demonstrated in 3DMark2001 (especially the realistic nature scene and Max Payne),

Umm, that nature scene ran @ about 10fps on my GHZ with my GeForce 2 (PRO 64MB DDR RAM) .. And the Max Payne demo looks nice but MGS2 easily looks better. Not to mention those are useless demos with no real AI, physics/ the works.. tech demos are always pretty, but no real game ever accomplishes those type of graphics.

- dm
- what\'s in the f\'cking box?

agreed! The natural demo ran at 2fps at my dads p4, 128ram,gf2gts. The max payne demo looked clunky, since the characters weren\'t made up of many poly\'s. They looked good in certain areas but in others they lacked detail. I also like those sprite chucks of stone and concrete that are shot off, cant gf3 do that in 3d?..mgs2 has proven that ps2 can do realisticly explodinf objects (the fruits, mags and botttles in the demo)

I have yet to a see a pc game that even has better graphis than shenmue or The bouncer! Dont say halo, doom3 or UT2 because those aren\'t out yet.

Originally posted by Metal_Gear_Ray
agreed! The natural demo ran at 2fps at my dads p4, 128ram,gf2gts.

But 30fps+ on the GF3!!! This demo makes extensive use of the powerful vertex shaders, something the GF2 doesn\'t have in hardware. Hence it\'s requires power the GF2 doesn\'t have.

The max payne demo looked clunky, since the characters weren\'t made up of many poly\'s. They looked good in certain areas but in others they lacked detail.[/B]

You can make such comments about any game if you look at them close enough, including MGS2 (such as it\'s average textures and animation). It is the effects like rain and the use of physics which makes the game look so awesome.

But again, does the PS2 or DC have anything close to matching the 3DMark nature demo, either in game or demo form? Nope!

I also like those sprite chucks of stone and concrete that are shot off, cant gf3 do that in 3d?..mgs2 has proven that ps2 can do realisticly explodinf objects (the fruits, mags and botttles in the demo)[/B]

That\'s an irrelevent comparison. For example, are numerous chunks of stone and concrete blown off the walls in the MGS2 demo leaving similar holes?

I have yet to a see a pc game that even has better graphis than shenmue or The bouncer! Dont say halo, doom3 or UT2 because those aren\'t out yet. [/B]

Graphics are a subjective topic, since what looks awesome to you may only seem average to me, and vice versa. IMO, B&W on the PC looks much better, and the realtime Evolution demo (PC+XBox) shows a character which easily blows away ANYTHING I\'ve seen on the PS2 or DC. Sure it\'s a demo (for now), but this is the kind of detail possible on today\'s GF3 equipted PC and the forthcoming XBox!

But before going too far into PC vs PS2 graphics, I\'m sure there are those who feel The Bouncer has better graphics than MGS2, but which is (or will be) the better game? Just a thought!

Originally posted by Falcon4
i have recently played black and white.... the fps are like ... crap! even with a 32mb nivida. 600 mhz processor, and direct x 8, the game runs under 30fps all the time!

Sorry to break it to you, but your PC is NOT cutting edge anymore!

And before you get angry, I still only have an AMD450Mhz+Voodoo3

However I witnessed B&W being played on my friends P4 and it was just awesome (and very s-m-o-o-t-h).

In a few months, I hope to join the \'high-end owning PC\' club!

I think I smell some anger twoards PS2?
Am I right Dr Yassam???

PS2 has the best graphics I\'ve seen anyways!

My friend has a 1.2GHz TB GeF2 (just like Bossiemans friends comp) and his games look like if they were on a Vic20 if you compare them to the 1 year old TTT!
They look like crap if you compare them to MGS2 or GT3!

/FAST

PS: PS2 is da system for me cuz it has da gamez and da graphics

Originally posted by Dr Yassam


Firstly, you cannot really measure a game in terms of GFlops used (and were do you get your *incorrect* figures from anyway! ).

Anyone who\'s seen the REALTIME graphics demonstrated in 3DMark2001 (especially the realistic nature scene and Max Payne), and the incredibly detailed model seen in the Evolution demo, as well as Doom3 and Unreal2 etc, will know that the PC can not only handle MGS2, it can do it better! (But let\'s not fight over that point ).

In terms of bandwidth, the only real bottleneck is AGPx4, which is just about sufficient for the GeForce3. Remember, textures are uploaded and stored in the massive onboard memory of PC graphics cards, so MOST of that bandwith is for vertices only!

Soon the PC will have AGPx8 and beyond, hence bandwidth problems are not a real problem anymore.

I dont know about the TB put the PIV has a maximum bandwith of 1,3 gflops. I´ll try to find a link for you.
According to Hideo Kojima, MGS2 AI uses about 30% of the power in the EE, so if the EE is about 3-4 times more powerful than a PIII chip that makes 1 PIII for just calculating the AI, then you have Physics like rain and stuff, so please explain how it is possible to run the MGS2 demo on a PC? The main CPU does all physics and enviroment calculations, not the Geforce 2 or 3.

Uh, are they buying PS2 for MGS2 or for the graphics?  I\'m getting the impression that they are getting it mainly for graphics...

IMO, that\'s one reason why I believe a lot of PC gamers are attracted to XBox.

But 30fps+ on the GF3!!! This demo makes extensive use of the powerful vertex shaders, something the GF2 doesn\'t have in hardware. Hence it\'s requires power the GF2 doesn\'t have.

For a 1000 mhz PC and a $400-500 \'all-powerful\' video card 30fps does not cut it. Considering it\'s just a demo, imagine if it was a real game with physics/ai/etc .. it would never be @ a constant 60fps. I don\'t care how powerful a GeForce 3 is, it will never be used to its maximum potential. Take all the previous 3D cards, none were taken well advantage of. Where\'s my 20mpps on my GeForce 2 with T&L/bump mapping/etc? Doesn\'t happen. Until the PC\'s architecture changes, I don\'t care how powerful the cards are, they will always be limited.

- dm
- what\'s in the f\'cking box?

To Dr Yassam

MGS2 has great animation, better than quake 3 or UT! have you even played it? The movies and screens dont show the power of this game, you need to play it to see it in its full visual glory

Originally posted by Bossieman


The bandwithproblem is not solved.
With only 1,3 Gflops there is no way possible to run MGS2 on a PC, I guess that MGS2 uses about 4-4,5 Gflops, that is a very high number.
The rain and wind is realtime, imagine a 1,2 GHz Thunderbird with a peek of 1,4-1,5 Gflops pushing all that information to the Graphic-card, that is not possible, that is why we dont see realtime movements in PC games, maybe U can do some kind of trick on the PC to make the rain look good, but you cant make it realtime..........yet.

                 You will see that on a PC sooner than you think. Think polygons first. The original SOF had 400 polys per character where  as SOF 2 will have 3000.  Detail? GHOUL 2 will make the game more realistic that will allow the Desert Eagle to take out only chunks of skull leaving oozing brain matter.When you look at MGS you see the PS2 at its best doing what it was bulit to do. But in real time check the backgrounds or look at the middle ground in ZOE. They save polys with that technique. Direct impact viewing where everything before you is highlighted. Also No game on PC comes close to using its full potential. We are talking the high end stuff here,most games can run on a 300mhz cpu! The real test is in the massive online stuff 200 to 3000 players and still render backgrounds effects. MSG is a fixed camera you have no control when in third person and aside from the rain how many models will you see on the screen at once in real time. PS2 is a great 3D monster but it still has llimitations when looking at the PC, otherwise why would Sony develop Planetside and Star Wars Galaxys for PC first and not PS2? Just a thought. Keep playing.
________
Park Royal 2 Condos Pattaya

otherwise why would Sony develop Planetside and Star Wars Galaxys for PC first and not PS2? Just a thought. Keep playing.

Sony has nothing to do with those games. Both of those are made by Verant. (which are owned by Sony, but Sony doesn\'t have anything to do with them) Also, both of those are online-only games. Why would they make that on the PS2 with no online capability (right now) ? Not to mention both of those games have been in production for a long time now. Before Sony purchased Verant.

- dm
- what\'s in the f\'cking box?

I can agree with that but those same folks brought us EVERQUEST and Sony had them then. When are we going to be able to use the PS2 online?
________
JuicyNicky

Ugh..

Don\'t mention everqu!@$#$ .. I\'m a recovering addict. Been almost a year now, and ugh well. nm.

Anyhow, Sony didn\'t own Verant when that horrible horrible game first came out.. it wasn\'t until sometime last year that Sony actually purchased them.

- dm
- what\'s in the f\'cking box?