Why do people still think the PS2 was technologically superior to the Gamecube?

Weren't PS2 dev kits also significantly cheaper?

Persona 4 is the most egregious case of this. It's so bad I thought there was something wrong with my monitor at first. But no, it's just then applying a really heavy motion blur to their 30fps game.

Presumably but I doubt this played a factor as much as "this console is tearing the world apart right now in terms of sales"

With the Gamecube I don't think Nintendo truly realized what they had at the time hardware wise and failed to market it as such. And by the time they did when they reused the hardware for the Wii it was already too late

You could really say this about most of their consoles

Not necessarily, they knew what they had with the N64 but the N64 still had underwhelming sales. The Wii and WiiU literally use recycled Gamecube hardware so it wasn't about hardware

It was, but component cables weren't cheap, there were missing games like GTA III and Metal Gear Solid 2, and PlayStation 2 was aggressively marketed to an audience that would have otherwise ignored video games. That market shifted to Xbox 360 or the Wii, and then back to PS4 if they hadn't already switched to the iPhone and iPad Galaxy phone and $99 off-brand Android tablet they got at Target.

More than any other single device, it's responsible for a lot of the western developer shenanigans today like DLC and unfinished games being marketed by news media, because a lot of the worst offenders would have otherwise stayed with the PC platform where that bullshit eventually took off, but it wasn't quick or quiet like it was on consoles.

Has to do with Burnout 3 and Burnout Revenge. Ports weren't developed for the GameCube because it couldn't handle lighting properly whenever car crashes occurred.

Related to this conversation:
dolphin-emu.org/blog/2017/07/30/ubershaders/

^PS2 emulators never had this problem.
Why?
Because Sony utilizes a much simpler, non-programmable, fixed-function pixel pipeline on the PS2, and so PS2 emulators could just hand-write shaders for the few possible configurations of the pixel pipeline.
Whereas Nintendo used the TEV, providing much more programmable functionality similar to modern pixel shaders.

"Xbox/PS2 was more sophisticated than Gamecube" is a meme Microsoft spread around back in the day to try and shoot Nintendo down.
Historically, Microsoft has succeeded by stealing from and attacking competition, and this case is no exception to their rule.

At the time when these consoles were still commercially relevant the majority of people at the time used RCA

The only reason people in the modern day bring up component cables is because we use widescreen televisions right now. At the time Nintendo even dropped support for it because nobody used it.

If they did then they wouldn't have used carts that severely limited the size of most games while scrambling to shove out the 64DD that also flopped.

Well, if you had enough money for a Sony or Panasonic in 2001, it likely had component video, if not s-video.

There are still drooling retards out there who seriously can't tell the difference between the picture given by a DVD and HD video from a BD, though, so that's why it lasted into the next generation.

1) they don't. They never did
2) because PS2 has more good games
3) because of the disc thing you mentioned resulting in some multiplats getting gimped on Gamecube

For some reason Nintendo didn't think of size for three generations in a row. But I guess the third time was the charm because having a smaller disc size than the competition didn't hurt them with the Wii.

Maybe if Nintendo wasn't fucking stupid in making the method of pulling the YCbCr signal use their proprietary cable you only could buy from their online store while doing fuckall to inform people that their system was capable of 480p, then it wouldn't have failed.

At PS2 and Xbox allowed for 480p video to pulled from both first and third party in a more practical way.

You have to understand that CD drives back in 1996 were still 2x at absolute most. CDs were fucking slow back then. People don't understand this because today we have like 32x drives

Only the PS3 really had a size advantage that gen. A lot of 360/PS3 multiplats required 2-DVDs for a full install on the Xbox 360 but just one Blu-Ray for the PS3

The Wii could handle dual-layer DVDs but early ones had trouble because Nintendo cheaped out on the drives on early models

Are you really so deluded as to believe games like Super Mario Shitshine and Metroid Poop are better looking graphically than games like Shadow of the Colossus?

Fuck off. And here's a sage for ya.

Xbox was still more powerful than the purple lunchbox, sorry Nintencuck.

They don't. It wasn't technologically superior, but it was superior overall since it had more/better games.

Tech specs don't even matter in consoles.

1x drives were indeed slow but you're overestimating the load times on 2x drives. Nintendo should've realized that making a cart only system just to suit their own first party games at the expense of everyone else was fucking retarded.

This decision is still fucking people to this very day. I have an original Gamecube with a digital output and I would like to have a component cable but they cost hundreds of dollars to buy now. My PC can play Dolphin flawlessly at low-level emulation configs at 1080p but it would still be nice to have

Yes? SotC looked fantastic for the hardware it was running but it certainly didn't look that great in comparison to the games you mentioned. Compare it with Twilight Princess for example. There's no contest on which game looked better graphically

The big issues were that carts were more expensive compared to CD and CDs were a lot more universal. I think it cost several hundred bucks for N64 cart mastering hardware alone.

Naw. Everyone at the time could see the differences in PS1 vs N64. Even kids. Kids didn't realize that the N64 hardware was better in some significant ways, because everything was gimped by the cart size being miniscule compared to the CD size. Go play a PS1 if you want to see how slow it was. Protip: it wasn't that bad. It also helped that you were dealing with far smaller games back then than today, but they were still far too big to fit on an N64 cart.

The size bottlenecked them hard so in a lot of ways they weren't able to take full advantage of the rest of their hardware. People say N64 is more powerful, but looking at the games, you'd never see it.

Some people think N64 games look better for some reason. The lack of textures makes them look terrible to me though.

The Xbox was indeed more powerful than the Gamecube but even then the Xbox was gimped by DirectX since it wasn't as mature back then. San Andreas looks significantly better on the PS2 for example while on the Xbox it runs at a much higher framerate but has less lighting effects. Xbox was definitely king of framerate though. A lot of Xbox titles are buttery smooth compared to the GCN and PS2

The Gamecube used a proprietary graphics API called GX developed by ArtX/ATI IIRC

Oh I'm aware of the scalping over Cube component cables. I believe that some hobbyists out there are currently trying to work around the Cube's proprietary digital component output to make a third party alternative, but I don't know much. At least with the Wii you can play GC titles in 480p as Nintendo came to their senses and opted out of using their proprietary signal.

What's even more bullshit about them removing component out on later Gamecube models is that there were still games coming out at the end of the systems life that supported 480p. Baten Kaitos Origins and Twilight Princess had it I believe.

I believe it was 20 bucks per cart vs. 2 dollars per CD when manufacturing. Even if it doesn't sound like much, it adds up, especially if you're manufacturing a game that's selling well and there's demand for it.

Few games went without textures on the N64, and only a few more had a lack on some objects. I don't blame them for barely texturing F-Zero X, though. That shit runs at 60 on the hardware.

Naw, even as a kid I always thought the N64 looked significantly better. The PS1 relied too much on pre-rendered backgrounds and cutscenes and even as a kid I never found a PS1 game that gave me the same feeling of freedom as I got with Zelda OoT or even Mario 64. And the PS1s lack of proper Z-buffer made the few fully-rendered PS1 games look like shit still compared to the N64

Crash Bandicoot and Spyro the Dragon (and of course the later sequels moreso) make the N64 Marios and Zeldas look like shit.

Spyro was impressive but Crash Bandicoot was more or less what I would consider a "hallway platformer" it gave you nowhere near the same degree of movement Mario 64 had. And even then Crash had to be insanely optimized to work with the lead devs even implementing their iwn programming language and APIs and shit just for the game. It did have better lighting I think but that's it. Spyro had terrible textures but also had nicer lighting effects

Paid DLC wouldn't have succeeded if PS2's market wasn't there to open their wallets.

Bro please

That's not what Zelda looks like on actual hardware. Spyro still looks better though.

Majora's Mask looks wonderful compared to the Crash trilogy. The same applies to Rogue Squadron, Battle for Naboo, Conker, and Perfect Dark.

In exchange for the CD drive, N64 also launched $100 cheaper than PlayStation and $200 cheaper than Saturn.

Sony cheaping out on this one thing has made PS1 games look like shit when rendered at a higher resolution. N64 games like Mario 64, on the other hand, looked just fine when played at 640x480 when they were brought to the Wii.

Crash was clever enough to actually figure out how to translate 2D sidescrolling platformers like Mario, Sonic, or Donkey Kong Country into 3D gameplay. Don't blame Crash just because N64 devs couldn't figure that out and had to sacrifice actual platforming for collectathon exploration elements. Both genres are fine, but don't act like linearity is a bad thing. That's the meme that resulted in so much open world garbage today. It's literally the same as saying Metroid is inherently better than Mega Man because Mega Man has linear stages and Metroid doesn't. Besides, Mario 64's Bowser stages were the best stages in the game anyway.

Yup. Good job picking two pics with nothing in them, to give less things to compare, other characters. Plus the later Spyros improved immensely, but comparing Marjora's Mask to Year of the Dragon, both from 2000, Zelda loses much harder than it does in your pics.

Also don't forget the framerate of the N64 was awful.

It arguably looks better on hardware, despite the dithering and blurry AA. PJ64 messes up the texture rendering, and often misses some of the most basic shit like noise texture generation.

I wasn't comparing genres themselves, rather, I was staring that I don't believe the PS1 was really capable of games with the same degree of freedom.
Is this why every modern 3D platformer has been a Mario 64 clone?

Even with the N64s texture limits Nintendo still put in superior textures. Look at the plastic looking floor on Spyro, you're dreaming

Early shareware models were the progenitor to DLC, only now you didn't have to wait for a floppy in the mail, you could just pay and download instantly, even the way that they sold the game to you in "episodes" was worse than a lot of DLC today.

It's more simplistic than most 2d platforming games, the whole series is a joke and people still deify it, Nintendo when they actually tried a platforming centric 3d platformer blew Crash completely out of the water. Super Mario 64 was more a this is how you make games in 3d than a genuine attempt at a 3d platformer, even though it still does a good job, and inarguably it's platforming centric segments like tick tock clock and the bowser levels are head and shoulders above the best of what Crash has to offer, mainly because the best of what Crash has to offer are the 2d levels.

But that's wrong though. Especially for Majora's Mask.

Good point. You can see why this would influence them to make that decision. But it also resulted in games being more expensive, so it was a really tricky trade that would result in more cost to the average consumer in the long run.

Except every 3D Sonic game, and the latest Mario games, which are pretty much the only 3D platformers that come out anymore.

That's why I mentioned Spyro.

We've reached levels of cherry picking that shouldn't even be possible.

But they weren't. They were free of charge if loaded over a network. You think people ordered Doom's first episode over the mail or bought it at their neighborhood Circuit City?

Nobody bought the Original Xbox. Xbox 360 attracted PS2's audience that bought into the console as a DVD player that happened to play video games. That's where the DLC shit really took off.

There were shareware games well before Doom, but I was unaware that it was free if loaded over a network.

Nintendrones are beyond saving.

That's not what Spyro looks like on the actual hardware, either. In fact, if upscaled, thanks to the lack of a z-buffer, movement of the entire environment would be a jumpy mess.

Sure, right.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_generation_of_video_game_consoles#Worldwide_sales_standings

Yeah IIRC Doom was completely free over network. It was a business model Id Software had used before Doom I believe and it worked

24 million is pathetic for the product of a DJIA component. That's only 2 million ahead of Gamecube. The fact is, most people buying an Xbox 360 were buying it as their first Xbox device.

I am honestly surprised it only sold ~2 million more units than the Gamecube, I thought it would've been more. Regardless nobody bought either of that shit compared to the PS2. I think the Nintendo DS outsold the PS2 eventually but Sony fanboys keep their distortion field around the PS2s sales numbers and use mental gymnastics like "the DS doesn't count since it is a handheld!" .etc

The DS doesn't count because it's a handheld
t. Had a PS2 and a DS

Handhelds are still game consoles. Regardless I think it still stands "officially" that the PS2 outsold the DS even though Sony was only able to actually confirm sales of 150 million while Nintendo was able to confirm 154 million for the DS and sales trackers did the rest. The difference is so negligible though at sales numbers this fucking insane for both sides that it's safer to say both consoles sold roughly the same and going into greater details are just for starting flamewars

Xbox is better than both anyway.

Still more than the cuckcube, though it was low enough that microshit decided to kill it 4 years after its launch for the 360.

Because Japan, where the sides were reversed. Cube was 2nd place there while the Xbox barely sold 2 million units. Most of that 24 million were US and Eurofags.

The Xbox was definitely superior framerate wise because it was technically the most powerful console of that gen, but I recall a lot of multiplats had better lighting on the PS2 as a result of DirectX being shit back then compared to OGL or whatever API the PS2 mainly used.

But it's a different market, people who had a console had a handheld too most of the time, and Nintendo has always been king of the handheld market, almost everyone that had a console around me had a DS.
It's like arguing that regular phones outsold cell phones, it's true but it's a different device that serves slightly different purposes

Those were mainly games ported from PS2 later on and not actual "multiplats". And in the case of MGS2 and Silent Hill 2, you can blame Konami for not being knowing how to work with the hardware. MGS2 not only has missing effects but a fuckton of slowdown in the Tanker chapter.

As if this wasn't the real reason more PS2s were sold. I'm on my seventh at the moment.

My PS2 fat from way back when still reads discs fine.

Thou art fortunate. Armored Core 2 and Vice City killed a couple of mine.

How would games kill it?

Constant reading is bad for cheap laser diodes with short lifespans.

There's a "diagnostics" mode you can access on the main menu by pressing "triangle" and it's supposed to re-calibrate the disc laser to address read errors. I've gotten PS2s for free as a result of disc errors when all the retards had to do was use the diagnostics option to fix it

PS2 was also overwhelmingly overpriced. Gamecube was $200 and Xbox was $300. PS2 was as expensive as Xbox despite having inferior hardware to both consoles.

sure thing buddy

I'm on my second PS2, but only because my mom dropped my original off the high shelf where I had it (in front of my bunk bed) when I was at school. Even after that it still worked sometimes but would only boot up rarely. My second still works almost 15 years later.

I hear about PS2 having problems but myself and nobody I knew had those issues. Unlike with 360 and PS3. I still miss my launch PS3.

I'm too lazy to look up the figures but I'm willing to bet you're listing launch prices and ignoring that the PS2 launched a year before the other two. You might as well complain about the Dreamcast's launch price in 1998 and compare it to the Gamecube's in 2001.

wot

So, was the price dropped to 200 bucks after GC came out or something?

The Gamecube was cheap as fuck halfway through it's lifespan, far lower than 200.

Video game consoles typically do drop their prices as time goes on like that, yes.

edition.cnn.com/2001/TECH/ptech/06/29/ps2.price.cut.idg/index.html
That's a lie though. In 2001 it was only dropped to $280. That's still overpriced compared to the competitors. It didn't even come with hard drive.

Not doable in the olden days. Now a PS2 is $10.

...

Well I did say I didn't do my research. But I'm still confident that over the course of the console generation things evened out a bit.

Though since PS2 was lacking hardware wise compared to the other, you could still argue it's overpriced. But then it's supply and demand. Can't expect them to be less jewish than the market demands.

Why didn't it come with a hard disk and only use the DVD's for cutscenes and extra sound files anyway?

Nothing before then came with a hard disc, so it was a cost they didn't think consumers were asking for. Considering Sega hadn't done it with their latest hardware, and Nintendo wasn't doing it with the one they put out shortly after, you can't blame them for not expecting the industry to move in that direction. The Xbox had it, but I don't think that aspect was moving sales.

Once the next gen hit and it was all about online and shit, then the need for one was greater. But online is the cancer that killed gaming so fuck it.

The PS2 is probably more impressive because I'm assuming it cost more than the DS. I wouldn't know though since I never bought a PS2.

No they don't.
Keep the fight with your imaginary enemies in your mind.

Hard disks were expensive for little storage back then, that's exactly why were were using optical media for everything.

They're right, you know. It's a completely different market. If anything goes, then the iPhone sold more than the DS.

The PS2 was about 200 bucks throughout its life on average while the DS I think was around 150 bucks on average

They're the same exact market, the only difference is market segment. The iPhone is an unfair comparison because it was always sold primarily as a phone and was not the same market OR market segment as the DS and PS2

The second revision of the PS2 did have a Hard Drive bay but it was never really utilized outside of PS2 Linux I think. And PS2 Linux was really only sold so Sony could get around an Import Tax in Europe like what OtherOS was for the PS3. The Hard Drive bay was relatively short lived since it was shortly killed off with the release of the PS2 Slim

The only time anyone says the PS2 is superior is in a thread about the Xbox or Gamecube. Every single time they do this, the ports of Resident Evil and Splinter Cell get brought up, and they screech that those don't count.

That's it, no one else thinks the PS2 was better. The PS2 just sold well because it was a cheap DVD player. Only fanboys that bought a PS4 and a PS4Pro will dispute this fact.

PS2 sold better because it had a fuckhuge library with a lot of good games (not to say that it didn't also have a lot of shit ones as well, though). The backwards compatibility and DVD player surely helped though.

You've got that the wrong way around and are looking at the game library in retrospect.

It was selling insanely fast on launch due to the DVD capability. The games on launch were pretty pathetic; mostly racing/sports games. Only decent launch titles were TimeSplitters and Unreal Tournament, which didn't get great adoption early on.
Now, after many people bought the cheap DVD player that could also play a couple of average games, devs decided to work on the PS2 and would happily give it exclusives as it had the highest user adoption rate.

That's what Sony was hoping for with the PS3 playing BluRays, but it didn't work as well due to BluRay having a smaller and slower adoption rate than DVDs.

The GC hit a low of $99 at retail

The PS2 was more valuable to customers being a cheap dvd player as well as a games console, I'd say it's about even when you take that into account.

The PS2 sold well I think because Sony took a page out of Nintendos book. That is to say they marketed the PS2 as an "Entertainment System" in the same exact vein as the original NES 20 years earlier. Sony tried to make the Playstation series of consoles as a sort of de-facto standard for console gaming, and I commend them for trying, but it all sort of fell-apart after Sony took some heavy losses from the PS3s slow-start. I had a chance to get a PS3 again for like 20 bucks and I really regret turning it down now because damn was that console solid as fuck.

The PS2 is a more interesting piece of hardware overall, it worked in absolutely insane ways and still put out performance that was pretty much beyond the league of it's hardware, Gamecube is just a "not PC" with gimped capabilities.
In pure power the Gamecube wrecked it obviously (Mini DVD faggotry aside, that shit ruined the gamecube) but then again the XBOX wrecked both of those even harder, but even still the Dreamcast and PS2 did things neither of those two could.

Here's a decent explanation of a few things.>inb4 muh plebbit

That Reddit post literally just took shit from the Dolphin Dev Blog

Sony advertised PS1 games as being part of its library. So not only do you have typical launch adopters, people who were blown away by what was, for a year, the most powerful hardware (that Saddam Hussein was using to launch missiles!) but people who might have been thinking of getting a PS1, with its very large library by that time, might get a PS2 instead, with the promise of more games in the future, which they could reasonably expect since the PS1 had a good library. This would include not only people who didn't have one of the previous consoles, but also people who had an N64 and didn't want to wait for next gen, since they could get this now and also get into PS1 games at the same time. And of course the Dreamcast was already a sinking ship by that time so I'm sure some of those poor bastards like myself got a second console, since they knew theirs wasn't gonna be getting new games for much longer.

And of course there was the DVD compatibility.

Sony's strategy with Blu-Ray was different in that it was twofold. Blu-Ray was not meant to sell PS3 so much as PS3 was made to sell Blu-Ray, and it worked. The PS3 was one of the primary reasons Blu-Ray beat HDDVD.

First post is by Phire which is a Dolphin dev

The PS2 could be used to start a nuclear war, how can the GC even compete?

Didn't they say similar shit about the Cell processor in the PS3?

Sony was most likely the ones who also started the rumors about the Saudi Prince who bought like 500,000 PS2s to link together to create a supercomputer that also turned out to be false. Sony was doing all kinds of fucked-up borderlined illegal viral marketing shit back then

The CELL BE was pretty much the most powerful version of a workstation CPU made for highly parallelized tasks and it cost a fraction of the price of that kind of equipment so yeah a cluster of those could crunch some big numbers with ease, doubtful anybody ever used it that way seriously though since OtherOS died early on and FAT PS3 had shit reliability which you don't want in a workstation.

Believe it or not the US Marines actually did build a server out of hundreds of PS3s running Yellowdog Linux under OtherOS. The project ended because Sony killed off OtherOS. The PS3 made me fucking hate Sony with a passion. Because it feels like the did everything wrong with the PS3 but what makes it so frustrating was that they almost did things right

Here's what I mean; The had a console with a LITERAL SUPERCOMPUTER CHIP inside of it and they had no fucking clue what to do with it. Was the PS3 a computer replacement? A console? A Media Center? It was all of them because they had to justify the 600 dollar price tag. The motherfucking US government was using PS3 to run their servers but Sony killed off OtherOS because OtherOS was only there to bypass European import tarrifs on computer hardware by marketing the PS3 as a devkit. And so people tried to revive OtherOS but Sony sued the shit out of them and it tarnished their reputation. It just blows my mind how many mistakes Sony made that gen.

You're also forgetting that the PS2 had more buttons compared to the GCN, 3 more buttons, 4 if you count the select button, but I cant really think of any game that really made any use of it besides using it as another menu button. Even the Xbox had controller buttons as well.

At 600 dollars it was still cheaper than other bluray players.

True, but the Dualshock still had horrible afterthought-tier ergonomics

Everyone knows the best controller that generation was the Xbox Duke

Horse shit, maybe the absolute highest-end shit maybe but there were a lot of Bluray players by 2006 way under 200 bucks

No there weren't you fucking retard. The first bluray player came out in 2006 and it was 1000$.

Good textures on a low-polygon model looks way better than a bad texture on a high-polygon model.

You answered your own question.

That doesn't apply to the PS2/GC as much as it applies to the PS1/N64.

No shit the first one was a thousand bucks. First-to-market media players were always over-engineered. I was wrong regardless since the Sony BDP S1 and the PS3 both came out Q4 of 2006. I think by Q4 2007 though there were a lot of players on the market that beat the PS3 in pricing

Bluray players still cost 400 dollars in 2008 you dirty nigger there was no reason to buy a standalone over a PS3.

It didn't take long before this devolved into console wars BS. Although I suppose that was inevitable.

You could have both on the GCN though if you were smart about memory. Smash Bros. Melee has fantastic textures for example

What do you expect from faggots too poor to afford more than one console.

Gamecube was a small river with high flow rate,
PS2 was a large river with slow flow rate,
the larger river with slower flow meant more boats could use it reliably.
PS2 ran more games better and more reliably, that's all that matters in an industry.
Industries favour more boats, sorry gamecube fans but it was a very very nice system with much less boats.

As someone who bought their first bluray player in 2008 for 150 dollars, I can conclusively say you are a underage lying faggot.

Could be from yurop, shit has a tendency of being massively inflated in price when it's new, like DVD players, US got their first one at around 600 bucks, yurop had to pay over a thousand for the first ones and price didn't really get to acceptable levels until 2003.

the real question is why are dolphin emulator guys so fucking based? dolphin-emu.org/blog/2017/07/30/ubershaders/ . I wish other emulators had people this competent behind them

Nah.

I don't have a smug enough image for this.

considering its competition are the ps2 and xbox emulator, it has pretty damn good performance. It works perfectly for the games I've tried and I have a decade old cpu

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying it's bad, but it has way too much issues to really be called competent, and way too much devs being blind to anything but their own opinions to be called based, especially with the only real competent guy (hrydgard) being gone and most of the competent guys beside him doing other things or having put the project on their backlog.

...

Along with bloom and blur. Latter games during that gen relied on it to cover up imperfections, but they end up looking lousy nowadays.

Back with crt's games, generally did as there was less pixilizatation due to anti aliasing with the n64. Having a z-buffer helped and the n64 games had little to no load times. Both systems in hindsight were held back various flaws.

Nintendo screwed up in not getting the disk drive done quick enough. That would have made a big difference.

Not that much. It had the advantage in having up to 1080i resolution, but the GC was very close to it.

There are people who already have made an HDMI output. Check out my life in gaming for the GC video.

The Dolphin Emulator is a God-tier piece of software in general let alone emulator. Yeah it had issues but the sheer amount of talented developers behind it is unprecedented. Dolphin is something every emulator in the community should strive to be. Accurate, low-level whenever possible, high coding standards.etc

I want it to support Wii U emulation since theoretically it should be as simple as it was to start supporting Wii emulation. Then we could finally escape CEMU's horseshit.

saturn hit the ideal middle ground with perfect video output, even high quality composite output, support for high resolutions even progressive ones, and minimized 3D warping by using quads and having an abundance of 2D games.

the wii u is notably more powerful than the wii despite mild similarities in cpu architecture.

plus wii u emulation without gyro, touch screen, microphone kind of really misses the point. the few games on the system made extensive use of these features.

few games really had issues with disc speed loading. Most of them were very early releases or were poor ports. the system with the worst CD loading was the neogeo cd which I doubt anyone had back then.

Fuck look at this GIANT FLAMING homosexual

The Espresso CPU is literally 3 Broadways on one die. The WiiU is a 32-bit machine and uses the same 750cl core as the gamecube

Nope, it's high resolution mode was 480i.

Wii U is several Wiis strapped together on a hardware level, going by my reading of it. CEMU shows emulation of the thing is possible in the first place but I do agree you'd basically be required to have a real tablet if you were going to emulate it.

do you understand why it's not going to be as simple as "dude just emulate the cpu 3 times lmao?"

720x480, and it could do progressive scan at that resolution but no games enabled it. There is a proof of concept demo running at 480p out there.

Consider that even with 10 times the devbase and just as much development time as PCSX2 it's still barely better, Dolphin is the best 6th gen emulator but that's just because everything else is just more terrible for more or less good reason (less devs and terrible legacy decisions for PCSX2, no dev and interest for DC/XBOX.
Also consider that a single dev that doesn't have as much talent as many of the high profile current and past Dolphin devs manage to single-handedly maintains a fork that is superior in every way to mainline, that is how much wasted potential Dolphin has coming from the devbase and completely autistic management.

It's medium accuracy at-best compared to what actual accurate emulator manage.
Let's take for example Mednafen PSX, it boots every games, has 3 games with major issues and a bunch more with minor issues.
Dolphin has visible issues in a good bit of the NGC library (not game breaking and mostly concentrated in the 3rd party games which is why people are much less aware of those) and many games that don't work at all in the Wii library (not to mention many issues come from them trying to fit Wii and NGC in a single emulator which even they admit was a bad idea in retrospect)

LLE isn't a silver bullet, PCSX2 is LLE for the most part too doesn't stop it from being pretty terrible overall

Such high coding standard that brought you refusing a 2 line PR that would have enabled you to play at more than 4x res for years before this became mainline, until some suicidal tranny did some forcing to get it in. and then obviously they hailed it as great progress despite the fact that any retard could make his own build with it activated.
Same coding standard which brought a guy that managed to break PJ64 with simple refactoring to make impact decisions on what code makes it in dolphin.
And then we get into the Intel IGP bug, the WM+ emulation via pad etc.

tl;dr being slightly less of a shitfest than others and having good PR doesn't actually make you good when it comes down to it.

Because it sold more than the gamecube and people think more sales = better coz they're drooling idiots.

That's not exactly a retarded argument. Pic related.

It is capable of booting every Gamecube game as of 5.0. It's a good emulator even relative to other generations. The best N64 emulators can't even do that even though it's a weaker console and it probably has a smaller library too

Contrary to what the shills say, PCSX2 is terribly optimized. I'm well aware that alot of PCSX2 devs come here to shill it frequently. It runs like shit on everything unless you have a top end $9999 intel hexadexa core cpu. Makes me think PCSX2 is poorly optimized on purpose to force you into buying an expensive cpu. Whereas dolphin will run on a shitty 2008 core 2 thinkpad no problem.

at least the PS2 had games unlike the PS3

...

Weaker doesn't at all imply easier to emulate especially when you're talking about a console like the N64 where common sense from normal electronic and software engineering mostly doesn't apply and you have to deal with many completely undocumented and extremely hard to replicate on modern hardware behaviors.

About 500 games in both case if we're looking at only NGC for Dolphin.

Plenty of emulator are capable of booting every games on their respective system, playing them without issues is a different matter entirely, in fact ePSXe not only achieves that but I'd be willing to bet given the appropriate plugins (the internal software renderer + eternal SPU) plays a larger percentage of the library without any issues.
Also as a comparison outside of games which requires specific hardware (eyetoy, microphone and some other thing) PCSX2 boots every PS2 games too, keyword being "boot" and not "play" (see Primal, 24 the game etc)

Good one.

Why in the fuck would devs purposefully not optimize to force you to buy hardware, there are plenty of more credible explanation that come before that.

Show how well your thinkpad runs Metroid Prime or BG:DA then.

10/10 perfect imitation of the basic Dolphin fanboy

...

Speaking of which when looking at the hardware the PS2 and N64 are quite similar in a lot of ways. Maybe there's just something about MIPS based architectures that are a fucking pain in the ass to emulate. But that wouldn't explain how emulating the PSP seems to be going along fairly straightforward. PCSX2 is still a shit emulator for a lot of reasons though but I think it mainly comes down to poor leadership rather than the difficulty of emulating the hardware. PCSX2 relied too heavily on plugins to hack functionality in rather than focusing on accuracy, the code base suffered from feature creep, and a lot of older devs just gave up trying to maintain the code base. It all comes down to leadership

Look at CEMU for example, it's made fucking amazing progress despite being made by only like 2 devs just because they get Patreon Bux to make it their day job.

Ps2 had the same problems as the ps1: horrible load times and fucked up frame rates. The GameCube at least fixed the graphics quality of the n64.

Nah the PS1 and PSP exists, MIPS CPU aren't really that hard to emulate and the PS1 and PSP GPUs aren't all that complex (they still can do things that require OGL3.3/4.x capable hardware to emulate properly but you can hack your way around and deal with that in OGL2), it's the coprocessors)and outlandish GPUs that are a problem in both the N64 and PS2.

GSdx and SPU2X are so tightly integrated it might as well not be plugins, the real issue with PCSX2 comes from Gabest deciding it was a fucking brilliant idea to code a renderer targeting shit hardware and have it mostly unreadable by people that aren't him and some other dev followed suit by rewriting the VU/EE dynarec on a whim because his favorite game didn't work with the old one, merged it without much testing and hoped nothing would break too hard so the rest of the team lost over 7 years just unfucking that situation and none of the team outside of Gregory and rama has any idea how most the shit actually works and even they have a tenuous grasp on it.

They're actually only now starting to plan major rewrites of the emulator to purge legacy shit from it, but it's likely gonna stay about the same as it always was with less terribleness, and obviously there are likely issues with PCSX2 that are inherent to emulating PS2 and you can't really do better like deinterlacing.

Going by what I've heard, apparently exzap managed to get Neobrain to help him, so yeah if you have the second most talented Dolphin dev and a professional dev working full time on emulating a console that is well documented, obviously it's gonna go rather fast, still rather slow for the salary they're getting but that's an opinion and not a well researched fact

Good thing the BC wiis have cheap component cables, of course if you want the GBPlayer you''re just fucked.

Fucking Sonyggers and AMDrones.

Don't forget that massive PSN hack that basically fucked everyone everyone over, and the subsequent class action lawsuit that arose when it turned out Sony's welcome back gift wasn't nearly enough to please anyone.

That shit drives me up the fucking wall. I'm surprised technology illiterate normalfags don't call PS4 a 512-bit consoles. But I've seen people call the Atari 2600 a "4-bit" console.

I still feel bad for Zipper Interactive. SOCOM 4 launched on April 19th, and the next day the PSN went down for an entire month. It absolutely killed that game, and it took the company down with it.

Nintendrone, please.

And then Sony fucked it up again with the Vita, promising the ability to play games over 3G wireless and delivering exactly NONE of that.

I'd rather just dump the money to buy a pro upscaler.

You can run NTSC games on a PAL Gamecube, user, at 60hz.

DVDs were superior to shitty proprietary mini-discs and a lackluster library.

Also,

The N64 was significantly inferior to the Playstation in most specs. The 64 in the name didn't really mean shit.

Thank god my Wii comes with component cables already so i don't need to fuck with any PAL trash. Though an upscaler would be useful for my older shit…

(You)

Absolute lie. The Nintendo 64 out preformed every playstation game. The playstation didn't even have true 3D rendering. Pull that nostalgia buttplug out of your ass.

Playstation had more colors, could push more polygons, had more storage (via CDs), CD quality sound (instead of compressed garbage), and better 2d capabilities.

The only thing the N64 had over the playstation was ram and that was partly aided by its retardedly expensive carts. I wouldn't expect a nintendrone like you to know any of this though. You just see some gouraud shaded polygons you mistake for being colorful (when they are solid colored with very little texture, ala Mario 64) and a z-buffer that keeps that shit looking stable. In fact most N64 games are lower polygon than Playstation games and that's including the best titles on either system. This again is due to the Playstation being able to push more polygons (about double in fact) than the N64.

The N64 is actually quite overrated hardware wise, because simple minded faggots such as yourselves commonly mistake the large environments on the N64 (due to more fucking ram) for more polygons. Your games still look like shit even if you don't want to accept it.

The PS1 lacked any kind of dedicated float-point hardware hence it lacked "true 3D"

Still looks better. Doom wasn't true 3D either, but it simulates it well enough.

odd way to determine what is and isn't true 3D but whatever. Saturn's definition of 3D is even weirder than that because it treats all polygons as sprites and just skews, rotates and scales them however many times a second it can, and it does this for hudnreds of polygons at once.

You can't expect today's children to understand something that doesn't involve pushing a button and having it delivered by an amazon drone.

They can't comprehend downloading a shareware game from a BBS using a telephone line, and calling the phone number on the nag screen which belonged to the guy who actually programmed said shareware. Then writing a check and putting it in the mail with the guy's fucking address on it. And six weeks later receiving the rest of the game.

It was 3D because it looked 3D and you interacted with it in 3D. Your semantics about what makes "true 3D" is deliciously desperate and your failure to refute any of my points in favor of the Playstation over the inferior N64 is quite telling.

While I'd agree even the most technically advanced N64 titles are quite lacking visually compared to the same thing on PS1 (say for example Raycrisis vs Rogue Squadron for two of the few title that did 640x480 @ 60fps on their respective systems) the N64 was technically superior in almost every way to the PS1, the two great things that fucked it in the ass is the texture size limit and cartridge being way too small to accommodate for a lot of things meaning that all the power of the console was used to fight it's shortcomings instead of actually powering the games.

Except Wii crashes with certain games because the BC isn't perfect.

Nintendo should have hung the moron who thought Hardware AA would be at all acceptable on games running at 320x240. Like, right there, on the HQ front lawn, with a sign around his neck saying "I love looking at the world through lenses smeared with Vaseline."

Funnily enough the USB/SD loader has better compatibility iirc where only one game crashes and one other can have pretty big audio issues.

Actual AA wouldn't have been as bad, it's just shitty 3 point filtering, which is shit even by vaseline filter standards.

Yeah, naw.

That's so cute the Nintoddlers still can't own up to the fact their shitty Vaseline cartridge machine got beat into the ground by the PS1 (and also the Saturn in Japan) and have to craft lies about its hardware.

Face it: Nintendo using cucktridges killed its potential.

The PS1 had dithered 16/15bit and very rarely used 24bit textures because of some limitation I don't recall, N64 had 24bit color on paper but could only use 21bit at any one time onscreen

The N64 had the same sound capabilities as the PS1 only restrictions was that cartridge can only hold 64MB of data at best, if you decided for some stupid reason to put uncompressed PCM on a cartridge the N64 could play it just fine.

It's not like I haven't mentioned that one

Completely untrue
The Turbo3D µcode could output over 500-600k polygon/s with texture mapping and even if that came at the expense of a lot of other things the most advanced commercial game still managed around 200k polygon/s (Rogue Squadron)which is a lot more than the PS1who only managed 115k polygon/s on the heaviest game on a handful of games (Crash Bandicoot 1-3)

tl;dr you're an uneducated retard who just happen to agree with me for all the wrong reasons

most N64 flagship titles ran sub 20 FPS

Actually, he's right. The Playstation had no floating point arithmetic. That's why 3D stuff jitters and jumps and textures distort on the system. It literally has no concept of a decimal point.

lack of floating points arithmetic doesn't make it "fake 3D"

You seem awfully defensive of Sony's half assed rendering hardware.

Good one nintencuck.

It does make for shitty transformations though.

Shitty transformations that didn't stop it from having ten times the library than N64, nor did it mean PS1 can't do "real 3D".

Oh I'm sorry user, I didn't realise popular things can't have flaws.

I said it before in other threads: You Nintoddlers need to pull back on those argumentative fallacies. The PS1 certainly had technological idiosyncrasies, no one is doubting that.

...

fucking finnicky mouse
>>/reddit/

I'm not even attacking the PS1 you sensitive sissy. I just said having no access to floats makes working in 3D shitty.

You know, if all you were going to do was post something everyone knows about the PS1s floating deficiencies, you might as well not post at all. No one denies the floating point shit and stuttering polygons.

And you're the retard saying

You >>>/reddit/ faggot.

...

It was.

user, it's time to stop posting, it's past your nap time.

Oh man, let me tell you about this shit. Like the fucking SNES. It supported RGB output over SCART back in fucking 1992, only they didn't bother to mention it in the manual. I never knew a single fucker who knew about this at the time, but admittedly sets accepting RGB were not that many.

When the N64 came around they were common however, at least in Europe and Japan, so what did Nintendo do? Since no-one bought the cable they did fuck all to advertise they concluded that people didn't want RGB so they made it unavailable behind a in chip Y'C transform. In the early French models the RGB output was actually still there, just not soldered to the connectors and so it can be fixed by adding a few leads. With a Y'C output it naturally still supported S-video but of course the significance of that wasn't advertised either. Fuck me when I plugged a S-video multi cable in by chance sometime before the Wii and realized I could I have spent the previous near decade playing much sharper looking games and no additional cost.

Why the fuck Nintendo insists on doing shit like this is beyond me.

The fun doesn't stop there.

nintendo is to blame for forcing SGI to have such a low price barrier to work with. Then again, the n64 would have been a bigger failure than it already was had they not targeted such a low price point so late in the generation.

lol it gets better, the 1chip is essentially a clone console in terms of compatibility so many games actually have issues.

there are 1-chip standard models but its still an absolute mess of a situation. Nintendo has never been competent with video output until the wii u.

I thought it was mostly restricted to games having some garbage in the edge of the screen, are there really big compatibility issues on it?

the garbage on the edge of the screen is pretty much a game to game issue not dependent on hardware revision, it's just junk elements of the image that developers expected to be hidden in the overscan. There used to be a big list of differences from 1chip to base model, but I can't seem to find it. I didn't look for very long however.

Nothing like issues where some games won't run, but rather some run inaccurately.

Almost every single Genesis game has this garbage, too. On the Genesis it looks like how they reserve colors for the palette or something, or perhaps putting colors into memory so they're reserved for later parts of the level

The only one I've noticed it on is Sonic 2.

Literally nobody thinks this.

Xbox > Gamecube > PS2

Exactly. This resulted in worse sound quality being one of the first things anyone noticed about the system compared to the PlayStation. I was 6 and it was the big difference I saw. PS1 had voice acting, N64 usually didn't. PS1 had music that actually had lyrics and shit. N64 usually didn't.

...

Nice logic there.
Funny since you just made all this bullshit up, and it is a fact the majority of N64 games were less polygons than playstation games. Like

Sonyfags.

There's a difference between not having the capabilities at all and the devs choosing not to use those to focus on something else.

Because Turbo3D can do 500-600k textured polygon/s at the expense of absolutely everything else which isn't viable in a game, just like the PS1 can do 360k flat shaded ploygon/s if you literally don't do anything else

> and it is a fact the majority of N64 games were less polygons than playstation games. Like

No they couldn't, because they wouldn't have room for a game. Note that CD quality was mentioned for a reason, because those had the fucking space to hold the game AND sound data. N64 carts which were part of its hardware, reading a fucking cart, didn't have the storage for anything but compressed shitty sound (and textures, lol)
The N64 could not do 500-600k TEXTURED polygons and no game for the system ever even came fucking close to those numbers. In fact as I said most were less polys per sec than playstation titles.
No I called it a lie that the N64 could do those polygon counts, and the fact is it never came close. I could have also pointed out the lie about Crash being the only games on the PS1 that did 115k or greater, since most post big name post 1998 PS1 games pulled those kinds of numbers, for example Vagrant Story did 120k polygons/s.

You nintoddlers live in a fantasy world where you think the sloppily designed N64 was better because you bought into the 64 hype when you were a fucking child. You can't even accept now looking back that most of the games on the 64 look like diarrhea and the few good looking N64 games still barely compare to the best PS1 games. What do you got? Conker's Bad Fur day? That's pretty much it.

Stop replying to him you fucking idiots

What a waste of dubs.

N64 can run games without carts, so no it's not part of it's hardware., see N64DD

"Nintendo's own "Turbo3D" microcode allows 500,000–600,000 normal accuracy polygons per second. However, due to the graphical degradation, Nintendo officially discouraged its use"
By normal accuracy they mean integer math and no Z-buffer, ligthing, filtering etc
And by discouraged they actually meant that they wouldn't give you approval to sold your game if you used it.

If it's a lie why don't you disprove it.

Because 120k is so much bigger than 115k, not to mention you don't have a source for that either.

Never owned an N64, just because someone doesn't agree with your retardation doesn't mean they're part of "X group of people you don't like"

Pathetic.
And by discouraged they actually meant that they wouldn't give you approval to sold your game if you used it.
It wasn't capable of doing it, period. It doesn't matter what the microcode was theoretically capable of accomplishing, it never did and Nintendo discouraged it for a good reason.
wew
The director blatantly said that Vagrant Story did 3k+ polys per frame, and averaged 40 FPS. I'm sorry that you are so ignorant of topics you get involved in.

Then why couldn't Gamecube handle Burnout 3?

Checkmate Cubefags.

Nintendo disallowed it because despite having a very high number of poly per second it really didn't look good (infact it looks kinda like PS1 3D except worse because of the lack of rendering order table and any form of correction for low precision math like most big games on PS1 had) not because the system was actually incapable of pushing those numbers.

There isn't a single source disproving the 500-600k number there are plenty using it though, you'd think someone would have disproved it long ago if it was false.

The game is locked at 30fps .

That's funny considering N64 games look worse. It's also funny considering most of them had lower poly counts than PS1 games, but if you desperately need to hold onto unproven theoretical outputs then go right ahead and do so.

There isn't a single game anywhere close to those. I'm not arguing the claimed numbers by Nintendo, I'm arguing what actually existed in reality. I never once even bothered mentioning the PS1's 300k unshaded polygons because they don't matter. What was actually done is what matters.
Cool story

There isn't a single game using Turbo3D exactly because you couldn't actually use it to make games, there are sample programs and demos that use it though.

First and foremost those were claimed by SGI not Nintendo, second anyone is free to compile and run the turbomonkey sample demo from SGI which is a performance benchmark that compares Fast3D and Turbo3D.

Pic related, not like it's hard to verify that one claim in particular.

What a laugh

Except those demos predate emulators.

This is really desperate. This would be like if I pulled the t-rex playstation demo out as some kind of proof.
What demos? I was talking about your Vagrant Story pic retard.

You claimed it couldn't do it at all, so it not being a game is irrelevant.

Yeah sorry about that read a bit too fast, still it's more proof than what you provided.

I've never seen someone so mad about the N64 that the mere notion the N64 could do something better than the PS1 at all sends them in an autistic shitpost rage, despite the fact that I clearly stated that even though it was technically superior it still find it worse visually.

It isn't surprising reading comprehension isn't something you are good at.

I listed things the N64 did better, such as more ram. The N64 also had practically no load times, AA (even if it was a shitty form), and a faster CPU clock. I am not the one in denial here.

God you two are still fagging it up? Both systems sucked a fat wad at 3D. Playstation moved like a fucking stop motion film and N64 looked like mud (Except Gauntlet Legends because they somehow disabled the fltering)

Sounds pretty clear to me.

You're not supposed ot use the plural or even listed when you talk about a single thing.

The fuck is wrong with you, dumbass? Shareware model was the closest you can get to demos, most notable example are episodic shareware games which are 'the worst' according to you. And aside from being on internet, shareware games were usually included as a bonus on many magazine discs which means you didn't pay for them either unless of course you bought some kind of pirated disc with shareware game alone in which case you were a fool or weren't aware of other options or simply you never had to deal with shareware for your entire life because you're underrage faggot.