• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Trailer Platform 15 Best Looking Gamecube Games That Were Ahead of Their Time

FeldMonster

Member
Nov 17, 2018
588
594
315
Downvoted this video purely based on the awful pronunciation of "Bros." in Super Smash Bros. Melee as "Broze" instead of brothers.

Regarding the video itself, there were some really nice looking games, but to me the pinnacle was Metroid Prime/Echoes. I just wish I could play them with true dual analog on Dolphin in 4K somehow. I can't go back to that archaic and awkward control scheme.
 

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Aug 18, 2017
10,120
7,295
905
Mount Olympus
www.neogaf.com
Wind Waker is absolutely beautiful
video games ww GIF
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
Depends on the genre. realistic racers and fighters, xbox. 3rd person adventures, gamecube. Honestly first person as well, arguably. Prime was 60fps, doom 3 was 30 with lower polygon count. Same with riddick although it looked better than doom. Had more advanced lighting but they aged worse.

Generalizations of course.

Xbox was more powerful, but bottlenecked and lacked eDRAM. They pretty much trade blows.

This would only work in a gamecube thread. They don't trade blows at all, xbox was simply more powerful all around. We had a vs thread you were banned from months ago were a multiplatform dev said the opposite of what youre claiming saying any gamecube game would run better on xbox regardless. This was an actual developer that worked on all three, not a forum guy with a 8 different Nintendo avatars and usernames.
Polygon pushing was never proved, just exclusive Nintendo devs making claims that could never be validated. Was gamecube powerful? Absolutely.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tazzu

shenmue mugen

Member
Nov 1, 2006
593
525
1,360
April fools, or just dumb?
Right out of the gate it was clear that the PS2 coudn't touch the Gamecube in many technical aspects (texture detail, resolution, image quality, texture effects). What a beast of a console. How I miss the old high tech Nintendo consoles.
 

shenmue mugen

Member
Nov 1, 2006
593
525
1,360
This would only work in a gamecube thread. They don't trade blows at all, xbox was simply more powerful all around. We had a vs thread you were banned from months ago were a multiplatform dev said the opposite of what youre claiming saying any gamecube game would run better on xbox regardless. This was an actual developer that worked on all three, not a forum guy with a 8 different Nintendo avatars and usernames.
Polygon pushing was never proved, just exclusive Nintendo devs making claims that could never be validated. Was gamecube powerful? Absolutely.
The Xbox was more powerful all around (oh the memories....I had all 4 consoles of that generation) but I always heard that Gamecube had a CPU and memory advantage that it would allow it to ''display/process'' more stuff on screen. The Gamecube was known as a very well balanced system, more than its competitors.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
The Xbox was more powerful all around (oh the memories....I had all 4 consoles of that generation) but I always heard that Gamecube had a CPU and memory advantage that it would allow it to ''display/process'' more stuff on screen. The Gamecube was known as a very well balanced system, more than its competitors.

When it came down to it, only exclusive devs say those things. Multiplatform devs said anything you could do on gamecube could be done at higher resolutions or framerate on xbox.
 
Last edited:

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
The Xbox was more powerful all around (oh the memories....I had all 4 consoles of that generation) but I always heard that Gamecube had a CPU and memory advantage that it would allow it to ''display/process'' more stuff on screen. The Gamecube was known as a very well balanced system, more than its competitors.
Clock for clock, their cpus were even (with Xbox being clocked higher), but cube had a latency advantage so it could punch above its weight in that regard. That's why Wii's cpu is more performant than Xbox.

Gamecube's advantage came from bandwidth and embedded framebuffer tricks, which xbox lacked edram.

If Xbox wasn't bandwidth limited in a scene and didn't have many texture layers, transparencies or reflections on screen, it could push past cube's polygon limits. Provided no normal maps were used. But gamecube could throw down more effects and texture layers without choking.
 
Last edited:

jufonuk

Member
Jan 1, 2009
11,639
3,538
1,325
Jim.
I really loved that little cube.
Probably the last over-powerful Nintendo console they made.
 

sunnysideup

Member
Nov 11, 2018
877
1,391
430
Xbox has to be the most powerful console ever released. Gamecube was extremely well designed at a good price.

About metroid vs halo.

This is like two completely different design philosophies. Halo is made by typical modern western pc developers. Metroid prime is a true console game. Halo tries all of these different things: vehicles, large outdoor battles, open sandbox gameplay, revolutionary ai, all of this often at the same time, performance be damned. When they designed the game they had little regard for the hardware. But they created a revolutionary game.

Where as metroid everything is designed around the hardware rather against it. Its like playing a perfect balanced clock. Everything runs perfect 60.

While halo was revolutionary, and took large steps forward. i think i prefer metroid primes aproach today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NeoIkaruGAF

Umbasaborne

Member
Dec 21, 2020
706
1,074
360
Ahead of what time? Its own time I guess? whatever that means. There's not one game presented in that video that was ahead of anything that wasn't already done better on PS2/Xbox (emphasis on Xbox).
Dude the ps2 was way weaker than the gamecube and the xbox for that matter. Ps2 ports often had compromised visuals or framerate. Just look at re4
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
Clock for clock, their cpus were even (with Xbox being clocked higher), but cube had a latency advantage so it could punch above its weight in that regard. That's why Wii's cpu is more performant than Xbox.

Gamecube's advantage came from bandwidth and embedded framebuffer tricks, which xbox lacked edram.

If Xbox wasn't bandwidth limited in a scene and didn't have many texture layers, transparencies or reflections on screen, it could push past cube's polygon limits. Provided no normal maps were used. But gamecube could throw down more effects and texture layers without choking.

Well, we can also dig up the old thread if you want to pretend box with your alts. But half life 2 was an absolute monster in physics at the time, taxing as hell on PC CPUs, yet it was only attempted on xbox. Gabe even said the xbox was the only console that come close to running it, and yeah, it struggled in places being a 3 year old console running the most advanced game of the time. Point is, that's a brutally CPU intensive game and xbox was chose instead. Here we have yet more developers saying the opposite of what is claimed here. But Nintendo fans gonna Nintendo.
 
Last edited:

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
Well, we can also dig up the old thread if you want to pretend box with your alts. But half life 2 was an absolute monster in physics at the time, taxing as hell on PC CPUs, yet it was only attempted on xbox. Gabe even said the xbox was the only console that come close to running it, and yeah, it struggled in places being a 3 year old console running the most advanced game of the time. Point is, that's a brutally CPU intensive game and xbox was chose instead. Here we have yet more developers saying the opposite of what is claimed here. But Nintendo fans gonna Nintendo.
You'd have thought i'd skinned your cat with all your nastiness. ...But you probably are just personally hurt whenever someone doesn't universally praise Xbox. You were like one or two of the only ones in the Re4 thread that didn't say there was a big difference between Ps2 and Cube lol. Wouldn't mention that, but you're always the anecdotal "everyone says Xbox was next gen" guy.

For the normal functioning adults in this thread, actually yes. Half life would have a harder time on the cube in terms of cpu processing ; as I said the cube could punch above its weight, not bridge the gap in that regard. The cpus both do 4 flops per cycle. What I said was in post #58 was Wii outperformed Xbox in cpu.

However, part of the reason half life ran so poorly was its lack of bandwidth. Those reflections for example could have been nearly free of cost with cube's embedded framebuffer.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
You'd have thought i'd skinned your cat with all your nastiness. ...But you probably are just personally hurt whenever someone doesn't universally praise Xbox. You were like one or two of the only ones in the Re4 thread that didn't say there was a big difference between Ps2 and Cube lol. Wouldn't mention that, but you're always the anecdotal "everyone says Xbox was next gen" guy.

For the normal functioning adults in this thread, actually yes. Half life would have a harder time on the cube in terms of cpu processing ; as I said the cube could punch above its weight, not bridge the gap in that regard. The cpus both do 4 flops per cycle. What I said was in post #58 was Wii outperformed Xbox in cpu.

However, part of the reason half life ran so poorly was its lack of bandwidth. Those reflections for example could have been nearly free of cost with cube's embedded framebuffer.

Alt boxing though lol. It's not that you skinned my cat, its that you've been banned several times for doing what you're doing now, talking purely from a Nintendo fans perspective when devs say the opposite. That's the reason I remember you when use the exact same verbiage over and over with alts. It's just obvious. But yeah, "normal functioning" adults lol.
Half-life 2 ran like shit on PCs far more powerful than Xbox and the problem was less about bandwidth and more about total system RAM. It was 512mb minimum for PC, Xbox has 64mb! The only reason you would ever say "bandwidth" is to bat the advantage in GameCube's corner somehow. So, really and truly the Xbox boxed above its weight on the CPU and RAM side, and that's considering people see the console as a GPU monster.
 
Last edited:

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
Well, we can also dig up the old thread if you want to pretend box with your alts. But half life 2 was an absolute monster in physics at the time, taxing as hell on PC CPUs, yet it was only attempted on xbox. Gabe even said the xbox was the only console that come close to running it, and yeah, it struggled in places being a 3 year old console running the most advanced game of the time. Point is, that's a brutally CPU intensive game and xbox was chose instead. Here we have yet more developers saying the opposite of what is claimed here. But Nintendo fans gonna Nintendo.
GabeN saying that might also have something to do with the fact that HL2 came out on PC first and then went to Xbox, which is relatively easy to do because of the commodity of the architectures (x86 based, GPU with shader support like the desktop, etc).

As for the GameCube: Back then there weren't many PowerPC based ISA's that would actually be performant enough, but X360 and PS3 eventually would run HL2 as part of The Orange Box.

Having said that, what a straight port of HL2 to NGC may have lacked in CPU grunt, it probably could be done atleast graphically. HL2 at launch was extremely scalable on the GPU front, to the point where even a DX6 GPU could be supported.

Obviously they aren't like for like, but Gamecube's Flipper's feature set is surely above that, and more in line with DX7 based GPU's like the Ati Radeon 7000 or Geforce 2.

So i don't think putting something similar to HL2 on display would be the problem there. The problem would be porting it over to the PPC ISA that Gamecube used. They were balanced in power for 2001/2002, low end by the time the Wii released (But more powerful than Xbox on that front) and downright anemic when Wii U was released in 2012 (As innovative as Espresso was, having 3 CPU cores being worse than a octa core Jaguar which already was quite paltry to begin with is just meh.)

PS: The Xbox did punch above its weight, as recent resolution hacks showcase it can run many titles at 720p by simply doubling the memory to 128 MB. If you do an overclock, Xbox could have stayed aside X360 as a low end system back in 2005.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mopey bloke

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
GabeN saying that might also have something to do with the fact that HL2 came out on PC first and then went to Xbox, which is relatively easy to do because of the commodity of the architectures (x86 based, GPU with shader support like the desktop, etc).

As for the GameCube: Back then there weren't many PowerPC based ISA's that would actually be performant enough, but X360 and PS3 eventually would run HL2 as part of The Orange Box.

Having said that, what a straight port of HL2 to NGC may have lacked in CPU grunt, it probably could be done atleast graphically. HL2 at launch was extremely scalable on the GPU front, to the point where even a DX6 GPU could be supported.

Obviously they aren't like for like, but Gamecube's Flipper's feature set is surely above that, and more in line with DX7 based GPU's like the Ati Radeon 7000 or Geforce 2.

So i don't think putting something similar to HL2 on display would be the problem there. The problem would be porting it over to the PPC ISA that Gamecube used. They were balanced in power for 2001/2002, low end by the time the Wii released (But more powerful than Xbox on that front) and downright anemic when Wii U was released in 2012 (As innovative as Espresso was, having 3 CPU cores being worse than a octa core Jaguar which already was quite paltry to begin with is just meh.)

PS: The Xbox did punch above its weight, as recent resolution hacks showcase it can run many titles at 720p by simply doubling the memory to 128 MB. If you do an overclock, Xbox could have stayed aside X360 as a low end system back in 2005.

They ported Half-Life 1 to a very custom, weird architecture in the PS2 and even started and nearly finished the Dreamcast version, both very different. They were open to anything that could run their games, and they even went on record saying that. The problem was absolutely not the PowerPC.
NGC got all kinds of ports with all sorts of engines and a game of that magnitude portion would have been a success. The main issue is when they saw the CPU, but even more, the total RAM, you can have all the tricks you want with RAM but total RAM pool is still incredibly important, not to mention the CPU being extremely taxed and the GPU probably forced to go down to 480i and it would have likely struggled at that resolution too.
 
Last edited:

nordique

Member
Sep 17, 2011
2,289
447
735
Right out of the gate it was clear that the PS2 coudn't touch the Gamecube in many technical aspects (texture detail, resolution, image quality, texture effects). What a beast of a console. How I miss the old high tech Nintendo consoles.
It was never pushed unfortunately because of the ps2 domination leading to so few games targeting gcn hardware, if they made the port to the system on time or in the first place at all. Some games had next to no optimization
 
Last edited:

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
They ported Half-Life 1 to a very custom, weird architecture in the PS2 and even started and nearly finished the Dreamcast version, both very different. They were open to anything that could run their games, and they even went on record saying that. The problem was absolutely not the PowerPC.
Goldsource and Source, though similar, aren't one on one the same thing. GoldSrc is modified Quake 1 technology and thus very flexible (By the time HL1 got ported, you already had Quake source ports for instance).
NGC got all kinds of ports with all sorts of engines and a game of that magnitude portion would have been a success. The main issue is when they saw the CPU, but even more, the total RAM, you can have all the tricks you want with RAM but total RAM pool is still incredibly important, not to mention the CPU being extremely taxed and the GPU probably forced to go down to 480i and it would have likely struggled at that resolution too.
I mean, aside the 24 MB 1T-SRAM, it did have GDDR3 and 64 MB of it. Wii's Hollywood like most of Nintendo's outings is just a strange piece of silicon. Imagine its a Radeon 7000 from 2000, except you give it more texture blending layers and you stuff it with GDDR3 memory much like the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3, yet in terms of GPU tech, you are still a Radeon 7000/VE.

That's Hollywood. And yes, a HL2 port would be 480i or 720x480 to begin with - Primarily because Wii's output units simply can't output any higher than that resolution. Do note that this does not mean that the Wii can't render higher than 480p, but just that its output silicon can't do it.

This question is essentially the same as this one, courtesy of Beyond3D, but for Doom 3. Would Doom 3 on Wii be possible?

Personally, i think it could be, in both cases. You can have Doom 3 stencil shadows without using shaders and purely using texture blending (Doom 3 had a seperate NV10/Geforce 2/4 MX renderpath to do just that, but Severance: Blade of Darkness showcased you could do Doom 3 visuals on nothing but a Voodoo card), so i don't think a fascimile port of HL2 couldn't be possible.

It would be rather modified though, and especially in the parts that you mention: Physics. Instead of real time kinematics, they probably would be baked animations in the same way waving flags or trees usually were pre-canned animations.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
Goldsource and Source, though similar, aren't one on one the same thing. GoldSrc is modified Quake 1 technology and thus very flexible (By the time HL1 got ported, you already had Quake source ports for instance).

I mean, aside the 24 MB 1T-SRAM, it did have GDDR3 and 64 MB of it. Wii's Hollywood like most of Nintendo's outings is just a strange piece of silicon. Imagine its a Radeon 7000 from 2000, except you give it more texture blending layers and you stuff it with GDDR3 memory much like the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3, yet in terms of GPU tech, you are still a Radeon 7000/VE.

That's Hollywood. And yes, a HL2 port would be 480i or 720x480 to begin with - Primarily because Wii's output units simply can't output any higher than that resolution. Do note that this does not mean that the Wii can't render higher than 480p, but just that its output silicon can't do it.

The engines are extremely similar, and every console that could run it, got a port or rerelease. That's no coincidence especially when Valve said that themselves.
Gamecube had 40mb of RAM for games(24mb for code and data), and when 64mb was barely enough, losing that much more is even more of a problem on top of everything else that we've talked about.

It would be rather modified though, and especially in the parts that you mention: Physics. Instead of real time kinematics, they probably would be baked animations in the same way waving flags or trees usually were pre-canned animations.

Yeah and at that point, it just destroys what made it Half Life 2 in the first place. Same for Doom 3, you strip down enough and it just takes away from what the game unique. You could even have PS2 or Dreamcast ports if you want to lower the quality enough.
 
Last edited:

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
The engines are extremely similar, and every console that could run it, got a port or rerelease. That's no coincidence especially when Valve said that themselves.
Well, there is still some Quake 2 code left in Source, so its not entirely unplausible.

But i am not interested in Valve's words, i am interested in the plausibility of things. Doom 3 was rumored to be on PS2, as did Riddick. There is a cancelled game (Deadlight) that showcases the same dynamic shadowing system as Doom 3 did.. and even some rudimentary HL2esque like physics.
Gamecube had 40mb of useable RAM for games, and when 64mb was barely enough, losing that much more is even more of a problem on top of everything else that we've talked about.
Hence why it would have to be tailor made. Or maybe it would be a Quake 2 PSX kind of situation (Different engine, intermission corridors to connect levels, etc) and still look and play very very similar, but tailor made for the machine.

However, you would also have to require taking into account the Wii controls. For all intents and purposes, Valve was not really like that.

That the Wii was capable is highlight by the numerous CoD ports the thing has. The games look reasonably like their HD counter parts, despite running on tech that's two generations prior in terms of feature set.

Yeah and at that point, it just destroys what made it Half Life 2 in the first place. Same for Doom 3, you strip down enough and it just takes away from what the game unique.
I will agree with you on the physics part since its so detrimental to the gameplay. You could pull off something similar that is also dynamic since there are more ways than one to do physics, but you would lose significantly on flexibility.

Graphically, i would have to disagree. Doom 3's uniqueness is in its visual plethora of light and shadow. Not only can a Geforce 2 pull that off by blending textures (Doom 3 on PC even has a specific renderpath for that), you can even pull that off on a Voodoo 1.

The reason it was not used that often is because its a novel approach.

Ill present Severance, a 2001 game, once more. Not only does it have stencil lights and shadows, it also has a extremely advanced physics engine. You can throw objects and they will interact realistically. Objects will drop realistically off stairs. Your character's weapon will stop its animation when it hits something solid.

Severance, in my opinion, is so impressive, that i made a seperate thread about it some years ago from a different era. Check it out, if nothing else for the amount of tech prowess it has.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
Well, there is still some Quake 2 code left in Source, so its not entirely unplausible.

But i am not interested in Valve's words, i am interested in the plausibility of things. Doom 3 was rumored to be on PS2, as did Riddick. There is a cancelled game (Deadlight) that showcases the same dynamic shadowing system as Doom 3 did.. and even some rudimentary HL2esque like physics.

Hence why it would have to be tailor made. Or maybe it would be a Quake 2 PSX kind of situation (Different engine, intermission corridors to connect levels, etc) and still look and play very very similar, but tailor made for the machine.

However, you would also have to require taking into account the Wii controls. For all intents and purposes, Valve was not really like that.

That the Wii was capable is highlight by the numerous CoD ports the thing has. The games look reasonably like their HD counter parts, despite running on tech that's two generations prior in terms of feature set.


I will agree with you on the physics part since its so detrimental to the gameplay. You could pull off something similar that is also dynamic since there are more ways than one to do physics, but you would lose significantly on flexibility.

Graphically, i would have to disagree. Doom 3's uniqueness is in its visual plethora of light and shadow. Not only can a Geforce 2 pull that off by blending textures (Doom 3 on PC even has a specific renderpath for that), you can even pull that off on a Voodoo 1.

The reason it was not used that often is because its a novel approach.

Ill present Severance, a 2001 game, once more. Not only does it have stencil lights and shadows, it also has a extremely advanced physics engine. You can throw objects and they will interact realistically. Objects will drop realistically off stairs. Your character's weapon will stop its animation when it hits something solid.

Severance, in my opinion, is so impressive, that i made a seperate thread about it some years ago from a different era. Check it out, if nothing else for the amount of tech prowess it has.

Yeah I just feel you can port anything, but it came to preserving the essence of those technically advanced games, I don't see it as a coincidence they were all on the xbox and the devs of both Doom 3 and HL2 mentioned the xbox was the only console for them. If it could run on PS2, it would have, 150 million user base and they would have made it happen, but instead they port it to the tiny user base of the xbox. All very telling when looking at it as a whole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiceRacz

tillbot8

Banned
Aug 4, 2020
1,876
4,355
385
Watched a playthough or RE1 on the Gamecube and graphically itholds up TODAY! Its a work of art
 

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
Goldsource and Source, though similar, aren't one on one the same thing. GoldSrc is modified Quake 1 technology and thus very flexible (By the time HL1 got ported, you already had Quake source ports for instance).

I mean, aside the 24 MB 1T-SRAM, it did have GDDR3 and 64 MB of it. Wii's Hollywood like most of Nintendo's outings is just a strange piece of silicon. Imagine its a Radeon 7000 from 2000, except you give it more texture blending layers and you stuff it with GDDR3 memory much like the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3, yet in terms of GPU tech, you are still a Radeon 7000/VE.

That's Hollywood. And yes, a HL2 port would be 480i or 720x480 to begin with - Primarily because Wii's output units simply can't output any higher than that resolution. Do note that this does not mean that the Wii can't render higher than 480p, but just that its output silicon can't do it.

This question is essentially the same as this one, courtesy of Beyond3D, but for Doom 3. Would Doom 3 on Wii be possible?

Personally, i think it could be, in both cases. You can have Doom 3 stencil shadows without using shaders and purely using texture blending (Doom 3 had a seperate NV10/Geforce 2/4 MX renderpath to do just that, but Severance: Blade of Darkness showcased you could do Doom 3 visuals on nothing but a Voodoo card), so i don't think a fascimile port of HL2 couldn't be possible.

It would be rather modified though, and especially in the parts that you mention: Physics. Instead of real time kinematics, they probably would be baked animations in the same way waving flags or trees usually were pre-canned animations.
Wii is capable of more physics than Xbox via cpu. See Boom blox as one example. If given the effort to re engineer half life for Wii (which realistically would be too much effort for the money) I’ve no doubt it could run better than the Xbox port

As for could it run doom 3... it’s not capable of the dot 3 lighting (normals) used, but could possibly be simulated. But doom 3 is such a low poly game, even compared to ps2 games that it’s purely an academic thought and not one that I think is important. Wii has the conduit which has pretty much every effect in the book sans normals, and it can even hit 60fps at points.

Really the question for me is could Wii run something like rallisport challenge 2 which was beautifully tailor made for the Xbox hardware and didn’t really hit bandwidth limits. I think something comparable could be possibly be made, but perhaps not a straight port. Xbox gpu theoretical peak geometry is higher than Wii, where other bottlenecks aren’t hit.

Were the Xbox gpu given eDRAM, it’s probable that it would still be more performant than Hollywood. But even so, games would be better off not using normal maps in favor of GameCubes typical high geometry approach.
 
Last edited:

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
Alt boxing though lol. It's not that you skinned my cat, its that you've been banned several times for doing what you're doing now, talking purely from a Nintendo fans perspective when devs say the opposite. That's the reason I remember you when use the exact same verbiage over and over with alts. It's just obvious. But yeah, "normal functioning" adults lol.
Half-life 2 ran like shit on PCs far more powerful than Xbox and the problem was less about bandwidth and more about total system RAM. It was 512mb minimum for PC, Xbox has 64mb! The only reason you would ever say "bandwidth" is to bat the advantage in GameCube's corner somehow. So, really and truly the Xbox boxed above its weight on the CPU and RAM side, and that's considering people see the console as a GPU monster.
One developer Rommy. A developer I respect, but one. ERP didn’t have the time to tailor make software for cube. Racing software as I said earlier in the thread has an advantage on xbox. Also, the idea that a cube exclusive developer’s input doesn’t matter is some sandbox warrior talk. Keep fighting the corporate fight though, you’re on ignore from now. Feel free to snitch if you think I’m an alt.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
One developer Rommy. A developer I respect, but one. ERP didn’t have the time to tailor make software for cube. Racing software as I said earlier in the thread has an advantage on xbox. Also, the idea that a cube exclusive developer’s input doesn’t matter is some sandbox warrior talk. Keep fighting the corporate fight though, you’re on ignore from now. Feel free to snitch if you think I’m an alt.

Your post about developer talk has nothing to do with mine above, so I have no idea what you're saying.
 

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
Yeah I just feel you can port anything, but it came to preserving the essence of those technically advanced games, I don't see it as a coincidence they were all on the xbox and the devs of both Doom 3 and HL2 mentioned the xbox was the only console for them.
I feel i am repeating myself here, but the choice for Xbox lies in multiple reasonings:
  • Common architecture. For the ports to Xbox, they had to go from x86 (PC) to x86 (Xbox) and take into account the GPU. This generally (not always!) is less work than porting over to an entirely different ISA, like PowerPC.
  • The time frame of these ports is 2005. In 2005, Microsoft was already showing its successor, as did Sony and Nintendo was dropping hints of what then was called the Revolution. At this stage, most developers would either go to the next-generation or give a final swan song on the current-gen hardware before quickly moving on to the new generation. This is thus another incentive to port to Xbox first (alongside Reason 1 shown above).
  • If either id or Valve wanted to port to any other platform than the Xbox, the amount of effort required would be more significant for reasons stated above. This does not mean it couldn't be done. It just means that in the timeframe they had, it would make less sense to port it over given when the new generation was lurking around the corner.
  • But why not a port to Wii? Well, Wii sold itself on its unique control features - which would be coded up from scratch if anyone wanted to port Doom 3/Half-Life 2 over. Then the same issues as above still remain - Moving over to a new ISA, working on a GPU architecture that the industry is moving away from, and so forth.
  • Alongside Nintendo's reputation as being a family-friendly company, ports from Doom 3 and HL2 would be difficult to convince to them. And yes, i know they allowed titles like Dead Space to exist - Proving that Nintendo would accept core games eventually.
One thing the Wii had going for it was its popularity - 100+ million consoles prove that. Its a market developers would want to cash in from, which could have been a incentive for id or Valve to step into the platform. Activision did and released various CoD's for the Wii which, whilst running at 480p30, do look similar from a core artstyle point of view to their HD brothers.

No doubt Doom 3 and HL2 could have the same fate. It just would require the kind of effort neither of the companies felt was worthwhile and rather opted for PS360 instead, which is in fact where they released Doom 3 and HL2 on to.

If it could run on PS2, it would have, 150 million user base and they would have made it happen, but instead they port it to the tiny user base of the xbox. All very telling when looking at it as a whole.
See the above. Doom 3 was actually considered for PS2 and Riddick actually was in development for it, but it got cancelled. The reasons why they were cancelled are above.

That isn't to say the PlayStation 2 couldn't pull of Doom 3 like visuals. Take a look at the aforementioned Deadlight:

Wii is capable of more physics than Xbox via cpu. See Boom blox as one example. If given the effort to re engineer half life for Wii (which realistically would be too much effort for the money) I’ve no doubt it could run better than the Xbox port
I think Wii benefited from more mature development pipelines and had some excellent developers that knew how to exploit the machine (Factor 5's cancelled Rogue Leader port being one of them). I am not sure if it would have run better. but graphically it would have to make concessions similarily to how the various CoD titles had to. I reckon that dynamic lighting would be cut out and replaced with lightmaps. I reckon that dynamic shadowing would be put to a limit since that ain't the Wii's strongest suit.

But as Overlord: Dark Legend showed, when using the Wii to its strengths and TEV, it was capable of pretty awesome graphics. Its just that the TEV way of doing effects was a step back in the past, flexible as it could be, when everyone in the industry moved on to the shader-based standard of doing effects.

As for could it run doom 3... it’s not capable of the dot 3 lighting (normals) used, but could possibly be simulated. But doom 3 is such a low poly game, even compared to ps2 games that it’s purely an academic thought and not one that I think is important.
Doom 3 ain't a low poly game and Wii can do normal mapping just fine.

Wii has the conduit which has pretty much every effect in the book sans normals, and it can even hit 60fps at points.
It hits 30. And although it has signficiant technical plethora (Bump maps, bloom), its ridden by a very bland artstyle and its successor dropped some of those effects. Even then so, The Conduit looks nice but not overly more impressive than Doom 3. I'd rather opt the aforementioned Overlord: Dark Legend for a Wii game that could pass off as a X360 title at low resolution.

PS: Here is David Gamiz Jimenez on how to achieve better EMBM/Normal mapping on Wii, using The Conduit as an example.
Really the question for me is could Wii run something like rallisport challenge 2 which was beautifully tailor made for the Xbox hardware and didn’t really hit bandwidth limits. I think something comparable could be possibly be made, but perhaps not a straight port.
I am sure something similar was plausible. But the strengths of both machines lie in accents, and to master accents is how one exploits the hardware the most.
Were the Xbox gpu given eDRAM, it’s probable that it would still be more performant than Hollywood. But even so, games would be better off not using normal maps in favor of GameCubes typical high geometry approach.
Ultimately, the Xbox feature set with its shader-based approach to effects was a step into the direction the industry as a whole was taking, what with PS360's having shader-based hardware to begin with. The Wii could pull off similar effects using TEV, but the methodology used there was one the industry was leaving from, from fixed-function to shaders.

PS: If you do want to see a PC demo that actually has some Wii-like rendering effects utilizing the texture combiners starting from the Geforce 256/Geforce 2 (Much like how Wii's TEV is a texture combiner) check Dagoth Moor Zoological Gardens and The Isle of Morg demo's, powered by the Experience Engine from WXP. They were impressive technical benchmarks/tech demo's in their day. (The Bernie2018 youtube channel has a ton of videos on tech demo's and benchmarks, by the way.)

 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Sep 26, 2019
2,953
3,613
395
I love the Gamecube

Resident Evil Remake, Zero and 4 were all amazing graphics
Mario Galaxy and Wind Waker are timeless
Rogue Squad was also pretty to look at
... Gamecube nostalgia :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigastar

Ceadeus

Member
Jun 22, 2013
2,689
814
655
32
Canada, Québec
First time I saw Metroid Prime was at Wal-Mart, a demo kiosk.

I was still playing DK64 during that period, so no need to say my kid mind was absolutely blown away.
 
Aug 29, 2007
7,976
1,143
1,400
Land of the OKC Thunder
The Gamecube was a good system for its hardware and the mini discs were novel, but coming from the N64 I was spoiled. I couldn't help but be disappointed by every single sequel released. Wind waker was a letdown compared to OoT and MM. Mario Sunshine was a letdown compared to Mario 64. Double Dash was a letdown compared to Mario Kart 64. Smash Bros Melee was a letdown compared to its predecessor on the 64, which is still the best Smash Bros to this day in my opinion. Speeding up the gameplay from Super Smash Bros. in this case, didn't really improve the combat or make it more enjoyable.

I played Skies of Arcadia and didnt really get the hype. Star Fox Adventure was a letdown. Luigi's Mansion was intriguing but the gameplay was too slow for my liking. Metroid Prime was phenomenal and one of the few bright spots for me on the Gamecube. Twilight Princess was excellent (my 2nd fav Zelda) but also a launch game for the Wii. Wave Race was absolutely boring. Pikmin was a surprise gem. I'll give Nintendo credit there. The Resident Evil remake was also well done - no complaints there.

Still, I spent far more time playing Super Monkey Ball and SSX Tricky than most games for the cube... TLDR the Gamecube was a good system but I spent more time despising the games and its way too clicky controller bumpers because I was spoiled by the N64.

I also was finally introduced to Halo CE at a LAN party and after that my time with the cube went downhill rapidly.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
I feel i am repeating myself here, but the choice for Xbox lies in multiple reasonings:
  • Common architecture. For the ports to Xbox, they had to go from x86 (PC) to x86 (Xbox) and take into account the GPU. This generally (not always!) is less work than porting over to an entirely different ISA, like PowerPC.
  • The time frame of these ports is 2005. In 2005, Microsoft was already showing its successor, as did Sony and Nintendo was dropping hints of what then was called the Revolution. At this stage, most developers would either go to the next-generation or give a final swan song on the current-gen hardware before quickly moving on to the new generation. This is thus another incentive to port to Xbox first (alongside Reason 1 shown above).
  • If either id or Valve wanted to port to any other platform than the Xbox, the amount of effort required would be more significant for reasons stated above. This does not mean it couldn't be done. It just means that in the timeframe they had, it would make less sense to port it over given when the new generation was lurking around the corner.
  • But why not a port to Wii? Well, Wii sold itself on its unique control features - which would be coded up from scratch if anyone wanted to port Doom 3/Half-Life 2 over. Then the same issues as above still remain - Moving over to a new ISA, working on a GPU architecture that the industry is moving away from, and so forth.
  • Alongside Nintendo's reputation as being a family-friendly company, ports from Doom 3 and HL2 would be difficult to convince to them. And yes, i know they allowed titles like Dead Space to exist - Proving that Nintendo would accept core games eventually.
One thing the Wii had going for it was its popularity - 100+ million consoles prove that. Its a market developers would want to cash in from, which could have been a incentive for id or Valve to step into the platform. Activision did and released various CoD's for the Wii which, whilst running at 480p30, do look similar from a core artstyle point of view to their HD brothers.

No doubt Doom 3 and HL2 could have the same fate. It just would require the kind of effort neither of the companies felt was worthwhile and rather opted for PS360 instead, which is in fact where they released Doom 3 and HL2 on to.


See the above. Doom 3 was actually considered for PS2 and Riddick actually was in development for it, but it got cancelled. The reasons why they were cancelled are above.

That isn't to say the PlayStation 2 couldn't pull of Doom 3 like visuals.


It didn't come to wii for probably the same reason as the gamecube. By that time more powerful systems were available and there almost no PC shooters on wii unless they were very casual. And the very few I remember ended up worse than the xbox versions. This one comes to mind and it really the only true PC shooter I can think of.



Wii was a very different focus than the gamecube and a much more casual audience and it was apparent that it wasn't easy to get Xbox games running on it. House of the Dead, Ghost Squad, COD 3, and several other shooters I remember struggled by comparison. Instead, ps3 xb360 all got follow ups or remasters of HL2, Riddick, and Doom 3. They would have all likely ran on the Wii, but it makes sense why they didn't come.

Carmack said Doom 3 would not run on Gamecube mostly due to RAM, ps2 would have the same fate in addition to the lack of shader tech on the GPU. There's a big difference to running a tech demo of doom 3 or HL2(which probably both ps2 and GC could do) but actual full levels with NPCs is altogether a different beast. I do think the Xbox's built-in harddrive was another advantage too not often discussed for streaming and I remember a developer mentioning that as well.

I think this interview with VV sums it up nicely. Even the xbox barely had enough RAM for Doom 3 and looking at the minimum requirements for HL2 it's not a stretch to say that either.

GP: On the PC, Doom 3 is going to be something of a resource monster. When it was first proposed as an Xbox game was there any concern about getting it to run on a console?

KB: John Carmack made some really good decisions in architecting the engine for scalability. We knew that PS2 and Gamecube were out of the question due to particular graphics requirements (global illumination, normal mapping, shadow volumes etc.), but we knew Xbox had a shot. The key concerns were memory and performance. With only 64MB RAM on the Xbox and a 733Mhz processor, we knew it would be quite challenging ?- but not impossible. The team here was really excited to be working on this project -? a chance to work on Doom! -? so we were definitely going to take it on and prove that a great Xbox version could be made. Now, after many months of development, I think it?s safe to say that players will be stunned when they see the type of graphics fidelity that Doom 3 is able to present on the Xbox.


So you go from barely possible on xbox with 64mb of RAM to far less RAM and a host of shader tech not possible on GC and PS2 without tricks, it becomes very clear. The game would have simply been compromised beyond the initial vision. Same with HL2, the game struggled on xbox with 64mb or RAM and streaming those massive levels and physics would been hilariously bad on anything else. It was borderline bad on xbox at the time. Definitely playable but it's considered one of the most impressive ports of the 6th gen for a reason.
 
Last edited:

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
It hits 30. And although it has signficiant technical plethora (Bump maps, bloom), its ridden by a very bland artstyle and its successor dropped some of those effects. Even then so, The Conduit looks nice but not overly more impressive than Doom 3. I'd rather opt the aforementioned Overlord: Dark Legend for a Wii game that could pass off as a X360 title at low resolution.

PS: Here is David Gamiz Jimenez on how to achieve better EMBM/Normal mapping on Wii, using The Conduit as an example.
It does that double buffer thing where it hits 60fps one second then dives to 30fps ala medal of honor heroes 2. Same with Conduit 2. The Conduit has grown on me over the years as a sort of halo + perfect dark mix, it's pretty fun really. Wii pointer makes the game.

First time I played Conduit 2 I didn't notice any lesser effects, but I can check again. Wouldn't mind playing through it again anyway.
Doom 3 ain't a low poly game and Wii can do normal mapping just fine.
It really is low poly. It's a benchmark in lighting, not detail. On every head in the game you see intense geometrical shapes.

I think Wii benefited from more mature development pipelines and had some excellent developers that knew how to exploit the machine (Factor 5's cancelled Rogue Leader port being one of them). I am not sure if it would have run better. but graphically it would have to make concessions similarily to how the various CoD titles had to. I reckon that dynamic lighting would be cut out and replaced with lightmaps. I reckon that dynamic shadowing would be put to a limit since that ain't the Wii's strongest suit.
Changes would be made here and there, some for the better. At least in this theoretical maximum dev time and effort wii port. Wii has games with per pixel dynamic lights that look better than HL2 ; see Darkside chronicles at 60fps or silent hill shattered memories. With both Xbox and Wii ports being quick and dirty, for sure Xbox would come out on top. Wii definitely can run better due to lower latency CPU performance and a bit more ram. You spoke of inverse kinematics but i'm pretty sure even Wind Waker has inverse kinematics.

Also, thanks for the normal map links. I didn't know any wii game used normals.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Redneckerz

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
It didn't come to wii for probably the same reason as the gamecube. By that time more powerful systems were available and there almost no PC shooters on wii unless they were very casual. And the very few I remember ended up worse than the xbox versions. This one comes to mind and it really the only true PC shooter I can think of.

Funny, i was just looking at Far Cry Wii to see how much its degraded yet also how similar i still is.

But would you say any of the CoD games were casual? Because most Call of Duty games ended up being on the Wii. (Call of Duty 3, Modern Warfare: Reflex, World At War, Black Ops, Modern Warfare 3). They look significantly different, but the also still look like CoD.
Wii was a very different focus than the gamecube and a much more casual audience and it was apparent that it wasn't easy to get Xbox games running on it. House of the Dead, Ghost Squad, COD 3, and several other shooters I remember struggled by comparison. Instead, ps3 xb360 all got follow ups or remasters of HL2, Riddick, and Doom 3. They would have all likely ran on the Wii, but it makes sense why they didn't come.
See the above. Else i have nothing more to add because you aren't exactly contesting my points, so ts good.
Carmack said Doom 3 would not run on Gamecube mostly due to RAM, ps2 would have the same fate in addition to the lack of shader tech on the GPU. There's a big difference to running a tech demo of doom 3 or HL2(which probably both ps2 and GC could do) but actual full levels with NPCs is altogether a different beast.
Carmack may say many things. He also said Quake Arena would come to DS. There is Deadlight for a visual example of Doom 3 visuals, else there is Stolen.

Else i am not sure what you are trying to contest here. What part in my statements makes you want to tell me in absolute terms that the Wii couldn't handle HL2 or Doom 3?

So you go from barely possible on xbox with 64mb of RAM to far less RAM and a host of shader tech not possible on GC and PS2 without tricks, it becomes very clear. The game would have simply been compromised beyond the initial vision.
If that is so, then why is there a specific NV10 renderpath on PC emulating most of the tech on fixed-function hardware like the Geforce 2? Those are also utitlizing tricks.
It does that double buffer thing where it hits 60fps one second then dives to 30fps ala medal of honor heroes 2.
This isn't exactly a good thing.

It really is low poly. It's a benchmark in lighting, not detail. On every head in the game you see intense geometrical shapes.
It actually isn''t so says the PC Gamer Germany copy of 2004 with a interview of Tim Willits stating this. Its 250.000 polygons in the inital model, then gets normal mapped to 10.000 polygons or so.
Changes would be made here and there, some for the better. At least in this theoretical maximum dev time and effort wii port. Wii has games with per pixel dynamic lights that look better than HL2 ; see Darkside chronicles at 60fps or silent hill shattered memories.
Is that actually per pixel lighting or is that projected textures doing it? Silent Hill also had self-shadows on snow flakes which was a clever trick if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

YeulEmeralda

Member
Aug 8, 2020
770
722
285
I feel like there were a dozen of us who owned an XBOX and none of us are watching ecelebs so nobody is going to do videos about how Microsoft was ahead of its time :messenger_confused:

But then nobody is talking much about PS2 anymore either are they? Nintendo just has this nostalgia cult brand power going on.
 
  • Empathy
Reactions: Mopey bloke

WalterSobchak

Member
Oct 13, 2020
175
169
230
The Gamecube was a good system for its hardware and the mini discs were novel, but coming from the N64 I was spoiled. I couldn't help but be disappointed by every single sequel released. Wind waker was a letdown compared to OoT and MM. Mario Sunshine was a letdown compared to Mario 64. Double Dash was a letdown compared to Mario Kart 64. Smash Bros Melee was a letdown compared to its predecessor on the 64, which is still the best Smash Bros to this day in my opinion. Speeding up the gameplay from Super Smash Bros. in this case, didn't really improve the combat or make it more enjoyable.

I played Skies of Arcadia and didnt really get the hype. Star Fox Adventure was a letdown. Luigi's Mansion was intriguing but the gameplay was too slow for my liking. Metroid Prime was phenomenal and one of the few bright spots for me on the Gamecube. Twilight Princess was excellent (my 2nd fav Zelda) but also a launch game for the Wii. Wave Race was absolutely boring. Pikmin was a surprise gem. I'll give Nintendo credit there. The Resident Evil remake was also well done - no complaints there.

Still, I spent far more time playing Super Monkey Ball and SSX Tricky than most games for the cube... TLDR the Gamecube was a good system but I spent more time despising the games and its way too clicky controller bumpers because I was spoiled by the N64.

I also was finally introduced to Halo CE at a LAN party and after that my time with the cube went downhill rapidly.
I agree about the GC sequels being disappointing coming from the n64 . And for sure about Smash 64 being the one true king. They were still good games but just not as good as their n64 predecessors to me.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
5,892
7,200
555
Funny, i was just looking at Far Cry Wii to see how much its degraded yet also how similar i still is.

But would you say any of the CoD games were casual? Because most Call of Duty games ended up being on the Wii. (Call of Duty 3, Modern Warfare: Reflex, World At War, Black Ops, Modern Warfare 3). They look significantly different, but the also still look like CoD.

See the above. Else i have nothing more to add because you aren't exactly contesting my points, so ts good.

Carmack may say many things. He also said Quake Arena would come to DS. There is Deadlight for a visual example of Doom 3 visuals, else there is Stolen.

Else i am not sure what you are trying to contest here. What part in my statements makes you want to tell me in absolute terms that the Wii couldn't handle HL2 or Doom 3?


If that is so, then why is there a specific NV10 renderpath on PC emulating most of the tech on fixed-function hardware like the Geforce 2? Those are also utitlizing tricks.
Speaking of COD there are some interesting comparisons where the Xbox wins versus the Wii in framerate and visuals.
I would say the COD games were more mass-market casual shooters yeah. I'm not really contesting your points because much of what you're saying I agree with. I'm familiar with Deadlight and I just see a very different-looking game in terms of tech. It looks like everything in the game took a massive hit just to get the lighting working and that's considering the fps is dropping without activity onscreen. It definitely looks like something that would run on PS2 considering that.

I'm not sure about Wii, I don't think it would be easy to do Doom 3 or HL2, but definitely possible. My point was those games on Gamecube. I just don't think it's a coincidence that Carmack and Gabe both said Xbox was the console for their games. Quake coming to DS is a false equivalence to saying Doom 3 wouldn't run on ps2 or gamecube. He was more speaking to the connectivity of the device for multiplayer and you can heavily downgrade a multiplayer game so longs as the gameplay is intact. Also, it wasn't just Carmack that said that, both VV and ID software made that known about Doom 3 not running on PS2 or Gamecube.

Then Riddick also, arguably the best-looking game of that generation with similar visuals to Doom 3 but again, only on Xbox. I don't think that's just another coincidence. Running all those shaders through a tiny 64mb pool was a massive challenge, and anything less than that would look something like Deadlight, which is fine but definitely not Doom 3. Xbox had the only hard drive available on consoles(hence the reason Doom 3 made you watch a cutscene every boot up)additional RAM, custom shaders just made it the only choice to get those two specific games running in a decent form. Anything less would just be unacceptable or very different.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Redneckerz

StateofMajora

Member
Aug 7, 2020
947
1,281
360
This isn't exactly a good thing.


It actually isn''t so says the PC Gamer Germany copy of 2004 with a interview of Tim Willits stating this. Its 250.000 polygons in the inital model, then gets normal mapped to 10.000 polygons or so.

Is that actually per pixel lighting or is that projected textures doing it? Silent Hill also had self-shadows on snow flakes which was a clever trick if you ask me.
It wasn't to say it was a good thing, just to say it's pushing more than 30fps sometimes. No more heroes does that thing as well which is pretty much my only complaint about it lol. Yeah, safe to say V-sync became better understood with time. Btw what features were missing from Conduit 2 so I may know what to look for?

I know for sure Darkside chronicles uses a per pixel flashlight. Now Silent hill, might be projected textures. But its shadow effects are pretty crazy. I will actually take a closer look at that today or tomorrow night. I love that game, very pretty.

I always thought doom looked bad, even back then because of the modeling. Just looking at that model, it is no where near 10000 tris (less than 5,000 even) so i'd be interested to see what models they're talking about. Definitely not the characters or enemies on average. Leon S Kennedy on gamecube is a 10000 tri model.

What I will say is I first played it on OG xbox a few years ago, and yeah the lighting was pretty much more advanced than anything else at the time. In that regard, it's more like a 360 game.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Redneckerz

Tazzu

Member
Jul 25, 2020
102
100
270
This happens in every Gamecube thread. Soon enough, Nintendo fans will say Wii was the most powerful.
 
Last edited:

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,921
3,623
695
Stuck in 1Q84.
Speaking of COD there are some interesting comparisons where the Xbox wins versus the Wii in framerate and visuals.
That much i am sure of, but the OG Xbox does not have that many CoD titles that also came to Wii. Only Call of Duty 3, i believe.
I would say the COD games were more mass-market casual shooters yeah. I'm not really contesting your points because much of what you're saying I agree with. I'm familiar with Deadlight and I just see a very different-looking game in terms of tech. It looks like everything in the game took a massive hit just to get the lighting working and that's considering the fps is dropping without activity onscreen. It definitely looks like something that would run on PS2 considering that.
Interesting that you know of Deadlight :) Yes, it had to drop some things, especially in the realm of texture quality, but it did highlight that Doom 3 eseque visuals were possible. The same tech was seen in Stolen.

So, a fascimile, really.
I'm not sure about Wii, I don't think it would be easy to do Doom 3 or HL2, but definitely possible. My point was those games on Gamecube.
I have given plenty of reasons why those titles didn't appear on Gamecube. If they really wanted it, you could get something reasonably looking and feeling like those games on Cube. But it wouldn't be a direct port.

There is plenty of Beyond3D quotes to go around with that highlight what the Wii could and couldn't. But i feel i made enough of a point with examples in earlier posts. If it is really necessary, ill link them, but i think this just will boil down to an agree to disagree notion on nuances primarily especially since we can look eye to eye on the overarching points.
Then Riddick also, arguably the best-looking game of that generation with similar visuals to Doom 3 but again, only on Xbox. I don't think that's just another coincidence. Running all those shaders through a tiny 64mb pool was a massive challenge, and anything less than that would look something like Deadlight, which is fine but definitely not Doom 3.
Which would be a passable port by any means. If Riddick, which was actually in development for PS2, would have been released on that platform, then no doubt it would have looked similar to Deadlight.
Anything less would just be unacceptable or very different.
That is your conclusion, which i don't share. It may look different, indeed, but not unacceptable, if you ask me. By that same notion any CoD Wii port is unacceptable because it loses any shader effects and runs at half the framerate of what any CoD player is used to. Yet the ports have their fans, not in the least because of their controls.
Btw what features were missing from Conduit 2 so I may know what to look for?
The Conduit is rive with bloom and normal mapping effects (enemies). Conduit 2 may still have those effects but nothing about Conduit 2 screams it is attempting to mimick effects seen on PS360. High Voltage also didn't toot their horn about the graphical prowess of the second Conduit game like they did with the first.

If you ask me, Red Steel 2 looks stylistically better as its better suited to the hardware. Red Steel 1 does show some nice reflections though.
I know for sure Darkside chronicles uses a per pixel flashlight. Now Silent hill, might be projected textures. But its shadow effects are pretty crazy. I will actually take a closer look at that today or tomorrow night. I love that game, very pretty.
Its a highlight game, yes. I just don't like it because its not in first person. :p
I always thought doom looked bad, even back then because of the modeling. Just looking at that model, it is no where near 10000 tris (less than 5,000 even) so i'd be interested to see what models they're talking about. Definitely not the characters or enemies on average. Leon S Kennedy on gamecube is a 10000 tri model.
The original model is 250k. It is then modelled to a low poly model (5k to 10k) and then normal mapped so it looks like a hi-poly model.
What I will say is I first played it on OG xbox a few years ago, and yeah the lighting was pretty much more advanced than anything else at the time. In that regard, it's more like a 360 game.
Especially when you utilize the resolution hack so it appears rendering at a dynamic 720p (Same for Riddick). OG Xbox perfectly could have suited as a lower end system similarly to how Series S now exists. It would also be a formidable counterweight against the Wii.

Alas, it never was to be. A Xbox S model of the original machine would have extended the life of the machine considerably.
This happens in every Game cube thread. Soon enough, Nintendo fans will say Wii was the most powerful.
Who exactly is that telling that really?
 
Last edited:

Porcile

Member
Oct 23, 2012
5,187
1,305
770
So much beautiful stuff on Gamecube that holds up so nicely even today. I remember thinking when the Wii specs were revealed that it was no big deal because Resident Evil 4 and Twilight Princess looked so great on GC, but we never really saw that level of graphical quality again on new Wii games. I'm sure that system could of been pushed further. Devs did the Wii dirty.
 

Shut0wen

Member
Oct 29, 2020
76
41
180
Luigis mansion which was a launch title at the time was very impressive even todays standard and so was bloody roar primal fury was amazing at the tine especially since it came out in 2002
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bridges