Could reissued dreamcasts be the new home for PSU

[lostinseganet]

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000790071989/
If this turns out to be true perhaps sega will bring PSU to the dreamcast. I know I would import in an instant.

[Kent]

...They won't. :/

There's no way the Dreamcast could handle PSU; it could barely handle PSO half the time.

[Tomeeboy]

Some Dreamcast games still look awfully good, even compared to today's current games. However, even though the dreamcast is capable of producing some nice smooth graphics, I don't believe it has anywhere near the processing power to handle something like PSU. I think that even the PS2 will have some hiccups here and there while running the game, based on what we've seen of some of the graphics and effects.

[PrinceBrightstar]

Who says it has the same parts? I understand there's no indication at all about this, but hear me out for a moment. (or not, i've been up for 18 hours now so this is just another of my typical random rants/philosphical moments)

Perhaps this new line has upgraded video memory and a new processor which would support PSU. Given the system originally was not even half a mhz, and since 450s are a dime a dozen these days, it would have been easy to upgrade the chip, which in turn would have boosted processing speeds and quicken load times.

I'm sure we all remember the old NES games where if more than 5 sprites were on screen, the game would stutter. There are mods out now that increase the voltage into the chips, resulting in smoother action, essentially overclocking the chips built in. Since software is no longer built on the principal that 10 mhz will be as fast as things will go back in the old DOS 3.3 days, if sega did such a thing, most likely all games would be compatible.

Lets take it a step further.

If Sega wanted to do a new system, they could easily. There would need to simply be 3 main components.

1. backwards compatibility.
2. DVD (This is what killed them in Japan, going with GD-Roms instead)
3. new processors.

Simply put, if PSU can run on a processor as slow as the PS2, you can bet it can on an overclocked dreamcast (on about 8 disks or so for each mode.)

[Sinue_v2]

Simply put, if PSU can run on a processor as slow as the PS2, you can bet it can on an overclocked dreamcast

Wha? Dude... the PlayStation 2 has the fastest CPU out there currently. Sure it's only 333Mhz, but it's the only 128-bit CPU available. Most of the PS2's graphics rendering is done through the Emotion Engine - whereas the GameCube and Xbox rely on their nVidia and ATI GPUs. The GameCube is only, what, about a 400Mhz - 500Mhz 64bit - with the Xbox being a 733Mhz modified Pentium III which is 32bit.

The higher the bit-rate, the more calculations the CPU can do per clock-cycle (1Mhz).

It would be great if Sega's re-releasing of the Dreamcast would mean that their return to profitability has encouraged Sega/Sammy to make a return to the hardware market, even if in a limited form, but I think hoping for PSU on the Dreamcast being a little too optimistic.

[Sinue_v2]

2. DVD (This is what killed them in Japan, going with GD-Roms instead)

Also... just to defend Sega on this point, there was really no other option left for them. They HAD to go with GD-Roms. Sony being a electronics manufacturer already had all the resources to build their DVD components in-house. However, Sega would have had to out-source the technology - and that was VERY expensive at the time. Even so, if they had taken the risk - it would have killed them anyhow. Console makers make their money back from hardware through licencing fees on software. Remember the PS2's launch? The PS2 had a sell-through rate of 1:1 games per console on average. People bought it AS a cheap DVD player instead of as a game console at first... and Sony lost a TON of money initially since people were spending their money on movies (which they got no licencing fees from) instead of games. Hell, The Matrix sold FAR more PS2's at launch in Japan than any of their games did combined.

If Sega had included DVD in the Dreamcast - they would have gone through a similar scenario. Lots of people buying extremely expensive hardware for Sega to create - without getting really any returns for the investment. Considering the financial situation of Sega at the time, I don't think they could have survived a blow like that - even if the Dreamcast was a unparralled success.

[Ryna]

On 2005-12-11 20:24, lostinseganet wrote:
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000790071989/
If this turns out to be true perhaps sega will bring PSU to the dreamcast. I know I would import in an instant.


As much as I would like to see PSU released on the Dreamcast, the odds of it happening are fairly low. It looks like the Dreamcast unit offered in this special likely comes from some old overstock. If that is the case, there will be no enhancements made to the consoles. One thing that supports this view is the $80 price point of the unit. If Sega were going to increase the abilities of the Dreamcast for a low-production run, the price of the system would be dramatically higher. As such, Sonic Team would have to put a significant amount of work into gracefully degrading Phantasy Star Universe so it would play on a stock Dreamcast. Given the decision to release PSU only for platforms that have large userbases (PS2 and PC), it wouldn't make any sense financially to expend the effort to port to the Dreamcast or even to release it if it was ported.

[therealAERO]

Wow you guys sure talk like you know everything...

[Niki]

Hm, it sounded more like an adult discussion to me...

[PrinceBrightstar]

Actually it was more Geek/Engineer than anything else.

What i'd like to know then is why some games slowdown on PS2 but don't on Gamecube. If the PS2 is the more powerful, why is this the case?

[Ryna]

On 2005-12-12 13:02, Jonathan_F wrote:
What i'd like to know then is why some games slowdown on PS2 but don't on Gamecube. If the PS2 is the more powerful, why is this the case?


There are dozens of reasons why a game may perform better on platform than another. Perhaps the game was designed and optimized to run on one platform and later ported to another without being reoptimized. Perhaps some less efficient programming libraries had to be used in the porting process. Perhaps the game was designed with a particular platform in mind and those assumptions did not translate well during the porting effort.

As you can see, it is very hard to make a generalization about why a game does better on platform than another.

[OdinTyler]

1. ST...you know, the developer? They said what platforms PSU would be on. If those 2 arent what you own, then, well it cant be helped. Their call, not ours. Accept it.

2. The Gamecube has a more powerful processor than the PS2. The small CDs (I forget what theyre exactly called) have a higher compression rate. They access faster & thus, run smoother. Hence, the slower (in comparison) PS.

3. The Gamecube has a higher quality graphics chip than the PS2. Ive seen graphics on the GC that blow away ALMOST everything on the PS2. An exception would be RE4. Somehow, on the PS2 (Deluxe Edition) is remarkably better than the previous GC version. Shows that more time & effort can already improve a good game.

The above are not opinions. They are facts & can be read up on, should anyone be curious to do so. As for my personal feelings, this is not to say I favor one system over the other. I have, own, & love both. Each system has its pluses & minuses that we could spend days discussing, but, whats the point? Choose the games you love to play & based on that decision, youll play the system(s) you want. My original intent for my PS2 was to play better & better RPGs. Who knew Id see of all games: Phantasy Star, on a Sony system. But then, I never thought Id see the day that Sonic & Mario were on the same side either...

[watashiwa]

On 2005-12-12 13:36, OdinTyler wrote:
2. The Gamecube has a more powerful processor than the PS2. The small CDs (I forget what theyre exactly called) have a higher compression rate. They access faster & thus, run smoother. Hence, the slower (in comparison) PS.

3. The Gamecube has a higher quality graphics chip than the PS2. Ive seen graphics on the GC that blow away ALMOST everything on the PS2. An exception would be RE4. Somehow, on the PS2 (Deluxe Edition) is remarkably better than the previous GC version. Shows that more time & effort can already improve a good game.


In regards to #2, the Gamecube simply uses miniature DVD-ROMs afaik. There is no higher compression rate on the disc. They're just smaller.

Also, even if the discs were higher compression, you wouldn't get better processing power out of a game. All you'd get is quicker load times. This would not affect slowdown in regards to the number of objects on screen or the action going on. Nor would it have anything to do with the quality of the graphics or anything.

In regards to #3, all reviews have stated the PS2 version of the game has worse lighting than the Gamecube version, although what they've managed to do with the PS2 version is remarkable in it's own. HOWEVER, you are forgetting one important thing. RE4 on Gamecube runs at 60fps, RE4 on PS2 runs at 30fps.

Good game, all.

[OdinTyler]

Well, to my knowledge, the GC discs had higher compression. I could be wrong, Idk. Higher compression WOULD help access time & overall, the system would work more efficiently. Its important to note this. The PS2 is a more popular system & more mainstream, no denying that. Its user base is ridiculously high & a library of games Ive not seen since...well...NES? However, graphically the GC does 'usually' do a better job. I mentioned RE4 because having seen the Deluxe Version (theres at least 2 PS2 versions from what Im told & 1 GC version), I was shocked at what I saw.
Not only did it run better, the graphics were smoother, ran better (if it was 30, it beat the hell out of the 60 on GC)...it was noticeably an overhaul. Not that the PS2 has crappy graphics by any means, but, knowing what I do about the GC then seeing a PS2 game surpass it graphically, just proves that its not just about the system, its about the programming effort that goes forth. Various systems can do alot when pushed to the limit. Its sad that by the time we begin to see their potential, a new system is rushing to come out.
As I said, I cant state what I thought of the regular PS2 version of RE4. All I can compare is the deluxe one & the GC. Its a good game, regardless of which one you play. I just know that since I did notice marked improvements & one of the sweetest box designs Ive ever seen (gun metal casing http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif ), Id invest in the Deluxe. http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif On a final note, does anyone remember talk about some new format? Blue...something? I believe its designed by Sony. Does anyone know if this format will be used in PS3 or is being used for some games already? From what Ive heard of it, its going to take ALOT of processing power to work with that.

[Parn]

GameCube simply uses mini-DVDs. There is no fancy "compression" going on at all, aside from what any typical programmer uses to store buttloads of audio and video data. You could use the same audio/video compression codecs on PlayStation 2, Xbox, or GameCube.

As far as Blue-Ray goes, it is a highly anti-consumer format due to Sony's Digital Rights Management. However, it does hold a lot of data, 50 GB to be precise. I'm more in favor of Toshiba's HD-DVD despite it holding less data, primarily because Blue-Ray is too damned restrictive. As far as "needing lots of processing power for Blue-Ray", I don't know what the heck you're talking about. You simply need a Blue-Ray drive, it's that simple.

[Sinue_v2]

I agree - HD-DVD would be the superior format IMO, simply for it's cost effectiveness and ease of use on a consumer end. 50GB of data is nice and all, but honestly I don't have THAT much of a problem getting up and changing disks every few hours. Good god, be glad anyone complaining about that never had to be a PC gamer back in 1989 when HDD's were still optional. Just to walk from one screen to the next you had to insert three or four different disks (and flip them upside down, if you were using 5 1/4). Got a cutscene or event comming up? Expect to swap out disks at least 6-8 times.

My GOD those 5 1/4 and 3 1/2 drives are SLOW....

As for the NGC's reduced load-time, you can attribute that to the smaller disk size reducing seek time. It simply takes far less time for the NGC's DVD lazer to move from the home position to the outside of the disk than a normal DVD player does.

[PrinceBrightstar]

Its funny but both BR and HD will loose this battle because about a year from now, terrabyte disks will be released.

[Sinue_v2]

I've heard about the holographic disks which can store just over a tetrabyte of information - but the impression that I got was that the technology was still quite a few years away in terms of consumer cost effectiveness. Blue Ray and HD-DVD may be outdated as a technology, but their usefulness will last for about as long as DVD's currently have.

Well, the superior format will last anyhow. The HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray competition is shaping up to be similar to the fight between BetaMax and VHS.

[Nai_Calus]

On 2005-12-13 01:28, Sinue_v2 wrote:

Well, the superior format will last anyhow. The HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray competition is shaping up to be similar to the fight between BetaMax and VHS.



...Except that betamax WAS the superior format. Whatever is cheaper and makes Joe Q. Averageidiot happier will win, superior technology be damned. :(

[Sinue_v2]

Superiority doesn't always consist of raw power (or storage space in this case). Superiority also comes in the form of user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, and marketing. I use the term "superior" as a blanketing statement meaning whichever format comes out the winner overall despite individual strong and weak points.

[IceBurner]

Hate to break it, but if you check the article for follow-ups you would find that a poorly tranlated offer for refurbished Dreamcasts on Sega Direct was mistaken for renewed production.

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000180072401



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: IceBurner on 2005-12-14 00:49 ]</font>

[OdinTyler]

I havent checked that link out Ice. Thanks tho, for clearing that up. Why would ST go backwards & put a PS game on the DC? There already IS one. Its called PSO. LOL As for systems, Sega themselves had already said theyve left the system wars. DC speculation shouldnt have even been an issue. I wish Sega still would consider a new system, but, whats done is done. Just as long as they stay in the industry somehow.

[Sinue_v2]

Well, Sega hasn't left the hardware market totally. They're still balls deep in Arcade hardware R&D - and considering that most of their consoles have been at least in part based on their arcade units - then it's not too much of a strech to think that they could make a new console based on some next generation archetecture of theirs. This is doubly true since Sammy has plenty of manufacturing facilitys for their Pachinko machine empire which could be converted to console production.

All they need is for SegaSammy to get a bug up their ass and think that they could make a successful run at the home market again. If it happens, it won't be for a long time, but it's not outside the realm of possibility either.

[Espilonarge]

On 2005-12-14 11:12, Sinue_v2 wrote:
All they need is for SegaSammy to get a bug up their ass and think that they could make a successful run at the home market again. If it happens, it won't be for a long time, but it's not outside the realm of possibility either.
As the old saying goes "Once bitten, twice as shy."

It's highly doubtful Sega/Sammy would go to great lengths to attempt another stab at the home console business (hardware anyways) since they seem to be doing pretty well just doing software.

Anyways even if one was to get PSU working on a DC (modded or not) it would be doubtful attempting to get the "online" part working because I think Sega (the servers anyways) will be monitoring what kind of activity is going through the network (such as what kind of packets are being sent and recieved.)

[OdinTyler]

Sega made it very clear theyre leaving the hardware market. They refered to consoles. I never said theyd leave arcades. Sega's done them since the 60s & have had consistent #1 arcade games. Theyd be fools to stop that. However, as far as theyre presently concerned, no more home consoles. Its a shame, but, Ive come to accept it. If I can accept Sega licenses on Nintendo & now Sony systems, Im ready to go foward. However, if Sega changes their mind, it better be a system that blows the rest away...otherwise, dont bother.