> > Also, the 32X could've done games with more frames of animation, but cartridge ROM
> > was still very, very expensive at that time.
>
>
> The Amiga 500 was good for its time, it probably could of done a arcade perfect port
> of Double Dragon, judging from some of its games from the early 90's. I think the
> Sega Saturn was pretty well behind the coin op, even its final games didn't look
> close to Model 2 games, the PSX wouldn't of been as far behind, the original Ridge
> Racer was close to the System 22 version, the PSX version had better color i think
> even though they both have same color capabilities, it just lacked the raw power, it
> ran at 30fps as opposed to 60fps, PSX only had 1mb of video memory but in most other
> ways it was as powerful as the Namco 22 and Sega Model boards in 1995, the PSX arcade
> hardware made Tekken 3 look decent, it looked pretty ugly on the PSX, it is amazing
> what another 1mb of video memory can do.
I am wrong actually, they made another original version of Ridge Racer that ran at 60fps it came as a bonus disk with Ridge Racer 4, they wanted to make Ridge Racer 4 60fps but it had to much animation so they decided make another original version at 60fps and include it as a bonus disk. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1IVswx_yFs
The PSX was better than people think, it can't do 60fps and Namco 22 is light years ahead in power people think, why so many of the games looked crap on PSX was cause of time limits they were given to develop them in, probably.
I am the original retro game dork.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: Why don't they produce arcade hardware that is ahead of the PC anymore!
Reply
