> > > 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 just played the bonus disk on EPSXE, the arcade version in MAME a little better still in texture quality and smoothness or framerate, it is not far behind, they did a good job.
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
