PDO was severly over rated both in gameplay and graphics.

So is NInja Gaiden, especially in the graphics.

Team Ninja hates water physics which is why the water in their games usually suck compared to the rest of the kick@$$ graphics in some of their games... Graphically I' d score Ninja Gaiden an 8.5 at most, but with the lousy water physics I' d have to drop the score down to a 7

" Dead or Alive is for people who love Dead or Alive."

That said, I' m pretty excited for Dead or Alive 4. The game looks fun and I can finally put Brad Wong to good use over Xbox Live. It seems like there is some heated debate over graphics or water ripples, something . . . I don' t get it.

Too bad Brad Wong is a Virtua Fighter 4 character.

Team Ninja hates water physics

They also hate reflections. Early in the first stage Ryu goes into a room and everything has a reflection, the walls, the gates that close and trap him inside... everything... except him and his enemy ninjas!

Cmon you' re all being sarcastic right? right? Ninja Gaiden lacking in the graphics department?

Not at all. Read what I said about the reflections. Read what Terry said about the water. You can see how crappy the water is in the DoA4 hi res trailer.

I personally think the graphics in DOA3 were awesome. When talking about the DOA4 trailer that' s an unfinished game with half a year left for it to be worked on.

I agree that DOA3 and Ninja gaiden didn' t have the best graphics. That definately goes to Splinter Cell Chaos Theory. I' d give the DOA games a solid 8.5 and maybe even a 9. they aren' t the best but they have a good style.

That' s what I like about PDO. It had a great art direction. I really thought the graphics were good but not great. I just really liked the art style.

The most impressive in the Dead or Alive series to me was Dead or Alive 2: Hardcore for the Playstation 2.. Simply because the Dreamcast version looked totally awesome and the PS2 version just added extra details to some of the gaming environments. For example in the Dreamcast version one level had you battling on snowy terrain whereas the PS2 version of the same level thrust you into a friggin blizzard!

And then the Xbox version just took the visuals to that next level with more awesome backgrounds, some featuring exotic animals and others sporting a bunch of cool-looking neon lights.

That' s what I like about PDO. It had a great art direction. I really thought the graphics were good but not great. I just really liked the art style.

I' ve often said the same thing about Ridge Racer V vs. Gran Turismo 3 & 4.. The graphics/art style of Ridge Racer V appeals way more to me than those of Gran Turismo 3 & 4 even though the aforementioned Gran Turismo games are technically superior.


AND speaking of Splinter Cell, what' s up with the review Rampage? Where the hell is it??????????

Ug. The PS2 version of Dead or Alive 2 look pretty bad compared to the Dreamcast version. Here is a pic I made when I rented the PS2 version of the game:

AND speaking of Splinter Cell, what' s up with the review Rampage? Where the hell is it??????????

Oh snap!!! I' ve been so busy with school and my new job I completely forgot! Sh*t. I' ll get on that tomorrow.

ORIGINAL: Joe Redifer

Ug. The PS2 version of Dead or Alive 2 look pretty bad compared to the Dreamcast version. Here is a pic I made when I rented the PS2 version of the game:

Wow. That' s nuts! How did they manage that one?

Dreamcast vs. PlayStation 2 vs. Atari Jaguar

I so want the Jaguar now. F*ck next gen! The 360 looks like crap compared to that!

If Microsoft could get Fight For Life 2 as an exclusive that would be a major coup for them!!

To me, just because the water in Ninja Gaiden doesn' t reflect " everything" doesn' t mean it' s ugly. It still had me stopping just to rotate the camera around it.

IMO best graphics for a 30fps Xbox game goes to Splinter Cell: CT. Best graphics for a 60fps Xbox game goes to Ninja Gaiden.

About DOA2 of Dreamcast vs PS2. I must agree that i think the textures of the Dreamcast version were nicer than the PS2 version.

I don' t think anyone would say that Ninja Gaiden is ugly. No way. Just not the very best. It' s up there, don' t get me wrong. Of course the " very best" is entirely subjective.

ORIGINAL: dismiss

Backgrounds are truly amazing, but the characters still look more like action figures rather than real people (even the anime-influenced Tekken 5 has more convincing fighters). This is more of a stylistic concern, of course.

Anyway, this is bound to look even better, once proper shadows for the fighters have been applied. Strangely enough, these screenshots illustrate just how superior DOA always looked in comparison to other fighting game franchises. I just hope that they update their fighting engine this time, it' s frustrating to have such a beautiful game lagging behind in gameplay.

The characters look like action figures because they, too, are anime influenced characters.

ORIGINAL: Terry Bogard

Team Ninja hates water physics which is why the water in their games usually suck compared to the rest of the kick@$$ graphics in some of their games... Graphically I' d score Ninja Gaiden an 8.5 at most, but with the lousy water physics I' d have to drop the score down to a 7

Well at least give them credit for their cool cut-scenes

Most people don' t realize it, but the Dreamcast just outpowered the PS2 in terms of graphics, the only thing better about the PS2 was the processor. So really you could have better physics in PS2, but graphics wise DC is supperior.

It also shows in Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament, both are on DC and PS2. DC versions run at a lot higher frames per second have much more detailed textures. Not to mention they also are playable in VGA which is basically the equivalent of 480P.
Besides just comparing the games that are on both systems you could compare games like Shenmue 1 and 2 to anything on PS2, there are several racing games that put PS2 to shame graphically (can' t remember the names of them, prequal to Project gotham racing 1 and another racing game that was on both PS2 and DC).
Sonic Adventure 2 on Dreamcast puts anything on PS2 to shame in my opinion. That uses most of the Dreamcast' s capabilities.

DC pushes a little more polygons per second than PS2, but where it puts it to shame is with the lighting and texture capabilities. It also has other loads of special features that the PS2 simply isn' t capable of, like cell shading.

Oh yeah, you could play online games on dreamcast way before you could on PS2. I remember playihng Dreamcast Quake 3 arena on dial-up internet with no noticable lag. You could even play the PC people on your Dreamacst in Quake 3.

By just looking at screenshots you are missing a lot too, if you see both systems in action side by side you will realize how much better Dreamcast is.
I consider the Dreamcast the best console ever, when you put into features for its time. 56k modem built in with a web browser, controller is only outdone by the xbox' s, VMUs (little gameboy type things with screens you put in your controller), and it has one of the best collection of games. I still have my Dreamcast, but last year I bought a Treamcast so I can play it on the road too.

The only category DC lost to PS2 in was marketing.

Sony claimed it would be worth the wait for PS2 as they are claiming for PS3 versus Xbox 360. Sony lies.


Oh and about the DOA graphics. In DOAU2 on xbox the lighting is really awesome except for the shadows. They even did a good job with the player' s reflections on most of the surfaces. The water in DOAU2 was pretty good, but i know they can do better. My main complaint is the shadows, it looks like only the bones of the players have shadows.

Actually technically the PS2 was superior to the Dreamcast in a variety of ways... It had a faster 128-bit processor, could do better lighting effects than the Dreamcast, better particle effects, and could push a hell of a lot more polygons..
The Dreamcast could push around 3 - 5 million polygons whereas the PS2 could push em in the double digits. Sony originally claimed 66 million polygons for the PS2 but that' s all FLATSHADED polygons with no AI, game physics, textures, or lighting whatsoever.. When applied that figured dropped down to around 28 million polygons, give or take, with effects and everything on.

The area where the Dreamcast would at times look better than the PS2 in was textures... The way the PS2 architecture worked was a little complex to say the least and developers needed to stream textures in order to utilize it properly as opposed to relying on the units paltry VRam which the Dreamcast had more of.. The Dreamcast was no doubt WAY more easier to develop for, it just wasn' t as powerful as the PS2 overall. The Dreamcast wouldn' t have been able to do Virtua Fighter IV without it looking pretty watered down. The NAOMI 2 arcade board featured much better lighting effects than its predecessor as well as pushed around 9 - 10 million polygons. Ever wonder why Virtua Fighter 4 went straight to the PS2 first without appearing on the Dreamcast?

And there' s NO way the Dreamcast could do a game like Kessen AS IS without the framerate almost crashing with all that onscreen insanity happening.

The PS2 can certainly do cel-shaded games, Klonoa 2 is one example of that.