|
Post by Xeogred on Sept 11, 2019 7:03:07 GMT -5
I put 50 hours into the new SC6, it seemed like a nice return to form. But yeah I never hear much about 3-5. They started getting way silly with the guest characters too (Darth Vader and Yoda?...)
Pretty sure SC1 was the only one on DC anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Ex on Sept 11, 2019 9:25:50 GMT -5
SC is one of my all time favorite fighting games series. A paragon of quality. With this series I've personally beaten:
Soul Edge on PlayStation Soulcalibur on Dreamcast Soulcalibur II on Xbox Soulcalibur III on PlayStation 2 Soulcalibur IV on Xbox 360 Soulcalibur: Broken Destiny on PlayStation Portable Soulcalibur V on Xbox 360 All of those were excellent, with the exception of Broken Destiny, which was merely "good".
The only bad SC game I've played, was Soulcalibur Legends on Wii. It's crap.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Sept 11, 2019 10:58:10 GMT -5
No, they're still good. I think SC3 was PS2-only, and it made a lot of significant changes to how some characters play that make it more divisive. Outside of that, I don't think there are any "bad" entries in the series, just good and better.
I forgot about SC Legends, though. Despite it being junk, I've always wanted a copy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 14:14:01 GMT -5
Can't say I have much nostalgia for the Dreamcast since it's all new to me. What I'll say is that many games on this console look much sharper and better to me than most early PS2 games. I think it also has more of a distinct look to it as older consoles used to have? The PS2 not so much.
|
|
|
Post by toei on Sept 11, 2019 14:58:53 GMT -5
Yeah, it's striking how good Dreamcast games looked. And it was only around for a short time, so who knows what else could've been done? I would have liked to see Skies of Arcadia become a series, for instance. Imagine if it had gotten three entries, like Phantasy Star on the Genesis?
|
|
|
Post by Ex on Sept 11, 2019 15:04:04 GMT -5
What I'll say is that many games on this console look much sharper and better to me than most early PS2 games. I'm not sure how it all works, but I agree the Dreamcast's GPU outputs very crisp and clean polys, typically with good framerates as well. I know it's not as powerful as the GameCube or PS2, but the DC's games still looked plenty good enough for me back then. We definitely gotta have a DC month next year guys.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Sept 11, 2019 15:36:55 GMT -5
I concur, Dreamcast month sounds great.
The Dreamcast used a PowerVR2 chip @ 100 MHz. It was a pretty solid design that still gets used a ton in mobile applications, although obviously iterated on quite a bit since the Dreamcast.
Also, if you haven't played Dreamcast using a VGA box, I highly recommend doing so. On top of being able to push those nice-looking polys, the ability to see them on a computer monitor, perfectly crisp and clear, was a revelation.
|
|
|
Post by Xeogred on Sept 11, 2019 18:06:08 GMT -5
It's crazy to hear some stories you guys have touched upon a little. Like today Jeff Gerstmann on the Giant Bomb podcast mentioned how big retailers ended up having no faith and distrust in the DC and wanted them off shelves. Other podcasts were sharing the usual story of how so many people were "waiting" for the PS2 and or traded in their DC towards one. I wonder if the media and magazines had a slant against the DC too? Crazy stuff, I wonder if Sony was dropping off some gold briefcases or what. A shame Sega made so many mistakes prior to the DC, otherwise maybe they could have marched on. On the other hand I appreciate that Sega took so many chances and experimented.
|
|
|
Post by toei on Sept 11, 2019 20:15:44 GMT -5
Xeogred Sega was the opposite of Nintendo, which was always conservative and slow to move. Nintendo supposedly had no plans to replace the NES until the PC Engine started selling in Japan, which is why it lasted so long. Sega, meanwhile, was hardware-happy. They always had some new hardware in the works, including weird stuff like the TeraDrive. It probably came from their arcade background; arcades have to be cutting-edge, so manufacturers were upgrading their boards every two years at the most. Just look at this list of Sega arcade hardware. It's nuts.
|
|
|
Post by Xeogred on Sept 11, 2019 20:57:02 GMT -5
I've always heard that about the NES as well. That definitely sheds some light on Sega's philosophy and adds up. Arcade tech looks like it advanced quite fast along the years back then, so they probably wanted to keep churning out new home hardware too. Some of their ideas weren't even bad, I kind of like the concept of the 32x a lot and it could do some cool stuff visually. The Sega CD has a lot of good titles actually. But I don't think they had the wallet's of your everyday consumer in mind haha, or the developers and their time. Sega were living life like Sonic going fast, just a tad too much. I always imagine the delay between Japan and the US launches made things kind of weird back then too. On a random note I'm at the point now where when I hear "Sega arcade", I picture those glorious zones in the Yakuza games. Such a fun nod to their own old legacy.
|
|