Zelda SS and TP port on the 3ds.

#31Lord_of_BeefDipPosted 10/22/2013 10:15:12 PM
Tell that to the ones who have said otherwise, and the games themselves.

Take DKCR3D. It has to cut the frames in half and lower the detail to get the game running. That should spell out that the 3DS is not as powerful.


Then we have games like Monster Hunter Tri that are actually improved from the Wii version. Yes it seems some textures and geometry took a small hit, but it has better lighting and effects, and it runs at double the framerate irregardless of 3D.

RE: Revelations is a mixed bag. For the most part it looks better than RE4 by a long shot, but somethings still stick out as bad. Still blows the Ps2 version of the game out and comes out ahead of the GC version.

Also bearing merit is Capcom stating that they could have pushed the graphics even further than what they did.

Nano Assault is a very impressive game, pulling off some excellent texture, lighting and shading effects. Geometry looks good as well. The Ps2 pulls off some great stuff, but I really think you're seeing it's games through rose tinted glasses.

I want to hear it from you, what Ps2 games are even close to be on level with the games I mentioned?

And I'm not even sure those are the best the 3DS has now, since I haven't kept up with it as much lately. grans would know more on that than I most likely.

Key word is "horsepower". Some games look comparable to PS2 titles, with some additional lighting features. I'm sure 3DS games have the potential to look better than the majority of PS2 titles, but my point is that the component specs of the hardware add up to be on roughly the same level as the PS2.

Plenty outright look far better.

If you compare raw specs, then they look comparable. But going by raw specs would lead you to think that the PSP is on level with not only the Ps2 but the 3DS as well.

We don't know how the CPU actually stacks against the Ps2, but I can all but guarantee it stomps the piss out of the EE. It is based on a newer architecture for one, and from what I have seen is much better clock for clock. The EE on the Ps2 wasn't all that good, and was inefficient as all hell. It also has 2 cores on top of that.

The GPU out and out is better than the one in the Wii. All the Wii even has is a over clocked Gamecube GPU, very little really changed on an architectural level. In terms of what it can render polygon wise, the number is 15 million. More than what the GC can render under most cases, and that is the stock model at 4K resolution.

The Pica in the 3DS is customized, and has a higher clock rate. With that ,and and the 3DS sub-SD resolution that number would go up quite a bit. Then with the effects it can do, it really is no contest.

It has more RAM than the Wii, and better memory at that. More video memory than the Wii too.

As for your question: absolutely.

So you effectively think that the Ps2 could run a game that pushed the Wii itself to its limit, at a similar fidelity that the Wii version ran at?

The Ps2 lagged to hell running SoTC, and that game was far less impressive than either the 3DS or Wii version of MH:Tri . SoTC dropped nearly to the single digits at times. Impressive, but it came at a huge cost.
---
..."go put on your favorite lingerie and streak in your public library while yelling about how sexy you'd look as a dolphin." - Ghasts