Shader Support? Even the first generation videocards could do shading. If what you ask is about the ability of the PS2 to do normal maps, then yes it could, however it didnt have specialized hardware for it, the same as GC and Wii. Only Xbox had specialized hardware for normal maps, meaning that the console doesnt take a hit in performance while rendering normal maps. This is the reason why games with normal maps were abundant in Xbox but not in PS2 or GC. PS3 and 360 have specialized hardware for normal maps. The Wii does not. This is why developers will avoid using normal maps in the Wii because if they decide to do it, then they wont be able to render more than 1 or 2 characters on screen, or a very empty and boring landscape. I dont know why people discuss the graphical abilities of the Wii. It is clear that it doesnt have graphical power. to compete with the next gen consoles. It is like beating a death horse.
Yep, unfortunately :/, and its a quite old technology, Geforce FX series had it, its what makes the difference between directx 8 games and directx 9 ones.
Shader Support? Even the first generation videocards could do shading. If what you ask is about the ability of the PS2 to do normal maps, then yes it could, however it didnt have specialized hardware for it, the same as GC and Wii. Only Xbox had specialized hardware for normal maps, meaning that the console doesnt take a hit in performance while rendering normal maps. This is the reason why games with normal maps were abundant in Xbox but not in PS2 or GC. PS3 and 360 have specialized hardware for normal maps. The Wii does not. This is why developers will avoid using normal maps in the Wii because if they decide to do it, then they wont be able to render more than 1 or 2 characters on screen, or a very empty and boring landscape. I dont know why people discuss the graphical abilities of the Wii. It is clear that it doesnt have graphical power. to compete with the next gen consoles. It is like beating a death horse. godhandiscen
wasnt that new konami game on wii suppose to have normal mapping? and yes normal mapping looks great when done right just look at riddick on xbox i loved that game more than halo SP in all honesty. its also great that it teaches kids how to shoot craps :D
Nope im %100 sure Wii doesnt have shader 2.0 suport (not hardware at least, software support can be implemented by devs but it eats too much power from CPU), what you show is normal mapping and Shader 1.1 has normal mapping.
Nope im %100 sure Wii doesnt have shader 2.0 suport (not hardware at least, software support can be implemented by devs but it eats too much power from CPU), what you show is normal mapping and Shader 1.1 has normal mapping. The Wii indeed doesn't have "Shader 2.0", it has something else called TEV, which is basically how the GC architecture does shaders :p I don't know much, but Google for "gamecube shader tev"... Not much really explains why multiplataforms look better on the PS2 than the GC because, well, that isn't true, at least I think so, because I've always read the opposite. Since I don't own any, I can't do comparisions, but people say that GC games look better than PS2.
No, the PS2 can't do anything that the Wii can't (that's why we're seeing a lot of direct ports PS2 games on the wii, it's extremely easy to do). On that note there weren't many things that the PS2 could do that the GCN couldn't.
[QUOTE="commania"]I know that gamecube lacked it, and even Wii doesnt have it either, but did PS2 have shader 2.0?
Maybe that explains why some Wii games and multi plat games on GC look worse that PS2.?!dgsag
Since Shader 2 is a MICROSOFT technology, I doubt any console had it, probably not even the Xbox since that was before SM 2 was invented... Lol, where did you get that from? How can it be a MS technology when all the graphics cards have it?
No, the PS2 can't do anything that the Wii can't (that's why we're seeing a lot of direct ports PS2 games on the wii, it's extremely easy to do). On that note there weren't many things that the PS2 could do that the GCN couldn't.Luigi_Vincetana
You may be right about the Wii, but though GC had amny advantages compared to PS2, still obviously it lacked in some areas too, there must be a reason why NFS games and Splinter Cell series look like crap (and have serious frame rate issues) on GC.
[QUOTE="Luigi_Vincetana"]No, the PS2 can't do anything that the Wii can't (that's why we're seeing a lot of direct ports PS2 games on the wii, it's extremely easy to do). On that note there weren't many things that the PS2 could do that the GCN couldn't.commania
You may be right about the Wii, but though GC had amny advantages compared to PS2, still obviously it lacked in some areas too, there must be a reason why NFS games and Splinter Cell series look like crap (and have serious frame rate issues) on GC.Yeah your right the PS2 specs had more "profits" which the developers couldn't keep all the graphics in tact for there GCN builds of the games. Seriously though, 95% of multiplats look better on GCN (as far as I'm aware the only areas the GCN falls short of the PS2 is pixel fill rates and what ever is required for those black boarders in cell shaded games).
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
Oblivion??? As far as i know, Pop: Sands of Time was the first game that didnt play on cards without shader 2.0 support (like Geforce MX cards, Ti and Fx series had it).
[QUOTE="dgsag"][QUOTE="commania"]I know that gamecube lacked it, and even Wii doesnt have it either, but did PS2 have shader 2.0?
Maybe that explains why some Wii games and multi plat games on GC look worse that PS2.?!commania
Since Shader 2 is a MICROSOFT technology, I doubt any console had it, probably not even the Xbox since that was before SM 2 was invented... Lol, where did you get that from? How can it be a MS technology when all the graphics cards have it? Since one excludes the other? The x86 architecture is done by a lot of processor manufacturers. "Shader" is a DirectX terminology.
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
Oblivion??? As far as i know, Pop: Sands of Time was the first game that didnt play on cards without shader 2.0 support (like Geforce MX cards, Ti and Fx series had it).
Your thinking of shader 1.0/1.1 tech, everything from Ge Force 3 to 6 series (not including GF 4 MX) with nvidia cards. Anything after 6 has 2.0 support.
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
Oblivion??? As far as i know, Pop: Sands of Time was the first game that didnt play on cards without shader 2.0 support (like Geforce MX cards, Ti and Fx series had it).
Your thinking of shader 1.0/1.1 tech, everything from Ge Force 3 to 6 series (not including GF 4 MX) with nvidia cards. Anything after 6 has 2.0 support.
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
I think Battlefield 2 was one of the first games to require Shadermodel 2.0. Direct3D uses "Pixelshading", OpenGlide uses for an example another type of shading technic and it's called fragmentshading.Â
The PS2 couldn't even do hardware bump mapping and PC graphics cards didn't have shader 2.0 (or even 1.1) support at that point in time. I think Oblivion was one of the first games on PC that wouldn't play on cards that didn't have 2.0 support. So it's not really last generation tech.
Pixel shaders are just buzz words for new hardware and it's confusing since nvidia chose to use words that were already used to describe old hardware. To see what people are talking about when they use these buzz words read this.
Oblivion??? As far as i know, Pop: Sands of Time was the first game that didnt play on cards without shader 2.0 support (like Geforce MX cards, Ti and Fx series had it).
Your thinking of shader 1.0/1.1 tech, everything from Ge Force 3 to 6 series (not including GF 4 MX) with nvidia cards. Anything after 6 has 2.0 support.
Ah ok, so Wii has shader 1.1?
Sorry was a bit wrong with when 2.0 was implimented on nvidia cards. Apparently the FX series had 2.0 and 3.0 was introduced with Ge Force 6 series... had an ATI card during that era so I was confused. It's easy to get confused... Anyway as far as I know the Wii doesn't even have pixel shader 1.0 support, if it's like many claim and the same card the GC had with increase clock speeds. Hard to tell when Nintendo won't release the specs though but that's the only reason I can think of for it getting PS2 ports rather than Xbox ports (Xbox had pixel shader 1.1)
Shader Support? Even the first generation videocards could do shading. If what you ask is about the ability of the PS2 to do normal maps, then yes it could, however it didnt have specialized hardware for it, the same as GC and Wii. Only Xbox had specialized hardware for normal maps, meaning that the console doesnt take a hit in performance while rendering normal maps. This is the reason why games with normal maps were abundant in Xbox but not in PS2 or GC. PS3 and 360 have specialized hardware for normal maps. The Wii does not. This is why developers will avoid using normal maps in the Wii because if they decide to do it, then they wont be able to render more than 1 or 2 characters on screen, or a very empty and boring landscape. I dont know why people discuss the graphical abilities of the Wii. It is clear that it doesnt have graphical power. to compete with the next gen consoles. It is like beating a death horse. godhandiscen
Believe it or not, most people thought that the Wii was more powerful than Xbox. The Wii has the same CPU speed and more memory (rumoured, no specs have been released), so pepole think that they will see games that look better than Riddick on Xbox. That's not gonna happen for the resaon you stated above.
Log in to comment