That's why you are what I've always said you are. You made the claim, YOU need to back it up.
I made no claim about in-order or out-of-order execution. I don't see you posting any proof to back up your claim.
It's a well known fact that more cache improves performance.
To a point. After that point, it's a waste of money (or die space, or whatever).
68k emulation is no big deal. There are open source 68k emulators and there is currently a homebrew GC developer writing one.
So, emulators are available. What I said is that you still need memory to run them.
My point is there marketing. What's your point?
That it's marketting BS to say the PSP runs at 300Mhz because it clocks down when the CPU is at idle. It's not BS.
They make it sound like a PSP is as powerful as a PS2
In what way? I certainly didn't bring this up, nor do I follow PSP advertisements.
The exact number is irrelevant. The fact that it's not 100% is the point.
How Sony holds up to the competition is the point.
It's kind of funny to hear an Amiga fan complaining about compatibility, isn't it?
Actually the 2 Zelda N64 games released on the GC as a ore-order bonus for pre-ordering Zelda:The Wind Waker were emualtor based.
Emulator-based is not always backwards-compatible, because you're actually getting re-licensed games on a native medium.
Lots of companies re-release their old games. I didn't have to repurchase my PSX titles or sign up to some subscription service when I got a PS2.
the Atari 5200 had a plug-in module for 2600 backwards compatibility.
I suppose this is equivalent to the Game Boy Player for the GameCube, as the hardware implementation is the same. I had an Atari plug-in module for my Coleco Vision. Does that count as backwards compatibility, or just emulation?
3" discs rare? Yeah, Ok. 3" CDs and DVDs have been around a long time. Look at the center 3" of you PC's DVD player, they all support them. Ritek it the preferred brand for GC pirates.
I think you overlooked something important in my post. :-)
Elder Scrolls is supposedly on 4 DVDs right now
That's because the developers suck. If I can get a 625x500 JPEG photo down to 80K without any visible artifacts, any game developer should be able to make a game that will fit on one count of whatever medium a console uses.
All this horsepower is cool, but it makes developers lazy. I wish developers would look into things like fractal-generated textures. It would help to make the games look more unique every time you play them, too.
I presume cut-scenes are largely to blame. Game developers should stop making "interactive movies" and keep making games.
As for the catride issue...so what, it happened, it's been over with for 7 years.
Well, the cartridges are partly to blame for the company losing their massive market share. They haven't gotten that market back, so it's arguable as to whether the issue is "over."
Because Nintendo is sticking with 480p max, there games will fit on 1 DVD like current gen Xbox games.
The total size of a game is determined by its screen resolution? Low resolution is a virtue?
Yes, I see your point. But, I thought the whole reason for using 3D graphics and vectors and nurbs and all this new-age crap was to make everything resolution independent. Only cut-scenes and other movie clips really justify your argument about low resolution.
I guess you forgot that I play my GC on my 50" DLP HDTV using component cables from my GC's digital video output. It can be modified to display VGA or a separate cable can be purchased. This can be done on the GC because the DAC in built into the cable, not the system.
It's the extra one I bought to put the modchip in that doesn't support the DV out.
My bad. I have a Rev C GameCube, so I can't get a cable to do that. I'm not into used hardware, though, so I guess I'll stick with S-Video.
I do find it annoying that newer versions of hardware, from any manufacturer, might lack features compared to the original design. Also, the VGA cable is pricey.
I'm arguing the application of it. I'm saying it's marketing spin by Sony. You want a PS3, buy it. You don't want a Revolution, don't buy it. I don't care.
Is this a rebuttal or not?
5FPS...Oh that's a good one. I really think you have nothing better to do than write rubbish in this thread.
What's rubbish about it? You blame the choppiness of XBox 360 titles on the inability of developers to use the full capabilites of the tripple-core CPU. This is what's rubbish.
Personally, I think the ease of development with XBox 360 just makes the programmers lazy. As a person who often ends up refactoring other peoples' code, I've seen plenty of this. The more forgiving the language, the sloppier people are at using it, and it drives me
nuts.
Don't expect Revolution lauch titles to be as good as the ones developed years later. Nintendo programmers are not immune to the problems faced by XBox 360 and PS3 programmers. Hell, it's pretty much the same hardware, really. It's the dev tools that count.
adolscent: Not true anymore. The micro only supports GBA games. (And, if you re-read what Wacoon said, you'll see he said the portables were backward compatible)
I should've pointed out that by "console", I meant to exclude hand-held systems. Technically, a hand-held system is a console.
Even calling a machine "portable" isn't terribly accurate. Or dare I say it, "REAL CHEAP."
Lou (@ me): I'm still waiting for him to show me a cell phone with 256MB of ram.
I didn't make that claim. Ask adolscent.
