Dreamcast VS Playstation 2 | Graphics Comparison | 5 Games | Side by Side Part 2

[@konyption]

Dreamcast had worse hardware on paper but in practice it worked a lot smarter. A lot of basic features like AA and tile rendering were handled on the hardware side so devs didnt need to implement it themselves on the software side, which combined with a higher native resolution and bigger texture cache is why a lot of games looked better.

[@SlowSpyder]

I was misinformed, nvm

[@Haywood-Jablomie]

@@SlowSpyder Yes, it was Supersampled . I'm not entirely sure why they did it though. 🤷🏾‍♀️

[@rcadenow7543]

it has a better gpu woth more vram...ps2 had an awful gpu with only 4mb vram.

[@Haywood-Jablomie]

@@SlowSpyder Okay, supposedly the Dreamcast Power VR GPU was capable of 1024x768 and was used in 23 games. but most games were either 640x480p or 800x600i supersampled down to 480i or 480p if using VGA and a compatible game. Also the Antialiasing was really great on Dreamcast for the time.

[@SlowSpyder]

@@Haywood-Jablomie But the games are internally rendered at 1024x768 before downscaled to those lower resolutions you mention. If you use the Dreeamcast VGA controller, all of the games will display in native 1024x768 as internally rendered. It'd be like today a game rendering at 4K, requiring all of the resources it takes to render at 4K, and then down scaling to 1080P. Why not just render at 1080P and save the resources is what I'm wondering here. What I was getting at is that I wondered why they wasted horsepower rendering at the higher res just to downscale. If they would have rendered at 640x480 natively and just output that, frame rates would be higher than rendering at 1024x768. But, the downscaling from a higher res doe have some benefits to pic quality as well as allows for the VGA box / higher resolution. But, I think most games and gamers would have preferred the extra FPS for very, very similar visual quality. And almost no one bought the VGA box back in the early 2000's (though I have one :D ).

[@JMyoutube1]

The dreamcast was such a powerhouse for the short lifespan it had. Really wish sega could have kept their business together and had long term success with the dreamcast

[@2beJT]

If only it had a DVD drive..

[@sirmi9868]

As always people blame sega, yes they have some guilt. But everyone were on the sony bandwagon

[@2beJT]

@@sirmi9868 People were on the Sony bandwagon because Sega made the Sega CD and didn't support it enough. And the 32x and didn't support it enough. So all the parents and kids who bought Sega systems were personally burned by Sega's lack of support. Sega had the lead and fan support. They squandered it.

[@davidm4677]

It wasn’t DVD drive GameCube didn’t have it and did well Microsoft bribed guys at sega ti make Dreamcast flop,

[@sirmi9868]

@@davidm4677 you crazy dude

[@syndicateofgamers1804]

Quake 3 Arena: Another important detail, when playing split screen there are even bigger differences between the two versions graphically... PS2 make many sacrifices... one big one is the fact that all weapons and item pickups are changed to plain 2D sprites, whereas Dreamcast still presents pickups in 3D.

[@SlickOnTop]

You can still play Quake 3 online on the Dreamcast and the Vita.

[@SlickOnTop]

@Rocthese are fan made private servers.

[@crowkid5553]

Even phantasy star online is still online via private servers

[@brennandoherty1778]

NFL 2k2 on the PS2 was released November 19th while the Dreamcast version was released on September 19th. The difference in team ratings is due to mid-season adjustments on the PS2 port

[@thotsunemiku]

Came here to point this out as well.

[@2beJT]

The Dreamcast allowed you to download roster updates to the VMU but I can't recall if I was doing that through the dreamcast web browser from volunteers or the game officially. Either way.. it was awesome downloading vmu save data and sharing it back and forth with DC.

[@Tippotipo]

@@2beJT Additionally, the fun part with the vmu is the selection of game plan with in two players.

[@steve9094]

I used to play Quake 3 Arena all the time on SegaNet using the standard Dreamcast controller, even though the controls were incredibly awkward at first without a second analog stick. I thought the game on the DC had a way more polished look than the grainier PS2 version, with more vivid colors and better lighting effects and overall visual ambiance.

[@DannysHauntedJourney]

You're the only channel that gives me exactly what I'm looking for.

[@RookerVision]

Thank you. Means a lot

[@maddix17]

That’s cap you never looked up how to tie a tie or something? 😂

[@mrsilly3242]

@@RookerVision make a comparison video on dead rising

[@vitorrodrigues5735]

@@RookerVision make a next DC vs PS2 part 3 and 4 use evil twin, f1 champiosnhip 2000 ubi soft, half life, 4x4 evolution, wacky racers, unreal turnament, espn track and field dreamcast is old engine, sega bass fishing, 18 wheeler APT Soldier of Fortune Conflict Zone NBA Hoopz thank you there are 57 games but these are most important together you did.

[@fredsmith8498]

@@RookerVision do Burnout Paradise and play the song girlfriend by Avril Lavigne because the PlayStation 3 version of that game looks the worst

[@Gintaras64]

GTA3 was ment to be Dreamcast exclusive and half of the games was made, but the Dreamcast was canceled so development continued on PS2.

[@lomop4385]

How when the Dreamcast didn't have enough buttons on their controller to ever operate gta 3

[@Gintaras64]

@@lomop4385 PSP also only had 1 analog, but it had GTA LCS and VCS.

[@MrDmoney156]

@@Gintaras64 yeah exactly, it would play just like those two i'd imagine

[@Gintaras64]

@@MrDmoney156 Actualy PS2 GTA3 and VC only uses second analog stick for first person view. Which isn't that important to gameplay.

[@MrDmoney156]

@@Gintaras64 True, i know

[@hababacon]

The PS2, especially the first few years had flat out bad picture quality. Interlacing and 8 bit 128 kb textures attributed to many of the PS2 games looking muddy with jaggies. PS2 excelled at pushing geometry, and motion blur effects, something like Voodoo T-Buffer effects. The DC had much better colors, twice as much vram with 5x texture compression technology so games could look geometrically simpler, but sharper. Historically DC games will have better textures, color, and sharper. PS2 will have better effects and higher geometry density due to its vector processing units and bandwidth.

[@mackalan]

The PS2 was hard to develop in it first years, Criterion Games show the true power of the PS2 with Black and Burnout games, that are far superior than all Dreamcast library.

[@hababacon]

@@mackalan Burnout yes, but Black was a bit muddy looking with grey textures. But like I said, the first few years I was not impressed with the PS2. I ended up buying 1 in late 2004 for Metal Gear 3 release.

[@computadoramatriz6819]

@@mackalan Dreamcast died in 2001... and you say "all library"?

[@mackalan]

@@hababacon For you Black looks bad, but for much people are one of the best looking games for PS2.

[@mackalan]

@@computadoramatriz6819 Lol, ikr. The Dreamcast is a big failure.

[@joacosnm]

For the time Dreamcast was available it beats almost always Ps2 in the graphic department. It’s unfair to compare latest Ps2 to Dreamcast one. It should have been interesting to see what the developers could have done with Sega’s machine in 2005 for example. I thing technically Dreamcast should have stand decently in comparison to Ps2. But the should have changed the controller incorporating a second stick.

[@SalivatingSteve]

The Dreamcast problem was they released it too soon - November 1998 in Japan. In 1998, Sony had barely just came out with the DualShock controller. There wasn’t enough time for a 2nd analog stick. It was REALLY dumb that Sega put less buttons on the DC controller than the Saturn: No C or Z button, so no shoulder bumpers.

[@joacosnm]

@@SalivatingSteve it was a time where controllers weren’t standardized, anyway it wasn’t a real problem because they could have changed the controller like Sony did with the dual shock indeed. I think the Dreamcast was a great pice of hardware and could have been relevant till 2004/2005. The real problem was Sega as a company… it’s a shame what happened to them.

[@almighty151986]

DC would not have got anywhere close to PS2 with more time. It was just a weaker machine.

[@joacosnm]

@@almighty151986 Ps2 was far weaker than Xbox and it didn’t matter at all. It got some amazing games. Anyway we can’t know for sure…

[@robotfan]

i completely agree!

[@golbibulbus5183]

Since the Dreamcast has VGA which is the main thing that makes it crisper than PS2. You should try comparing the games with Emulators, Flycast & PCSX2 as the latter can workaround interlacing & has an Anti-blur feature.

[@lux_film3314]

Someone from Capcom said, "At the time of PSONE, we had detailed libraries from Sony, but when PS2 came out, we didn't have those libraries. Also Dreamcast has more VRAM.

[@SalivatingSteve]

This is the real answer. PS2 didn't have the libraries and it was a lot more difficult to program for.

[@derealized797]

I absolutely hated the ps2 back in it's day. It was garbage compared to literally everything else but everyone praised it for "having more games", it's like they don't understand that sony did not make those games themselves. Why i hated ps2 though, aside from the annoying fan base. The graphics were blurry, like you often saw trails [ghosting] when you moved in many games. And the bland colors. If asked what i liked then, i liked everything except the ps2. And today i still prefer PC over everything because there's certain things about 'console' that i just don't agree with. Actually today more than ever before.

[@lmcgregoruk]

@@derealized797 Well part of the reason of the PS2's success is A. It was Cheap, and 2. The PlayStation 1 blew everyone away with how much better it was than previous consoles. I mean the Saturn was basically the only "competition" the PS1 had, the N64 didn't come out till later on, and by that time the PS1 library was quite big(especially with 3rd party games) So everyone was expecting the PS2 to do the same thing, Ironically I think both the Xbox and GameCube are better than the PS2, but I can see why so many people had a PS2.

[@That_Guy-]

@@lmcgregoruk the dvd player was also a big selling point

[@lmcgregoruk]

@@That_Guy- Yeah, Microsoft cheaped out on requiring you to buy a DVD Remote/dongle (which I had/have?) to play DVD's. I mean especially since they were already willing to lose money on Xbox, just to get their foot in the Console market.

[@fightclubhubbs]

"Definitely won't see a GTA3....." This line didn't age well. lol It's a matter of time to see how the indie port of GTA3 turns out.

[@chevalierkraken]

yeah, with nearly no lighting effect and worse framerate. it's look like a beta

[@fightclubhubbs]

@@chevalierkraken because it is a beta. Or rather closer to an alpha.

[@chevalierkraken]

@@fightclubhubbs the dreamcast will never be ablke to have the PS2 lighting effect, even the PC version was not able to have it. for lighting effect, PS2 was the best. the staff should change their direction and give the dreamcast version a different art direction, with no lighting effect and slighty lower model, but cellshading to follow Jet set radio and Crazy taxi style, it fit way more the Dreamcast than trying to copy PS2

[@fightclubhubbs]

@@chevalierkraken there are plenty of Dreamcast games with far better lighting effects than GTA3. Besides, for a system that isn't suppose to be able to run GTA, Bullfrog seems to have managed to get it running at a pretty stable 30fps with the lighting effects off. Besides there are always tricks/workarounds that programmers can do to achieve certain effects on "weaker" system.

[@chevalierkraken]

@@fightclubhubbs no, clearly no for the lighting effect... I never seen a Dreamcast game with lighting effect at GTA3 ps2 abd xbox level (the PC lack many lighting effect so yeah, the lighting of the PC version is maybe at Dreamcast level) And for the framerate, frogbull have decent framerate, but without effect and only in one area,another dev made video on another area and the framerate go between 40 and 11, it's very instable even worse than the PS2

[@JoJoSwansonEpicMeme]

"never see a GTA 3 on the dreamcast" (doesn't realize there was a Dreamcast port planned and that had started development before Sega ended the consoles life)

[@Ostnizdasht206]

I would have loved to have seen it, but the lack of a second analog stick would of held it back big time.

[@cooiolhh8955]

​@@Ostnizdasht206 not really the psp had gta

[@2fernandoc1]

Well now a team is making a GTA III Dreamcast port and it runs on real hardware (it's still in its early days, but it's apparently advancing quickly and the fact that it runs on Dreamcast at all is crazy).

[@cooiolhh8955]

@@2fernandoc1 i know, so hype . Can't wait to play it on real hardware. Sega4life

[@Tippotipo]

Fun fact, Gran Theft Auto 3 was originally developed for the Dreamcast before the latter demise.

[@XfromDarkHorse]

I love how Dreamcast which is older console than PS2 has better anti-aliasing.

[@beatnicksodyssey]

The Dreamcast was so unique and ahead of it's time. It was capable of a lot and it was the beginning of the modern gaming era in my opinion. I agree that the controller probably held it back. I keep mine hooked up, but rarely play it. The PS2 is my favorite console of all time and I play it more than any other system, even today. You touched on it towards the end of the video, most developers did not really know what the PS2 was capable of in the beginning and many games just lacked a bit because of that. They didn't really start to tap into the full potential of the PS2 for a couple years or so.

[@tavius88]

I love the Dreamcast controller

[@beatnicksodyssey]

@@tavius88 I didn't get my Dreamcast until they were dying off and I already had the PS2. It's an alright controller, but my hands usually cramped after holding it a while and the analog stick wasn't the best, not sure how to describe the issue with it, but it felt awkward at times, plus the wire being on the bottom of the controller didn't help. I'm using the StrikerDC when I play now and that's definitely an improvement over the original, though some games still feel a little awkward so that's probably the controls for the game, not the controller itself. My only problem with the StrikerDC is when you put the rumble pack in it, it feels a little top heavy, but it's not a major issue.

[@christianweber9089]

In 2003/2004 the real ps2 Grafik comes out. 3 or 4 years after launch. On dreamcast they had on launch great Grafik, example Soulcalibur, 1year F355 Challenge , MSR, Rayman 2 and many more. Ps2 power after some years after launching, DC power directly to launch.

[@christianweber9089]

Beatnick, I agree with your 2 comments. The original DC controller was good, but my madcatz DC controller was better. The second analog I misses on all DC controller. Ps. The ps2 controller was okay. But the best controller after the DC controller was the Xbox 360 controller, and now the Xbox one /series controller. I don't know why, but I don't like playstation controller. I had ps2 and ps3. Had the DC 2 analog sticks, it had to be perfect at the time then.

[@beatnicksodyssey]

@@christianweber9089 It's a very close call between the PS2 and Xbox 360 controller for me. I do like the side by side analog sticks better on the PS2, but prefer the disc type pad on the 360. It's pretty much a tie, but I have used the PS2 controller for so long it takes a slight lead as my favorite. I never played with the Madcatz controller on the Dreamcast, back in the day I just had to original and I can't remember the name of the 3rd party controller I had, but it wasn't very good because of the shoulder buttons. The modern StrikerDC is a major improvement over the original controller.

[@Steve-zc8yn]

Fun fact: GTA 3 was orginally in development for the dreamcast so yes you could have had a 3d dc gta game.

[@MoonSarito]

Dreamcast was really a beast, it's amazing that despite the hardware being weaker it can still beat the PS2 in some respects. I still think it could have been a successful console and would have been in second place of the sixth generation in sales if Sega had persisted more, too bad he died so soon.

[@TheyCallMeSledge]

Agreed, however financially the writing was on the wall for Sega at that point when the Dreamcast was released so what could have been a redemption arc for them was a swan song at best. They took too many hard Ls during their bleak 3 years with the Saturn and it set them back big time. As you said, it died too soon and it couldn't be helped. Even if the Dreamcast managed to be successful, Sega still probably would've bowed out of the console market and with Microsoft's Xbox being a new entrant into the race couldn't possibly compete with 3 other contenders let alone the King of the Mountain at the time, the Playstation brand.

[@caseyhayes4590]

For anyone who bought it on day one it was one of the most successful consoles of all time. $200 for a machine that destroyed every other system on the planet for at least 18 months, maybe a full two years or 2.5 years when you consider it took PS2 a while to build up a library.

[@yournightmare9999]

Probably scenario will be that PlayStation 2, Dreamcast, Xbox, Gamecube.

[@ElricSowrd]

I remember the previous Video. Shenmue and First Person Shooters were made for Dual Analog Sticks after playing the HD Versions of Shenmue I and II.

[@Palendrome]

You watch these videos and start to understand why people like playing on original hardware so much. Ports to future consoles from old ones, or even emulators, a good percentage of the time are not accurately showing the game as it was intended.

[@SalivatingSteve]

I don't think the PS2 has a lower resolution necessarily, but aliased. The Dreamcast has cleaner video output because it supports anti-aliasing. Sony has always been awful when it comes to anti-aliasing support and their consoles are notorious for jaggies.

[@ibrohiem]

I think some of the games looked sharper because the dreamcast supported better texture compression. But towards the end of the ps2 life cycle it's clear that the ps2 was outputting games that probably could never be done on dreamcast.

[@ZinhoMegaman]

It's not Antialiasing, it's Field Rendering, it uses 2 224/240 horizontal lines/rows with interlace to make it looks like 512x448/480 or 640x448/480. Timesplitters for example, if you disable interlace the game renders in 512x240 progressive mode and you can see the vertical resolution is in reality 240p, the same used on 5th gen consoles, like PS1, Saturn and Nintendo 64, but when using field rendering i looks like 480 pixels but interlaced. This is the reason why GSM don't work on all PS2 games or have undesired results in some.

[@ZinhoMegaman]

@@ibrohiem It's because 96% of the Dreamcast games support 480p and even in 480i they are rendered in full 640x480, thats the bigger difference on the PS2 vs all other 6th gen consoles, Dreamcast, Gamecube and Xbox all renders games in full 640x480, but PS2 renders all games internaly at 512x224, unless the game supports 480p, then the PS2 renders these games in 512x448, 512x480, 640x448 and full 640x480, but sadly using field rendering was the much easier way, so only some 300+ games are 480p capable.

[@SalivatingSteve]

@@ZinhoMegaman so basically it’s interlaced rendering.

[@ZinhoMegaman]

@@SalivatingSteve Yes, but people who knows the in and out of the PS2 says it's fields that are rendered and not lines, I don't know more details about the technique, only that It renders 2 half resolution fields that are mixed using interlace. Using the PCSX2 emulator it's possible to see It in action and use deinterlace pnach to disable It entirely, this is how I play TimeSplitters without field rendering. But in the case of Tekken Tag Tournament and Ridge Racer 5, field rendering is not needed, If you force 480p with GSM or use the progressive patch on PCSX2 in both games they are truly rendered in 640x448, I think Namco used It because first PS2 SDK doesn't have progressive modes from what I know.

[@djm9937]

I'd love to see the comparisons between consoles with PS2 using GSM. The majority of these games playing in 480p with GSM look amazing compared to standard 480i :)

[@SalivatingSteve]

I think that's why some of these PS2 games look jaggy or pixelated, is due to them being output at 480i. There is the option of component cables on PS2 as well.

[@Deliveredmean42]

@@SalivatingSteve Yeah, surprise with the lack of component comparisons. Both console did offer such options, but I am sure many users always use the standard cables that came with it.

[@SalivatingSteve]

@@Deliveredmean42 I didn't even have official component cables. I used one from gamestop that supports PS2, Wii, and Xbox 360 component.

[@Deliveredmean42]

@@SalivatingSteve Neither did I. The second brand cables I bought works pretty well at least.

[@ManOfAttitudeLP1998]

Nah on Manhunt 2 for example in 1080i on an HD CRT I still see jaggies but resolution and game looks clean besides that the PS2 never had good AA OG Xbox got it though like x4

[@jaya_surya_a5118]

the dynamic shadow in dreamcast is huge development at the time

[@thatcowboy89]

Im so glad u uploaded this, Thank you. Ive been waiting for the part 2 for ages man

[@RookerVision]

You're welcome

[@Nekodaisuki88]

For some reason all the games I’ve seen on other peoples PS2 seemed blurry back then, when my Dreamcast output a clear picture. We all had CRT TVs with SCART and PAL/SECAM (so VGA wasn’t the factor here, I didn’t have it). It always perplexed me because even though I had the Dreamcast, I know that the PS2 was more powerful, after all it cost more at launch and was release years later. It looked to me as the PS2 had worse interlacing of something and that ruined the image.

[@cbrmax4192]

definitely, video output on the DC was great and with the VGA box was outstanding! playing Quake 3 online with keyboard and mice (no need to buy the expensive official ones, adaptors were available) was just priceless..!!!

[@christianweber9089]

The DC had hardware anti aliasing unit, the ps2 software unit. The reason, why the DC was sharper.

[@cbrmax4192]

@@christianweber9089 mmmh I don't think it was a matter of anti aliasing, even with aliasing the image was clearer and more vivid than any other system I had at the time (PS2 and Xbox), but I could be wrong... DC was just a fantastic console with a amazing game library, even from the beginning, I never bought so many games on any other system ♥️

[@hitkid2456]

Do keep in mind Dreamcast had twice the VRAM, so it's not that inferior. That much of a difference is certainly noticeable in the textures.

[@Asphodellife]

Indeed, DC always looked crisp with 'clean' colors. PS2 seemed to look a bit blurry with drap colors most of the time.

[@UE5n00b]

Having a Dreamcast was like having an actual arcade at home, with the same level of graphics

[@karlimo4034]

I owned both. Dreamcast had better picture quality, PS2 was always too blurry. And Dremcast had better colors, so lively, PS2 colors looked washed out in comparison. In the sound department Dreamcast was a lot better, the clarity of the sound was top notch, with PS2 I had to turn the TV´s volume up all the time. Now, talking about rough power, of course PS2 was a lot better. It´s hard to imagine Dreamcast hadling games like Metal Gear Solid 3 substance, God of War or Shadow of the Colossus. So I call it a draw.

[@DontKnowDontCare6.9]

Draw LOL Sega's worst selling console versus the reigning best selling console. At the end of the day, hardware power is useless versus profits. Just ask Sega (again) between Game Gear and GameBoy.

[@ChimpRiot]

The colors on the Dreamcast versions looked better in every game here, except MDK2.

[@ChristianStout]

Did you use composite, or component video to record this? Both consoles look way better with component.

[@turnbasedtoddy7664]

Man, I had no idea you where over here doing gods work. Keeps these videos coming, these are great!

[@tiagomnm]

Nice video, was curious about how things stacked up in the real world. For 3rd party games like MDK2, it seems the DC biggest VRAM buffer gives it higher quality textures but the texture filtering itself is probably just bilinear. They seem to both support anisotropic but DC probably takes too big of a hit, while most PS2 games seem to have it. For MDK2, they probably could have used the higher polygon throughput of the PS2 to improve some stuff, of which NFL 2K2 is a perfect example. It was also released after DC being discontinued, so more dev work put into making PS2 a first choice platform. Overall, what I am surprised at the lower res of some of the PS2 games, which might be a 480i issue but I recall something about early games running lower res but high fps. Some for sure are running 448 vertical res, looking very blurry when the framebuffer is scaled afterwards. That might have been a big issue for release games and some time afterwards.

[@MizfitZer0]

Just like how the megadrive/genesis was 2 years older than the snes and still stood toe to toe with it, the dreamcast was 2 years older than the ps2 and went toe to toe with it and often was the superior version. Sega really was ahead of their time every gen

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

@Dean Satan You're oversimplifying. The SNES is just designed to do a few things very well - color depth, transparencies, and absurdly large sprites, for example. This, unfortunately, required cost cutting sacrifices elsewhere, and the bottlenecks are just one of the many issues. Another is that you can only use two sprite tile sizes at the same time, and unlike the Megadrive, you can't turn background tiles into sprites - which was a handy trick for getting a performance boost. This leads to a lot of wasted resources on sprites that are often too small and too many or too big and need to be masked. With that said, the Amiga's doing a lot of smoke and mirrors to hide its weaknesses. Minus copper tricks, you're dealing with 32 colors for the actual game itself. And software sprites kill frame rates, unless you're a genius coder and careful of the demands you're making on the hardware. It's completely exposed when it tries to handle Streetfighter 2, with 6 different attack buttons and demands for instant access to a ton of animation frame data. You're limited to choosing between unplayable trash or something that looks like a Master System port. (Super.) In the same way, the Genesis can outpace the SNES....especially when the SNES is using SlowROMs to boot the cpu into a strangled "compatibility mode" so third parties can actually turn a profit. But that investment into color depth really paid off when pre-rendered sprites and digitized images started becoming popular. Suddenly, the popular belief was that the Genesis was obsolete - it's reputation wouldn't be restored until internet video comparisons between entire ROM libraries became popular. And even now, too many people still think the SNES runs in a higher resolution. (Okay, that one just proves Nintendo hardware fans are a bit stupid, and have no idea they're singing the praises of RPM Racing.....'s backgrounds and lot of menu screens. The point still stands.)

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

​@Dean Satan The 68000 and the 5A22 aren't directly comparable by clockspeed. The 5A22, being a 65C816 variant, can achieve more in a single cycle. It's similar to the situation between the Z80 and 6502. The original DMG Gameboy isn't multiple times faster than the NES and C64. Neither is the Colecovision. Anyways, thanks for agreeing that the Amiga is more flexible than the SNES, No Second Prize and Hunter are the best polygon engines on stock 16 bit hardware....if we ignore the X68000. You should have quit while you were ahead. Not sure how you decided all the gradient sky copper tricks mean you can ignore the 32 color limits that expose Mortal Kombat 2? It's considered top tier for both systems, in case you were hoping to hide behind the Amiga's reputation for terrible arcade ports. Once again, the SNES is a specialized machine. It's why it can run Smash TV without issue. And why you're stuck pretending that Mr. Nutz is a better game than the Donkey Kong Country series.

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

​@Dean Satan If you're going to claim HAM solves the Amiga's color limitations, then you should at least make sure the Amiga community isn't willing to explain to curious folk like me, why it was mostly used for digitized pictures. You might have better spent all that wasted time learning how the DMA channels work in the SNES, since you think everything had to be run through that narrow databus first. Or by talking to people who've actually played MK II for the Amiga 500. Their reviews aren't as glowing as yours. The term "great for the platform" keeps coming up when talking about controls and animation. But exaggerating Nintendo's flaws while overlooking the limitations of other hardware is your only trick. It's why you don't want to tackle the PS2's dropping frames vs. the Gamecube or the Dreamcast's polygon count limitations. Honestly, I'm not sure why you were begging for that debate. Face it: you're the Ben Shapiro of the console wars. You ambush people who don't understand the subject, and try to attack anyone who calls you out. Because your arguments don't really hold up when examined. It's no different whether folks like you call me a Nintendo fanboy when I defend the SNES or a Sega fanboy when I defend the Genesis and Sega CD. You're all the exact same thing, in the end. It upsets that you every platform was a compromise of strengths and weaknesses. Because that's complicated. And you don't know how to deal with complications.

[@cameronabshire1195]

​@@juststatedtheobvious9633 I didn't know the GC had a problem with poly counts. I always thought it went toe-to-toe with PS2 in that one aspect. It becomes harder and harder to compare them the deeper you delve into their libraries and their theoretical rendering limits. Ports from a native console to other consoles almost always have budget/time constraints that disallow seeing what both consoles could do with a given product at its best. To my knowledge the GC's main limitation was its GPU being fixed-function so you were basically just playing with pre-set shaders and their parameters, whereas on PS2 (and Xbox?) you could create truly new effects. In practice this didn't seem to mean much. Trying to wring new "shaders" out of the PS2 came at a huge performance loss, with only a few tricks able to stand up to a framerate test, but generally it could do almost everything the GC could do given enough dedication. A few GC games showed off more extensive normal mapping than what is possible on PS2 (best example is FF Crystal Chronicles). I know there were 2 examples of PS2 using normal maps but they were very limited, can't remember the games atm. PS2 could pull off some impressive soft shadows, Silent Hill 2 and ESPECIALLY Harry Potter Chamber of Secrets, I have no idea how they did those shadows wth? They have a hard center and soft penumbra, most games can't do that today! Other than that there's the whole fillrate thing, the only example of it being fully utilized (that I know of) is the SH2 fog layers. I'm not sure the fillrate ever got much practical use considering all the other bottlenecks there were to contend with on PS2. Hi my ADHD meds kicked in this morning, how are you? 😅

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

@@cameronabshire1195 I'm good. My Ritalin is a quick fix it, even if it only lasts a few hours before kicking my skull in on the way out. I miss the Concerta. Anyways, you misread. I said the Dreamcast has the raw polygon count issues. When it comes to Gamecube games, just look at what Capcom got out of RE4 vs. the PS2.

[@shenmuebaloff]

How about Grandia 2 Dreamcast vs PS2, Marvel vs Capcom 2 Dreamcast vs PS2, Dead or Alive 2 Dreamcast vs PS2, Capcom vs SNK 2 Dreamcast vs PS2 (this one is special cause it has crossplay with Dreamcast version) and Rez Dreamcast vs PS2 that would be great to watch

[@nefilim5800]

The ps2 version of Grandia II was just a awful port of the Dreamcast version, not really a fair comparison.

[@hitkid2456]

"Sworn enemies... Take that! Sky Dragon Slash! You shall be defeated!!!"

[@mackalan]

I has a theory, the beta version of GTA 3 that is more colorful and has very poor draw distance, is the GTA 3 for Dreamcast that Rockstar planned in first instance. Makes much sense, because the Dreamcast can't handle much draw distance in its games, 4x4 evo is a example.

[@SalivatingSteve]

4x4 Evo is terrible.

[@Foxlum]

4x4 EVO is a Windows CE game, CE games were usually really terrible and unoptimized.

[@jonpirovsky]

That makes little sense. Shenmue I and II, as well as Omikron prove that the DC was more than capable of dealing with a GTA... Had it survived till 2002, it probably would have happened.

[@joacosnm]

@@jonpirovsky I agree

[@mackalan]

@@Foxlum But why the PS2 version has much more draw distance?

[@apexRoar98]

3:54 - The reflection on the helmet on the PS2 is just an environment map, which the DC could have certainly done better because of its superior video memory pool. In reality, the PS2 version was given priority and reworked, while the DC version was just and update on the previous year's NFL2K1.

[@FirstLast-rb5zj]

The Dreamcast had something magic with the graphics I can't really explain. I had a PowerVR card for my PC a long long time ago although a better one than the DC had. It eventually either broke or I needed to upgrade. I can't remember but I got another card much much more powerful in theory. However, everything just looked kind of off with it. There was something that graphics system did, I know not what that make things just look a certain way that was better. I think being sharper was part of it but there seemed to be something else as well. This is a bit of an issue today. A lot of stuff is standardised. Back then you had distinct effects that don't seem to be easily reproduceable. If you look at how games looked on the Kyro II 64MB you might be surprised. This is something people completely overlook. They do synthetic tests and track FPS but miss how things actually look. There was something funny going on with the Kyro II. After replacing it and then playing a game with a much more powerful card in the same settings it didn't actually look as good. Something was off. It was kind of dull and a little smudged or something.

[@DP12321]

Would like to see an Unreal Tournament comparison video! Loved playing that and Quake 3 online on Dreamcast.

[@stucazzo2000]

Even with PS2's dual analog controllers, I felt the game still played better on the Dreamcast.

[@ar13f1992]

Ahhh people talking Dreamcast better than PS2 but I grew up with Playstation 2, I didn't recognize Dreamcast as a child so PS2 still better all the way for me

[@slikdarelic]

2:47.. there's no crowd on the PS2 bcuz they used the remaining processing power on the TV screen and the swinging bandana.. hahaha..

[@NobodyAtAll420]

said it was about graphics and brought up the controls anyway lol

[@777Eliyahu]

The biggest design flaw on the Dreamcast was the lack of blast processing. This highly advance computational technology did wonders for the Genesis/Megadrive, and its absence on later consoles was a glaring flaw. Had they included and marketed that for the Dreamcast, I have no doubt that the public would have bought that up over the PS2 and its novelty DVD player.

[@DontKnowDontCare6.9]

The biggest flaw is actually support of MIL CDs. Yknow.. The ones that made piracy easy on the DC. Marketing blast processing for the Genesis didnt really work. Because the SNES still sold more. Almost 10 million more.

[@N1C0YA]

Love this channel. It's like watching a t.v show about my childhood gaming years. Cant put a price on it at all. Appreciate the hard and cool work. Dreamcast 4 life 🤜🏼🤛🏼🔥💯💯

[@erickcontreras113]

I love these sega dreamcast and ps2 comparison

[@IngeldGaming]

Dreamcast released 2 years before ps2 and still looks better in most games due to superior texture filtering and higher resolution.

[@Nick_Lavigne]

It would have been neet to see finished copies of the cancelled Max Payne and GTA3 on the dreamcast. now that would have been really interesting.

[@pattrell5257]

When I first saw a DC in action after getting it, I was like this was the last console I'll ever have to get. It was that much better than anything before it. Sonic Adv, Marvel VS Capcom 2, Crazy Taxi, and NFL 2K series?! And, the PS2 came after it(almost 2 yrs later), but did not look quite as good! I did go on to purchase the GC later, but the DC lit up the gaming fancy! After that, DC was how future cpnsoles would be measured!

[@kevinfromsales9445]

I really like your comparisons, will you redo Def Jam fight for NY some day?

[@RookerVision]

I already did. Be warned. I rapped whole video

[@kevinfromsales9445]

@@RookerVision I know and it was a cool idea but some prefer your more serious comparisons so maybe you can revisit that game sometime?

[@exaltedb]

With MDK2, the Dreamcast seemingly using mip mapping in that game didn’t seem as such a good idea with the low resolution textures, as the mipmapping just blues them out

[@GacMan47]

Dreamcast should have survived and triumphed. I wish I contributed and bought one. The only reason people bought a PS2 was the DVD playback.

[@TurboLazer007]

And another amazing video!!! Thanks for your work 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@RookerVision]

Thank you

[@khuzaimaakram]

Let's go my favorite KZbinr is back keep up the good work 👍

[@RookerVision]

Hahaha. Thank you.

[@paldinox1]

IMO The resolution on Dreamcast really makes up for the higher poly models and texture detail on PS2. Dreamcast games just look better on a modern display.

[@computadoramatriz6819]

No

[@Hpalhazred]

Nope, compare DC games to Gran Turismo 4, GOW II, FFX, Tekken5 on modern TVs.

[@paldinox1]

@@Hpalhazred I have played all of those games before on my modern TV, and the video connection on the PS2 makes them look dark, washed out, and blurry. I can fully acknowledge the PS2 is the more powerful console, but the video output is atrocious and doesn't at all do the games justice. If you really want to see how good PS2 games can look, get yourself a BC PS3, its night and day compared to a PS2.

[@iwanttocomplain]

From a historical perspective the consoles should be compared on a crt using rf connection to see how that image compares as that accounts for the majority of use cases.

[@paldinox1]

@@iwanttocomplain Maybe not RF, both consoles shipped with composite cables, and trying to capture RF video off a CRT would be a nightmare.

[@markula_4040]

Do you want to know why the Dreamcast holds it own and sometimes looks better with these very specific games? Because they were made for the Dreamcast and ported to the PS2. Anytime you take an existing game and put on a different system with different architect, you are going to get diminished results even if the system is a bit more capable. If all of these games were instead made from the ground up for the PS2, ALL of them would look much better than these ported versions.

[@yanceyboyz]

Except the Dreamcast was a 480p machine with over 90% of its library hitting that number and the PS2 was a 480i machine, which is half the resolution. Plus Dreamcast has double the vram and on board AA. The more you know. Hardly any games on ps2 are 480p, it had the least for that whole generation, that's a fact you can Google.

[@meep5386]

​@@yanceyboyz Dreamcast could only ever dream(pun intended) to pull off a game like God of War 2 or Gran Turismo 4. Once devs better learned the ins and outs of PS2 it became clear it pushed games that Dreamcast could've never pulled off.

[@yanceyboyz]

@@meep5386 so your argument is that games look better on PS2 after years of letting developers get used to the system. But the Dreamcast which already had higher resolution and actual AA in games from day one.....wouldn't have looked better....after letting developers have the same amount of years to get used to the system....weird angle but ok. We will pretend that sonic adventure 2 doesn't have hugely better graphics than the first one, in just 2.5 years....

[@RandomlyDrumming]

Compared to PS2, which enjoyed way longer life on the market, we can only theorize what Dreamcast was capable of, since it was so short on the market and the devs didn't really have time to learn all the ins and outs of the hardware. Dreamcast had certain advantages compared to PS2, like more VRAM (which translated to higher resolutions and better AA and AF), but the PS2 as a whole, had more capable hardware that could push more polygons and do more complex things (lighting, for example). Some speculate that SEGA should've gone with the hardware design from SEGA of America, which was to be based on IBM or Motorola CPU and 3dfx GPU. And while the CPU that SEGA eventually settled on (Hitachi SH-4) was quite powerful for its time and comparable to IBM's and Motorola's stuff, many argue that 3dfx's solution in the GPU department would've been better. Not just because it would've been more powerful than NEC's PowerVR (that Dreamcast eventually ended up with), but it would've generated more support from devs, especially EA.

[@robotfan]

gotta also factor in that it didn't have to render polys off screen. if used correctly, it could definitely get even better than we already saw in it's short lifespan. also DC hand hardware fx that were never even used in games. tony hawk almost didn't have vids play on the projectors cause the dev kits hadn't been updated with the feature. long story short, DC had much more potential than people give it credit for!

[@goodall1bay]

Had both back in ghe day and it amazed everyone that the dreamcast looked sharper and colours looked better. The ps2 always had a subtle blur

[@DjStiv3]

i hope one day someone does a port of like gta3 and see what the possibilities coud be with it. And what it could have been.

[@RE4-Station]

Amazing Video as always!

[@RookerVision]

Thanks again!

[@yashy2x]

I have been waiting for your video ❤️ you didn't disappoint as always great vid ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@RookerVision]

Thank you

[@retroboy-fh1ji]

Dc was better on textures, sound, antialiasing, tile rendering and vram mainly. But ps2 was stronger in almost every other way. Though dc and ps2 are much more closer than say, ps2 to gamecube and ps2 to xbox. Shenmue 2 and test drive le mans 24 hours looks so good and comparable to midlife ps2/gc/xbox games

[@sunilbassi7181]

I am not sure if a component cable is being used for the ps2 demonstration. For North American ps2 models, a good quality component cable really shows off the ps2’s capabilities. If you use a good quality component cable on the ps2 and use a crt tv, the graphics are noticeably better than a composite cable hookup.

[@yanceyboyz]

It doesn't stop the game having a 240p resolution though or 480i (same thing) Dreamcast was 480p over vga and looks stunning to this day on crt

[@ChristopherStendeck]

I'm currently on a Dreamcast kick, having blown the dust off the little white box, replaced the battery and recalibrated the laser. I bought a RetroFighters StrikerDC controller, which I am enjoying, an HDMi adapter so it looks better on my modern TV, and am rebuilding my collection currently. Like many here, I think the Dreamcast had the potential to be a serious generation 6 contender, but fell short for want of a few small things: It needed a DVD drive. DVD's were exploding at the time and it would have added huge value to be able to play DVD movies, as well as larger single disc games. A more conventional, i.e slightly smaller and more ergonomic controller, with 2 sticks, perhaps built-in rumble too. And better support, at least from SEGA themselves, with games. There were some notable franchises that could have had fantastic next gen sequels but never materialised.

[@piloto88ed]

Dreamcast, the most underrated console of the history.

[@ShadboY44444]

In many ways, the Dreamcast looks better and faster on the graphics than the PlayStation 2. I think that if SEGA had been lucky with the console back then and it would have found success, maybe SEGA would be a giant now (or at least making its own consoles).

[@ggwp4053]

Sega are idiots for not choosing a DVD drive

[@DoggoneNexus]

Why do the controls make MDK2 a tie if this is purely a graphical comparison?

[@sjftech]

One thing you didn't mention is that Quake III on the PS2 runs at (mostly) 60fps whereas it's 30 on the Dreamcast so depending on your preference of image quality or frame rate the PS2 might be the better version.

[@yanceyboyz]

PS2 is half the resolution though.

[@sjftech]

@@yanceyboyz Yes, hence why I said "depending on your preference of image quality or frame rate"...

[@yanceyboyz]

@@sjftech my bad, thought you were referring to the PS2 frame rate being higher too, I read it wrong.

[@Charlie-eq3dj]

The reason you didn't see a GTA on DC is not because a version couldn't have been dumbed down a bit for the console but because the GDROM (1GB) didn't have the storage capacity to house the entire came compared to a DVD (4.7GB) and also it could not stream the content fast enough as it was needed.

[@The_Prizessin_der_Verurteilung]

Wrong. GTA 3 was developed on Dreamcast and the map was finished in 2001, the Dreamcast was discontinued in 2001, so Rockstar scrapped development for it and offered exclusivity to Xbox who declined due to poor sales of the previous 2 games. Then it went multiplatform to all except the Dreamcast and GameCube. It had nothing to do with the GD-ROMs at all, there are multiple games that use multiple discs, like Shenmue, Headhunter, or even Rayman 3 on PC.

[@Charlie-eq3dj]

@@The_Prizessin_der_Verurteilung Look at that. It looks like you're right, it was originally developed for the Dreamcast. I would imagine there would have been some upgrades once development switched to PS2. I wish there was gameplay footage so we could compare. Thanks for the correction.

[@spawntheeeternal8140]

I understood specific things in this video about how the PS2 out preformed the Dreamcast. I saw at times things were a bit opinionated. When it comes to the ps2 specifically games actually made for the Dreamcast were optimized exclusively for Dreamcast because of arcade Naomi hardware. The hype level for the PS2 prior to it's release was a partially a success to Sony. The console did well in Japan and also America.

[@gamedad7336]

Dreamcast is hooked up via vga, and I'm guessing the ps2 is composite? Point being they should've been compared using the same connection. I'm sure if you had a similar connection it would've been a different outcome. Just saying.

[@yanceyboyz]

90% of DC library tenders at 480p 90% of PS2 library renders at 480i or lower. Best cables in the world aren't gonna save it when it's running at 50% resolution.

[@ivofernandes88]

What killed Dreamcast was Piracy, period.

[@wvecst]

Dreamcast was not that much less powerful, and could have rivaled ps2 with the right production teams. Just simply didn't have the backing line that Sony had.

[@kapeklaw4799]

Keep these videos up dude they're awesome

[@GeorgeWeeman]

I'd like you to do a side by side comparison with (DC) Gandia 2 vs (PS2) Grandia 2. Both versions had their differences that made them unique to each other.

[@roberto1519]

Would be so cool if SEGA pushed the Dreamcast a few more years, at least up to 2004 and if it did manage to get the GTA trilogy for some sort of miracle, it would have sold a lot. But the PS1 didn't not only destroy it, yes, the PS1, the PS2 came backwards compatible with all PS1 games, and it did have a DVD drive, which could play movies, etc, so the Dreamcast really hadn't ANY chance the way it was released before it should. So, the conclusion is always that they rushed the Saturn before it should and the Dreamcast was ejaculated the same way, if the DC was released two years later, with a DVD drive and a better gamepad, then it could have had a chance.

[@armorwolf7934]

People don’t usually say what the PlayStation 2 does right with multi plats because I guess people don’t like praising the highest selling console but it’s cool you said some good things the PlayStation 2 did.

[@hairyasstruman2257]

Grandia II would've been a great comparison. Dreamcast had the better offering, in that case

[@nefilim5800]

Not really a fair comparison, the ps2 version was just an awful port of Dreamcast version, It has nothing to do with the console's capability.

[@ridiculous_gaming]

With the PS1 analogue dual stick out, I do not know how Sega released the Dreamcast with only one.

[@lazarushernandez5827]

Sega should have known, they themselves had optional twin stick controller on the Saturn for the game Virtual On. I believe there was a DC version of this controller for the sequel, Virtual On: Oratorio Tangram.

[@The_Prizessin_der_Verurteilung]

Y'know the PS1 originally had none. The thumbsticks weren't there until Sony revised the Dualshock, and the PS also didn3D games too. One is better than none, but I really wish they'd gave the DC a second one too.

[@yanceyboyz]

You forgot that Dreamcast came out in 1998, the dualshock had only just come out.

[@arghagaming631]

Nice comparison

[@izzykazoo7569]

The dreamcast CPU was almost 100 MHZ slower than the PS2, and just the fact that it could even compete in terms of graphics and gameplay with very little slowdown is impressive. It was released almost a year earlier than the ps2 as well. That says alot

[@yanceyboyz]

1998 Vs 2000

[@V3ntilator]

I always preferred Dreamcast and GameCube over PS2.

[@mr_swordkilla24]

Rip Dreamcast 1998-2004

[@xavierwilliams2228]

Could madden 01 be done on the Dreamcas? I’ve always wondered.

[@SLYZANY]

The real funny part is Dreamcast was launched way before PS2 in like 98 Dreamcast was available during PS1 and N64 era..

[@JesusChrist-em1iz]

It did launch before ps2 but I always viewed it as a competitor to ps2. Mostly because in North America it released a year before ps2. I did not get a ps2 at launch. I did however have a Dreamcast at launch and to this very day I still prefer my Dreamcast over the ps2. Ps2 does have some great looking games on it though. I remember ClockTower 3 and the God of War games looking great on it. PS2 does seem to suffer from antialiasing issues in some games and the graphics sometimes were blurry which I don't know why. Maybe connected to the backwards compatibility with ps1.

[@ennohex]

Ports. Let the fanboy battles commence. I felt like I was clickbaited.

[@caseyhayes4590]

Ken Kutaragi fooled nearly every American gamer into thinking PS2 in game graphics would look identical to movies. Turns out it wasn't much more powerful than DC and people who waited for PS2 missed out on a few years of amazing gaming on an affordable system. PS2 ended up with a great library, but man being a DC owner on day one was insanely awesome. I had the VGA box that was HD gaming years before it would be norm.

[@axilmar254]

"Ken Kutaragi fooled nearly every American gamer into thinking PS2 in game graphics would look identical to movies." Exactly this. I remember all the magazines of that era drooling over PS2's cinematic graphics and the rumors that it would do 60 million polygons per second. A secondary reason that the PS2 was so successful, was the dvd player. At least in my country, Greece, the PS2 and PS2 games were sold at video stores: you could buy a PS2, or rent it, and rent your favorite movies/games for the weekend.

[@Shroomamite]

Dreamcast was like the Playstation 1.5

[@kylevasquezsantos6457]

Very detailed. I loved your channel.❤️

[@yearight5303]

The PS2 was a joke. The Dreamcast was so much better.

[@TheMamaluigi300]

One pretty huge thing you neglected to point out on Quake III is that while the PS2 version looks worse, it runs at a considerably higher frame rate.

[@palemonvazquez1383]

wich version is better ready to rumble 2 round 2 ps2 or dreamcast

[@Ettdutubkonto]

Is it not worth noting that Quake 3 on PS2 runs at twice the frame rate of the DC version?

[@adrianolouback1550]

Looney tunes space race and Quake 3 I played in the early 2000's on Dreamcast, a lot of fun. I also played them currently on my pc.

[@scottmichaelhedge5055]

In comparing Ready 2 Rumble, you didn't mention the PS2 version having real-time shadows.

[@benkeith4073]

Dead or Alive 2 Dreamcast vs PS2 that game really shows what a really optimised Dreamcast title looks like. For sure the PS2 was more capable but Dreamcast image a texture quality could be really nice. Really bright beautiful games shone on Dreamcast like Crazy Taxi 1 and 2, DOA2, Soul Caliber, Virtua Tennis, Shenmue, Jet Set Radio, MSR, REZ, PsO, Quake3, Ikaruga. 2D stuff was excellent Guilty Gear, SF3, Alpha3 MVC 1and2. PS2 had clear technical advantages and the benefit of maturing tools, time and development experience which resulted in some absolute stunners It was a good time to be a gamer!

[@manmonkee]

I have a deep abiding love for the DC, first time i ever saw individual fingers on a game character ( blew my mind) but although I feel nothing for my PS2 I probably spent 10 times more hours play on it.

[@s727r]

Important to remember that a lot of devs struggled with the PS2 hardware, GS, EE (which had 8 seperate units) and two VUs it took a lot of effort to get them working together and some games didn't really utilise its full power. Later games eliminated the hazy looking graphics. Never understood sonys obsession with complex hardware. Correction: the VUs were part of the main processor.

[@crust5909]

You forgot to mention that Quake 3 is running below 30 fps on the Dreamcast and then its running at 60 fps on the PS2. So its a not a fair graphical comparission.

[@christianweber9089]

Sry, but this is not true. Quake 3 runs at dreamcast with 60 fps!! I had play this game in dreamcast then, and I owned actually since then.

[@crust5909]

@@christianweber9089 type "Quake 3 Arena Dreamcast Framerate test" on youtube and see for yourself. I'm sorry that you can't tell the obvious difference between 60 and 30 fps even in this video.

[@sandmangreen8743]

@@christianweber9089 it runs at 30 fps on the Dreamcast with drops to 20 fps. There is a framerate test of the dreamcast version on youtube by Mad Tech Gaming, look it up.

[@yanceyboyz]

Ps2 was half the resolution though to achieve this (240p)

[@48hourrecordsteam45]

The extra space of the dvd disk and the extra poliygons give ps2 an edge

[@CoolsBreeze]

I remember going to a games store every week and the Dreamcast was always on display with demo games. I wish I had the money back then to buy one. That thing was so powerful and small.

[@theobserver86]

Awesome concept I hope you have some GameCube comparison vids That console was more powerful than alot of ppl seem to realize