![]() Ītari attempted to extend the lifespan of the system with the Atari Jaguar CD add-on, with an additional 13 games, and emphasizing the Jaguar's price of over US$100 less than its competitors. Underwhelming sales further eroded the console's third-party support. However, the multi-chip architecture, hardware bugs, and poor tools made writing games for the Jaguar difficult. The Jaguar was an important system for Atari after the company shifted its focus from computers - having ceased development of its Atari ST - back to consoles. The system's library ultimately comprised only 50 licensed games.ĭevelopment of the Atari Jaguar started in the early 1990s by Flare Technology, which focused on the system after cancellation of the Atari Panther console. The Jaguar launched with Cybermorph as the pack-in game, which received divisive reviews. Powered by two custom 32-bit processors – Tom and Jerry – in addition to a Motorola 68000, Atari marketed it as the world's first 64-bit game system, emphasizing its 64-bit bus used by the blitter. Part of the fifth generation of video game consoles, it competed with the 16-bit Sega Genesis, the Super NES and the 32-bit 3DO Interactive Multiplayer that launched the same year. It might have only shipped on DVD while the lesser port also shipped on CDs.The Atari Jaguar is a home video game console developed by Atari Corporation and released in North America in November 1993. I don't remember exactly but it was much harder to get at the time. There was one that was a port of the 360 version, and I think it was only available with graphics cards or via online retailers or something. One was a port of the PS2/XB/GC version of the game, and it was the retail version. King Kong was also a cross generation title, and the 360 version was one of the best looking early "next gen" titles. The PS2 version via emulation gets a big face lift because the fur shells look better with the added resolution, and the textures don't look as bad with proper filtering. So comparing the demos might not even be representative of what the machines did when the game came out. The issue was resolved in shipping code, and the Xbox version of that looks better overall. Can't remember exactly what, just remember giving my friend a hard time about his mighty Xbox being outdone by the Gamecube. I remember playing the demo for Timesplitters 2 on Xbox after I already owned the retail release on GC and noticed it missing some graphics. ![]() I also don't know if the demo is different than the retail release. I don't know if any version has any exclusive effects or anything, but the Xbox version was the most playable in my experience. The framerate is more stable on Xbox and the texture filtering is better. The thing about the PS2 version is that the framerate isn't all that stable, and the texture filtering is PS2 quality. It's probably the worst port, but still OK for what it is. But I don't think anyone would think it could run Doom 3 and have it look as good as the base Xbox version, much less one with extra memory.Ĭlick to expand.It's a surprisingly good movie tie in game that's decent on every platform it released on. It even has extra frequency to make it even faster. Through Wii, we get a good look at what Gamecube could do with a bunch of extra memory, with real development effort optimizing for the system. Or how about Splinter Cell Double Agent? The Wii version looks a generation behind even though it's technically a generation ahead. I mean, has anyone here looked at the games that were on Xbox (original) and Wii? The Wii port of FarCry is terrible. And Wii, yeah, that didn't hold up next to 360 at all either. You would expect a system that came out later to unilaterally outperform one that is older, but with PS3, that was not the case, as most 360 games looked or ran better, often with quicker load times. It doesn't really matter why something came out later, only that it did. And WiiU released not long before PS4 and Xbox One and struggled to match 360 in many games. The difference between Xbox One and One X is larger than WiiU to Switch, I think. Sure, the newer consoles are better, but it isn't a "normal" generational gap. Within it's own product history Nintendo has done OK, but lets be honest, GC to Wii and WiiU to Switch were almost lateral moves.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |