Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread

[Black Tiger]

Not trying to argue with you here, but I want to hear your suggestions of Genesis games that do more impressive tricks. Contra: Hard Corps is one that comes into my mind.

Isn't The Adv. Of Batman & Robin supposed to be harsh killer?

It seems to me that many people on this board think that the Turbo can do basically anything the Genesis can do bar none. My question is this: Why didn't it and if it did why didn't it more often?

I've gone into detail about some of the reasons why before, but to sum it up. The answer is that it didn't need to... and why would it(they)?

Why didn't more Genesis & SNES games try to reproduce massive animated CD-style cinemas with voice and digitize in entire soundtracks in Neo Geo sized carts?

Why does Square spend 100 million dollars to produce and market an RPG that is simpler gameplay-wise than an NES game?

The PC Engine succeeded so well and for so long because of the types of games it had, not the kind it didn't. Once the CD-ROM format took off early on, why would a developer spend more of its time programming in visual tricks for a consumer who's more looking forward to another huge game with beautiful cinemas and yet another killer CD soundtrack? Also, PCE fans obviously settled for games that were just plain fun as well, since there are quite a few hits that aren't aesthetically cutting edge.

Where as the Genesis was battling it out against the SNES, both systems trying to prove how "powerful" they were and trying to cram as much as they could visually into a small cart. So we got more detailed, but repetative graphics with lots of effects inplace of animation(mainly the SNES) to save on space.

The reason why more developers didn't try to go crazy with effects in PC Engine games is the same reason the DS is the most succesful gaming system ever and the PSP is on it's deathbed. As a PCE publisher, you didn't make the big bucks putting out tech demos as games.

And it's all about money in the end. Which is why we saw more tech demo games on Genesis & SNES, because publishers were actually able to make money that way. DKC was marketed for all it's dohickery and Sonic 2 was sold on blast-processing. Where as Tengai Makyou II was marketed for it's gameplay length, voice work, story, music, character design, etc... -as the type of game only the PC Engine could do.

And again, on any console, every time an effect can't technically be done by the same means, it can either be reproduced in a different way(in which case, why does it matter how it was done?) or a different or better, possibly system-specific effect or other upgrade can be used.


Personally, I'd rather play this game-







Than this game-





It's like the Saturn, it may have been capable of doing pretty much anything, but it was hard to program for. So not everyone went the extra mile that some developers did (those who did often called those who didn't "lazy" in interviews). But just because it didn't have more games at the time doing certain things, it doesn't mean that it can't do most of what the N64 and PSX can and did.

But I usually hear people (even PSX & N64 fanboys) say that the Saturn never saw it's full potential. But when it comes to the PC Engine, we get so many people just saying, "the PC Engine can't do it".


Someone mentioned how the Chris Covell demos are nothing special. Well, what makes them so special is that this is just some guy making these for fun, without a development team or dev kit. And look at what he's already come up with. And so often anti-PCE'ers like to say that the PCE has no chance of comparing to the big 2, because is straight up can't do "blankety blank" at all. Well look at all the "blankety blank" some amateur pulled out of the PC Engine's ass.

Here is a game the TurboGrafx-16 could not do 100% (graphically) without major sacrifices:
Castle of Illusion starring Mickey Mouse.

What does this game do that'd require a sacrifice? Someone mentioned a multi-directional background or something. Magical Chase has one, with a couple of uniquely shaped layers floating around inbetween and like 4 times the sprites. Other than doubling the color, I don't know what the difference would be.

Here is a game the Genesis could not do 100% (graphically) without major sacrifices:
Super Castlevania IV

I've never actually played this game, but from what I've heard and seen in screenshots is that there's a level or levels that rotate 360. Didn't Sonic 1 do this in it's bonus rounds, except more detailed and colorful with animated walls?

95% isn't the whole game, so I win. Ranger X officially cannot be done on the PC Engine, as confirmed by a programmer.

With everything that the PC Engine could add, especially on CD, especially with the Arcade Card, wouldn't a PCE port really wind up around 120+%?

Who cares if machine X can't replicate machine Y 100% perfectly? Arguing about it is as pointless as the whole 'Can Mario beat Sonic in a fight' kind of thing.

Exactly! Everyone knows that Bonk would wipe the floor with both of them!
 

Anyways, since it looks like this thread is still going on, I figure I ought to highlight a few more passages from the private AIM conversation that started it all.  Just to put things in perspective...........

Too...  much..  ripe material...  to comment on...

__________________

"I'm not gay, really!"

[GUTS]

In case you guys hadn't picked up on it by now, we were f*cking with Keranu in chat.  Personally I think the PCE could do a decent job of Ranger X, hell honestly I think Lords of Thunder actually looks better.  I doubt there's any games on either system that couldn't be done on the other one with some minor sacrifices.  What I find amazing about Ranger X is what nod mentioned, that it uses basically every graphical trick in the book and puts it all in one awesome mech-blasting package.

And Keranu, Silpheed does use polygons for the player ship, enemies, and most bosses.  That's why they look like complete shit compared to the pre-rendered backgrounds.

The real question here is whether or not the shit, handicapped SNES could do Ranger X or Lords of Thunder, and resounding answer is NO.  That would be like giving speed to a guy in a wheelchair.  So what have we learned by this thread?  The SNES sucks shit while the PCE and Genesis rock it's face off.

[Odonadon]

Okay, I kinda predicted all this in my second post.. but anyway, since Emerald Rocker and GUTS are basing their argument soley on opionion, I thought I'd respond to this post which I thought was kind of funny.

Anyways, since it looks like this thread is still going on, I figure I ought to highlight a few more passages from the private AIM conversation that started it all.  Just to put things in perspective.

(1)
(01:08:06) Keranu: But saying it can't be done on PCE is silly;.
(01:08:16) Emerald Rocker: it can't be done on PCE.

Because..... ?

(2)
(01:15:19) Keranu: But the MIPS is a hard fact.
(01:15:28) Keranu: You can't ignore specs.
(01:15:32) Emerald Rocker: yes you can

You can?  Why?  This is the only piece concrete evidence you would posibly have to support your position, and yet it is to be ignored

(3)
(01:15:38) GUTS: its also a hard fact that that must not matter much since ranger X smashes the pce library
(01:15:49) Keranu: GUTS, you are basing that on your opinion now.
(01:16:03) GUTS: no i'm basing that on the fact that ranger x has too much for the pce to handle
(01:16:04) Keranu: You think Ranger X looks nice, that's YOUR opinion, not fact.
(01:16:12) GUTS: hell it couldn't even handle a decent port of Altered Beast
(01:16:19) Keranu: Ok, now ask a programmer to make a port of it for you.
(01:16:37) Emerald Rocker: the programmers already had their chance at Altered Beast and failed

Let's have a look at SUPERIOR Sega ports ont he PCE shall we, such as After Burner II, Space Harrier, etc.  Altered Beast was an abomination, but that just means the programmers screwed up, not that the PCE couldn't do it.  You say it "couldn't handle a decent port of Altered Beast", well there has never been a decent port of the game so I'm curious how you know that.  Also, I am a little concerned that you would consider PCE's Altered Beast a "decent port".  I was going to give Ranger-X a spin and see what the hype is about, but am starting to re-think that if PCE's Altered Beast is "Decent" to you

(4)
(01:17:37) Emerald Rocker: where's the Contra Hard Corps of the PCE
(01:17:41) GUTS: yeah hard corps would not be possible on the pce
(01:17:48) Keranu: This is ridiculous.

Not sure if you are trying to help Keranu win his argument with this post or what, but to me it looks like you are content on the "It can't handle game X because I say so" position.  Fine, I'll agree with Keranu that the Genesis can't handle 90% of PCE games.  I don't have anything to back this up (other than colour and sprite size differences), but then again this argument isn't based on facts - only opinion.

(5)
(01:23:10) RuninRuder: the turbo might have been "weaker" in effects but it used its strengths optimally, the colorful crisp graphics in rondo and gate for instance, plus brilliant cinemas
(01:23:37) RuninRuder: the snes was "powerful" but used its strengths for absolute shit and crippled its games with flicker and slowdown
(01:23:39) Keranu: Plus processor speed.
(01:24:06) RuninRuder: genesis had some nice effects at times, used better than snes effects, but looked horrible due to limited colors very often
(01:24:12) GUTS: well except that Chrono Trigger is beyond what the turbo could o

It can't do Chrono Trigger because....?  We all know Square spent as much time on the PCE port of Chrono as they did for the SNES version, so it's apparent it couldn't be done.  Wait a minute, I just made that up!

(6)
(01:24:45) Keranu: In fact, you want to see what Metal Slug would look like on Turbo?
(01:24:47) GUTS: they'd have to change all the huge background graphcis to tiles
(01:24:51) Emerald Rocker: weren't the sprites bigger than the Turbo could do?

From what I remember, I seriously doubt it.  I've seen many Turbo games with bigger sprites.  Perhaps this was programming trickery, not sure.

(7)
(01:27:46) GUTS: lets compare Riot zone to Streets of Rage III
(01:27:59) GUTS: no contest, and that's the best the duo could do

Wow, even us PCE experts here didn't know that Riot Zone was the pinacle of the PCE's capabilities.  Good to know.  For a man with nothing to support his argument, you sure know alot about the PCE's capabilities

According to the private AIM chat that started this, the PCE cannot handle:
Chrono Trigger, Contra Hard Corps, Dragon's Fury, F-22, Golden Axe, LHX, Metal Slug, Ranger-X, Streets of Rage 3, or... Altered Beast.

According to reality (not the AIM chat), these should all be possible.  I can't say I liked any of those games listed too terribly much, so I'm not upset that decent ports never made it over.  I'll take my existing PCE library any day over the 10 games the PCE simply "could not ever do".

OD

[Black Tiger]

And Keranu, Silpheed does use polygons for the player ship, enemies, and most bosses.  That's why they look like complete shit compared to the pre-rendered backgrounds.

Does this mean that Sapphire is also using real polygons? At least on the non-boss enemies?

__________________

"I'm not gay, really!"

[Odonadon]

In case you guys hadn't picked up on it by now, we were f*cking with Keranu in chat.  Personally I think the PCE could do a decent job of Ranger X, hell honestly I think Lords of Thunder actually looks better.  I doubt there's any games on either system that couldn't be done on the other one with some minor sacrifices.  What I find amazing about Ranger X is what nod mentioned, that it uses basically every graphical trick in the book and puts it all in one awesome mech-blasting package.

Okay this is starting to make sense, I thought you and Emerold Rocker were either in denial (been caught there before), or just insane

The real question here is whether or not the shit, handicapped SNES could do Ranger X or Lords of Thunder, and resounding answer is NO.  That would be like giving speed to a guy in a wheelchair.  So what have we learned by this thread?  The SNES sucks shit while the PCE and Genesis rock it's face off.

[/quote]

Well, you may be starting another argument here  As a fan of all three systems, owning at least one of each for several years (hell I Even traded my TG16 for a SNES when it first game out), I have to say statements like this is unecessary.  I personally like the SNES better than Genesis, but I still really enjoy the Genesis .  I think all systems could do each other's games, but there would be pro's and con's to each.

I love the Genesis for it's style, and excellent games.  A lot of games use a lot of great animation too (Cyborg Justice).

I love the SNES for it's epic games - RPGs mainly - primarily because of it's good music chip and cool FC it can do, transparencies, whatever.

I love the PCE just because I like it better overall.  I like the games better, I think some of the games have superior graphics to the Genesis or SNES, some have superior music, etc.  Overall I like it better.  Doesn't mean I hate any one system.  I don't think the SNES is shit, I think it's excellent.  Nintendo knows (and knew) what they were doing.  Same with Sega.  Same with Hudson/NEC.

OD

[SignOfZeta]

Also (again) why do people always think that "bright colors" automatically translate to "good graphics"? Personally, I think bright colors are terrible, and that games with very dark colors look far, far better than a game using bright colors.

Well, personally I hate dark games. I like bright autumn leaves more than the leaves you find frozen to the concrete in your driveway in January. Really though that's just a difference in individual taste. MD games are mostly all muddy and brown because of its hardware. The SNES could do muddle and brown, but most games were bright probably because these machines were new at the time and programers were probably excited to be able to use these new colors coming from the FC, or the C64, or whatever.

The PCE has quite a few colorful games, and quite a few drab ones.

I'm not sure why I just typed that last sentence...

[Keranu]

I really liked Black_Tiger's post that discusses why PCE didn't get all the fancy special effect support from developers like the other consoles did. I think Black_Tiger hit the nail with the hammer, it seems most logical to me. Oh and the Bonk 3 screenshots were fantastic !

Well, personally I hate dark games. I like bright autumn leaves more than the leaves you find frozen to the concrete in your driveway in January.

This line rules .

By the way GUTS, I thought you didn't believe what programmers say? I thought you said they were just theorists with no hard facts? Has GUTS gained a soft spot in his heart for the beloved programmers ?

[SignOfZeta]

And Keranu, Silpheed does use polygons for the player ship, enemies, and most bosses.  That's why they look like complete shit compared to the pre-rendered backgrounds.

Does this mean that Sapphire is also using real polygons? At least on the non-boss enemies?

I doubt it. You mean like the really simple blue ones that look like they were stolen from Viewpoint? Those are almost definitely pre-rendered...just as they were in Viewpoint. Without some real technical skills it would be impossible to prove either way, but I think its safe to say they aren't real-time since there really wouldn't be any point in it.

As much as people hoot and toot about Sapphire, from what I can see its your basic shooter with enemies that have a crapload of animation, and sound FX that are really bad. I quite like the game, especially 2 player, but I still think GoT is the best PCE shooter.

[nodtveidt]

Actually, GUTS, I think the SNES graphics processor could handle many of the effects in Ranger-X easier than the Genesis did...and it would have to, because its crap processor would otherwise be too bogged down. As far as LoT goes...sure, it could be ported to the SNES but the music would suffer greatly for it.

Gotta hand it to you though...that escape tactic to save face was classic. Haven't seen that in years, usually people just go down fighting.  

[FM-77]

95% isn't the whole game, so I win. Ranger X officially cannot be done on the PC Engine, as confirmed by a programmer.

With everything that the PC Engine could add, especially on CD, especially with the Arcade Card, wouldn't a PCE port really wind up around 120+%?

Maybe. But that's not the console we're talking about - that's a PC Engine CD. With an add-on.

[Black Tiger]

Also (again) why do people always think that "bright colors" automatically translate to "good graphics"? Personally, I think bright colors are terrible, and that games with very dark colors look far, far better than a game using bright colors.

There's a difference bewteen Bright vs Vibrant colors as well as Dark vs Dull.

But when most people talk about colorful games, I think they usually mean higher color games, which can be very dark or bright and are usually more detailed.

Regardless of palletes and theoretically maximum colors per screen limits, the real determining factor to how well color gets used in games, is all the little bottlenecks along the way.

The PC Engine seems to be able to produce some very nice vibrant graphics, even when a high number of colors technically isn't being used.

SNES games sometimes look kinda drab, even when they're using a high number of colors.

Genesis games sometimes recycle colors, to keep detail in sections, but wind up with clashing colors. But it seems to also have some weird bottle necks that sometimes keep it from getting near it's onscreen color limit.

One day I was making these two screens into gif's for a project and was surprised when I noticed how much color was changed in the Genesis version. The PCE version only uses 68 colors. The Genesis version got cut down to 41, but way more shades were recycled than I would've thought necessary, even with 41 colors.







Anyone know why'd they do this?

95% isn't the whole game, so I win. Ranger X officially cannot be done on the PC Engine, as confirmed by a programmer.

With everything that the PC Engine could add, especially on CD, especially with the Arcade Card, wouldn't a PCE port really wind up around 120+%?

Maybe. But that's not the console we're talking about - that's a PC Engine CD. With an add-on.

So are we now limiting all Genesis and SNES theoretical ports to 8 meg carts?

And does the 32X platform not exist?

The "add-on" is the real system as we all know and love it. It didn't tank like the Sega & Mega-CD and it didn't add any processing power or specialty effects/chips either.

The CD format lasted longer than the PC Engine went without it beforehand and was the main format that all PCE software was produced for.

__________________

"I'm not gay, really!"

[Joe Redifer]

Wow so much to respond to!  I'll do this by memory since going back and quoting everything will take forever.

1 - Castle of Illusion - Yes, the two BG layers are what I am talking about.  One of them would have to be sacrificed and that is quite a large graphical sacrifice in my opinion.  We all agree the Turbo could fake this with sprites to some degree in a few certain areas, but not 100%.  Maybe a better example would be Thunder Force IV since it does put a bunch o' sprites on the screen.

2 - nodvietd (?) - Fanboy argument accepted.  I never meant to imply that you personally said "genesis is teh sux", though.

3 - Vertical scrolling - I have no idea how it works and yes MUSHA uses it to a limited degree.  I have seen games with horizontal line scrolling combined with the 8 pixel vertical scrolling to do a limited rotation effect, so I don't know about scrolling being locked to a horizontal line (but then again I am not an authority on how that was achieved).  You can see this in quite a few later Genesis games like Gunstar Heroes, Adventures of Batman and Robin, Shinobi III (barely).  Hell even Gynough/Wings of Wor used this for the BG(s) in a level and that was a fairly early game, come to remember.

4 - Genesis multi-plane scrolling - This isn't in response to anything, but I'm pretty sure the Genesis can, for example, have layer 1 as the backmost BG layer, then layer 2 overlapping in front of it, and then layer 1 overlapping in front of layer 2, and then layer 2 overlapping in front of layer 1 again, etc etc etc just as long as layer 1 never overlaps itself horizontally and the same with layer 2.  I think the 32X worked in a similar way.  It imported the graphics from the Genesis and layed 32X graphics over that and then output.  However I have seen 32X graphics be between Genesis layers which is pretty amazing considering the layering must be done in analog.

[sunteam_paul]

95% isn't the whole game, so I win. Ranger X officially cannot be done on the PC Engine, as confirmed by a programmer.

With everything that the PC Engine could add, especially on CD, especially with the Arcade Card, wouldn't a PCE port really wind up around 120+%?

Maybe. But that's not the console we're talking about - that's a PC Engine CD. With an add-on.

Considering that aside from CD music, the only thing the CD unit adds is the extra memory in the System cards, then given more storage a HU can do the same as a CD game. Then, you add enough storage to a Megadrive cart and it can do even better looking games. Then you add more to a HuCard and it can do amazing games. Then you add more to...

See where this is going?

[FM-77]

What I mean is that you're comparing small Mega Drive carts to CD-ROM based games.

[sunteam_paul]

What I mean is that you're comparing small Mega Drive carts to CD-ROM based games.

Yeah, what I mean the whole system v system argument is pretty pointless.