Originally posted by Jabu
Zero effects or textures, yes. Add textures, especially multiple layers, and the GC totally owns the PS2.
The GC's got that nice hardware 1:6 texture compression system. All in all it's like the Mac of the console world: colourful, compact, awesome power for its stats.
I remember sitting in a classroom full of dual processor G4s with 512mb RAM running Lightwave6 next to single processor P3s with 256mb RAM. I remember the students using the Macs give up in disgust and using the PCs to do the Lightwave stuff and doing only their textures and compositing on the Macs. Turns out that Mac OS9 and 3d are not a match made in heaven.
More on topic, I'd have to disagreee with you about the PS2 and the Gamecube, simply considering the basic fat pipe architecture that the PS2 is based on. Sure, if you try to force a PC style 3d engine on that hardware, it runs like crap (rather like trying to run LW on a Mac). PC style 3d engines, with their dependency on narrow-pipe/fat-buffer hardware, will almost always rule out on systems (like a Gamecube) designed for that sort of thing. On the other hand, a 3d engine optimised for a fat-pipe/small-buffer system, with an emphasis on fast fetches back to mainstorage and a lack of dependency on multiple staged caches, will run like crap on a Gamecube and rock out on a PS2. The basic architecture of the PS2 goes against the grain of every other console that has come before it (all of which are based, initially, on the small computer philosophy). It is based, instead on the same basic computing philosophy of the supercomputer: bandwidth wins. Fat memory pipes, fat graphics pipes and fat pipes back to main storage. The GCN is cute and all, but, by comparison, its kinda limited by its own hardware.
I'll stick with a PS2 and my beloved PC.
