Agreed 💯. My best friend back in the day preordered one for the midnight 9/9/99 release. Going from playing Castlevania 64 early that day to playing Soul Calibur and the demo for Power Stone that night was INCREDIBLE!
Due to me being as old as the hills, the greatest technological leap forward for me was the transition from the 8-bit Commodore 64 to the 16-bit Commodore Amiga. That was an absolutely incredible upgrade for me.
@clarenceboddicker6679 i was around for the jump from the NES to Genesis/SNES and it was big but Dreamcast really blew my socks off. Fast, smooth and best of all clean 3d games as good as or better than the arcade!
I feel like consoles always push things a generation too early… ps1/saturn weren’t really ready for 3D and n64 barely was. You still see it today where ps5/xsx claim to be 4k120hz consoles and rarely hit either the resolution or frame rate
I have been playing video games since the very early days of Pong, Space Invaders and Pac-Man. No game has ever impressed me as much as Soul Calibur on Dreamcast. I was stunned. I immediately bought a console just to be able to play that at home. It is still, to this day, my favourite console with an insanely good library of games. The Saturn is my close second favourite. I have always been a massive Sega fanboy. I’m so grateful to the talented people who created excellent emulators on the PC for Model 2 and Model 3 arcade machines, so I can play my favourite Sega games just as I remember them, except at much higher resolutions.
Same here and I always say the Dreamcast was the last great leap in graphics. Coming from PS1/N64 games it was jaw dropping. No other console ever made this kind of leap. I still have my Dreamcast connected to my entertainment centre, now with GDEmu going through an OSSC. For me nothing beats original hardware and controllers.
I had never been a fan of Sega and only owned Nintendo and Sony consoles, but the first time I saw Soul Calibur at a friend's place, I reacted the same way. The Dreamcast would be my first and last Sega system, but it was a wonderful one.
First time I heard that the Dreamcast utilized "deferred rendering," I wondered if that was the console's secret sauce. Now, deferred rendering is considered a significant factor for efficiency.
Everything since about 2016 from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel (a bit later for them) switch to tile based deferred rendering. Today, everyone uses it including Apple and Qualcom.
@@Nintenboy01 I was excited to read about that. I was there when PowerVR was introduced in the 90s...I even have a Gen 1 card... and the tile rendering was such a neat idea. I'm happy PowerVR tech lives on.
The best Dreamcast games looks pleasant even today, back in the days seeing things like soul calibur,doa 2 or shenmue running on screen was simply a jaw dropping experience. It's a shame that the potential of this marvel was far to be exploited when It was discontinued
PowerVR is still around. The GPU in Apple's devices are spiritual successors to PowerVR GPU and for a long time before Apple started making their own GPUs they used PowerVR for their mobile devices . Intel also used them for their iGPU at some point. One of the benefits of the way PowerVR renders things is efficiency so for a long time it was the only real choice on mobile devices and laptops with integrated graphics as it would sip power by while still rendering fairly complex scenes.
PowerVR also was in the PS VITA. So it had a longer console legacy than most people realize. The tech was good. A lot of it has made its way into modern GPUs.
Soul Calibur was easily the most impressive looking launch title release ever. It still looks pretty solid even today. Other Dreamcast games that impressed me visually speaking were HotD2, Confidential Mission, Shenmue, VOOT, Under Defeat, Outtrigger.
Got mine on launch day with Sega rally 2 and powerstone, and blue stinger. I have really fond memories of this console! Soul calibur, code veronica, jet set radio, shenmue, sonic adventure and too many more to count.
If everyone who says they owned a Dreamcast had ACTUALLY owned one then the console would've been a massive success. I still have mine. It really was the little console that could.
This is insanely good - please continue with a deep dive into the workings of the DC. I doubt I’m on the only one who would love to hear more! Well done, let’s continue!! 😊
In the arcade they got around the multipass rendering issues in the Naomi2 board by using a dedicated transformation and lighting chip alongside the PowerVR GPU.
Efficiency really sums up the Dreamcast's hardware design. Everything is thought through to minimize any waste. Ontop of the tile rendering (which allowed them to get away with a lower polygon count) the system feature really good texture compression allowing it to fit almost 8 times the amount of texture data into memory. This allows the system to store all the texture in the video memory rather than having to fetch it from main memory when being used. This of course means SEGA could get away with having a smaller amount of ram but also the bus between the CPU and GPU would be freed up for other tasks. Extremely efficient.
The DC still has nicer looking textures than the PS2 as a result of that really good texture compression. It was a fantastic machine for it's a time. Developers who worked with it loved it, and it's a bit of shame we never really got to see what the hardware could actually do when really pushed.
the console i was waiting for in the Technically Correct saga, fantastic work! The Dreamcast is to me the most fascinating console ever, just everything about it was interesting.
if i recall correctly, nvidia gpus started using hardware tiled based rendering in the Maxwell generation, which lead to a big jump in performance and efficiency against the amd gpus at the time! And that was not so long ago...
I'm a simple man, anytime I hear the Dreamcast mentioned I have to stop everything else and listen. I still think it remains the greatest console ever made, but also the most unlucky.
Finally. Another video. It took long enough, your videos are the only thing keeping me alive. My life is in your hands. Keep that in mind. Don't let me down and don't let me die. Thank you.
I’m glad you mentioned tile based rendering. It was such an interesting time to watch these technologies evolve and compete. Really was survival of the fittest
The funny thing is it scales so well when over clocked and can have 32 mb memory on it with mods. Makes you wonder just how much the performance can be stretched out withs it's design. Turns out windows ce was much better than people thought. Hombrew programmers have found this out and it had good online stack fir the games as well. Turned out the ports using it were rushed by people wothout the required experience.
Tile based deferred rendering scaled pretty linearly in a multi GPU system. Unlike dual GPU graphics cards where it would try to split the scene at the driver level and have each GPU render half you could for example send every other tile to one GPU or the other and then collate them at the end and get close to double the render speed instead of the 30~50% increase typical in most dual GPU setups because that was already how the hardware rendered the scene in the first place. There was a PowerVR1 graphics card made by NEC back in the late 90's that had an option for running two in your system and performance was typicaly a 70%~80% speed increase, and it didn't even need a special bridge between the cards to do this it just went through the PCI buss. Unfortunatly it also only worked with PowerVR1 specific titles, it's hardware was so different (even more so than PowerVR2) that supporting OpenGL and Direct3D was not possible. It used something called "infinate planes" instead of rendering polygons line by line. It could display triangle based models but it's method for doing so was vastly different than scanline based rendering.
What makes it even cooler was sega made the dreamcast with off the shelf parts. There were no custom pieces for the dreamcast and they were able to make it so ahead of its time. I wish they were still making consoles
If I recall correctly, the Z-buffer was only virtually eliminated. Each tile still had a 32k sized buffer for Z calculations. But of course, at 32k you can say it more or less has been eliminated.
Thank you for the outstanding investigative work; it's astonishing how the Dreamcast still manages to astonish us. Have a great day and keep making excellent videos.
Another good retro system video. I am one of those who grew up on Sega, but I didn't have my own Genesis until 1994. I also had a Saturn and the Dreamcast is still my favorite Sega system... because it's my favorite console to this day.
TBH if it wasn't for Yu Suzuki and Sega gaming would not have gone in the direction that it has. Sega invested billions purchasing military technology to develop 3d graphics for video games all directed and led by Yu Suzuki
At the time the Dreamcast was absolutely loved by all, but the more fanboy gaming press at the time were telling people to wait for the PS2 instead. Which people did because of how phenominally successful the PS1 had been. Power Stone on Dreamcast was absoutely incredible, but all the press would talk about is PS2, PS2, PS2.
Uh. From 1998-2001? PC processors were quite a bit more powerful than an SH4 200Mhz. By 2001 AMD Athlons were already over the 1Ghz in clockspeed. Around 1998, AMD had K6 cpu's clocked between 200 and 400Mhz. Intel had Pentium II processors around 266Mhz to 450Mhz or so. Though the SH4 wasn't a slouch. It was probably a very good pick for the system.
A lot of people were suggesting that the dream cast should have been done as a $99 addon for the Saturn. That would've moved a lot of Saturn hardware and games, giving SEGA a much needed billion or two in revenue, albeit continuing production of the old console for a time. It also would've saved the Saturn in the Japanese market and gotten hundreds of Japanese titles localized for the international market. If SEGA really wanted to compete, use the SuperH, VooDoo 2.5, and the PowerVR for limit pushers, still at cost for less than $150 while using the Saturn to draw backgrounds.
The Dreamcast port of Starlancer used WindowsCE as well. It was a really good port of the PC game. Lots of cool extra vfx and it played surprisingly well on that controller.
And to think 3dfx could have been in a Dreamcast if they won the contract. The Naomi to Dreamcast ports were almost indistinguishable from each other. Sega had an excellent lineup of hardware and software for Dreamcast development. Unfortunately, poor leadership decisions in the 90s led to the company’s decline in hardware. Thankfully, Sega is still around, albeit as a shadow of its former self and we are able to enjoy some of their games. Sega utilized custom arcade hardware in its arcade games until the introduction of the Sega Lindbergh and ALLS systems, which were PC-based, similar to other arcade manufacturers. This shift highlighted the advancements in PC gaming hardware at that time. Heck console manufacturers went to pc like architecture as well due to lower cost of R&D and quicker time to draw the first triangle (aka Mark Cerny).
Thank you so much for the research and for making this video! It’s incredible how much things changed with graphics and technology each time new consoles came out… I feel lucky to have been there as a teenager (and child in the 80s). The Dreamcast graphics were truly mind blowing at the time. So smooth and stable visually, compared to the PSX and Saturn not very long before it
The lessons Microsoft learned for the Dreamcast they put into effect for their own Xbox several years later. Yes, Sega are indirectly responsible for the Xbox Original.
Despite the similar names, PowerVR's Tile Based Deferred Rendering isn't the same thing as the Deferred Rendering used in modern games (since the likes of Stalker or Killzone 2). TBDR caches all the transformed triangles that touch a tile, then clips and rasterises them in an efficient way. It defers rasterisation. Modern DR renders all the triangles as normal for the GPU, but doesn't do lighting, instead it renders out colour, normals, depth and other data for the whole screen into a massive G-Buffer (geometry buffer), then it performs lighting calculations on that to get the lit pixel colours. It defers lighting.
I wonder what might have been for Sega had they launched the DC at $219.99 (in NA) and choose to add a DVD-ROM and player software vs. the GD-ROM that couldn't double as a DVD player.
Dreamcast was an amazing gaming console and I still have mine. I still play it on a CRT! I love that system. PCs were faster though. Your PC speed estimates for 1998 and 1999 though are way off. They were at 200 Mhz by 1996. By the time of the Dreamcast launch in NA the Pentium 3 500 Mhz ($700 roughly, $500 for the 450 Mhz) was launching, followed shortly by the GeForce 256 ($199); both of which outclassed the Dreamcast pretty handily. Even for the 1998 launch it would have been up against the P2-450 and Nvidia TNT 2.
PCs were up to 500Mhz during 98 - 99. But there is something on that Dreamcast's cooling system & fan that sounds like a vacuum cleaner. -System simply does not overheat, no matter what. I think they got a lot more than 200Mhz performance out of that CPU... But overall, it was the texture compression technology that made Dreamcast like no other. PS2, NGC or even XBOX did not manage to beat texture detail & clarity DC has. While Bump -Mapping on XBOX looks great, the actual colour depth on Dreamcast's most detailed textures is something beyond.
@@mopeybloke DC does not have any texture issues. Developers said back in the day, that courtesy of texture compression, they can display even 64MB worth of textures on screen at once. I own DC/PS2/NGC/XBOX... Dreamcast has better textures than any of those systems on RGB -cable. I use Component Cable for others. But it's not due cable. For example Sonic Adventure on DC has way better textures than any release of Sonic Adventure DX.
Some of the best aspects of Dreamcast hardware was the aim to provide crisp textures, emphasize 60FPS support and progressive scan output. It was only via VGA at the time because that was the best option but hooked up to a monitor or TV it was really a leap over the previous generation. Especially N64 which suffered badly from ugly smeary over filtered textures. Seeing that detail preserved by DC was a revelation.
I remeber not getting a ps2 because it didn't look as good as the Dreamcast games did. I wish they would have kept it around the loading times seemed so much fast then any after it too. I think the 360 was the first console that reminded me of how it was to play on the dreamcast.
Only if Microsoft never made the Xbox. Sega would still be making consoles even though Hitachi and Yamaha were the ones making the components for Sega consoles and Sega took all the credit.
“I don’t think PCs were any more powerful than 200MHz at this time” The Dreamcast was released at roughly the same time as the first Intel Pentium III (JP launch was just before, US launch was just after) which debuted at 450MHz.
Great vid, but at 1:25 - In 1998 there were 400MHz Intel and AMD CPU's available before the DC released. You can't really compare the DC's RISC CPU to a PC's X86 CPU with clock speeds though, they're totally different. Although it's still likely that a 400MHz X86 CPU would have outperformed the DC's RISC CPU for gaming. But not significantly. The DC is still the biggest leap graphically that i've seen for a home console generation. The PS2 was a downgrade in comparison when i later got one, with very poor looking release games and blurry + muddy looking graphics. This was partially due to the PS2 not having proper SCART output (something even the Saturn had!), but also due to how it had to compromise texture colours because of it's lower 4MB texture memory (4-bit texture palette + texture compression which further reduced colour accuracy). When all these issues were combined the image quality just looked nasty. Washed out, dull, brown, grey... etc. It's the reason why not a single PS2 game looks as vibrant or beautiful as so many DC games.
The claim about the Dreamcast's CPU being more powerful than the ones found in PCs at the time is BS. Also, PC CPUs absolutely did go above 200 Mhz at that point in time. I have seen from other sources that the Dreamcast's hardware was actually relatively inexpensive, and that they could have gone with a more powerful design if they had wanted to, or at least, a different console company in a better financial situation definitely could have. It seemed amazing at the time because it was the first sixth gen console to market, and it definitely did have a pretty good design which was pretty well optimized for playing 3d games.
The rest of the GPU market didn't start properly occluding objects that weren't seen (and thus not wasting rendering on them) until Z culling happened in the Geforce 3, well after the Dreamcast.
Sega Dreamcast is a party machine like the N64, which is fine when you got friends to play with, it sucks ass as a single player machine. Single counter to this is it died to early, but it was always gonna be like this. Be frank, I hate the controller as well, lol.
The Pentium III 1Ghz was out and I had a Celeron 566 that I had overclocked to 850Mhz when the Dreamcast was hot IIRC. I could be wrong... If not that system I had a PIII 450Mhz slot 1 system with a Voodoo.
It really doesn't. It' true most games are higher res, but when it comes to texture quality, geometrical density, it was beaten by the PS2 by 2001 at the latest. Also so many games at 60 FPS.
At its launch, DC was the most powerful thing SEGA could have put out there for the money. But the PS2 /CPU, GPU, MEM, DVD/ easily outperformed the DC. The overall evolution was going too fast.
@@gurujoe75 Unreal Tournament run far better on DC than PS2, everybody know that. Sure, Quake 3 was upgraded for the PS2. Anyway, FPS are more PC games and the Dreamcast allows to play them using keyboard + mouse.
Small corrections: "... RISC based CPU that in cooperated a lot of cool Sega stuff like Super Skalar and things like that..." You are confusing Sega Super Scaler branding for the sprite based pseudo 3D tech that they had in the arcades with the concept of parallelism that the Dreamcast's CPU design was based off, making it a 2-way superscalar processors. It's the thing that Intel was the standout in the first Pentium generation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superscalar_processor Speaking of which, 200mhz was below PC CPU's of the time, that ranged from 200 to 400mhz at the time the Dreamcast launched in Japan and over 1ghz for the Western launch.
Still look at prices in 1999, 450Mhz CPU costs 500$ and 1Ghz -990$. And don't forget that this CPU require well-cooling system! Even original Xbox has 730Mhz CPU and it was 2001!
@@colos3284 PC has always been more expensive, but more importantly I just mentioned that something was factually incorrect. Saying a PS5 Pro is as fast as a 4090 is still wrong no matter if you bring pricing into it.
@@elgoog-the-third Happy to see a source, but considering it was a design with just a 16 bit instruction set and was only rated at 360 MIPS at the 200 MHz Dreamcast used vs over 2000 MIPS of a 600 MHz Pentium 3 I highly doubt that... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second
Super scaler is a generic CPU term that indicates the CPU can begin execution of multiple instructions at the same time. I can see why that might get confused with Sega's "Super Scaler" arcade graphics system for resizing sprites in this case, but the two are entirely different things.
the GD ROM was pointless , sega touted it as a way to thwart piracy - how'd that work out? I still believe they would have been better off just using a DVD ROM.
The Dreamcast should have had the Naomi2 TnL hardware, and supporting geometry memory, to be fully on par with PS2 polygonal performance, that along with the higher resolution and VGA monitor support would have told a much different story for the system.
@santitabnavascues8673 Yes, which makes it not be a DVD player, and it flopped so badly that, if not for the GBA, Nintendo would've been forced to leave the console business.
@@elgoog-the-third many ps2 games didn't occupy all the DVD, and to my knowledge, only 3 games used the dual layer, the Xenosaga games. Resident Evil 4 was superior on GC, and used a single disk. And if the DVD playing was a factor for the ps2 success then ignoring that factor leaves the PS2 success not that much over the XBox or Game Cube, and wouldn't be really meaningful for the GameCube downfall. If storage was a concern, then games would come in multiple disks, Skies Of Arcadia would occupy 2 GDROMs on Dreamcast and only one mini-DVD on GC, albeit with lower quality audio and worse textures. But TLDR DVD playing as a factor for success is unrelated to gaming, and thus not so important.
@santitabnavascues8673 no, DVD playing is not at all unrelated. DVD players back then were as costly as a PS2 itself, so why buy just a console and just a DVD player, when you can have a DVD player _and_ a console in one for less? Especially when it was foreseeable that the two consoles could produce graphics in the same ballpark. Also don't forget that there were people who got the PS2 just as a DVD player, but then ended up playing games, too, since they now already had a console anyways.
Why would you say cpu's weren't more powerful than 200 mhz by 1998 without doing any kind of research? PC always was and will always be on the lead, by 98 you had 450 mhz pentium II and even 550 mhz K6-2 cpus, by that era you could already emulate the N64 without issues, the previous gen of the Dreamcast...
When the Dreamcast released in Japan in 98 the Pentium 2 was top of the line in the PC realm and clocked as high as 450mhz. Come February of 99, well before the September 99 release of the Dreamcast in the states, the Pentium 3 dropped starting at 450mhz. And Coppermine was out come October which could clock upwards of 1133mhz. That's all CISC though. In the RISC space the top dog was the PowerPC G3, also known as the PowerPC 7XX series which launched in 97' starting with clocks in the 233-366mhz space. By 98 the 755 was reaching 400mhz. And in 99 was hitting 533mhz. 200mhz RISC was a great speed at the time for a console, but PCs were already there if not above, and even in the lower consumer space. If I recall we were rocking a somewhere around a 233mhz in my house, and it was not a high end PC. I was rocking a hand me down 75mhz Pentium in my bedroom. Or was it 100? I don't remember.
The best Dreamcast games are hardcoded bypassing Windows CE with custom libraries for the off the shelf GPU as far as I remember reading. Clearly this is something few third party developers could manage. Still it was a nice bit of kit and deserved to do well but sadly for SEGA the PS2 being the cheapest DVD movie player in the world at the time was going to kill it and a lot of high profile titles were cancelled, like Colin McRae Rally etc. if you take sales/year even the N64 suffered at the hands of PS1 which set the stage for PS2 to continue. I think the PS2 is still the highest selling console of all time with 160-175 million sold or something. Nintendo only survived due to massive profits of both Gameboy hardware sales and the millions of Pokemon games for it sold during the slaughter of Sony to all rivals.
Those consoles came out later than the SEGA ones. It would be weird in those times if they were worse. Which the SNES is in some respects. Including the sound. Don't @ me.
The claim about the Dreamcast's CPU being more powerful than the ones found in PCs at the time is BS. For one, you couldn't tell how powerful a CPU was just by looking at the Mhz value, but secondly, PC CPUs absolutely did go above 200 Mhz at that point in time.
Those days were crazy, sega actually had a stake in another gpu company called 3dfx they were the nvidia of their day, and they still went with the powervr solution!
@youngwt1 true but ironically it was Nvidia who had the massive potential so much that they underestimated themselves.because CEO Jensen Huang told Sega that unfortunately they weren't able to come up with a GPU solution for the sega dreamcast but demanded Sega pay them $5 million to help them recuperate their research & development cost because the Dreamcast Nvidia GPU nearly exhausted in Nvidia into bankruptcy Theoretically,I think Nvidia were too far ahead in terms of their current GPU tech at the time that Sega didn't see the full potential and went with NEC's PowerVR2 GPU chip which was a decent alternative at best
It didn't matter what GPU Sega put into the console. It was not the console itself that made Sega pull out of the market. It was Microsoft entering it. Microsoft and Sony and to a lesser extent Nintendo are behemoths compared to Sega in 2000. Sega simply did not have the resources or ability to go head to head with the other three and come out profitable. If you want to blame a single reason for Sega abandoning consoles, it's Microsoft.
@@adventureoflinkmk2 Sega's past mattered less and less with each success they would have. If Microsoft didn't release a console, there's a good chance Sega would have sold an additional 10-20 million consoles if they stuck around for a full generation. Especially if the best place to play online games, especially sports games was the Dreamcast. That would have resulted in profits year after year and by the end of that generation, even if they finished third behind Sony and Nintendo, it would have been considered a turn around success from where they were.
The jump from Saturn/PS1/N64 to Dreamcast was INSANE! Biggest improvement gen to gen to me
Agreed 💯. My best friend back in the day preordered one for the midnight 9/9/99 release. Going from playing Castlevania 64 early that day to playing Soul Calibur and the demo for Power Stone that night was INCREDIBLE!
Due to me being as old as the hills, the greatest technological leap forward for me was the transition from the 8-bit Commodore 64 to the 16-bit Commodore Amiga. That was an absolutely incredible upgrade for me.
@clarenceboddicker6679 i was around for the jump from the NES to Genesis/SNES and it was big but Dreamcast really blew my socks off.
Fast, smooth and best of all clean 3d games as good as or better than the arcade!
I feel like consoles always push things a generation too early… ps1/saturn weren’t really ready for 3D and n64 barely was. You still see it today where ps5/xsx claim to be 4k120hz consoles and rarely hit either the resolution or frame rate
Absolutely.
I have been playing video games since the very early days of Pong, Space Invaders and Pac-Man. No game has ever impressed me as much as Soul Calibur on Dreamcast. I was stunned. I immediately bought a console just to be able to play that at home. It is still, to this day, my favourite console with an insanely good library of games. The Saturn is my close second favourite. I have always been a massive Sega fanboy.
I’m so grateful to the talented people who created excellent emulators on the PC for Model 2 and Model 3 arcade machines, so I can play my favourite Sega games just as I remember them, except at much higher resolutions.
Same here and I always say the Dreamcast was the last great leap in graphics. Coming from PS1/N64 games it was jaw dropping. No other console ever made this kind of leap. I still have my Dreamcast connected to my entertainment centre, now with GDEmu going through an OSSC. For me nothing beats original hardware and controllers.
Soul Calibur is for me top 10 games ever.
I had never been a fan of Sega and only owned Nintendo and Sony consoles, but the first time I saw Soul Calibur at a friend's place, I reacted the same way. The Dreamcast would be my first and last Sega system, but it was a wonderful one.
First time I heard that the Dreamcast utilized "deferred rendering," I wondered if that was the console's secret sauce. Now, deferred rendering is considered a significant factor for efficiency.
tile based dr to be exact, which Nvidia also started using with their Maxwell GPUs
Everything since about 2016 from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel (a bit later for them) switch to tile based deferred rendering. Today, everyone uses it including Apple and Qualcom.
@@Revenant_Knight AMD started using it with Vega which came out 2017
@@Nintenboy01 I was excited to read about that. I was there when PowerVR was introduced in the 90s...I even have a Gen 1 card... and the tile rendering was such a neat idea. I'm happy PowerVR tech lives on.
The best Dreamcast games looks pleasant even today, back in the days seeing things like soul calibur,doa 2 or shenmue running on screen was simply a jaw dropping experience. It's a shame that the potential of this marvel was far to be exploited when It was discontinued
PowerVR is still around. The GPU in Apple's devices are spiritual successors to PowerVR GPU and for a long time before Apple started making their own GPUs they used PowerVR for their mobile devices . Intel also used them for their iGPU at some point. One of the benefits of the way PowerVR renders things is efficiency so for a long time it was the only real choice on mobile devices and laptops with integrated graphics as it would sip power by while still rendering fairly complex scenes.
PowerVR also was in the PS VITA. So it had a longer console legacy than most people realize. The tech was good. A lot of it has made its way into modern GPUs.
Soul Calibur was easily the most impressive looking launch title release ever. It still looks pretty solid even today.
Other Dreamcast games that impressed me visually speaking were HotD2, Confidential Mission, Shenmue, VOOT, Under Defeat, Outtrigger.
Outrigger YES!!! Not enough love for this excellent arcade arena shooter.
The Dreamcast was SO AHEAD of it's Time... I preach this since 20 Years!
The Better Console *Lost* 😑
Got mine on launch day with Sega rally 2 and powerstone, and blue stinger. I have really fond memories of this console! Soul calibur, code veronica, jet set radio, shenmue, sonic adventure and too many more to count.
If everyone who says they owned a Dreamcast had ACTUALLY owned one then the console would've been a massive success.
I still have mine. It really was the little console that could.
My Dreamcast is the only older console that I've actually kept.
I could never stop playing ChuChu Rocket.
I still have 2 dreamcasts. They both still work.
Whats wild about the Dreamcast is its 2024 and I've still only seen some of the sharpest textures on the little dude.
This is insanely good - please continue with a deep dive into the workings of the DC. I doubt I’m on the only one who would love to hear more! Well done, let’s continue!! 😊
In the arcade they got around the multipass rendering issues in the Naomi2 board by using a dedicated transformation and lighting chip alongside the PowerVR GPU.
Efficiency really sums up the Dreamcast's hardware design. Everything is thought through to minimize any waste. Ontop of the tile rendering (which allowed them to get away with a lower polygon count) the system feature really good texture compression allowing it to fit almost 8 times the amount of texture data into memory. This allows the system to store all the texture in the video memory rather than having to fetch it from main memory when being used. This of course means SEGA could get away with having a smaller amount of ram but also the bus between the CPU and GPU would be freed up for other tasks. Extremely efficient.
The DC still has nicer looking textures than the PS2 as a result of that really good texture compression. It was a fantastic machine for it's a time. Developers who worked with it loved it, and it's a bit of shame we never really got to see what the hardware could actually do when really pushed.
@@seanmckelvey6618 32bit colour vs 16 bit on the PS2
Added to watch later immediately because I love these and on the weekend I sit with these on my projector drinking wine. Keep yo the good work.
The Dreamcast is the first 3D console that still looks great today
Look at Sega Rally, Panzer Dragoon Saga, Last Bronx etc. and say that again with a straight face
the console i was waiting for in the Technically Correct saga, fantastic work! The Dreamcast is to me the most fascinating console ever, just everything about it was interesting.
if i recall correctly, nvidia gpus started using hardware tiled based rendering in the Maxwell generation, which lead to a big jump in performance and efficiency against the amd gpus at the time! And that was not so long ago...
Which the Switch has
I'm a simple man, anytime I hear the Dreamcast mentioned I have to stop everything else and listen. I still think it remains the greatest console ever made, but also the most unlucky.
Finally. Another video. It took long enough, your videos are the only thing keeping me alive. My life is in your hands. Keep that in mind. Don't let me down and don't let me die. Thank you.
I’m glad you mentioned tile based rendering. It was such an interesting time to watch these technologies evolve and compete. Really was survival of the fittest
Absolutely love this series. Really love the detail that you go in to.
I never understood why it didn’t do much better. It STILL looks great after all these years. My friends brother had one and it was amazing.
The funny thing is it scales so well when over clocked and can have 32 mb memory on it with mods. Makes you wonder just how much the performance can be stretched out withs it's design. Turns out windows ce was much better than people thought. Hombrew programmers have found this out and it had good online stack fir the games as well. Turned out the ports using it were rushed by people wothout the required experience.
Tile based deferred rendering scaled pretty linearly in a multi GPU system. Unlike dual GPU graphics cards where it would try to split the scene at the driver level and have each GPU render half you could for example send every other tile to one GPU or the other and then collate them at the end and get close to double the render speed instead of the 30~50% increase typical in most dual GPU setups because that was already how the hardware rendered the scene in the first place.
There was a PowerVR1 graphics card made by NEC back in the late 90's that had an option for running two in your system and performance was typicaly a 70%~80% speed increase, and it didn't even need a special bridge between the cards to do this it just went through the PCI buss. Unfortunatly it also only worked with PowerVR1 specific titles, it's hardware was so different (even more so than PowerVR2) that supporting OpenGL and Direct3D was not possible. It used something called "infinate planes" instead of rendering polygons line by line. It could display triangle based models but it's method for doing so was vastly different than scanline based rendering.
I wish the Dreamcast was more successful! I found it 10x better then the ps2!
I did wonder why everytime my dreamcast starts up I hear "Alright Dudes!" 😂
Congratulations on your 100k channel views!🎉 I hope more people find this channel soon.
The time the arcade really came 2 the home's
What makes it even cooler was sega made the dreamcast with off the shelf parts. There were no custom pieces for the dreamcast and they were able to make it so ahead of its time. I wish they were still making consoles
If I recall correctly, the Z-buffer was only virtually eliminated. Each tile still had a 32k sized buffer for Z calculations.
But of course, at 32k you can say it more or less has been eliminated.
Thank you for the outstanding investigative work; it's astonishing how the Dreamcast still manages to astonish us. Have a great day and keep making excellent videos.
Another good retro system video. I am one of those who grew up on Sega, but I didn't have my own Genesis until 1994. I also had a Saturn and the Dreamcast is still my favorite Sega system... because it's my favorite console to this day.
TBH if it wasn't for Yu Suzuki and Sega gaming would not have gone in the direction that it has. Sega invested billions purchasing military technology to develop 3d graphics for video games all directed and led by Yu Suzuki
At the time the Dreamcast was absolutely loved by all, but the more fanboy gaming press at the time were telling people to wait for the PS2 instead.
Which people did because of how phenominally successful the PS1 had been.
Power Stone on Dreamcast was absoutely incredible, but all the press would talk about is PS2, PS2, PS2.
Super scalar here doesn't mean super scaler like those used in sega arcade hardware.
awesome videos, love them! peace from Yorkshire
Uh. From 1998-2001? PC processors were quite a bit more powerful than an SH4 200Mhz. By 2001 AMD Athlons were already over the 1Ghz in clockspeed. Around 1998, AMD had K6 cpu's clocked between 200 and 400Mhz. Intel had Pentium II processors around 266Mhz to 450Mhz or so. Though the SH4 wasn't a slouch. It was probably a very good pick for the system.
MHz aren't everything. The 200 MHz SH4 is said to be roughly equivalent to a 600 MHz x86.
A lot of people were suggesting that the dream cast should have been done as a $99 addon for the Saturn. That would've moved a lot of Saturn hardware and games, giving SEGA a much needed billion or two in revenue, albeit continuing production of the old console for a time. It also would've saved the Saturn in the Japanese market and gotten hundreds of Japanese titles localized for the international market. If SEGA really wanted to compete, use the SuperH, VooDoo 2.5, and the PowerVR for limit pushers, still at cost for less than $150 while using the Saturn to draw backgrounds.
The Dreamcast port of Starlancer used WindowsCE as well. It was a really good port of the PC game. Lots of cool extra vfx and it played surprisingly well on that controller.
С архитектурой, за полупрозрачными поверхностями, окружение было светлее. Я хорошо помню.
And to think 3dfx could have been in a Dreamcast if they won the contract.
The Naomi to Dreamcast ports were almost indistinguishable from each other. Sega had an excellent lineup of hardware and software for Dreamcast development. Unfortunately, poor leadership decisions in the 90s led to the company’s decline in hardware.
Thankfully, Sega is still around, albeit as a shadow of its former self and we are able to enjoy some of their games.
Sega utilized custom arcade hardware in its arcade games until the introduction of the Sega Lindbergh and ALLS systems, which were PC-based, similar to other arcade manufacturers. This shift highlighted the advancements in PC gaming hardware at that time. Heck console manufacturers went to pc like architecture as well due to lower cost of R&D and quicker time to draw the first triangle (aka Mark Cerny).
Thank you so much for the research and for making this video! It’s incredible how much things changed with graphics and technology each time new consoles came out… I feel lucky to have been there as a teenager (and child in the 80s). The Dreamcast graphics were truly mind blowing at the time. So smooth and stable visually, compared to the PSX and Saturn not very long before it
The lessons Microsoft learned for the Dreamcast they put into effect for their own Xbox several years later.
Yes, Sega are indirectly responsible for the Xbox Original.
Despite the similar names, PowerVR's Tile Based Deferred Rendering isn't the same thing as the Deferred Rendering used in modern games (since the likes of Stalker or Killzone 2). TBDR caches all the transformed triangles that touch a tile, then clips and rasterises them in an efficient way. It defers rasterisation.
Modern DR renders all the triangles as normal for the GPU, but doesn't do lighting, instead it renders out colour, normals, depth and other data for the whole screen into a massive G-Buffer (geometry buffer), then it performs lighting calculations on that to get the lit pixel colours. It defers lighting.
I wonder what might have been for Sega had they launched the DC at $219.99 (in NA) and choose to add a DVD-ROM and player software vs. the GD-ROM that couldn't double as a DVD player.
It likely would've stood a chance.
Dreamcast was an amazing gaming console and I still have mine. I still play it on a CRT! I love that system. PCs were faster though.
Your PC speed estimates for 1998 and 1999 though are way off. They were at 200 Mhz by 1996. By the time of the Dreamcast launch in NA the Pentium 3 500 Mhz ($700 roughly, $500 for the 450 Mhz) was launching, followed shortly by the GeForce 256 ($199); both of which outclassed the Dreamcast pretty handily. Even for the 1998 launch it would have been up against the P2-450 and Nvidia TNT 2.
It surprised me to learn that the Saturn outsold the Dreamcast. The latter has way more of a cult following.
RIP headphone users on that intro 😅
I know...first time I heard that intro on another video I almost closed it out. 😂 Luckily I didn't.
@@Charlie-eq3djthen youll really live that nostalgia nerd guy lol
Loving this series
If it launched in 1998 here like Japan then it would have been a huge hit.
What about the sprite layer?
PCs were up to 500Mhz during 98 - 99.
But there is something on that Dreamcast's cooling system & fan that sounds like a vacuum cleaner. -System simply does not overheat, no matter what.
I think they got a lot more than 200Mhz performance out of that CPU...
But overall, it was the texture compression technology that made Dreamcast like no other.
PS2, NGC or even XBOX did not manage to beat texture detail & clarity DC has.
While Bump -Mapping on XBOX looks great, the actual colour depth on Dreamcast's most detailed textures is something beyond.
Are you sure? Most XBOX and PS2 games run at 24 bpp, while DC does 16. Also its texture compression leaves artefacts.
@@litjellyfish i think it was more to save videoram for textures.
@@mopeybloke DC does not have any texture issues. Developers said back in the day, that courtesy of texture compression, they can display even 64MB worth of textures on screen at once.
I own DC/PS2/NGC/XBOX... Dreamcast has better textures than any of those systems on RGB -cable. I use Component Cable for others. But it's not due cable. For example Sonic Adventure on DC has way better textures than any release of Sonic Adventure DX.
Some of the best aspects of Dreamcast hardware was the aim to provide crisp textures, emphasize 60FPS support and progressive scan output. It was only via VGA at the time because that was the best option but hooked up to a monitor or TV it was really a leap over the previous generation. Especially N64 which suffered badly from ugly smeary over filtered textures. Seeing that detail preserved by DC was a revelation.
I remeber not getting a ps2 because it didn't look as good as the Dreamcast games did. I wish they would have kept it around the loading times seemed so much fast then any after it too. I think the 360 was the first console that reminded me of how it was to play on the dreamcast.
Dreamcast>PS2
I thought the original Xbox really captured a lot of the Dreamcast's magic. In many ways it felt like a spiritual successor to it.
@@TAGMedia7 Yeah partially... That's why I went with it after the Dreamcast was Gone
32bit colour -- the PS2 couldn't do it.
Only if Microsoft never made the Xbox. Sega would still be making consoles even though Hitachi and Yamaha were the ones making the components for Sega consoles and Sega took all the credit.
@@litjellyfish he maybe has a point there,when sega luched the dc in japan sega know nothing about the xbox coming.
I always thought that your kids had a 32-bit bus
“I don’t think PCs were any more powerful than 200MHz at this time”
The Dreamcast was released at roughly the same time as the first Intel Pentium III (JP launch was just before, US launch was just after) which debuted at 450MHz.
Zero research effort was put into this video.
Pentium with 450Mhz costs 500$ in 1999 😂
pentuim 3 450 mhz katmai only very sligtly faster than a pentuim 2 450 in quake 3 arena.
Yeah this was a disappointing start of the video.
MHz aren't comparable like that across architectures. The 200MHz SH4 is said to be roughly equivalent to a 600MHz x86 CPU_
Great vid, but at 1:25 - In 1998 there were 400MHz Intel and AMD CPU's available before the DC released. You can't really compare the DC's RISC CPU to a PC's X86 CPU with clock speeds though, they're totally different. Although it's still likely that a 400MHz X86 CPU would have outperformed the DC's RISC CPU for gaming. But not significantly.
The DC is still the biggest leap graphically that i've seen for a home console generation. The PS2 was a downgrade in comparison when i later got one, with very poor looking release games and blurry + muddy looking graphics. This was partially due to the PS2 not having proper SCART output (something even the Saturn had!), but also due to how it had to compromise texture colours because of it's lower 4MB texture memory (4-bit texture palette + texture compression which further reduced colour accuracy). When all these issues were combined the image quality just looked nasty. Washed out, dull, brown, grey... etc. It's the reason why not a single PS2 game looks as vibrant or beautiful as so many DC games.
The claim about the Dreamcast's CPU being more powerful than the ones found in PCs at the time is BS. Also, PC CPUs absolutely did go above 200 Mhz at that point in time.
I have seen from other sources that the Dreamcast's hardware was actually relatively inexpensive, and that they could have gone with a more powerful design if they had wanted to, or at least, a different console company in a better financial situation definitely could have. It seemed amazing at the time because it was the first sixth gen console to market, and it definitely did have a pretty good design which was pretty well optimized for playing 3d games.
They didn’t do go above that for £200 tho that’s the point i was making
MHz can't be compared like that. A 200MHz SH4 is roughly equivalent to at least a 600MHz x86.
I've always wondered if the Dreamcast would have been capable of running FFXI if they had added a hard drive to it.
The rest of the GPU market didn't start properly occluding objects that weren't seen (and thus not wasting rendering on them) until Z culling happened in the Geforce 3, well after the Dreamcast.
And didn't have TBDR until Maxwell launched in 2014.
Didn't the Nintendo 64 do that?
Powervr was around until 2019 when Apple dropped them for their own gpu and they were their biggest client
No Jaguar video. Big sadge.
Sega Dreamcast is a party machine like the N64, which is fine when you got friends to play with, it sucks ass as a single player machine. Single counter to this is it died to early, but it was always gonna be like this. Be frank, I hate the controller as well, lol.
The Pentium III 1Ghz was out and I had a Celeron 566 that I had overclocked to 850Mhz when the Dreamcast was hot IIRC. I could be wrong... If not that system I had a PIII 450Mhz slot 1 system with a Voodoo.
Yeah, zero research was put into this video.
Pentium 3 with 450Mhz costs 500$ and was need in well-cooling system.
A 200MHz SH4 is roughly equivalent to a 600MHz x86.
Do one of these videos on the Atari Jaguar and the 32X.
Highlight of my youtube feed
USB 2 could only transfers about 38 MB a second just for comparison and that came out years later
Sega saturn the best !!
No , It was hardware T&L that the power vr kyro gpus couldnt do. I had a Kyro2 and it beat at GF2gts in many titles.
The Dreamcast had better graphics than the PS2, the image had more resolution and it looked a lot cleaner.
It really doesn't. It' true most games are higher res, but when it comes to texture quality, geometrical density, it was beaten by the PS2 by 2001 at the latest. Also so many games at 60 FPS.
@ true but higher resolution means cleaner and more defined image
They were cleaner, no doubt but they were also quite simplistic and in many cases had rudimentary lighting effects
@@eponymous7910 yes I couldn’t agree more with you on that one. No Sega Dreamcast game could compare to Ratchet and Clank, God of War or Kill Zone.
@@mopeybloke not treu dead or alive 2 had better textures on dreamcast .
Bits aren't bytes 😉
great video but you didn't mention the hall effect joysticks.
At its launch, DC was the most powerful thing SEGA could have put out there for the money. But the PS2 /CPU, GPU, MEM, DVD/ easily outperformed the DC. The overall evolution was going too fast.
I remember multiplatform games better on DC than PS2.
@@totoonthemoon3593 Cause most were made for Dreamcast/Naomi.
@@totoonthemoon3593 yep. HL1, UNREAL, QUAKE3 running half framerate, half gfx of a PS2. Sure kid.
@@gurujoe75 Unreal Tournament run far better on DC than PS2, everybody know that. Sure, Quake 3 was upgraded for the PS2. Anyway, FPS are more PC games and the Dreamcast allows to play them using keyboard + mouse.
@@totoonthemoon3593 reported kid.
Small corrections:
"... RISC based CPU that in cooperated a lot of cool Sega stuff like Super Skalar and things like that..."
You are confusing Sega Super Scaler branding for the sprite based pseudo 3D tech that they had in the arcades with the concept of parallelism that the Dreamcast's CPU design was based off, making it a 2-way superscalar processors. It's the thing that Intel was the standout in the first Pentium generation.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superscalar_processor
Speaking of which, 200mhz was below PC CPU's of the time, that ranged from 200 to 400mhz at the time the Dreamcast launched in Japan and over 1ghz for the Western launch.
Still look at prices in 1999, 450Mhz CPU costs 500$ and 1Ghz -990$. And don't forget that this CPU require well-cooling system! Even original Xbox has 730Mhz CPU and it was 2001!
200MHz SH4 = 600MHz x86
@@colos3284 PC has always been more expensive, but more importantly I just mentioned that something was factually incorrect. Saying a PS5 Pro is as fast as a 4090 is still wrong no matter if you bring pricing into it.
@@elgoog-the-third Happy to see a source, but considering it was a design with just a 16 bit instruction set and was only rated at 360 MIPS at the 200 MHz Dreamcast used vs over 2000 MIPS of a 600 MHz Pentium 3 I highly doubt that...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second
Super scaler is a generic CPU term that indicates the CPU can begin execution of multiple instructions at the same time. I can see why that might get confused with Sega's "Super Scaler" arcade graphics system for resizing sprites in this case, but the two are entirely different things.
the GD ROM was pointless , sega touted it as a way to thwart piracy - how'd that work out? I still believe they would have been better off just using a DVD ROM.
The Dreamcast should have had the Naomi2 TnL hardware, and supporting geometry memory, to be fully on par with PS2 polygonal performance, that along with the higher resolution and VGA monitor support would have told a much different story for the system.
It wouldn't have mattered. What mattered was that the PS2 had a DVD drive.
@@elgoog-the-third game-cube had 1GB mini DVDs
@santitabnavascues8673 Yes, which makes it not be a DVD player, and it flopped so badly that, if not for the GBA, Nintendo would've been forced to leave the console business.
@@elgoog-the-third many ps2 games didn't occupy all the DVD, and to my knowledge, only 3 games used the dual layer, the Xenosaga games. Resident Evil 4 was superior on GC, and used a single disk. And if the DVD playing was a factor for the ps2 success then ignoring that factor leaves the PS2 success not that much over the XBox or Game Cube, and wouldn't be really meaningful for the GameCube downfall. If storage was a concern, then games would come in multiple disks, Skies Of Arcadia would occupy 2 GDROMs on Dreamcast and only one mini-DVD on GC, albeit with lower quality audio and worse textures. But TLDR DVD playing as a factor for success is unrelated to gaming, and thus not so important.
@santitabnavascues8673 no, DVD playing is not at all unrelated. DVD players back then were as costly as a PS2 itself, so why buy just a console and just a DVD player, when you can have a DVD player _and_ a console in one for less? Especially when it was foreseeable that the two consoles could produce graphics in the same ballpark. Also don't forget that there were people who got the PS2 just as a DVD player, but then ended up playing games, too, since they now already had a console anyways.
Sausage.
Mash
Why would you say cpu's weren't more powerful than 200 mhz by 1998 without doing any kind of research? PC always was and will always be on the lead, by 98 you had 450 mhz pentium II and even 550 mhz K6-2 cpus, by that era you could already emulate the N64 without issues, the previous gen of the Dreamcast...
It just not true. In 1998 there were no pentium pc's at 450 mhz. 233 was already top of the bill.
You can't compare MHz like that. SH4 200MHz = x86 600MHz.
When the Dreamcast released in Japan in 98 the Pentium 2 was top of the line in the PC realm and clocked as high as 450mhz. Come February of 99, well before the September 99 release of the Dreamcast in the states, the Pentium 3 dropped starting at 450mhz. And Coppermine was out come October which could clock upwards of 1133mhz.
That's all CISC though. In the RISC space the top dog was the PowerPC G3, also known as the PowerPC 7XX series which launched in 97' starting with clocks in the 233-366mhz space. By 98 the 755 was reaching 400mhz. And in 99 was hitting 533mhz.
200mhz RISC was a great speed at the time for a console, but PCs were already there if not above, and even in the lower consumer space. If I recall we were rocking a somewhere around a 233mhz in my house, and it was not a high end PC. I was rocking a hand me down 75mhz Pentium in my bedroom. Or was it 100? I don't remember.
Absolute horse shit. In 1998 there were no pentium pc's at 450 mhz. 233 was already top of the bill.
the sh 4 had 10 mill transistors vs 6.35 mill transistors for the power pc 7 the sh 4 looks like a top risc cpu for the time.
Dreamcast's SH4 performance = 600MHz x86
The best Dreamcast games are hardcoded bypassing Windows CE with custom libraries for the off the shelf GPU as far as I remember reading. Clearly this is something few third party developers could manage. Still it was a nice bit of kit and deserved to do well but sadly for SEGA the PS2 being the cheapest DVD movie player in the world at the time was going to kill it and a lot of high profile titles were cancelled, like Colin McRae Rally etc. if you take sales/year even the N64 suffered at the hands of PS1 which set the stage for PS2 to continue. I think the PS2 is still the highest selling console of all time with 160-175 million sold or something. Nintendo only survived due to massive profits of both Gameboy hardware sales and the millions of Pokemon games for it sold during the slaughter of Sony to all rivals.
Think Sega let everyone down before, think that let the Dreamcast down.
Not having a DVD drive is what killed it.
A total ps1 killer but no match for the ps2. The megadrive was the nes killer but clearly inferior to the snes. You really let me down sega, twice.
Those consoles came out later than the SEGA ones. It would be weird in those times if they were worse. Which the SNES is in some respects. Including the sound. Don't @ me.
You have no idea. The Dreamcast definitely was a match for the PS2.
th-cam.com/video/dWLsuIcYVZY/w-d-xo.html - sure, PS2 at its best is verily a early PS3 gfx.
The claim about the Dreamcast's CPU being more powerful than the ones found in PCs at the time is BS. For one, you couldn't tell how powerful a CPU was just by looking at the Mhz value, but secondly, PC CPUs absolutely did go above 200 Mhz at that point in time.
Does it not occur to you that you contradict yourself? The SH4 was about equivalent to a 600MHz x86.
If ONLY Sega had let Nvidia put a GPU chip inside that dreamcast......😭😭😭
Those days were crazy, sega actually had a stake in another gpu company called 3dfx they were the nvidia of their day, and they still went with the powervr solution!
@youngwt1 true but ironically it was Nvidia who had the massive potential so much that they underestimated themselves.because CEO Jensen Huang told Sega that unfortunately they weren't able to come up with a GPU solution for the sega dreamcast but demanded Sega pay them $5 million to help them recuperate their research & development cost because the Dreamcast Nvidia GPU nearly exhausted in Nvidia into bankruptcy
Theoretically,I think Nvidia were too far ahead in terms of their current GPU tech at the time that Sega didn't see the full potential and went with NEC's PowerVR2 GPU chip which was a decent alternative at best
It didn't matter what GPU Sega put into the console. It was not the console itself that made Sega pull out of the market. It was Microsoft entering it. Microsoft and Sony and to a lesser extent Nintendo are behemoths compared to Sega in 2000. Sega simply did not have the resources or ability to go head to head with the other three and come out profitable. If you want to blame a single reason for Sega abandoning consoles, it's Microsoft.
@@Charlie-eq3djwell... if it werent for the fact that the 32x and saturn were also flops...
@@adventureoflinkmk2 Sega's past mattered less and less with each success they would have. If Microsoft didn't release a console, there's a good chance Sega would have sold an additional 10-20 million consoles if they stuck around for a full generation. Especially if the best place to play online games, especially sports games was the Dreamcast. That would have resulted in profits year after year and by the end of that generation, even if they finished third behind Sony and Nintendo, it would have been considered a turn around success from where they were.
dude if you didn't develop for this console just don't make false video how they worked and pretend how they worked
Your comment is more useless then a hidden background polygon
@@grpdadgod say dumb people like you
Do a “Technically Direct” video about the original Game Boy, back from 1989.
I have one that’s still holds up very well, in in today’s age.