PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
NEC PC-Engine/SuperGrafx => PC Engine/SuperGrafx Discussion => Topic started by: SuperGrafx16 on March 16, 2012, 03:17:22 PM
-
I really want to know how SuperGrafx Ghouls 'n Ghosts stacks up to the awesome MegaDrive/Genesis version, and the arcade version.
Is the SuperGrafx version worth owning?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
-
It is the best home version of the game.
-
I don't own a Supergrafx, but there is really no point in buying Ghouls n Ghosts. The Genesis version is just fine. :mrgreen:
Also, the music is the worst out of all the ports.
-
It is the best home version of the game.
I really like the way it looks from screenshots. I'm going to play it via MagicEngine emulation to see if it's worth it to me to own a real copy.
-
Also, the music is the worst out of all the ports.
I beg to differ. The Megadrive is inconsistent with its music. The PCE is smooth the whole time.
-
SGX version is nice, but X68000 version is nicer....
-
SGX version is nice, but X68000 version is nicer....
Yes and no. The X68k's graphics are closer to the arcade, but for some retarded reason, the game is interlaced only.
XD The SGX version is in proper 240p and looks a lot nicer imo.
-
I don't own a Supergrafx, but there is really no point in buying Ghouls n Ghosts. The Genesis version is just fine. :mrgreen:
Also, the music is the worst out of all the ports.
and the snes is the best console of ever :idea:
-
Alright I tried out both the SGX and X68K versions via emulation, and while the X68K version looks much closer to the arcade, I'm going with the SGX version because of the way it looks. I'm tired of the arcade and want something that looks in-between the Genesis and arcade. For that purpose, the SGX fills that role just right.
-
Alright I tried out both the SGX and X68K versions via emulation, and while the X68K version looks much closer to the arcade, I'm going with the SGX version because of the way it looks. I'm tired of the arcade and want something that looks in-between the Genesis and arcade. For that purpose, the SGX fills that role just right.
By playing through emulation you aren't seeing the game in it's actual interlaced mode. This is a case where emulating makes the game look better then it is on the real deal. Comparing the real hardware, SGX is way cleaner, but I do like the X68k version just for it's MIDI option. A good module + good amp and speakers is just fantastic with this game.
-
None of the versions really matter if you own a PS2 joystick and Capcom Classics Collection :mrgreen:
-
I've never played it, but watching videos I know they messed up the scrolling of the layers in he beginning of level 3. What is part of the front layer should be in the background or vice-versa, I forget.
-
None of the versions really matter if you own a PS2 joystick and Capcom Classics Collection :mrgreen:
Not true in the least. Arcade ports have their own charm and it's why people still play them.
I don't have nostalgia for the Genesis version, so the SGX version of the music sounds better to me (the Genesis music sounds slower and sloppier). I owned the SGX and this game back in '93. The SGX version has more unique detail overall too, compared to the MD version. But then again, the SGX one is a larger cart/rom.
-
Yeah it is really sad, you get that one hot cinderella girl, but you have to go threw her fat step mother first, no to mention her throw-back sisters.
-
The SuperGrafx port looks kinda sloppy and unpolished. The graphics are much more faithful to the arcade, since the MD version's graphics are pretty much all redrawn. The SuperGrafx version also has way more animation and little details. The SuperGrafx version uses the same general coloring as the arcade in most places, but has some fugly choices in spots. It could just be messed up shading or something. The Genesis version may be very simplified visually, but they balanced the color nicely and did a great job redrawing everything with low detail. The Genesis version is the most fun for me to play, as the game is so cheap and random on arcade and SuperGrafx and the Genesis version is easier and plays great on a Nomad. I like the SuperGrafx music much more though. The Genesis music is well done overall, but in several places it literally hurts my ears and I'm not crazy about the soundtrack in general in any form.
None of the versions really matter if you own a PS2 joystick and Capcom Classics Collection :mrgreen:
That's a port/emulation of an imperfect port for Playstation. I believe that the first CCC also either doesn't run in progressive scan or uses filtering and is 480i/p anyway. The Playstation and Saturn versions played in 240p on a crt are much better, especially when using the Saturn pad.
-
I've noticed that Ghouls n' Ghosts is too dark on the Xbox Capcom Classics Collection.
I'd buy a SuperGrafx in a heartbeat if someone made me a custom cable so I could plug my US Interface Unit into it and therefore enjoy RGB video.
-
You could probably cut up an RAU-30 adapter to make it fit.
-
I cannot believe the regular PC-Engine got a HuCard 20 megs (SFII:CE) that was larger than any SuperGrafx game. Imagine if SuperGrafx games had been at least that big...
-
I can't believe they built the SuperGrafx instead of shining up Hu-OS :-#
-
I can't believe it's not buffer.
-
You could probably cut up an RAU-30 adapter to make it fit.
I'm too lazy to go look right now, But the rau 30 might just fit already.
-
No, it doesn't. I looked a few years ago (at Joe's initial request), but it doesn't work. Something about the mould of the plastic around the expansion connector, IIRC.
-
No, it doesn't. I looked a few years ago (at Joe's initial request), but it doesn't work. Something about the mould of the plastic around the expansion connector, IIRC.
yeah. the cord of the RAU 30 sticks out the side, preventing it from sliding all the way into the US IFU.
You could carve a giant slot out so it slides in though.
and the SGX itself cant shove in, because the power cord plugs in there.
I think it would only take a bit of cutting on the TurbobCD unit.
-
I can't believe it's not buffer.
Yeah, the SuperGrafx was a real missed opportunity. They should have held off on the CD upgrade and combined it with the SuperGrafx, much like how Sega upgraded the actual hardware of the system with the SegaCD.
Either that or they should have just sat on their hands for a couple years and released the damn thing as a whole new system with, indeed, more buff specifications and possibly backwards compatibility.
-
and the SGX itself cant shove in, because the power cord plugs in there.
Wouldn't the SGX get its power from the IFU just like the TGX does?
-
and the SGX itself cant shove in, because the power cord plugs in there.
Wouldn't the SGX get its power from the IFU just like the TGX does?
No. The SGX and the IFU both have their own independent power bricks. You still need both, even when the SGX is hooked up to the IFU. At least, that's the way it is with the Japanese IFU. I would assume it's the same if you got it hooked up to a US IFU.
-
They should have held off on the CD upgrade and combined it with the SuperGrafx
They should have stick with the suitcase model, and offer a bloody trade in.
One year it would be ( give in a PC-Engine any model and get a brand new engine,
for half the price, directly from NEC ). Two years later after holding the fort down against the SNES ( trade in that IFU for an advance IOU, for only half price ). After holding the fort down for the next time, around they would once again ( trade in that
CD-ROM for a brand new DVD-Rom, watch VCD, Karokoe, photo-cd and DVD as well ).
They could have repeated this process for a very long time. They could have even intergrate Bee-cards ( some how ).
That was the mistake. They made the ideal game system model. More importantly they made it "too expensive?", and they let the Americans Yankee-doodled the US campaign. Then they copied the Americans? They over estimated the fan-base?
-
and the SGX itself cant shove in, because the power cord plugs in there.
Wouldn't the SGX get its power from the IFU just like the TGX does?
Nope. The SuperGrafx draws more power than the PCE, and requires its own power brick. RAU-30, when attached to the SGX, has a hole that lines up with the power brick on the SGX, so that you can fit it in properly.
They should have put a better f*cking CPU in the Super Grafx. a 65816 would have done wonders, especially if they'd done it like the SuperCPU did for the C64.
but, oh well. Shit happens.
-
I remember in EGM back in 1989, they were saying the PC-Engine 2 was supposed to have a true 16-Bit CPU, as well as better audio, in addition to better graphics.
-
I like me some Daimakaimura. The game is fun.
-
I remember in EGM back in 1989, they were saying the PC-Engine 2 was supposed to have a true 16-Bit CPU, as well as better audio, in addition to better graphics.
Better audio and graphics capabilities would have been nice, but a 16-bit CPU wouldn't have made any difference over a faster 8-bit CPU.
-
I remember in EGM back in 1989, they were saying the PC-Engine 2 was supposed to have a true 16-Bit CPU, as well as better audio, in addition to better graphics.
Better audio and graphics capabilities would have been nice, but a 16-bit CPU wouldn't have made any difference over a faster 8-bit CPU.
what if the 16-bit CPU was faster than the 8-bit one.
the 65816 can punch up to 20mhz, as demonstrated by the SuperCPU addon. Screw the retarded SNES one.
either way, 16-bit capabilities are pretty important.
-
what if the 16-bit CPU was faster than the 8-bit one.
the 65816 can punch up to 20mhz, as demonstrated by the SuperCPU addon. Screw the retarded SNES one.
either way, 16-bit capabilities are pretty important.
Well, if the 16-bit CPU was faster than the 8-bit one, then yes, it could make a big difference. That said, they could still use an 8-bit core and use certain 16-bit addressing modes if designed properly. I don't think 8 vs 16-bit for the core functions would affect the abilities of the console as much.
Now, the way to make a true-16-bit transition for the PCE might have been to adopt a 16-bit CPU but retain the Hu6280 as an audio co-processor (give it some additional hardware to work with, of course, like a few FM channels and some enhanced sampling functions) and, perhaps, like the SGX, a couple of the VDPs working together. Might be a bit of a bitch to program for, though. Still, I imagine graphics chips are much easier to work with in a parallel configuration than something like a general purpose CPU (ala the Sega Saturn).
-
its an excellent conversion graphically superior to the megadrive but audio it does lack some oomph..
you could also get the cheaper capcom generations 2 for psx/sega saturn
-
I've never played it, but watching videos I know they messed up the scrolling of the layers in he beginning of level 3. What is part of the front layer should be in the background or vice-versa, I forget.
oh that level where you travel upwards then jump along the wiggly tongues.....
-
a 16 bit CPU, in this case, say the 65816, is already faster than the 65c02, and has access to all of it's modes and them some. 16 bit mathery is going to benefit from a 16 bit CPU. You can do shit half as fast basically. What you describe (8 bit CPU with 16 bit addressing modes) is basically a z80. Indirect indexed on the 6502 is 16 bit apparently. But f*ck that crap.
and no, it doesn't need a co processor for audio, and some FM. This isn't a mega drive.
-
I've never played it, but watching videos I know they messed up the scrolling of the layers in he beginning of level 3. What is part of the front layer should be in the background or vice-versa, I forget.
oh that level where you travel upwards then jump along the wiggly tongues.....
[/quote
He's talking about the first half of level 3, not the 2nd half.
-
a 16 bit CPU, in this case, say the 65816, is already faster than the 65c02, and has access to all of it's modes and them some. 16 bit mathery is going to benefit from a 16 bit CPU. You can do shit half as fast basically. What you describe (8 bit CPU with 16 bit addressing modes) is basically a z80. Indirect indexed on the 6502 is 16 bit apparently. But f*ck that crap.
and no, it doesn't need a co processor for audio, and some FM. This isn't a mega drive.
Or just make a x86 based cpu and have loads of fun with pc ports! :P Anyway back on topic, I tend to agree that the SGX version of Ghouls N Ghosts is definitely one of my favorites. Its a shame the damn game costs so much on the bay these days.
-
a 16 bit CPU, in this case, say the 65816, is already faster than the 65c02, and has access to all of it's modes and them some. 16 bit mathery is going to benefit from a 16 bit CPU. You can do shit half as fast basically. What you describe (8 bit CPU with 16 bit addressing modes) is basically a z80. Indirect indexed on the 6502 is 16 bit apparently. But f*ck that crap.
and no, it doesn't need a co processor for audio, and some FM. This isn't a mega drive.
Or just make a x86 based cpu and have loads of fun with pc ports! :P Anyway back on topic, I tend to agree that the SGX version of Ghouls N Ghosts is definitely one of my favorites. Its a shame the damn game costs so much on the bay these days.
$40-50 on the bay isn't TERRIBLE, though it is a tad high. I am firmly on the side that SGFX GnG is worth every penny (like Aldynes).
-
every game on the SGX is worth it.
i mean, what other system lets you get the whole library for like, 200 bucks.
-
every game on the SGX is worth it.
i mean, what other system lets you get the whole library for like, 200 bucks.
1941 alone may bump that up a bit ;)
-
a 16 bit CPU, in this case, say the 65816, is already faster than the 65c02, and has access to all of it's modes and them some. 16 bit mathery is going to benefit from a 16 bit CPU. You can do shit half as fast basically. What you describe (8 bit CPU with 16 bit addressing modes) is basically a z80. Indirect indexed on the 6502 is 16 bit apparently. But f*ck that crap.
Both absolute and indirect addressing modes on the 65x are 16bit. 16bit addressing wasn't a stranger to 8bit cpu, it was the norm. If you mean indexing, then yeah - only 8bit. The 6809 cpu has 16bit indexing though.
The 65816 is a kind of crap cpu though. For two reasons: it was originally made pin compatible with the 6502 and thus 24bit addressing is done through multiplexing the data bus and address bus - you have to use an external register to latch this (using Phase 1 and Phase 2) . This means all roms have to be twice as fast in the cpu clock rate. A 20mhz 65816 would need 40mhz memory. That's really shitty. Even on the snes with it's custom package, those rom speed requirements are still there (that's why there's a option to run the cpu in slower speed, slower speed roms were cheaper). A 7.16mhz 65816 on the SGX would require ~50ns rom (as well as ram) or introduce wait states which would defeat the purpose. Second, the 8bit data bus is pathetic. It hinders the real power of that processor design. It would be incredibly fast if the data bus was 16bit (it's gimped similar to the 68008 8bit data bus 68k, although not as bad). The 65816 is also missing some opcodes from the 65C02 (there are two official revisions of this processor, the second one adds more opcodes - and is what the 6280 version is based off of), so it's only backwards compatible with the 6502, not the 65C02 or 65C02S. And all the 6280 opcode slots are already taken up on the 65816.
I don't think it's worth having a 16bit cpu (ala 65816) in the SGX if it means breaking compatibility with the PCE. An external DMA controller to take the load off cpu for graphic updates would do good for the system (16bit DMA writes to the VDC for twice the transfer rate as the Txx). The 6280 has a few opcode slots open for upgrades, they could have added additional register (16bit indexing), address to address 16bit math (macro instructions), long 24bit addressing, and such through these. Even chain or paired opcodes, like the z80 prefix opcodes (there have been external hardware upgrades to the original 6502 that did stuff like this). If not done on the processor, it could have been handled via an external controller unit (like the SNES does or the Arcade Card on the PCE); 24bit addressing with self incrementing or decrementing, etc. There's plenty of open bus area in the hardware bank ($ff) for this (it's what the arcade card does).
I bought the SGX back in early '93 and was a little disappointed that they did nothing to upgrade the sound. It still had the same thin/skinny bottom end as the PCE. Two additional DMA DAC channels would have cleared that up. I would take that sort of upgrade over any cpu upgrade.
-
I have a spare loose copy of Daimakaimura. Offers welcome, preferably trade ;)
-
Both absolute and indirect addressing modes on the 65x are 16bit. 16bit addressing wasn't a stranger to 8bit cpu, it was the norm. If you mean indexing, then yeah - only 8bit. The 6809 cpu has 16bit indexing though.
I know that. My point though was more the fact that the 6502 lacks actual 16 bit registers to do the aforementioned things. It'd be nice if they used a CPU that did for the SuperGrafx. I'd venture to guess that it would be fine to use a 65816, since you can kick them into 65c02 emulation mode. I'd also guess that Hudson would come up with some hybrid thing anyways like they did with the 6280.
You should see the C64 w/ a SuperCPU. It's pretty wild. The one game for it (Metal Dust), pulls things off the C64 crowd could never dream of otherwise. The game's not exactly great, but it shows the difference you can actually get. the speed and the 16-bitting help a great deal. This is why all of those Doom/Wolf3D games for C64/Speccy/etc are pretty rough. You really need more bittage to achieve those kinds of things.
Imagine what you could do on the SuperGrafx with a 16 bit CPU that is faster than the 6280. I suppose, if Spenoza's idea of using the 6280 as a coprocessor went into effect too, you wouldn't need to worry about compatibility.
Something similar is often discussed in Amiga land. People think the Amiga line should have been backwards compatible with the C64/128 line. They want the exact opposite. 8 bit CPU instead of a 16 bit one... weird.
It's all preference though, and I don't see the point in debating it any further. SuperGrafx just needed some sort of 16 bit CPU. It's kind of apparent that the 6280 wasn't powerful enough to deal with everything well.
EDIT: added some C64 nonsense.
-
every game on the SGX is worth it.
i mean, what other system lets you get the whole library for like, 200 bucks.
1941 alone may bump that up a bit ;)
and also counting in the two available hybrids, you easily can add a further "0" behind.
-
Both absolute and indirect addressing modes on the 65x are 16bit. 16bit addressing wasn't a stranger to 8bit cpu, it was the norm. If you mean indexing, then yeah - only 8bit. The 6809 cpu has 16bit indexing though.
I know that. My point though was more the fact that the 6502 lacks actual 16 bit registers to do the aforementioned things. It'd be nice if they used a CPU that did for the SuperGrafx. I'd venture to guess that it would be fine to use a 65816, since you can kick them into 65c02 emulation mode. I'd also guess that Hudson would come up with some hybrid thing anyways like they did with the 6280.
You should see the C64 w/ a SuperCPU. It's pretty wild. The one game for it (Metal Dust), pulls things off the C64 crowd could never dream of otherwise. The game's not exactly great, but it shows the difference you can actually get. the speed and the 16-bitting help a great deal. This is why all of those Doom/Wolf3D games for C64/Speccy/etc are pretty rough. You really need more bittage to achieve those kinds of things.
Imagine what you could do on the SuperGrafx with a 16 bit CPU that is faster than the 6280. I suppose, if Spenoza's idea of using the 6280 as a coprocessor went into effect too, you wouldn't need to worry about compatibility.
Something similar is often discussed in Amiga land. People think the Amiga line should have been backwards compatible with the C64/128 line. They want the exact opposite. 8 bit CPU instead of a 16 bit one... weird.
It's all preference though, and I don't see the point in debating it any further. SuperGrafx just needed some sort of 16 bit CPU. It's kind of apparent that the 6280 wasn't powerful enough to deal with everything well.
EDIT: added some C64 nonsense.
Not really debating so much as listing our wishes/wants of what the console should have came with ;)
I think the easiest solution for a 16bit upgrade is to make the 6280 just like the 65816 in the register extension department. You have a flag that sets whether the bus and regs are 8bit, or 16bit. In 16bit mode, everything is extended. A, X, and Y are 16bit. PC is 32bit. Bus is 16bit. All the instructions are the same, just wider regs. D7/D6 flag logic would be extended to D15/D14, etc. If they really wanted to be cheap, they could keep the 8bit data bus like the 65816 does (but no need to multiplex the address bus since the 6280 already has a much bigger address line set than the 6502 and 65c02). But there's nothing stopping someone from just putting a cpu on the hucard just like SNES did. If SNES did it, then it's fair game. Same for my wish for extra two DMA DAC channels. The hucard slot has the audio line in, and the channels would be fine for mono (I'm was thinking along the lines of bass instruments and drumkits - they way some CD games to do chip music use the ADPCM channel for this. Fiend Hunter sounds great ).
-
http://www.cmdweb.de/scpu.htm
=3
I should have kept mine, lol.
-
@Bonknuts: Fiend Hunter! That was the game that you ripped the PSG from? (or, at least, provided an .mp3 of the sound effects/PSG and/or ADPCM?
I recall listening to this many moons ago.
-
I found the EGM clips I think I was talking about (sorry, i'm a bit drunk right now :mrgreen: )
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/3843/pcengine2july19896ib.jpg)
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/5745/pcengine2july198926he.jpg)
(http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/9430/pcengine2augsept198928ev.jpg)
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/7216/pcengine2augsept198936nf.jpg)
Notice how the 16-Bit PC-Engine 2 name was used for the unreleased Namco 16-bit "Super Sytem"
Whoa!