From what I've read, the arcade version runs at 60 fps, while the port runs at 30.
The arcade version has frequent sudden bursts of really jerky slowdown while the port runs at a pretty constant framerate throughout.
Is the arcade slowdown like the Dreamcast Sega Rally 2 curse, where it'll hold 60 FPS for awhile and then take a dive? That was awful. I think Takumi might have locked the PS2 version at 30 to avoid porting over the slowdown. A PS3 or 360 re-do of GWG could likely be done with NO framerate hits period.
If you don't let the graphics bother you, the game plays well. Unfortunately, lack of Tate knocks it down a point- especially when Raiden III and Homura keep their Tate modes.
gameoverDude wrote:I think Takumi might have locked the PS2 version at 30 to avoid porting over the slowdown. A PS3 or 360 re-do of GWG could likely be done with NO framerate hits period.
I'm no tech expert, but somehow I doubt that technical limitations are the culprit here - I'll bet a much better job could have been done right on the PS2, but they just didn't bother.
Let's face it, the PS2 couldn't handle GWG. They tried, admirably, and we got an original mode that's 300% better than the arcade version. Not a bad deal.
The PS2 handled far more complicated and "advanced" (for lack of a better term) stuff than GWG - seriously, even the arcade hardware it was produced on was hardly considered top of the line at the time. Color me unconvinced that a better port couldn't have been done.
look at gradius 5, then say with a str8 face that this game was to advaced for the PS2.
Damn Tim, you know there are quite a few Americans out there who still lives in tents due to this shitty economy, and you're dropping loads on a single game which only last 20 min. Do you think it's fair? How much did you spend this time?
