New Giga Wing/Type-X HW Questions

[BAD]

Sorry if this information can be found elsewhere, but I don't know much about the GWG and the Type-X, so I have a few questions to ask about it.

1. Recently, I've seen that Giga Wing Generations is coming out for PS2, but I also heard before that it was coming to XBox; is it still coming for XBox? Was it just a rumor? I can't seem to find any information on it...

2. The Magic Box says that the Type-X hardware is Windows XP-based, and I've also heard that it is the XBox arcade hardware. Is it really XBox arcade hardware, or was that said just because it's Windows XP-based?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Thunder Force]

There is no Xbox version of GWG announced, or planned AFAIK.

Xbox arcade hardware is Sega's Chihiro, not Taito's Type-X. Also Xbox/Chihiro runs on a modified and optimized Win2K kernel, not on XP.

On paper, Type-X hardware is more powerful than Chihiro:
CHIHIRO: http://www.system16.com/sega/hrdw_chihiro.html
TYPE-X: http://www.system16.com/taito/hrdw_typex.html

[gameoverDude]

Sorry if this information can be found elsewhere, but I don't know much about the GWG and the Type-X, so I have a few questions to ask about it.

1. Recently, I've seen that Giga Wing Generations is coming out for PS2, but I also heard before that it was coming to XBox; is it still coming for XBox? Was it just a rumor? I can't seem to find any information on it...

2. The Magic Box says that the Type-X hardware is Windows XP-based, and I've also heard that it is the XBox arcade hardware. Is it really XBox arcade hardware, or was that said just because it's Windows XP-based?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Type-X isn't Xbox based. Sega's Chihiro is Xbox hardware (733 MHz Pentium 3). AFAIK there's no Xbox GWG in the works.

Taito's board runs on a 2.5 GHz Celeron in its normal configuration but is upgradable to a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4. ATI Radeon graphic cards can be used in it- all the way up to an X800XT. It's more PC based and the games come on hard drives.

[BAD]

Oh, OK. Thanks, guys. I've heard a lot recently about this stuff, so I just wanted to ask about it and get it straight. I knew that the Chihiro hardware was the XBox arcade hardware, which is why I was wondering if what I had heard about the Type-X was true or not. So then, what is it comparable to? And what makes it more powerful than the Chihiro (without all of the aforementioned upgrades)?

[TWITCHDOCTOR]

Don't worry about it...get the Dreamcast versions and you'll be very happy.
See other post.

[raiden]

Type X has a main CPU of 2,5ghz, making it roughly three times as fast as Chihiro. The graphics hardware is also more advanced than that of Chihiro. Concerning GWG however, this power doesn´t seem to be used that much, really, as the arcade version still slows down, crashes and allegedly has laggy input. The PS2 version, on the other hand, has no tate, runs with 20 frames and has scaling problems as well as flickering bullets.
Raiden III, also a Type-X game, is currently availlable at more than $2000 from Coinopexpress.

[U K Narayan]

Type X has a main CPU of 2,5ghz, making it roughly three times as fast as Chihiro. The graphics hardware is also more advanced than that of Chihiro. Concerning GWG however, this power doesn´t seem to be used that much, really, as the arcade version still slows down, crashes and allegedly has laggy input. The PS2 version, on the other hand, has no tate, runs with 20 frames and has scaling problems as well as flickering bullets.
Raiden III, also a Type-X game, is currently availlable at more than $2000 from Coinopexpress.

Ew. That explains all the bad impressions I've been seeing.

[BAD]

Oh, OK. Thanks again, guys.

[Cthulhu]

So far Raiden III is the most impressive Type X game. Just about everything released on the set has suffered from pretty bad visual problems - the fighting games have really, really chunky sprites and some other assorted visual issues, Gigawing Generations has a wretched framerate and some frame dropping (not just slowdown) problems...

[Rob]

Ew. That explains all the bad impressions I've been seeing.

It explains something. (hint: raiden hasn't played the game)

[Rummy Bunnz]

Ew. That explains all the bad impressions I've been seeing.

It explains something. (hint: raiden hasn't played the game)

So are you saying raiden's info is incorrect? I've played it, and thanks to the quality of the port the game's an unplayable piece of garbage. It's nice that you dig it, but PS2 GWG has serious problems, most people aren't willing to put up with them, and all these silly one-liners of yours mocking anyone who dares suggest the game isn't up to par just make you look like a (and I'm loath to use this term, but I really can't think of anything more fitting) mindless fanboy. Isn't there a better way to defend something you love so dearly?

[Rob]

It's not mocking raiden. I'm just saying that he can't possibly have played the game if he lists flickering bullets as a problem. Now there might be a flickering bullet amongst 3000 in the top right hand corner of the screen on stage 5 at 47.6 seconds in, but I haven't seen it and it certainly isn't a problem. Fine if people don't like the game, but the technical/port issues are exaggerated and someone listing grievances with a game they haven't played is ridiculous (I'm pretty sure raiden said unequivocally that he was passing on this game because of no tate - and with raiden's tate fetish, I'm sure he just wants to see the worst of the port, which is why that looks like a laundry list of every complaint posted by anyone, as unsubstantiated as they may be).

[raiden]

you´re right about your assumption, I didn´t play GWG yet when I wrote the above post, but I have played it now, and it´s even worse than I expected. It looks like an interesting game, but I´m not willing to play it in that form. Flickering bullets really aren´t the main problem, the main problem is the bad framerate and the fact graphics look so ugly and deformed that my fantasy isn´t enough to imagine playing the game in its original form (like someone suggested on how to handle this port).
Considering my tate fetish, I´ve explained before how yoko mode isn´t only a visual step back, but also changes the gameplay, especially regarding hitzones. But if I imagine now I could play GWG in tate, yet with the framerate of the PS2 port, I would much rather play Giga Wing 1 instead, no matter which version. Just to put this tate preference a little into perspective. Every Genesis shmup I bought in recent weeks looks miles better, technically and aesthetically than the GWG version for PS2.

[Rob]

But where are the flickering bullets seriously? I'm confused 'cause I still haven't seen an instance of it after 20-30 hours or so.

So which Genesis games did you buy? GWG looks rough, but so do a lot of Genesis shooters.

[raiden]

But where are the flickering bullets seriously? I'm confused 'cause I still haven't seen an instance of it after 20-30 hours or so.

If flickering means bullets disappearing completely, like the Bakraid PCB does for example, I haven´t seen that, too. I´ve already admitted I was quoting people from the big GWG thread in my first post.
But there´s a lot of flickering going on as a result of the scaling procedure which is used. Fundamental things like having a sharp contrast between bullets and background or a clearly discernable speed difference in multi-speed patterns to analyze pattern structure while playing are affected by it. On this level, graphics aren´t just eyecandy but the matter which enables you to play a game in the first place.

So which Genesis games did you buy? GWG looks rough, but so do a lot of Genesis shooters.

"rough" is about as euphemistic as it gets. I was talking about games like Twin Hawk, Fire Shark, Hellfire or Thunderforce III. They may have speed issues when a lot of objects are on screen, but contrast is never a problem.