http://www.vimeo.com/1278226
If only ???
Nice M2 game play.
Moderators: 3DO Experience, Devin, Bas, 3DOKid
-
3DO Experience
- 3DO ZONE ADMIN
- Posts: 3686
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: U.S.A.
-
parallaxscroll
- 3DO ZERO USER
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:29 am
on-topic:
This shows that the 3DO-designed M2 technology, whether it was in a (canceled) console or a Konami arcade board, was capable of handling any of the SEGA MODEL 2 arcade games without compromise, such as the game similar to Evil Night, original House of the Dead which ran on MODEL 2C. So M2 could rival MODEL 2, unlike Saturn, PS1, N64 or 3DFX Voodoo equiped PCs which all had lower performance than Sega's 2nd-gen 3D arcade board, and M2.
off-topic:
With that said, Matsushita's claims of M2 having nearly SEGA MODEL 3 performance was just hype. M2 was nowhere near MODEL 3.
M2 = 300K to 500K triangle polys/sec
(textured, g-shaded, lit, with all effects)
MODEL 3: over 2,000,000 triangle polys/sec
or over 1,000,000 square polys/sec
(textured, g-shaded, lit, anti-aliased with all other effects)
It would've taken a very beefy upgraded MX (unoffically M3) to rival Sega's MODEL 3 board. Maybe 3DO/CagEnt & Nintendo's work on MX in late 1997 would've gotten there. They were aiming for a late 1999 release in Japan. If the MX technology had been upgraded enough, and with embedded memory (like PS2 and GCN), then I think MX could've rivaled and surpassed both MODEL 3 and Dreamcast/NAOMI, but only by a small amount at most. It would not have been as powerful as the GameCube which was a clean-sheet new architecture designed in 1998-2000, released in 2001.
This shows that the 3DO-designed M2 technology, whether it was in a (canceled) console or a Konami arcade board, was capable of handling any of the SEGA MODEL 2 arcade games without compromise, such as the game similar to Evil Night, original House of the Dead which ran on MODEL 2C. So M2 could rival MODEL 2, unlike Saturn, PS1, N64 or 3DFX Voodoo equiped PCs which all had lower performance than Sega's 2nd-gen 3D arcade board, and M2.
off-topic:
With that said, Matsushita's claims of M2 having nearly SEGA MODEL 3 performance was just hype. M2 was nowhere near MODEL 3.
M2 = 300K to 500K triangle polys/sec
(textured, g-shaded, lit, with all effects)
MODEL 3: over 2,000,000 triangle polys/sec
or over 1,000,000 square polys/sec
(textured, g-shaded, lit, anti-aliased with all other effects)
It would've taken a very beefy upgraded MX (unoffically M3) to rival Sega's MODEL 3 board. Maybe 3DO/CagEnt & Nintendo's work on MX in late 1997 would've gotten there. They were aiming for a late 1999 release in Japan. If the MX technology had been upgraded enough, and with embedded memory (like PS2 and GCN), then I think MX could've rivaled and surpassed both MODEL 3 and Dreamcast/NAOMI, but only by a small amount at most. It would not have been as powerful as the GameCube which was a clean-sheet new architecture designed in 1998-2000, released in 2001.