Why was Playstation too weak to handle Duke Nukem 3D?

>>3340870
Why was Playstation the only accurate port of Duke Nukem 3D?

>>3340870
On consoles the CPU is typically weaker, compared to PCs of the same era. Reason being that they use dedicated graphics hardware, to offload a fair amount of the work. Also makes them quite a bit cheaper.

Duke Nukem 3D does not use polygons, or sprites, or tiles. As such, the dedicated graphics hardware on the PS could not be used.

With the major advantage of the console out of the picture, the comparably weaker CPU caused the difference.

The N64 game is not a port but uses polygonal graphics instead, so it takes full advantage of the hardware. The difference is, among other things, indicated by the game being named Duke Nukem 64, not Duke Nukem 3D.

The picture for the PS is misleading because the other two have the Y axis go up to 40fps, and maintain 30fps on the graph. The PS graph goes up to 60fps. The yellow bump near the right third goes close to 30fps

>>3340903
>The PS graph goes up to 60fps.

That just means it has an unlocked framerate. In practice, it never goes up that high unless you are walking into a wall.

>>3340908
>That just means it has an unlocked framerate
The graph, not the framerate. The three graphs use different Y-axes, resulting in misleading comparisons. The yellow graph might be the lowest, but it hits 30fps at least at some point. That one 30fps point looks lower than the 30fps bar on both other images. That's what I pointed out.

>>3340870
because the playstation version was the only one to use the actual build raycasting engine. the others used another, actually 3d engine, which meant the relatively weak cpu didn't have to do all the work.

>>3341215
The build engine is not a raycaster for fucks sake

>>3341256
it's close enough for informal use, for fucks sake

>>3341215
>playstation uses build engine
>pc duke doesn't

I love /vr/ I learn something new every day.

>>3341275
OP shows three versions, none of them PC. Out of these, PS is the only one using the build engine

It was in software and barely made use of the hardware. Same for Doom on PSX (Although that turned out well)

>>3341295
>Same for Doom on PSX (Although that turned out well)
a simpler engine giving weaker hardware fewer problems? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked

>>3340870
>game gives you 3 graphic options (filtering, shadows, vsync)
>uses all of them
>surprised the game runs bad

This is a pretty unfair comparison considering that the Saturn version, unlike the other versions, is a different game, a complete recreation down to gameplay behaviours which are inaccurate as fuck.

It does show good looking, smooth 3D on Saturn though, with some fun lightworks, but Lobotomy was like "porting? fuck that, we'll just remake our own Duke3D instead" and it turned out worse overall.

>>3340903
Duke Nukem 3D does not use sprites
u wot

>>3342684
it does not use hardware sprites, no

>>3340908
But damn that wall is going to run buttery smooth.

>>3340870
>not appreciating a cinematic 12fps