What Dreamcast graphics will one ever achieve?!? Here is a valid reason to compare why ATI succeeded in graphics and 3dfx failed. 3dfx and Power VR displayed graphics the best at the time, but eventually ATI knocked them out of the water. ATI succeeded because after this gen, its graphics concetrated on detail rather than color. 3dfx failed in graphics because of the color was akin to the N64 era. Power VR is by far the best graphics of the bunch, and its the one chosen as the best in the video. However, I think Power VR failed because Sony was using Nivdia like graphics at the time. Power VR is infact the most unique. It just failed to catch the attention of the public. That's why you can't really mimick a DC emulator on a computer unless you use and older generation of graphics card. Some games perfer that graphics card eg star lancer on ATI displays simply fail in general. The fact is the textures are distorted for dx5, so you can say technology gets better or you can say it gets different. Just look at the HD tv, its basically so different as to change the view of television, yet all in all its a flat monitor, so its the monitor that revolutionized technology and the cathode tube being displayed as emitted color pixels via a digital chip. All-in-All Dreamcast Power vr would have simply turned graphics into a different environment, if it were to continue. That infact is for the developer to figure out. To develop a different cloud surface on the game of each graphics card out in the market..and a good idea to centralize the market. To use a Dreamcast emulator effectively, i imagine you would need a Power VR card, to emululate the textures accurately. Old technology is infact still fairly useful in this regard.

Does technology in gameplay really fail though?

Just look at old games like forsaken, descent or Bang gunship elite whom's genres have subsequently been abandoned. Sure even real time effects have been abandoned (see msr, test drive le mans), due to the fact that no one will ever play a 24 hr game or the clock feature simply got old. However, its interesting. Hence why do I play star wars battlefront, and 1942 battlefield to get the same exact gameplay and fun factor? Its not the genres that will fail its how you play the genres. Gameplay is infact precision based. It never fails. Games are fun not because of graphics but because of challenges. That's what made Dreamcast's first gen games so successful. They were challenging, and cont. to deliver that challenging gameplay. You can get star wars bf up against battlefield 1942 and depending on how you play it, or if youre good at it one will be better than the other.

To be off topic: Radar is a good example of how microwave technology fails, it only goes a few thousand feet. However, MH70 lost track of radar...my theory is an explosion of lithium batteries caused the pilot to panic and commit suicide. Another theory is why turn the transponder off? Well he had to manually turn everything off before going into the ocean. Radar hasn't changed for 60 years, however, universal radar has changed. Turning a transponder off for saftey seems like sense. Depressuring a cabin, he could have had no way to stop the fire before going to sleep. Or terrorists could have controlled the plane from the back. Technology can always fail. The revelation of MH17 is infact a missile from a buk in russia, yet the plane swirved away from a rain cloud or acted as an enemy aircraft. If all-in-all, I think Russia is not at total fault for trying to close the airspace like how the Us did in Syria. Completly logical.