/vr/ - Retro Games

>>2176776
Probably has something to do with the fact that most of Nintendo's great games are first party titles.

That pic is from the pc version, by the way.

>>2176776
Probably because most of the franchises they had then are around now and they aged relatively well.

>Does it bother anyone else that no one is going to care about the first Playstation in a few years?

Nope. Just means more cheap games for me.

nintendo has a kiddie image to them that's simply much more nostalgic
also most of the ps1 properties didn't turn out so well in the future (crash, spyro)

Why bother?

PS is a cheap throwaway toy system, with cheap throwaway shallow games

it's the equivalent of iphone games for casuals these days, with equally shitty controls and no resale value

>>2176785

Oh yeah, forgot to mention that PS has more edgy

>>2176783

Nothing will stop reseller bastards I'm afraid,

>>2176785
This.

The RPGs on N64 are much be-

oh wait.

>>2176791
Oh well. I'll just have to keep buying everything from Japan for a fraction of the price.

>>2176794
you could just modchip it and burn isos

1) Sony themselves hardly made any games for PS1, they didn't do their massive first party buy until PS2

2) PS1 was barely a real 3D console, so lots of games have pre-rendered backgrounds or fixed cameras which makes them feel ultra old-fashioned to new gamers

3) A lot of popular PS1 franchises hit the dust (Crash, Spyro, Tony Hawk, etc)

>>2176792

I'm so sorry you like menu and number simulators

I bet excel is a fun game for you too

>>2176801
>3) A lot of popular PS1 franchises hit the dust (Crash, Spyro, Tony Hawk, etc)

I was going to point out how Tomb Raider is still around, but then I remember watching a 15-or-so-year-old relative of my brother's wife playing the new Tomb Raider reboot, and when I mentioned it was a prequel he said "there are more of these?"

>>2176805
I actually enjoyed the new Tomb Raider quite a bit

>>2176805
It's not so specifically PS1 either. All the Tomb Raiders were ported to PC, the first one came out on Saturn first, 4 and 5 were on Dreamcast. Though it's true that the early series is associated with PS1.

I think the main reason is that the popular N64 Nintendo titles were pretty much all Nintendo made, and except the Rare games and a few exceptions like Wave Race they re still being made.

I also think the Wii was very important, many people were introduced to Retro gaming through it. I wouldnt be surprised if more pople played Super Metroid from 2006 on than in the 90s (iirc it only sold a million and a half copies in the 90s).

The other reason is that Playstation changed with the taste of mainstream consumers, Platformers stopped being the focus already with PS2, in Europe and Latin America it has always been the "dudebro" machine for Fifa, and people buy it to play Ass Creed, GTA, Call of Duty etc.
Meanwhile Nintendo will always be about cartoony platformers as if they were stuck in the 90s.

I had one and liked playing on it (probably because it was my only option) but from today's standpoint I honestly see no reason to care about the Playstation as a system. The processing power and therefore 3D capabilities are relatively few even for the time (compared to the N64 and Saturn fewest polygons per second, fewest colors on screen, fewest textures per frame, unlike the N64 no AA, mipmapping or bi/trilinear filter), it suffers from polygon jitter and warp, especially in later years lots of games had superior versions on the Dreamcast, disc drives will never be reliable, and the few games actually worth playing run just as well on a PS2 or PS3.

>/v/ Nintendo fanboys shitposting
>In my /vr/

It's all over is it?

Also OP, I don't know where you live but pretty much everyone about my age and even a bit older remembers his PS quite fondly together with the Megadrive, Nintendo isn't really that prominent, unless you talk about the Gameboy.

Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?

Firstly because it's the only thing they could rely on after PS took over, with the massive shift of devs Nintendo could really only try to pump up resources into making mainly first party games, something they still do now.
Secondly, most of the third party franchises they had migrated to other consoles, Castlevania, Squaresoft franchises etc., which also poses the interesting question of why of all franchises present in SSB there's no Dragon Quest characters but there's Pokemon, even though DQ has been on Nintendo's side much longer than Pokemon.
Thirdly, nostalgia value, Nintendo came way before Sony, it's only natural they have more charm.
Lastly it's not like Nintendo isn't much different from Sony, the fact that they better at making people buy the umpteenth Mario title is the fact that Mario/Zelda/DK are still going whereas Sony's IP are basically dead now, which brings another point up, Nintento tend cling to their old IPs while Sony tend to invest into new ones.

Basically, Nintendo is more "traditional" while Sony tends to follow the trends regarding first party IP, keep in mind that Sony is a different beast altogether from Nintendo, we're talking about a once massive corporation that invested in all fields of technology and something that over the years became fundamentally a game dev house.

There are also other things one should mention but it's already too long a post and I doubt many people care since they probably know what I'm going to point out anyway.

tl;dr, check up some history about the videogame industry.

>>2176826
>Meanwhile Nintendo will always be about cartoony platformers as if they were stuck in the 90s.

What shits me off the most about Nintendo is the way they keep rehashing, rereleasing and recycling their IPs. I realise its incredibly unfair to single out Nintendo since pretty much every modern video game company is guilty of it, but I mean seriously once I'm a crusty old man am I really going to have to watch my grand kids playing the re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release of Super Mario World?

ITT: Faggots who had an N64 as their first console. If the Playstation isn't interesting as a retro console, then the 64 shouldn't be as well.

>>2176842
>even though DQ has been on Nintendo's side much longer than Pokemon

>>2176851
>even though DQ has been on Nintendo's side much longer than Pokemon

It has though.

>>2176854
Everyone loved DQ7 on the N64

>>2176869
That isn't my point, in fact I wonder why since it's such a successful and loved series wasn't on Smash.

>>2176872
Because Nintendo isn't willing to pay the price Enix/Square-Enix demands. It's not like they have a lack of alternatives.

>>2176848
And it's not.

>>2176785
>>2176790
>>2176804
lol check out how mad this guy is

The PS1 is the system of Final Fantasy 7, debatably the most beloved video game of all time. It will always be at least somewhat relevant because of this.

>>2176776
>Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?
Is that why a vast majority of the N64 games worth playing aren't on VC?

>>2176776
That seems like an absurd false dichotomy. Nintendo is "better at introducing their older titles to new gamers" because all they fucking do is push their franchises over and over on every system they make. Why are you trying to compare Nintendo's actions as a software developer with the memory of a console whose developer did not do the same thing?

>>2176898
Playstation will be important because of the introduction of cinematic cut scenes into gaming. Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear and Resident Evil being all classic Playstation games and an example of that.
Even to this day Sony first party makes mainly cinematic games.
That was not a good influence imo.

Final Fantasy VII sold 10 million units, more than any Zelda game, but less than a third of what Pokemon sold at the same time in the late 90s, and much less than Super Mario Bros (40 millions), Bros 3 (18 millions unbundled) or World (22 millions), it sold about the same as Mario 64 (slightly less).

I don't think it is the most beloved game of all time because many western rpg fans consider jrpgs to be inherently flawed and not real rpgs.

>>2176936
>Playstation will be important because of the introduction of cinematic cut scenes into gaming.
Definitely the Playstation and not the dozen LD and CD based devices before it because nobody bought those or heard of those.

>>2176938
not him but yes everyone remembers the PS as the first console to have cinematics in games. The other systems were flops in the US

>>2176776

>Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?

Marketing, whenever sony adds a 'new' classic game to the PSN, it's only really advertised on a small section of the blog, not to mention all the classic ps1 and ps2 games are only on the PSN store for the PS3, so gamers who have the PS4 don't even get the chance to relive or be introduced to classics.

>>2176938
>not the dozen LD and CD based devices before it because nobody bought those or heard of those.

Well yeah, same reason why people think Wii invented games based around camera and motion recognition when the EyeToy did it years before.

>>2176776
TONS of people will still care about the PS1. Not to mention that Sony is still alive and kicking.
Sega's old consoles on the other hand will gradually be more forgotten.

>>2176947
I don't think Dragon's Lair or Myst were flops.

>>2176776
See
>>2176780

I'm sure Sony would be cranking out their own rehash library (like Mario, Zelda, Sonic) if they had the licensing rights for them.

PS1 will be the GOAT rpg console for all eternity.
Whether or not console-style rpgs deserve to die and be forgotten is up to debate. Imo the style has cannibalized itself into irrelevancy.

>>2176994
They already are a dead/irrelevant genre. Though the ones that come out these days often are better than in the last gen.

SNES is definitely better than PSX, though, at RPGs. PSX RPGs are slow in every way. Too much trite dialog, too many long animations, too many loading times.

>>2176997
>Though the ones that come out these days often are better than in the last gen.

>>2177002
Yeah, FFX wasn't a good game. I replayed it recently. I remembered enjoying it, but good god it is boring. It is like watching an anime with some fights thrown in once every hour.

>>2177007
I wasn't referring to FFX specifically, but still, it's miles ahead than FFXIII.

>>2177010
FFXIII is irrelevant though. I've never played it, I don't know anyone who has ever played it. I don't know why anyone would want to play it.

>>2177012
>FFXIII is irrelevant though.
Sales say otherwise
Plus, it's a mainstream game which is almost a face of the genre, just because there were a few good games it doesn't mean this gen was good regarding RPGs.
In fact it was fucking shit except a few decent titles, last gen was much better and there were much more games too.

>>2176997
PS1 library has 10x the volume
PS1 RPGs went thematically beyond "Ancient evil awakens" and technically beyond "ATTACK-MAGIC-RUN".
Somewhere along the way all creativity dried up and the race to the bottom started.

As well as the stronger 1st party brands, the 4th gen has aged better than the 5th gen.

>>2177019
The creativity dried up during the PSX era. JRPGs on the PS2 never had the fresh, exciting feel of a genre at its height.

>>2177028
Can't really argue with this, it was the nadir of the JRPG golden age.

>>2176776
I suppose that since PS1 classics were mainly third-party, then the explanation would go on a publisher-by-publisher / dev-by-dev basis?

I have heard that Square-Enix lost all their assets for at least two PS1 FF games, and so any remake would have to be drawn from scratch. But I heard that on /vr/ so it only has a 50% chance of being true. Personally it strikes me as strange that a company which produced some of the most technically advanced titles didn't follow the same data storage protocols as a mid-level PC user, but maybe backing up all the assets of FFVIII in the late 90s would have required $10,000s' worth of external HDDs and more man-hours than it took to produce the dance cutscene. Speculating out of my ass, maybe the resources which would've gone to backing up FFVIII were diverted to Spirits Within, and the resultant bankruptcy prevented them from going back & completing the storage backup.

>>2177037
Hey, Sega somehow managed to lose the Genesis Sonic's source code.
Shit happens.

>>2176842
Dragon Quest 8 says hi.

>>2176848
>Not being part of the Saturn and PS1 master race
stay pleb nintendorks.
kidding i grew up with the N64 as my first console but now i really don't give a shit about it outside of nostalgia except for at least 20 games compared to the few dozen on Sega and Sony consoles. But to OP i can see your point just like in the next generation growing up or so will not give a shit about the PS2 and will grow nostalgic towards xbux 360 and PS3. also thank god hopefully the prices will stay a good rate and if sony keeps releasing their old titles or third party companies do, the better off I am.

>>2177053
>will grow nostalgic towards xbux 360 and PS3

Fucking hell I don't know how. There's like a dozen games worth playing and they're on both the systems...except for a couple of them which are on ps3.

>>2177053
Dont you mean the dreamcast master race

>>2176776
>Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?

Because Sony doesn't own most of their older titles; 3rd-party publishers do.

And most 3rd-party publishers just don't give a fuck about their old games

>>2177081

So much this

why are nintendrones so insecure that they always have to shit on the PSX?

at least shit on the Saturn or Dreamcast for variety's sake

Why does it even matter? New players are already rotten from the start and probably can't get into old graphics anyway. Only a handful will go back and become enthusiasts and those guys will get to know all the classics anyway. What a fucking retarded question.

>>2177114

I'm inclined to think this is kind of a falseflagging thread, or simply a thread to instigate the daily N64 vs PS1 war, I'm tired of it.

By the way I never understood Sony's way of working.
For example Jumping Flash are, to me, some of the best and most original games on the PS1, and they're better platformers than anything the west has put out on the PS1 (Crash, Spyro, etc), yet Sony totally forgot about it.

For example in the Smash sony ripoff, there were weird characters like Bioshock or Donte, which aren't even Sony exclusive, but Robbit was nowhere to be seen, not even a cameo. Jumping Flash was one of the PS1's flagship titles back in 1995. Robbit was awesome as a mascot for Sony, AND Sony owns the IP, the developers who did the game, Exact, were a 1st party studio owned by SCEJ.

I don't know what happened, why did Sony decide to kill Exact, kill Jumping Flash, and give priority to stuff like Crash or Spyro. I know in the end it worked, Crash sort of became PlayStation's mascot, at least unofficially, but Robbit could have easily been the official PlayStation mascot.

>>2177168
That game is not a household name...at all. I'd never even heard of it before a few years ago, and I remember the early PSX days.

>>2177169

That's because Sony were incompetent at managing the IP, as I said.

And yes, Jumping Flash was one of the most commented PS1 games back in 1995. In fact, it was my first PS1 game.

>>2177168
>Jumping Flash
>better than Crash and Spyro
What kind of shitty opinion is that? Not to mention that it's first person and that you can't even see the character. Totally unfit for a mascot. Klonoa on the other hand...
The first and second game are masterpieces.

>>2177176

>What kind of shitty opinion is that?

Calm down.

>Not to mention that it's first person and that you can't even see the character. Totally unfit for a mascot.

You can see Robbit at all times (or a graphic representation of it), and there's many instances in the game where you see it. But yes, the main hook with JF is that it's a first person platformer, and that's what makes it unique. Crash and Spyro are rather generic in comparision. But that's just my opinion, don't get mad, OK?

Klonoa is a Namco game, why would it be a Sony mascot? I repeat, Jumping Flash was a first party Sony game.

>>2177182
>You can see Robbit at all times (or a graphic representation of it)
Still unsuitable for a mascot. A small 2D graphic doesn't leave the impression a fully featured 3D character offers. Not to mention that Crash and Spyro had personality. So did Sir Daniel Fortesque in Medievil.

Those games were much uniquer in their representation too. Jumping Flash has bland aesthetics and gameplay that is unfocused. Maybe the idea was more unique at the time but Crash and Spyro are way more refined and still great platformer games while Jumping Flash remains more an interesting experiment. That Crash and Spyro are way more popular than Robbit is pretty clear, this alone answers all your questions.

Sony's Smash Bros clone is pretty shitty and unsuccessful so I don't really want to talk about that game.

>>2176776

its the way they treat their IP's. They own and respect them because the IP's are what made nintendo rich. Since OP posted a LOK game, take a look at the latest entry: Nosgoth. Do you think whoever owns the rights to that series cares about the series?

>>2177206

I don't know, the same way you disacredit my opinions, I feel the freedom to disacredit yours: I think both Crash and Spyro are very uninspired, generic, their personalities reek of the cheesy 90s "cool and edgy" mascot. Robbit feels more Sony-like, a cute little rabbit robot, reminds me of Aibo in a way.

I also don't think JF just feel like "experiments", Jumping Flash 2 is an excellent game, with nice level designs and I also feel the controls are very tight, I love how you can double jump AND calculate where you're gonna land. Mirror's Edge pales in comparision to the platforming on JF. (I know ME is supposed to be more realistic, though). So no, I don't agree with you, sorry.

I think JF could have been a more successful IP, in fact, at the time it was well received. But Sony decided to promote Crash instead. Marketing wins.

PS1 had relatively few great games. Lots of decent and fun titles, but not very much in the way of "I'm going to buy the entire console for this one game"

PS2 had like.. hundreds of those kinds of games

>>2176782
Nintendo old games age ridiculously better than their new ones.

>>2177229
other way around

>>2177232
your opinion is wrong and my opinion is right

>>2177224
Calm down. Just note that Crash and Spyro had huge popularity while Robbit, yeah, no one gave a fuck about Robbit.

>>2177236
other way around

>>2177239
lol

>>2177237
I liked robbit dude! D:
ghost in the shell was actually jumping flash on stereoids and bulshit difficulty

>>2177232
I agree with this guy. PS1 had a ridiculous amount of great games.

>>2177229
So wrong it hurts. Take it back to /v/.

>>2177247
prove me wrong

>>2177248
There are no good platformers on ps2.

>>2177237

But I'm calm, you were the one who seemed horrorized by the thought that someone might prefer JF over Crash or Spyro.

And yes, I know that Spyro and Crash were benefited by better marketing than JF (and in consequence more popularity), it's what I've been talking about since the beginning.

>no one gave a fuck about Robbit.

People did for a while between 1995 and 1996, then yeah, Sony stopped supporting Exact and the JF IP and everyone forgot about it, except enthusiasts. I still like Jumping Flash and I'm sure there's more people who also remember and recognize JF's role as an early flagship PS1 title, and also a unique kind of platformer. It's been 20 years and we still haven't got something similar to it.

>>2177242
love this game, but it loops and gets old too quickly
wish they woulda turned this concept into an adventure platformer

>>2177252
idk

>>2177248
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekqYhP8PhMg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Ln-qyvX_I

>>2177243

Right, Ghost in the Shell was also made by Exact and has similar physics. One of my favorite PS1 games. Man I wish Sony wouldn't have dissolved Exact.

The game it's not that difficult when you get used to use L and R to strife sideways, and you can also press both L and R at the same time to dash forward and backward.

>>2177256
>gets old too quickly
the whole point is to play with 2p

>>2177258
man I love that ps1 intro
I miss bootup sounds in general

>>2177229
Only a pleb would make that kind of statement.
PS1 and PS2 had like no competition in their generations. Both had a great library that covered pretty much every genre extensively and offered many awesome experimental games too.

>>2177269

>pleb

while I agree about PS1 and PS2 having great catalogues, I suggest you go back here: >>>/v/

>>2177286
pleb is a /mu/ saying

>>2177286
Ironically this comes from the guy who uses the high art of redirection. A popular technique among shitposters who don't have much to say.

>>2177290

Well, both /mu/ and /v/ are teenager-dominated boards.

>>2177295
4chan in a nutshell really
successful people don't get into hobbies

>>2177305

Now that's just pure hyperbole.

>>2177305
>successful people don't get into hobbies
I haven't read something so moronic in years.

>>2177168
>Big Daddy in Sony Smash

I don't get this. Wasn't Bioshock originally a 360 and PC exclusive at one point, and then ported to the PS3 more than a year later? I guess it could be seen as Sony's equivalent to Brawl's Snake, where MGS only had four games on Nintendo consoles while Sony had almost a dozen. I remember how Kojima was so happy to bring up MG1 for the NES as proof of Snake's "history" with Nintendo, the very same game he constantly shits on.

Speaking of, are the BS games even related to the SS games, or are they considered the same because they both end in Shock and both had Ken Levine in them?

>>2177307
do you watch agdq? everyone there looks like a fucking loser

>>2177312
>raised like 1.5 million in charity
Ya look at those losers.
Go off yourself.

>>2177305
>successful people don't get into hobbies
More like we are unsuccessful because we put our hobbies above everything else.

>>2177317
all for jewkama and his scammy charity
none of the speedrunners pocketed a single cent of that money

>>2177310
>I remember how Kojima was so happy to bring up MG1 for the NES as proof of Snake's "history" with Nintendo, the very same game he constantly shits on.

Kojima didn't like the NES Metal Gear, but he probably understands its legacy.

Here's a good read and interview with the Metal Gear NES director:
http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/metalgear/masahiroueno.htm

As for Bioshock on Sony Smash, no idea.

>>2177320
I feel sorry for you. Being that materialistic. Must be suffering.

>>2177312

>do you watch agdq?

No, I don't.

>>2177323
meguca is suffering
Then again speedrunners get free publicity for their twitch channels, so I guess they do gain something out of it after all.

>>2176776
>Does it bother anyone else that no one is going to care about the first Playstation in a few years?
First things first, what makes you think that?

>>2177327
>Then again speedrunners get free publicity for their twitch channels, so I guess they do gain something out of it after all.
Most of those speedrunners barely average a few thousand watchers. They make nothing compared to the time they put into it.

PS1 will remain being my favorite console of all time.

>>2176826
Platformers, like single-screen games etc., have mostly disappeared, because platforming is an outdated and currently unnecessary abstraction. It's a genre that has developed due to games being 2-dimensional. When games became increasingly 3D, platforming became unnecessary.

Another example of a genre becoming obsolete is the point-and-click. Today adventure games can have lush graphics and interactivity AND direct controls, so they don't have to rely on text input or point-and-click mechanics.

Just like the abstraction of a seperate battle screen in RPGs is disappearing, and most general so-called "RPG mechanics" are disappearing: modern computers, even dedicated gaming consoles, are capable of much more, so these abstractions, that were so important in the past, are no longer necessary.

>>2177345
You're welcome to your own opinions but I think you're on the wrong board.

>>2177345
Holy shit the bait.

>>2177345
A very 1997-ish way of thinking

>>2177345
Just say that action is the primary focus in a time where attention spans are ridiculously short.

>>2176801
>Tony Hawk
What happened with that, anyway? Everyone loves the THPS games.

>>2177363
The same thing that happened with Crash and Spyro. The quality of the games went down the toilet.

>>2177353
>Just say that action is the primary focus
That would be wrong. Why would I?
>in a time where attention spans are ridiculously short.
What time? When is that time? What are you talking about? Are you trying to say that modern games accomodate a shorter attention span that they used to? Most modern games take 20 hours to beat. Most 80s games took 40 minutes to beat. An average gameplay session in a modern game is 3-4 hours. An average gameplay session in an 80s arcade would be about 2 minutes at best.

>>2177352
What does that even mean? In 1997 I was in high school. Most games I play are pre-1997, whatever the significance of that particular year is to you. I have no idea what exactly your'e getting at. Are you trying to hint that I'm somehow wrong due to having also played video games in late 90s, as well as early 90s, late 80s, etc. etc.?

>>2177349
Your opinion on what board I should post on is irrelevant, though. You're not welcome.

>>2177350
And you might as well learn to speak like a person and not an autoposting spambot.

>>2177368
10/10

>>2177368

Passive-aggressive: the post.

>>2177368
>Your opinion on what board I should post on is irrelevant, though.
Your point of view which is based on preference doesn't correspond with this board's primary discussion subject. In other words you're plain shitposting.

The old vidya vs. new vidya shitposting shtick isn't anything new to me at this point on so I'm not even mad, just sad that you are wasting time on trying to make a bunch of people upset on the internet.

>>2177374
What's so passive about my post? Would you have wished that I also call you a fuckwad or something?

>>2177372
Do you have anything to say or are you just shitposting?

>>2177345
someone point out what's wrong with this post, i agree with mostly everything he said

>>2177376
>Your point of view which is based on preference
You're wrong. My point of view goes against my personal preference. I personally prefer 3rd and 4th gen platformers above all else.

That doesn't hinder me from understanding how and why video games change, though.

>>2177380
Have you even played a 3d platformer?

>>2177376
whats wrong with what he said tho, platformers and japanese style rpgs are turning obsolete

>>2177379
>What's so passive about my post? Would you have wished that I also call you a fuckwad or something?

What's so passive? The amount of cheesy sarcasm, that's what.

Nice to see youf inally stopped trying and went full brute as you actually are.

>>2177368
>>2177345
This is a sneak peak of 6th gen being allowed on /vr/. Everyday we get closer.

>>2177384
Video games are an obsolete outdated medium considering virtual reality is a possibility.

>>2177368
>What time? When is that time? What are you talking about? Are you trying to say that modern games accomodate a shorter attention span that they used to?
I'm trying to say exactly what I wrote. In a time with smart phones, quick in and out designed checkpoint fast food systems and extremely easily accessible entertainment in any size and form with sites like youtube and twitter etc. attention spans shortened to an unsightly length.

Also games in the past didn't consist mainly of arcade games. What the fuck are you even on about?

>>2177379
No one's going to debate you, bro. Just heckle you about your bad opinions.

>>2177382
last one i played was mario galaxy? only current example i could think of was mirror's edge and the scripted jump ass creed

>>2177392
Such tight controls and wonderful perspective that make 2d platformers completely outdated!

>>2177387
long live the occulus rift, mang

i do think 3D platformers are dead after the collecathon era
we saw a ressurgence in platforming thanks to nostalgic 2.5D shit like new super mario bros, dkc returns, rayman origins and legends
but its definitely lost popularity in the last 10 years
same about jayperguers

>>2177395
o i love me 2D platformers tho, i was talking about three dimensivions
i honestly cant think any examples of real 3d ones beside mario galaxy

>>2177389
you have a point, corridor shooters didn't become a trend until very recently

>>2177389
>Also games in the past didn't consist mainly of arcade games. What the fuck are you even on about?
Let's see. I'd estimate an average 3rd gen title to last about 40 minutes. Mastering it would take about 5-6 hours, 10 hours for challenging titles. I'm talking about games like SMB, SMB3, Contra, Castlevania. JRPGs took about 15-20 hours.

Modern action titles take 20-25 hours. Mastering them takes about twice that much due to additional modes, unlockable difficulty levels, unlockable skills, online play etc. Modern JRPGs take about 50 to beat and about 80 hours to master.

Here I'm completely bypassing arcade games... which were paramount in 80s and early 90s gaming, which you should've known if you knew anything about gaming history. But just for you I'm not talking about those. Still, modern games take much more attention to beat than retro games. That is factual, independently of my personal opinion on which games are better.

Modern games are much more commercial, focus-tested, stale. That much is true. But "low atention spans and dudebros" is, simply put, a myth.

>>2177398
I know. You asked what was wrong with the earlier trollpost. Its the laughable suggestion that 3d makes 2d platformers obsolete. Generally if a 3d platformer is good, it is for reasons that are not platforming.

>>2177405
im not reading all that shit, grandpa

>>2177405
Pulling statistics out of your ass aside,

>Modern action titles take 20-25 hours [to beat]
>modern games take much more attention
Where is the connection?

>>2177406
Right, but 2D games in general are rare these days.
You don't see them getting made too often, and when they do it's often cheap indie games.
3D replaced 2D as the industry standard and that killed off the platformer genre.

>>2177406
>Its the laughable suggestion that 3d makes 2d platformers obsolete.
I never said that. You imagined that. Existing 2d platformers will not become obsolete, period. The genre, though, yes, that's now mostly obsolete, which is a fact. It is not the dominating genre and has not been for more than 15 years.

You're claiming that my post is an opinion, and then claim that my opinion is wrong. My personal opinion, though, is that 2d platformers are the best. Meanwhile, there is a fact that they are obsolete; my personal preferences are irrelevant, your rage misguided and misdirected.

>>2177410
Whatever the fuck else do you call attention but concentrating on something for long periods of time? Holy shit, you fuck-o, you make me kinda angry.

>>2177412
Did 3D kill the fighting game standard set by Street Fighter II?

>>2177405
I don't see how the length of a game has anything to do with what I said. Only because modern action games have tens of millions of budgets and way more content doesn't change that those experiences are completely different.

>>2177416
no
but kof 13 sold like shit and they are going to use 3D models for 14
guilty gear, mvc are also using cel shaded 3D models now
its at least affected it

>>2177415
>You're claiming that my post is an opinion
It is though.

You're claiming one is obsolete to the other when the two are fundamentally different to each other. You're comparing a standard painting to a 3D model.

>>2177352
>>2177368
There was a brief period in the mid to late 90s when 2D was considered radioactive and obsolete, now nobody really gives a damn and some major games are 2.5D.

>>2177418
What? We're talking about attention spans. Longer games require longer attention spans. Do we or don't we agree on that? See your post at >>2177410 where you seem to be actively arguing with that.

Seriosuly, you stupid piece of shit. Come the fuck on.

>>2177419
Point remains, the gameplay remains 2D. Virtua Fighter/Tekken didn't become the new set standard for new fighting games, majority of fighting games are still based on the 2D gameplay standard set by Street Fighter II, the only 3D being the graphics.

>>2177421
there hasnt been a triple AAA 2D title in ages tho
only indie games seem to still make use of the style

>>2177420
>You're comparing a standard painting to a 3D model.
I'm comparing the TECHNIQUE. Oil painting is quickly becoming obsolete due to digital painting and 3d modelling. It did not disappear, but it's not the most important skill for a modern commercial artist anymore.

Did I say that oil paintings are shit? No. I only stated the fact that modern techniques are obsolete. Oil painting is done for.

Similarly, 2d game design is mostly done for. It still exists, but today it's niche. Unlike 20 years ago, where perhaps roughly 95% of all games were 2d.

>>2177426
yeah but capcom once had the purtiest 2d sprites in the market dude now they are all full 3d
popular opinion simply doesnt buy 2d games

i wanna go back ;_;

>>2177421
Some magazines panned Street Fighter III simply because it still relied on spritework, didn't they?

>>2177423
>We're talking about attention spans. Longer games require longer attention spans.
That fucking logic. Unbelievable. We're talking about the fucking pacing here. It's the pacing that completely changed, the way modern games are designed that changed. Factual length has nothing do with anything you mongoloid.

(The guy who said that 2d platforming is not the most popular game design techniques, and 2d platformers are no longer the most popular genre, which is due to most consoles and computers not jsut being 3d-capable, but 2d-incapable.)

>>2177426
This is correct, there are no mainstream fighting games that are actually 3d gameplay-wise. At best, 3d in fighting games is a gimmick. How many truly 3D fighting games are even there? Bushido Blade, Destrega, what else is even there? Tobal, Ehrgeiz. I remember there's a modern game about war heroes from different periods. All of those were always niche. The most 3d fighting game that was also mainstream was probably Soul Calibur, and even that had gameplay that was mostly effectually 2d.

>>2177434
Some of SFIII's sprites were rotoscoped from 3D models IIRC, Elena in particular. In any way I don't mind 3D graphics which are barely distiguishable from hand-drawn sprites, the kind of cell-shaded graphics Xrd uses. I do agree with you concerning 2D vs. 3D to a degree.

>>2177446
The powerstone series is truly 3D.

>>2177458
Rotoscoping is standard practice since like forever.

>>2177459
Right, Powerstone, too, forgot about that.

>>2177458
it wasnt 3D, just actor motion capture

>>2177458
That has nothing to do with the fall of the platforming genre, by the way.

>>2176845

I don't mind it. When you have a winning formula, there's not much change needed.

As far as response to the cartoony artstyles...
At least I can stand to look at it, even when it's jagged and polygonal or "Dated" compared to what's possible today.
Here's an example. I played Arkham Asylum for the first time the other day. Everybody told me what a great game it was, how awesome it was, how good it looked, etc etc.

Bullshit. The gameplay was slow and not really engaging. It took like 20 minutes before the actual game even started. Batman runs like a fucking goon who can't into direction. And everything looks like it's made out of metallic flake covered plastic. And that's not even in reference to "new" technology. It just looks like absolute shit. I had to force myself to play it for about 3 hours and I just couldn't stand it anymore.

The only thing it's got going for it is Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.

>>2177446
>>2177459
There's also this. This thing was seriously ahead of it's time.

>>2177079
Dreamcast is life man but for 5th gen all about Saturn and PS1!
>>2177060
Not saying they wont have any nor that they dont have any good games but many are mulitplat so it will be more of just of a certian game instead of system and the rise of iOS gaming will contribute as well.
>>2177114
>at least shit on the Saturn or Dreamcast for variety's sake
but anon they had more games unlike the n64 :^)) tho the NES might beat them both even as a Sega fanboy i say that

(Since the post in question has gone somewhere, I will need to restore it fromt he archive. The janitor may have made a mistake. Please read it before deleting.)

Platformers, like single-screen games etc., have mostly disappeared, because platforming is an outdated and currently unnecessary abstraction. It's a genre that has developed due to games being 2-dimensional. When games became increasingly 3D, platforming became unnecessary.

Another example of a genre becoming obsolete is the point-and-click. Today adventure games can have lush graphics and interactivity AND direct controls, so they don't have to rely on text input or point-and-click mechanics.

Just like the abstraction of a seperate battle screen in RPGs is disappearing, and most general so-called "RPG mechanics" are disappearing: modern computers, even dedicated gaming consoles, are capable of much more, so these abstractions, that were so important in the past, are no longer necessary.

>>2177476

man I love Gradius

>>2177471
this is still 2D just with vertical movement

>>2176845
>they keep rehashing, rereleasing and recycling their IPs
If you actually think about as opposed to jsut getting annoyed, you'd see that most of their series only have one game per entire fucking system.

One Mario Kart per system, period.
One 3D Mario per syste, sometimes with a Lost Levels-type sequel at worst.
One 2D Mario game.
One Yoshi game.
One SSB game per system.
All entirely different games.

They do have 2 Zelda games per system, and both are often terrible. But still, it's just two games per entire system. Liking it to yearly (and often even more frequent) installments of Assassin's Creed, sports games et al is stupid.

>>2177482
>still 2D
>with vertical movement
?

>>2177480
So do I. No 2D shmup has ever been nearly as solid as the pinnacles of 2D autoscrollers.

>>2177476
Since I'm convinced now that you aren't a troll; This is an inherently flawed thought process because the point of a game is provide a challenge for the player to overcome. Not be a simulation. Simulation is a genre OF game. In a simulation, the point of the game is to be like something in real life.

How is abstraction unnecessary? Have you played anything by Paradox Interactive? They make the best and most highly thought of strategy games on the market today, and their games are massively abstracted. To the points of being maps and a UI.

>>2177486
u can fly like in astra superstars and dragonball

>>2177053
I grew up with Saturn at first and got PSX a bit later. It made my childhood awesome. The only time I was jealous was the lack of a FPS (Perfect Dark). But my neighbor had it with 4 controllers so it was awesome. Kind of like how everyone wanted Halo in the next generation.

Originally it would've been nice to have Mario Kart 64 too but when CTR came out and I got it I realized quickly that CTR was the superior kart racer.

Saturn was basically my Sega only console. Enjoying NiGHTS, Sonic R, Virtua Fighter, etc.

>>2177492
i grew on the ninty64 too but got to experience the ps1 from friends and later on through emulating

then something went horribly wrong with my life

>>2177436
Probably

Even something like Street Fighter IV or Mortal Kombat 9 would have been laughed out of the room for the longest time. You had to be at least superficially 3D.

>>2177490
Simulation isn't possible on modern hardware anyway. It's just that 2d abstractions gave way to 3d abstractions. The reason is, 3d was heavily marketed in mid-90s.

Unlike what the angry people above had thought, I did not claim (and there's nothing to support that in my post) that 2d gameplay is bad. But it is osolete. I.e., it is not mainstream anymore. Even handheld gaming is increasingly 3d. That much is a fact.

This has nothing to do with dudebros or attention spans either. CG appeared in movies instead of claymation. Claymation is obsolete. Same thing.

>>2177490
this

abstraction is quite necessary for most genres of game.

Why?

Because it's that abstraction that lends boundaries to a game. A specific set of rules in which the game is contained. They clearly delineate was is and isn't possible. What can and can't be done. It lends focus to the gameplay and garners a challenge to the player because the player must overcome or adapt to those rules.

That's why games like, I think it was Prototype, with as much as there is to do, it seems so jarring when you get to the Outside Fence. It's arbitrary. But MORE arbitrary that the rest of the gameworld. You can jump, climb, fight, scale, but that damned fence at the edge of the world is insurmountable.

You have this HUGE amount of freedom, and a very very limited ruleset, but then when you finally get to the boundaries of that ruleset, BAM. There it is. And suddenly all the freedom and all the immersion is broken completely because of that.

>>2177498
i agree with everything u said
but
i think you meant to say animatronics

>>2177501
and in 2D that boundary is even more redicluous

>>2177502
Claymation, animatronics, stop-motion et al. All coolest stuff. All obsolete animation techniques now, perfectly niche because of CG. Similarly, 2d game design is obsolete (i.e. used to be popular but is not anymore) due to 3d game design being widespread.

>>2177505
I beg to differ. In 2D you already have less freedom, so to speak. So the ruleset is already much smaller. So in a sense, in 2D you don't expect to be able to scale that fence because there's already so little you are capable of doing.

While in 3D the world is large, the possibilities are greater. The more you are able to do, the more you expect to be able to do. Until you can't do that, and it just seems silly. Especially when the ruleset says you can climb fences, just not THAT fence.

>>2177510
Suspension of disbelief is the term. The more realistic something is, the easier it is to break. Its why World of Warcraft looks great, but a hyper realistic shooter on the UE3, with constant popping textures looks like garbage.

>>2177519
yes. But I didn't use that term because I was talking about gameplay, not graphics.

Case in point. A game without rules is not a game. And counterintuitively, the more rules, generally, the better the experience.

>>2177528
It applies just as well to gameplay as to graphics, though.

>>2177528
>the more rules

eh. I mean, the more explicitly defined the rules are.

>>2176792
Not only did you fall for an obvious troll, but you also turned it into a playground fight too. Great job!

>>2177531
That's not to say it doesn't. Of course it does. It is just that I was not personally applying it to graphics.

>>2177396
>i do think 3D platformers are dead after the collecathon era

No, collectathons KILLED 3D platformers in general. Nostalgia aside, Rare was the scourge of the genre. There's a lot more you could do in a platformer other than collect an arbitrary number of shit to beat the stage, and then beat that stage a few times to open up a new stage.

>>2176826
>Meanwhile Nintendo will always be about cartoony platformers as if they were stuck in the 90s.
That argument is pretty bad by itself, even if Nintendo goes at it the wrong way.
Take Mario as a hand drawn movie, and "Mature" games as a CGI movie.
Yes, the CGI will shock and awe in the moment, and may be good enough to remain important for a few years (The last beowulf movie comes to mind, but that movie is just good in general).
Now, the handdrawn style is simply eternal. Look at Xiaolin Showdown and Shreck, for example: they are more or less from the same time, but Xiaolin still looks just plainly great while Shreck is an eyesore.
For example, Mario is a game that supports itself. It does not try to look mature, because it is mature by being what it is and not trying to look like a grownup by using fingerless gloves and jeans.
There are a few games that are actually "mature" in plot like SS2 or Deus Ex, so I am not saying that all games should have a plot that can be described in two lines, but I don't get my hopes up either when I see them.

>>2177305
what the fuck would successful people be working toward if they don;t have hobbies? what is success? working 24-7?
lol

>>2177252
Why is there so much bait in this thread?

>>2177323
You do realize giving to charities is a scam, right? It's hard to find an actual charity that doesn't just pocket most of the money given to them. Tax-free, I should add.

>>2179801

>>2179790
fishin' season, anon!

>>2179817
colonialism.jpg

>>2179981
Colonialism was the best thing to ever happen to Africa

>>2179989
Yeah, no. Being left as spear throwing savages was much, much better than colonialism.

>>2177174
>And yes, Jumping Flash was one of the most commented PS1 games back in 1995

"Commented" where?

What do you base this on?

I think you're assuming that others share your experience with this game; for example I have never seen anyone mention this game anywhere on the internet, and I have only seen it at rental stores.

>>2176845
When you get the opportunity, you should go to barnes and noble and check out older successful novels like LotR. There are quite possibly 10-15 different covers and styles for the same book series.

When something is popular, you repackage it and re sell it to a new generation. At least with games you can touch up the graphics and such.

>>2176963
sony has the most restrictive licensing and can freely reuse any IP of the company that developed for their systems for marketing reasons and probably more.

The problem is that they have no proper, well-known, recognizable franchise for their consoles that stretches from ps1 to ps4 and instantly makes you think of their consoles.

Nintendo on the other hand - does.

>>2177010
that's a super low hanging fruit of bad video games.

They might have as well made ff13 as interactive dvd and it might have turned out even better than the "game" did.

>>2176776
>Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?
Because SEGA, Sony, and Microsoft actually make new titles. Now go back to /v/ please.

>>2180062
I did not have internet at my house in 95, but I remember magazines talking about JF, and when I bought my PS1, JF was one of the reccommended games to get from the store I bought it .

Again, JF. Was a Sony first party title. It was an early 3d platformer, and a good one at that. After the second one was released in 1996, which was even better than the first, Sony simply decided to stop caring. They dissolved Exact, and made a spiritual sequel called mon dieu robbit which wasnt as good as the first two, and barely had any marketing for it, not sure it even was released outside japan.

I find it weird that people question the importance and relevance of JF. If you dont remember it, you probably didnt own a PS1 in the years 1995 and 96

>>2177471
>tfw it's just like the X game

>>2179991
This.

Better to have shoved them onto reservations like the United States and Australia. Give them scratch offs and liquor every now and then. Maybe some petrol to sniff.

>>2176776
they need to bring that soul reaver/legacy of kain goodness back

>Those games were much uniquer in their representation too.
>2177206
Not talking shit, and all your points are valid, but
>much uniquer
> uniquer
Please try harder next time. Once again, thank you for your well-crafted argument.

>>2181346
>google image for thas it mane
>get this

that'll do, pig. that'll do

>>2176785
>PS is a cheap throwaway toy system, with cheap throwaway shallow games

it's the equivalent of iphone games for casuals these days, with equally shitty controls and no resale value

I got what you're saying, and you're not entirely wrong, either. But it was because it was the "cheap throwaway toy system" that it became so popular and had as much 3rd party support as it did. Games on it like Klonoa, Silent Hill, Final Fantasy VII-IX, Touge Max, Racing Lagoon, Metal Gear Solid, Ridge Racer, et cetera, are all classics within their own right. Playstation was about the software far more than the hardware.

>>2177367
Not only that [though Crash and Spyro was more like Sony not getting the liscenses from Universal, which led said franchises to die], the THPS games were dying in popularity along with the Skater popularity[people stopped caring about Tony Hawk and with the recent stupid social events, you get the idea] and the studio, Neversoft started to lost its quality through the years until they died 1 and half years ago[iirc; they merged with other Activision studio]

>>2176776

I'm more concerned about the Saturn and Dreamcast than I am the PlayStation.

PS1 games are all over the PSN for the PSP/PS3/Vita, and I am assuming they will be playable on the PS4 at some point (rewriting Pops from Cell to x86 and then bugtesting hundreds of games is probably taking a long time), and the system itself is super easy to emulate extremely reliably even on ancient hardware, so PS1 games (even obscure ones) will be playable for a long, long time if the demand is there.

Conpare that to the Saturn, which still has incredibly spotty emulation due to its complex architecture, and the Dreamcast, which fares a little better but doesn't have the emulation demand behind it (namely, a lot of gamers don't care about DC games).

PS1 games will be readily playable for a long, long time. Other CD based consoles from the same era do not share that same fate unfortunately.

>>2183420

>taking bait from 4 days ago

>>2176842
>Calls out fanboy shitposting
>uses biased language to create a fanboy shitpost of his own

Take it to gamespot

>>2176848

>>2184620
Not the guy you're replying to, but I had both, and I had the N64 longer; I still say the PSX had more good games. I also prefer the unfiltered textures over the N64 blur. Also, the Dualshock is the perfect controller in my eyes, and the N64 controller is...interesting.

I don't hate the N64, but I find myself discovering going back to play PSX games WAY more often.

>>2184620
I had an SNES first, then we got an NES from a garage sale afterwards. PS1 for christmas one year, brother got an N64 for his birthday one year. The N64 just has shittier games then the PS1. We had fun with it because it had 4 player co-op. It was good, but now that I'm pretty much playing solo all the time its not a good system.

n64 fucking sucked anyone who praises it you just know it was their first console. That piece of shit was the death of every classic gaming franchise.

0 mega man platform games
0 2d castlevanias
0 contra games
0 double dragon/streets of rage style beat em ups
0 final fantasy or dragon quest games
0 street fighter games

You only think it's good if it was the first thing you ever owned and you had no attachments to those classic franchises from previous gens because you only started gaming on the faggot64.

>>2184694

n64 was the start of 3d so why have a 2d castlevania? the castlevania we got wasn't half bad.

one can only wonder where they could've taken megaman and double dragon.

>>2184694

One thing is which console was better in the second half of the 90s, another thing is which console someone who plays retro games in the 2010s would enjoy more.
Back then it sucked to not have Street Fighter games on the N64, but nowadays the arcade ports of the Playstation and Saturn aren't worth much when we have had Mame emulation for ages.

N64 didn't kill those franchises, they moved to Playstation. If the Mega Man games declined in quality it was not because of Nintendo.

>>2184729
Sorry I meant the death of classics on nintendo consoles because if you had grown up with and loved those games you would be pissed when you didn't see them get continued on the next nintendo console. Square moving to the playstation was a huge blow for the n64. I meant it that way because you wouldn't have known any different if you had n64 first because you didn't know what you lost. I don't think mega man dropped in quality moving consoles or anything they just tried some shit that didn't work I didn't mean the franchise actually died sorry.

>>2180854
Crash Bandicoot is easily their most recognizable, it's just a shame that the last good game was also for the PS1.

>>2184719
>n64 was the start of 3d

this is what nintistics actually believe

>>2184694

Yes, we know N64 doesn't have too many 2D games, thanks for reminding us.

I don't prais ethe N64, but I am not an immature kid and I know it has great exclusive games, many of them emulate like shit too, so it's good having a N64 and pop in some Sin and Punishment or Goemon every now and then.
I also enjoy the PS1 and the Saturn.

A shame you don't enjoy videogames, how old are you by the way? I mean, to assume other people had the N64 as their first console, especially on /vr/ must mean you are also kind of young... are you in your early 20s by chance?

>>2184861
Well it was, technically.

>>2184639
Considering most of the best titles on the system are single player, that's a weak argument. You need to play more games.

>>2184861
I wouldn't say it was the first 3D console, but it's definitely what made 3D catch on and take off.

>>2176782

This anon right on the money, because Nintendo franchise get consistent and not annual sequals (usually three years or one game per system) every generation whose into the new Zelda will be curious about the older ones, some buying/emulating them all. ditto for the rest.

Playstation has those too (metal gear, Reseident Evil) but to less of an extent. I love Einhander and Strider 2, but I only happened to disscover them through browsing old vidya pages (although Strider got a download only sequel that wasn't even like the first two).

>>2185146
>>2184982
The playstation was a technically superior console in every other way though. It rendered more polygons and higher res textures. As well as generally using a higher resolution. N64's sudo bilinear filter and it's z buffer was all it really had going for it. There is a couple of games that (arguably) couldn't be done on the PS1 like Conkers BFD and Banjo Kazooie, but these games had atrocious framerates and came very late into the N64's cycle. The framebuffers and effects used by MGS, Chrono Cross, and Crash Bandicoot were well beyond anything the N64 could do. Also games like Gran Turismo 2, Tekken 3, Vagrant Story, SOTN, Einhander, Spyro 3, MDK, Legend of Dragoon, Klonoa, Syphon Filter, Bushido Blade, Soul Reaver, etc etc etc. All pushed the limits of what the PS1 could do and went way past what the N64 was capable of.

>>2185965
On top of that games like Tony Hawk clearly showed the superiority of the PS1. While all of these can be mostly attributed to ease of development, the end result is really what matters. And in the end the PS1 had better looking games overall. While the N64 had a handful of first party gems.

>>2184982
There are numerous things wrong with this image. The N64 is floating-point, not fixed-point. Also, the Genesis has probably less than 10 games that actually display shaded polygons- and with the exception of Virtua Racing, it was always done in software.
Also, a key point in this argument seems to be that the Saturn and Playstation had difficulty doing perspective-correct texture mapping. Where does that leave the Genesis- which could not even handle texture-mapped 3D?
The reason Saturn and Playstation are considered 3D consoles is because the bulk of games released for them were in 3D.

>>2185965
>The playstation was a technically superior console in every other way though
But it's not. The specifications are far lower, even on paper.
>It rendered more polygons and higher res textures
It's almost like you believe there's no cost associated with rendering 3D properly. Have you played Battle for Naboo? It renders far more polygons and higher res textures than other comparable flying games on PS1, while still having glitch-free 3D.
>Conkers BFD
Conker's framerate is not atrocious compared to most PS1 games, unless you do a lot of cherry picking
>Banjo Kazooie
The framerate in this game is actually pretty good, and it's not late the cycle - it's a 1998 game.
> The framebuffers and effects used by MGS, Chrono Cross, and Crash Bandicoot were well beyond anything the N64 could do
Why? Where is the secret sauce in the PS1 that makes it possible? Framebuffers are limited by RAM. Even without the expansion pack, the N64 has more RAM than the PS1 (4MB vs 3.5MB).
>All pushed the limits of what the PS1 could do and went way past what the N64 was capable of.
Once again, it's almost like you think there's no processing cost associated with doing glitch-free 3D. It's often estimated that the N64, using microcodes that generate PS1-esque image quality, would be at least 2.5x faster than PS1

Literally the only advantage PS1 has in hardware that it's easier to program and has a dedicated sound module.
>>2185969
>The N64 is floating-point, not fixed-point
Where is the FPU in the N64? Oh right, there is none.

both consoles are pieces of shit and the fifth generation was the beginning of the end of videogames, with everyone trying to be long cinematic casualized experiences than good games

y'all fucking nerds

>>2186739
They're integrated into the chips, jackass. The RCP GPU was capable of 100 MFLOPS.

Captcha: GDurr

>>2186959
Capable of FP != good at FP

Without a specialized FPU, these old consoles aren't going to be doing anything in FP quickly. And they didn't, except on rare occasions.

>>2186739
>The specifications are far lower, even on paper.

This is correct for the majority of the specifications. The N64 has three times the clock rate of the PSX & 4 MB main memory. But let's not discount that the PSX had 512 KB dedicated audio RAM and actual audio / MPEG1 hardware.

>It's almost like you believe there's no cost associated with rendering 3D properly.

Erhm, in hardware, no there is no cost. That's the point of having the Z-buffer in hardware. The N64 gets perspective-correct textures and Z-buffering for free because the GPU is doing that in silicon. If the PSX had hardware Z-buffer and perspective-correct textures then it would still pump out more polygons per frame than the N64 because the hardware architecture is simpler far, far more efficient at rendering. The N64, even with the GPU doing the heavy-lifting work for free, struggles to do a tenth the number of polygons per frame the PSX does because of the bollocks microcode and CPU<>GPU<>RAM pipeline.

>Conker's framerate is not atrocious compared to most PS1 games, unless you do a lot of cherry picking
PSX is no example of framerates, but the N64 is consistently lower. OOT runs at 17.5 - 20 fps. All PSX games are 25+(PAL)/30 and a few at 60. Are there any N64 games running at 60 fps? I don't rightly know.

>> The framebuffers and effects used by MGS, Chrono Cross, and Crash Bandicoot were well beyond anything the N64 could do
>Why? Where is the secret sauce in the PS1 that makes it possible? Framebuffers are limited by RAM. Even without the expansion pack, the N64 has more RAM than the PS1 (4MB vs 3.5MB).

The PSX treats the screen buffer as a texture like any other. It's extremely simple and fast to do framebuffer effects. The N64 has to go through the GPU to do anything which makes framebuffer effects slow, expensive and difficult.

The point is that the N64 is a cool games console, but it cannot compete with the PSX in terms of "bang-for-buck" efficiency.

>>2187315
>Are there any N64 games running at 60 fps? I don't rightly know.

F-Zero X, Bangai-O, Mischief Makers, Yoshi's Story.
Sin and Punishment feels like 60fps, but not sure.

>>2187363
Ah yes! F-Zero X, thanks for reminding me.

>>2187363
Also Super Smash Bros.

>>2187315
>But let's not discount that the PSX had 512 KB dedicated audio RAM and actual audio / MPEG1 hardware.
It wasn't discounted. I very clearly stated that dedicated sound hardware is definitely to PSX's advantage, aside from ease of programming. The MPEG block matters little, because the N64's CPU speed advantage easily makes up for video decoding. Better, potentially to do in software, because it can try many different codecs, which I'm pretty sure is literally the only way Resident Evil 2 was able to fit on a cartridge.
>no there is no cost
It's not free at all, otherwise the lead programmer of World Driver Championship wouldn't have written his own microcode that handles z-buffer more quickly than default, nor would Perfect Dark disable texture filtering on some distant textures.

Hardware support simply means that the architecture has been designed for these features in mind, not that it's free.

Perspective correct texture mapping requires multiple passes of information. If you do each pass one at a time it's slow. The N64's GPU can calculate some parts of it in parallel, so it has a huge speed advantage over the Playstation at doing it, but it still ain't free.

>simpler far, far more efficient at rendering.
It's not more efficient at rendering. It's that the N64 microcodes are more ambitious, with greater image quality goals.

>struggles to do a tenth the number of polygons per frame the PSX
A tenth? Where did you get those numbers from?

Even Sony's claim of 180 000 polygons per second (but this is without lightning, only texture mapping) is not even double the estimate of 100 000 polygons per second of the N64's slowest microcode the ironically named Fast3D (which includes lightning, among other things like anti-aliasing, Z-buffer etc). Turbo3D/Super3D which produced Playstation-like graphics were estimated to be capable of 500 000.

(cont...)

>>2187315
>>2187373
(cont...)

There was a second version of Fast3D released in 1998 which was a lot faster than the previous one. But anyway, custom microcodes were the key to high-poly glitch free graphics on N64.

>All PSX games are 25+(PAL)/30
...How many PSX games have you played? Have you tried venturing outside of RPGs and favorites like Crash and Spyro?

>Are there any N64 games running at 60 fps?
F-Zero X

> The N64 has to go through the GPU to do anything
Going through GPU for framebuffer is a bad thing? You also have to remember that the N64 does the majority of its graphic processing on the GPU (matrix calculations/textures/rasterization) while the Playstation only does textures and rasterization on its GPU, its matrix calculations are done on GTE inside the CPU.

The GPU is far more important to the N64 than it is to the Playstation.

autistic

>>2176812
Fun game. But it's not tomb raider

Both were good.

>>2187378
The N64 has a handful of games running at 60fps while there are numerous examples on the ps1. There were a couple of standouts graphics wise on the N64. While on ps1 theres dozens of games on the ps1 that the N64 couldn't do. It's an absurd comparison the make. Looking at spyro, crash, soul reaver, armored core, mgs, vagrant story, twisted metal, sotn, omega boost, tomb raider, ridge racer 4, gran turismo 2, syphon filter, and so on the difference is clear. Even comparin multi platforms the ps1 destroys the n64. Look at MML2 or THPS2 resident evil, mortal kombat, quake, or even doom 64 compared to the ps1 doom. The differences are obvious and huge. You can argue the figures on paper all you want but the N64 simply didn't have the library to compete with the ps1 graphically.

>>2187684
>The N64 has a handful of games running at 60fps while there are numerous examples on the ps1
This is mostly to do with genre bias though.

When the majority of your games either use pre-rendered backgrounds (RPGs/survival horror) or fixed camera angles (fighting games, 2D games, Crash Bandicoot) then you are going to see 60fps more often, since the rendering is less ambitious compared to things that the N64 specialized in: 3D platformers with large open worlds, and FPS games.

>While on ps1 theres dozens of games on the ps1 that the N64 couldn't d
But that's got more to do with storage space than processing power. I agree the N64 couldn't have Parappa the Rapper.

>doom 64 compared to the ps1 doom
They aren't even the same game (Doom 64 is completely new not a port). And the rest of your post makes little sense as well.

>>2187684
On top of that sound was low quality at best even in first party releases. Notable comparisons are ton story, hydro thunder, resident evil, Rayman 2, thps, ridge racer, gex. That's just off the top of my head. Textures were always lower quality bar a couple of examples. And there were almost no fmvs on the n64. The resident evil 2 team had to cook up some black magic straight out of Louisiana to even get it on the biggest n64 cart. All around compromises were made to get games going on the n64 while the ps1 just rate forced everything with ease.

>>2187721
>All around compromises were made to get games going on the n64 while the ps1 just rate forced everything with ease.
You're right for the most part, but it's not so absolute.

Until Spyro the Dragon was released, it was commonly believed among Playstation developers that a game similar in scope to Mario 64 would not be possible on the console because the low-precision 3D rendering would not be able to produce glitch-free landscapes.

Spyro has some kind of voodoo engine of its own to make it work on Playstation. And it looks pretty good too. But I'd still argue its worlds lack the scope of Mario 64 (the verticality for instance).

>>2187732
I'll concede on the scope versus mario 64. Mario 64 is definitely more open ended. I apoligize for my posts being difficult to follow. I have a tough time typing on my phone. There is several open wold style games on the ps1 though that do render large environments. Spyro being the most popular, syphon filter has some huge maps, tomb raider, driver, twisted metal, vigilante, soul reaver, and ghost in the Shell to name a few. There were plenty of open world games or games with large environments on the ps1 that looked great.

>>2187778
>large environments
Ah, but I think this is where the misunderstanding comes in. I mean large environments from a rendering point of view, as in, large environment rendered all at once in a single frame.

The games you've listed like Soul Reaver do indeed have large worlds, but the game never draws too much of at one time. The developers have designed the level layouts like a serious of corridors and small rooms. Others like Ghost in the Shell and Twisted Metal have fairly blatant pop-in.

A lot of N64 games are poorly coded, and have a lot of fogging as well. But the games without fog on N64 with good draw distance, you won't find their equivalents on Playstation. The hardware simply can't handle large polygons. It's just a limitation of the hardware architecture.

>>2187816
Very true, the Playstation can't handle large polygons without signifI can't warping. The style between both consoles is just different I suppose. Each has its own strengths I suppose.

>>2176776
>Why is Nintendo so much better at introducing their older titles to new gamers?

Because they rehash everything once per generation, and because a Nintendo kid can go back 3-4 generations and he can still play Mario and Zelda and Pokémon.

>>2187885

You aren't really answering the question though, you're just using buzzwords ("rehash") and that their franchises prevail in time. But you are not answering WHY is that.

>>2183527
Saturn doesn't have spotty emulation because of its complex hardware, it's because you have to implement 1 billion different features one by one, and no one has time for that.

Mame and Yabause both got up to the point where they can boot some games with minimal gfx and said "fuck it" at that point.

>>2187387
It's like the equivalent of Max Payne 3:

Fine game, but not a true entry in the series.

>>2184982
They both still had games processed in 3d. What precision they did so was irrelevant. Low precision was simply used due to limitations in processing power at the time. And besides, for a game or a consumer product, the goal is to achieve the illusion of doing something, not actually doing that something (high precision matters for scientific calculations, not for fucking Pacman). Wolfenstein 3d was just a smart raycaster, no hint of 3d at all, and yet people still considered it virtual reality when it came out.

Also technically the Saturn can draw 2 perspective correct, z-sorted squares with its background processor at 4096x4096 size. And as long as they don't intersect, it can mirror one of them to draw a third (for floor + ceiling or ground + skybox effects; check Last Bronx or the sonicworld part in Sonic Jam).

>>2187315
>The PSX treats the screen buffer as a texture like any other. It's extremely simple and fast to do framebuffer effects. The N64 has to go through the GPU to do anything which makes framebuffer effects slow, expensive and difficult.

Doing framebuffer effects on the Playstation means that you render to a memory in VRAM, and after rendering you use that area as a texture for another poly. It is entirely GPU sided on that machine. And it's not exactly fast there either, since you are doing double pass rendering.

Saturn could do it in a round-about way as well. It could only render to the framebuffer. But, you could read the data out from the framebuffer and copy it elsewhere. So technically it was possible, but was slower and required stupid loops to go through, just like everything else on the machine (worst part was that while you read the framebuffer, you couldn't draw polygons).
The best trick was that you could also transfer your polygons into VDP2 ram and apply 32-level alpha transparency or even various background effects. At least one game did this trick.

For the N64, the only question is whether you can read the framebuffer area back in. If you can, you can do framebuffer effects like on the Playstation and Saturn. How fast or difficult is, depends on how the machine handles that reading. I'm not familiar enough with the N64 hardware to tell. I imagine that, if it is possible, it would require an extra memory read+write operation at best (if it cannot directly texture from framebuffer). So how expensive it is depends on how fast you can read framebuffer and write it to vram.

>>2187893
>You aren't really answering the question though,

I -did- answer your question. They are better at introducing their older titles by always releasing the same fucking shit with just a different spin on it. How many Mario Karts or Mario Party games are they up to right now? A kid can just sit down on a SNES and still play Mario Kart, and it just has simpler audiovisuals and less features but it's still Mario Kart.

They also keep porting their old titles to new machines as well, all the fucking time. There are Game & Watch compilations for Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, and the DS as well.

>>2187945
>They also keep porting their old titles to new machines as well, all the fucking time.
Well, this isn't THAT bad, as long as the ports are cheap I consider it an act of respect towards their past.

>>2187910
>What precision they did so was irrelevant
You can't draw large distant polygons with low precision. I mean, the vertices themselves will literally start severely glitching (much worse than the regular type of PS1 glitching) in that kind of coordinate system, so it does matter what precision you use.

>Also technically the Saturn can draw 2 perspective correct, z-sorted squares with its background processor at 4096x4096 size. And as long as they don't intersect, it can mirror one of them to draw a third (for floor + ceiling or ground + skybox effects; check Last Bronx or the sonicworld part in Sonic Jam).
Interesting. VDP2 was a cool chip.

>>2187945

>They are better at introducing their older titles by always releasing the same fucking shit with just a different spin on it.


But why are they better at doing so? That's what you're not answering. We know they keep (most of) their IPs alive and sometimes they're very conservative about it (New SMB), sometimes they're not (Kid Icarus Uprising), but most companies with popular franchises will try to keep them alive one way or another, it's basic business. So I don't know why you're bitching about it.
Also I think you are wrong, kids are less likely to go back and play a SNES game, especially something like Mario Kart, when they have the newest HD MK. Kids bitch the most about graphics and stuff.
I'd say most people who enjoy older titles through virtual console are either adults who actually played these games back in the day, or hipster teens who want retro cred (and maybe genuinely enjoy them in the end, too). Kids are too busy with Halo, Minecraft or whatever is popular with kids nowdays.

>>2176845
*New* New Super Mario World 3: The Prequel to the Sequel for New Wii UU.

>Please no, Nintendo

It bothers me that I can't run Blood Omen without a billion bugs so I can't get into a supposedly great series.

>>2189808
you don't need to play Blood Omen 1.

Soul Reaver 1-2, and defiance are all the nessasery games to knowing wtf is happening. Blood Omen 2 is ok but not great.