/vr/ - Retro Games

Where you not around? It was basically the cumulation of the bit wars. It felt like the start of how video games would be played from there on. For the most part is was.

>>2225445

The leap happened almost 20 years ago. Many people on the internet weren't born or were too young

>>2225461
True but on /vr/ we got a lot of people who were.

It's surprising because most of the younger gamers aren't that interested in old games. When they are it's usually 8 and 16 bit. The early 3d stuff is often looked at as "ugly". So it's hard to describe that shift from 4th gen to 5th gen.

>>2225468

90s kids love PS1 and N64 though. It's a nostalgia point

I remember looking at the Mario 64 demo at some store with the japanese N64, before the american one launched. It got me kind of hypnotized, I clearly remember the part where Mario runs along a bridge that falls down on the ghost house, I couldn't believe that thing was in-game and not a CGI movie.

Like, being able to have control over that scene seemed wicked.

The only 3D experience I had prior to that were some arcade games, like virtua fighter, or pseudo 3D like Doom.
SM64 was something new.

And yeah, I can't say I've been that much impressed with videogames ever again as far as novelty go... nowdays I find me more fascinated by older, beautiful 2D games rather than cinematic HD games from the present, I don't know what happened.

>>2225473
Early 90s do. Mid to late 90s would of had 6th gen be their main console.

8bit and 16bit was looked at as ugly by the mainstream too. Low poly graphics will probably follow.

What "leap" exactly? Computer games had been doing it since the 80's, and the 4th gen consoles started experimenting with it, but it wasn't until the 5th generation of consoles where 3D really started to take off and move into becoming the default.

It was really much more of a slow movement than a leap. I wouldn't really call it amazing. A lot of early 3D games sacrificed interesting gameplay or graphical quality just for the sake of being in 3D. The amount of 3D shovelware was enormous, just because people were trying to learn how to utilize it.

Wolfenstein was cool, but seeing Doom for the first time was something else entirely. I was flabbergasted that graphics could possibly be that good.

Through the years, lots of has impressed me graphically. Quake with the incredible lighting engine that blew away everything else in its day, Unreal and its giant exteriors and gorgeous art direction, etc... But nothing made me say "there's no way this is possible" like Doom did. It was astonishing for the time.

>>2225487
It was a leap backward. The worst was pushing existing franchises over to 3D with little care about how well it fit.Just make a lousy action game, slap 3D on the title and call it a day.

>>2225481

Mid to late 90s like the gen too. I was born in 1996 and have nostalgia over the PS1 despite personally playing less than 15 PS1 games. Spyro 3 has to be my most played game, I use it to relax because I know it so well and it's so easy.

8 bit isn't that amazing looking but the 16 bit has a lot of amazing looking games. No wonder indies love 16 bit

>>2225428
It was and is still a pretty bumpy ride. A lot of people give modern 3D games a bad rap whenever they're not as good as Mario, but forget how horrendous some of the early attempts like Bubsy 3D and Superman 64 were. For ever Banjo-Kazooie and Crash Bandicoot out there you had about five completely broken games. I think people bellyaching about stuff like Epic Mickey and Sonic Boom forget that games like Earthworm Jim 3D actually existed and were sold at full price.

>>2225428
It really depends on the genre:

Racing games, FPS, adventure games, action adventure games, horror games, GTA clones and a few others became WORLDS better as a result of the jump to 3D. Then there were several new genres made possible by the jump to 3D like survival horror, vehicular combat, 3D fighters and 3D platformers (witch are both different genres than their 2D counterparts.

On the other hand, several genres gained nothing but ugly viduals: side perspecfive platformers, side perspective fighting games, side perspective action games, ec. And then there were genres that just sucked ass in 3D: Very early 3D fighting games, early TPS like games, action games, ect.

All in all, I think the move was needed, as we gained a lot more than we "lost". Especially since 2D games of every genre still come out to this day and 3D genres that blew ass eventually evolved or disappeared entirely.

Though, to be honest, the jump to the Dreamcast and PS2 was when 3D games started getting good in general. Before that, they were hit and miss.

>>2225529
I think what I miss the most is hand drawn and pixel art graphics in 2D games. It seems very rare nowadays outside of indie "8-bit" platformers which are just now starting to look good. Ever since Capcom went 3D with Street Fighter it just looks hideous to me, and a lot of games like New Super Mario and Yoshi's New Island have abandoned their old art style and adopted this weird "2.5D" look. I feel like there hasn't been a true 2D console since the PS1 (yes it had 3D games, but the 2D games were actually 2D and not '3D at a different angle'), and maybe the DS.

I wish there were more games out there like Rayman that retain the actual hand drawn look instead of immediately going for 2D with 3D everything.

>>2225428
Like landing on the moon, serious I thought anything was possible after seeing my cuz show of Mario 64, I thought there was no boundries I didnt even comprehend invisible walls or skyboxs everything seemed infinite. I was 6 or 7 in 96.

If it was a good game it was amazing. Mario 64 and Doom really impressed me as a kid. It was so new to me.

I wonder if VR will have the same effect on me once they really iron out all the kinks.

>>2225549

VR will be good by the time we're seniors

>>2225428
Personally I think the leap from 8-bit to 16-bit was far more impressive, as well as the leap from the PS1 to PS2.

Not all concepts transitioned to 3D well, it was a nice gimmick but a lot of 3D adaptations just plain sucked. Meanwhile when we first went from 8 to 16-bit you were pretty much guranteed to just get bigger, better more mindblowing versions of all the games you loved.

I tell this story a lot but I'll tell it again, maybe short version this time since I'm doing other shit. I should just copypaste it.

The short version is that I grew up right along with video games and the whole Sega-CD debacle left me thinking I had outgrown video games as the 3DOs and the CD-Is left me pretty unimpressed with the supposed "next gen" video games. Then, the year I graduated high school the Playstation was released and I was right back in it. It made me believe again.

It's hard to describe, but those early 3D games actually seemed to look REALLY FUCKING GOOD even though now we look back and they arguably look worse than earlier sprite-based games.

It was just so mind-blowingly new. I'm sure people in the 60s felt the same way when they first got a color TV

>>2225981
It wasn't how they LOOKED it was how they FELT. For the first time, we were completely free to move around within a virtual space that had three dimensions. That feeling of freedom and the unlimited potential for new gameplay mechanics that came with it was just intoxicating.

>>2226004
Yeah if you started with Mario 64 maybe. God help you if your first 3D game was something with tank controls

>>2225481

>kids born in '96 are 19 now

>>2226010
Well like I said I had just graduated high school so I was clearly too much of an adult to play kiddie shit like Mario 64 (at least not until I was fully back in The Life) so my transformation came Christmas of '96 when I played Tomb Raider and Resident Evil at the same time, both of which have "tank" controls. When I did play Mario 64 the controls seemed extremely loosey goosey / imprecise to me after having cut my teeth on Tomb Raider.

It's not really 3D because you are still playing the game on a 2D screen. The REAL 3D revolution will come when occulus rift is working 100%..

>>2226019
that's not 3D either though. The real 3D revolution is when we have 3D holograms

>>2226019
>>>/v/

Actually, I wonder once true 3D displays become common if emulators for systems like Playstation and N64 will be capable of rendering the environments in 3D.

>>2225428
Kind of gradual. All sorts of 3d games started popping up on the PC in the early 90s, like flight sims, FPS games, and the like. Plus pseudo-3d games that weren't actually 3d, but looked 3d, like Myst.

It wasn't like one day the N64 came out and everything was 3d.

>>2226031
>Mario 64 is basically like Microsoft Flight Simulator + Doom

>>2226031
>It wasn't like one day the N64 came out and everything was 3d.
I'd say for most it was. At least in America. Unless you count doom as 3d. There wasn;t a whole lot of PC gamers back then. The isometric 2d definitely out numbered the actual 3d also.

It was for me basically. Only thing before I had was Starfox and that was a fun game.

>>2226031
>It wasn't like one day the N64 came out and everything was 3d.
Actually it kinda was like that. Out of pure ignorance, mind you, but still. At least for my generation, since little kids were less likely to be playing computer games like doom

>>2226038
Depends on what you had, really. 3d was always just an alternate sort of design to me, since flight sims were actually a huge genre on PC back in the day and I was introduced to them early. And it made sense that as tech got better, they'd do more and more stuff in 3d. Plus, as a mainly PC gamer (I did have an SNES too), I got to enjoy good looking 2d games well into the 2000s, because as you said, isometric graphics were really popular on PC.

I always hated 3d platformers, hated how mario 64 and donkey 64 both looked worse and played worse than the SNES games, but other genres, especially racing, were awesome in 3d. Shit like F-Zero X and Pod Racer were mindblowing.

>>2226047
>was a little kid when N64 came out

Heh, I think >>>/v/ might be more your speed, kiddo. Leave /vr/ for the grown ups.

I didn't really like how Nintendo transitioned to 3D with the N64. Yes, the games were pretty damn good in and of themselves (Zelda OoT, Mario Kart, Mario 64, etc), but it felt like they started almost from scratch. Mario 64 didn't have the fire-flower power-up (or any of the other power-ups). OoT didn't feel anything like LTTP. Starfox completely abandoned its kickass rock soundtrack and became some kind of weird parody of a Saturday morning cartoon.

A true 3d transition of the 2d Mario games didn't come until Super Mario 3d Land on the 3DS. I'm still waiting for a 3D Zelda game that feels like LTTP, though Twilight Princess came pretty close. No, I'm not counting the 2.5D Link Between Worlds (even though that was fairly good). I fear we're never going to get another Starfox game like the original.

>>2225428
going 3d was pretty cool but when we tried VR for the first time at the arcade oh man. I am just happy its making a comeback now. I cant wait!

>>2226049
I love the 5th gen 3d and 2.5d platformers. 4th and 5th gen are my favorite generations.

>>2226051
Yeah, my apologizes for not being 15 in 1996.

>>2226053
>OoT didn't feel anything like LTTP.

But a lot of people kept saying "it's just ALTTP but 3D"

>>2226053
>Mario 64 didn't have any power-ups
wtf am I reading?

>>2226058
Well technically /vr/ is set in 1999, so if you were, what 6,7? in 1996 then you would only be 9 or 10 in /vr/ years and therefore should not be posting.

>>2225428
5th gen was a quantum leap. Seeing Mario roam around and jump in 3D was jaw-dropping.

With the 6th gen, games got a lot more immersive. Big outdoor environments could be done justice in 3D. Lots of things can happen on-screen without fear of slowdown. Cool technologies like bump-mapping and pixel shaders stole the show in many games.

Unfortunately for 3D games (platformers and 3rd person shooters), a bad camera system could royally fuck your game over if you're not careful.

>>2226059
For me, music is a big deal. OoT was the first game without the original theme music. The Hyrule Field music dances around the theme, but never goes into it. Starfox 64 didn't have any of the original themes.

>>2226060
It had power-ups, but none of the ones featured in previous games. That was my point.

>>2226062

>>2226062
Not him but if we were in 99 then there's no 4chan, we're on dial up, and most people can barely figure out their email let alone this newfangled crazy irc thing but with images.

>>2226067
So basically it's just the fire flower you're complaining about, which would be extremely worthless in 3D because impossible to aim.

OoT definitely doesn't "feel" like Link to the Past. It feels much more like an anime, and it has more characterization. I've actually grown to like OoT more as time passed. I didn't like it as a kid. But I didn't have an N64 as a kid, so the controls were always weird to me when I played it. But I always liked the graphics and musics, and I appreciate the game much more now than I used to.

I never owned a 5th gen console, just an SNES and PC, but all my friends had them, so I was very familiar with the games.

>>2226071
Dude, image boards like 4chan are fully within the realm of 1999 Internet technology.

>>2226072
Super Mario 3D Land made it work.

>>2226071
Seriously? Internet Forums have been around since the early 90s (and there were BBSs before that, not to mention Usenet), and 4chan really isn't anything much beyond a forum.

>>2226079
Well Mario 64 isn't fucking Mario 3D Land. They were literally breaking the fuck out of new ground with that game and it actually works really well and feels like Mario. I can only assume that they tried to make Fire Flowers work but were unable to on the hardware in the time frame.

>>2226078
and yet 4chan was 2003

>>2226086
So?

>>2226071
I had cable internet in 1999, and was playing Starcraft and Quake 2 online.

>>2226078
>99 dial up
>5mb sized images
>fully within the realm of 1999 Internet technology.

>>2226091
You can just look at the thumbnails of too-big images if you're on dialup.

>>2226097
Hold up I'm still waiting for my image to upload.

>>2226089
>Not him but if we were in 99 then there's no 4chan

do you have the memory of a goldfish?

>>2226104
I really don't understand what you're arguing here. I think it has something to do with somebody's comment about you being too young to be here? I'm personally one of the oldfags that really appreciates and welcomes young dudes to retro gaming and think it's even more special when you cast off the shackles of modern caming for the old school.

However, for you to bother arguing about it makes me think it probably would be best if you just GTFO. Show some respect to your elders, Child.

>>2226108
someone made the argument that we're supposed to pretend it's 1999. If it were 1999 then there's be no 4chan for us to discuss this on, so this is just silly.

You're awfully dense

>>2226110
Pedant

The leap to 3D now Looks ugly, but to me back then it looked great. And of all the generations of games I think the 5th gen resulted in the most change in the way games are played. So many new genres and gameplay features came from that generation.

And even though the low poly models are a little hard to look at, there are plenty of other things that were pretty amazing at least to me. Things like they way people would move and fall very naturally. This was especially cool for fighting and light gun games. Or in racing games turns were actual turns and not just the road bending. Also pre-rendered backgrounds would really compensate for the low poly models

>>2225445
I was there and for me personally it was an era of disappointment and hallow promises... we were promised a great new era of great looking 3D games, what we got were a bunch of half assed cash ins and plogon mess/blocky eyesores.

>>2226187
it looked ugly to me back in the day as well, maybe you never experienced all the ads that showed these great looking smooth graphics and then you got the game home you popped the game in with anticipation only to be greated with an eye searing mess of polygons (yes FF7, I mean you)

>>2226053

>Mario 64 didn't have the fire-flower power-up (or any of the other power-ups)

This is a good thing. Aiming a fireball in Mario 64 would've been a nightmare. Nintendo were one of the few that understood good game design in 2D doesn't necessarily translate well into 3D so they changed the formula when it was necessary.

>>2226207
? All the AAA games were amazing.

>>2226219
>Aiming a fireball in Mario 64 would've been a nightmare

Yeah, 3D games where you have to aim and shoot stuff? It'll never work.

>>2226067
it's pretty retarded to dislike a game just because it isn't exactly like the other games in the series, also, and disliking a game because of one fucking song? dear christ, wtf is wrong with you? Also if music is a bit deal to you, you should have loved OoT since a lot of it is based around music.

>>2226224
AAA games weren't even a thing back then you dumb fuck

>>2226224
yeah castlevania, street fighter, contra, etc. were all great the first time they tried 3d, simply amazing

>>2226228
yeah its not like the games that have you do that are in first person or have crosshairs or finer camera control or anything like that

>>2226235
personally I think something like that would break the flow of the game, it works in the Zelda games because they aren't about faced paced platforming and more about taking your time and figuring things out.

>>2226235
>have crosshairs or finer camera control

zoom in over mario's shoulder, have a crosshair fade in and reduce sensitivity

>>2226245
or you know, just don't bother because it would break the flow of the gameplay and be annoying

compare all that to "just press Y"

>>2226069
>delayclose.jpg

jesus christ that's an old meme you got there son

>>2226019
>It's not really 3D because you are still playing the game on a 2D screen

eat shit.

3D games have true X Y and Z coordinates being addressed by the graphics card. They mathematically have 3 dimensions.

oculus rift just makes use of parallax. In it's case, it uses offset and multiple screens to create the illusions of depth, but in this case it is still only an illusion. That is, you can view a mathematically 2D image in an occulus rift (or, if you're too poor, with anaglyph glasses) and have your illusion, but it will still be a logically 2D image.

Try actually playing some oculus enabled or anaglyphed games -- the illusion of depth is far less relevant compared to the actual existence of a logical 3rd dimension.

The buildup and anticipation to play Mario 64 was unreal.
>we'll never have that big a leap again in gaming
There hasn't been, but I have similar feelings these days about VR.

>>2226025
no one's done it yet, but it wouldn't be hard.

Quake 2 had (poorly supported) anaglyph and stereoscopic 3D support. Modern Quake 1 ports feature the same.

OpenGL has native functions for handling polarised light based 3D.

It'd be pretty easy (but would increase computing overhead): all you have to do is take the scene, render it twice, and then present it as per the media you want it to work with (stereo-views like oculus: render one per monitor; R/C anaglyph: color filter each appropriately and offset by X-pixels; polarised: tell each slice to display on the correct set of pixels in the hardware).

A few emulators have started experimenting with R/C anaglyphs in software, and nVidia has drivers for certain cards to do it in hardware.

tl;dr it wouldn't be hard to do in software and it's already here if you own the right video card.

tangential: I play quake in R/C anaglyph mode (that is, 3D with colored glasses) all the time. It's really an overrated experience.

>>2226246
I really don't get this obsession with having EVERYTHING from previous games in a later game is anyhow... like why the fuck does it even matter if the game is fun? Isn't that what's more important?

>>2226231
It's just a term asshole.
>>2226232
Those weren't exactly great sellers.

>>2226084
4chan's japanese predecessor predates 1999 iirc.

>>2226285
but the term wasn't in use then and it refers to a type of streamlined generic game experience that didn't exist yet then.

>>2226286
>>2226084
forum =/= image forum

>>2226289
I thought it just meant the big budget/first party games.
Sorry if I got my /v/ terms incorrect.

What I should had I guess was "All the big dollar games meant to push the system sales were amazing."

>>2226291
I was talking about futaba channel, which is an imageboard. However, my iirc was indeed wrong: futaba channel launched in 2001.

>>2226282
more than fans of any other form of entertainment, gamers just dont know shit about what makes a game good or even how the creators approach making one. so they just want superficial shit like fire flowers

now that nintendo is all about selling nostalgia to those people though, they finally did get a fire flower in a 3d mario game like over 15 years later, and even with an extra 15 years of experience making 3d platformers under their belt, it was still annoying to use

>>2226286
one could post images on USENET...hell, you can post full applications, PDFs...ANYTHING on USENET.

>>2226303
meant to reply to >>2226291

>>2226303
do you have some sort of mental disorder or something? usenet worked nothing like how 4chan works.

>>2226298
yeah, i was going to say that iirc the text forum it's a spin off from was made in like 1998 or something but futaba channel launched in the early 2000s.

>>2225428
>I keep on hearing it was amazing and we'll never have that big a leap again in gaming

the emergence of good VR like oculus is actually a bigger leap. After that, there aren't many more leaps to be made for a long time, until we get holographic projection and shit going.

>>2226310
>the emergence of good VR like oculus
It's not as great as they said it was going to be. Everyone I've talked says they can't read text well and gives them a headache.
But for gaming it has a lot of hope.

>>2226309
nah, futaba was proceeded by 2channel...which is a text board that launched IN 1999 (not 98).

Now then, the ultimate ancestor of imageboards altogether launched earlier than that (I believe it was 96, but as can be seen, I'm not particularly good at remembering things thusfar).

>>2226310
but holographic projection already exists... though if you are talking about home use, then yah, that is probably a long way off

>>2226321
>or something
I know that correcting people to make them look like idiots gives people on this site hard ons but you should really read an entire post before doing so.

>>2226317
>It's not as great as they said it was going to be. Everyone I've talked says they can't read text well and gives them a headache.

everyone i've talked to says it is revolutionary and mind-blowing. its primary use obviously isn't games where reading text is a focus. tell your friends to stop trying to play ero novels on their oculus.

>>2226328
holo-projection as used at concerts and in high-end telepresence isn't actually that complex of a technology. its wholly unrelated to 3d tech too.

basically, holographic projection is
>project a movie as one would in a theater
>...but use a transparent screen rather than a white one.

the only limitation to home use is the same as with why everyone doesn't have a projector in their home.

>>2226317
first off, I've only heard that about the first version, from what I've heard later versions improved that immensely, and second off, the thing is still in development, it's not going to be perfect.

>>2226332
>basically, holographic projection is

except what you said outright is not how it works.

>>2226331
>ero novels

bear in mind that you've got a bunch of William Gibson fans out there who use oculus to emulate the feeling of cyberspace while just using it to view the internet.

>>2226340
then they're retards. that isn't a strike against the technology itself.

>>2226331
They love it for most games. But like I said when it comes to computer tasks is sucks. You would need to go back and forth between it and a monitor. Pretty shitty problem.
They also tell me they need to edit settings for games with the monitor in some cases.
>>2226336
Just saying it's not as amazing as it's made out to be. And honestly with how many times VR has failed the Occulas is going to have to be near perfect for people to give a shit.

You also run into problem with older games not optimized for it. FPS can be near unplayable because you can loose the cross hair easily.

>>2226342
>You would need to go back and forth between it and a monitor. Pretty shitty problem.

non-problem whatsoever. a non-retard is going to understand that you don't put on the oculus when you need to do "computer tasks". it's equivalent to complaining that your seat belt stops you from leaving the car easily.

>And honestly with how many times VR has failed
0 times? when has technology like oculus ever existed in the past?

I was honestly frustrated by it at first and found it much less fun because I was having trouble figuring out what was going on, between not having depth perception and suddenly changing camera angles. I also thought it would be really difficult to hit things in 3D.

I eventually got over it thanks to games like OoT and Banjo Kazooie and play plenty of 3D games, both modern and from that era. But initially, I was more like "Why can't you just keep making Genesis games instead?"

>>2226348
>0 times? when has technology like oculus ever existed in the past?
...


It's not like you can just rest the occulas on your head like glasses. At least not for long. You're basically buying it as weird peripheral for gaming. As it is now anyway.

>>2225491
>Doom
>flabberggasted by a 1993 3D game

PLEASE nigger, I was playing this shit years prior. The sound in this video is all fucked up, but the free roam 3D world in this was fucking nuts for the late 80s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNXypBxNGMo

>>2226348
>when has tech like oculus existed in the past

literally ever since virtual boy...and even before. the entire concept is "strap a stereographic display to this niggas head"... its been done and done and done many times because the theoretical basis of what's being done has existed for over 100 years.

the ONLY thing unique about the oculus is that screen technologies have gotten good enough to put a high quality screen in such a small form factor. other than that, its literally just another virtual boy.

>>2226348
VR has existed in one form or another since the late 80, it is just that machines were expensive and bulky. The reason it failed was because it was being promoted as the next big thing but really wasn't ready for the mainstream market. Oculous Rift is being promoted as the next big thing but doesn't have the later problem.

Also, all of a sudden everything looked like butts. Like, it was amazing, but at the same time it was horrible. The 16-bit era was graphically enhanced enough that I felt like what I was looking at was just a drawing of whatever it was supposed to be, and I felt like things looked pretty much exactly like they should. Especially games like Genesis Aladdin which looked like it was animated just as well as the film. All of a sudden I'm looking at early N64 and Playstation graphics where everything is clearly triangles and such and had all those ugly angles, and everything scaled so nothing looked as clean around the edges.

I do still think that the 5th gen is the ugliest gen past the third. Couple with awkward controls, I really wasn't initially impressed.

>>2225428
Born in 91' here. So I was born before the leap, but not old enough to experience it first hand.

I had one hell of a time catching up though. By 1998 I had played through a very decent library of games for the Atari 2600, NES, Genesis, Playstation, and Saturn.

It helped to have a set of Grandparents who's life's work was the Flea Market.

>>2226360
it existed way before the virtual boy, and the virtual boy isn't and never was, actual VR. Also the virtual boy had a slew of problems that had nothing to do with it displaying 3D, also it didn't even strap to your head, you needed to keep it on a tiny stand, and the red display caused eye damage and motion sickness.

>nigger
>idoitic projection of childish attitude
>obnoxious meme image
please go back to /v/

>>2226371
meant for >>2226359

>>2225468

I grew up with 4th and 5th gen, and most 5th gen 3d so ugly - I would say enough to be nearly unplayable. So, kids have it right.

>>2226362
As far as polygon counts go, they are saying that we have sort of reached a point to where increasing it any further will not necessarily make things look better, so it's a continuation of improving textures and lighting, and creating better engines to run the stuff. And this is why VR is being opencly embraced now, because we are at a dead end really, and it IS the next big leap in gaming.

>>2226379
was that meant for a different post or something...

>>2226379
I'd hazard that manipulability and physics/lighting could be improved.

personally, I think we've got a lot of things we could improve. just picture Minecraft...but instead of meter-wide, partially "physics'd" blocks, imagine it with millimeter sized blocks that have complex physics models, a simulation of the fundamental forces, and a proper light model applied to each one. that's where we could start seeing realism: emulation of atoms directly.

>>2226053
>but it felt like they started almost from scratch
This was actually a very good thing. By starting from scratch and making a game from the ground up instead of trying to take the 2D games and make them 3D, they ended up making better games overall. What works in 2D does not necessarily work in 3D, and by starting from scratch they ended up focusing on what worked in 3D only, which made for better games right out of the gate.

Contrast with Sonic, which tried to take the 2D games and make them 3D, and stumbled infamously in the process.

>>2226371
Serious mode for a moment. I was honestly completely blown away by games like Carrier Command, Armour-Geddon, Midwinter 2 and Virus long before Doom was a thing.

Interphase here was one of the games that impacted me the most as a kid - despite it being weird as all hell the game was really something truly revolutionary and absolutely blew me away.

Doom really didn't have much of an effect on me, but I'll agree that Quake was the game that was the real 'next level' for 3D gaming.

Also the only board I have ever posted on are /vr/ and like twice on /g/ a few years ago just to start a fire between Mac, Windows and Linux users.

>>2226371
Serious mode for a moment. I was honestly completely blown away by games like Carrier Command, Armour-Geddon, Midwinter 2 and Virus long before Doom was a thing.

Interphase here was one of the games that impacted me the most as a kid - despite it being weird as all hell the game was really something truly revolutionary and absolutely blew me away.

Doom really didn't have much of an effect on me, but I'll agree that Quake was the game that was the real 'next level' for 3D gaming.

Also the only board I have ever posted on are /vr/ and like twice on /g/ a few years ago just to start a fire between Mac, Windows and Linux users.

>>2225428
> I keep on hearing it was amazing and we'll never have that big a leap again in gaming
Graphically, yeah and no... It was terrible... by gradients... so it was a great huge leap to say... Crysis from say a generic raycasting game. 3D has been around since something like the early 80s - it just wasn't amazing. Graphically the leap is really about detail. Gameplay wise it's about fluidity and camera control and precision more than anything since you can 'emulate' 3D in 2D within a limited scope. Gameplay was a large leap, it's hard to imagine having the same kind of leap again since there's nowhere other than 3D to really go with that. There's no 4D we're going to experience (even if such a thing does exist from a technical standpoint). You can do 3D support with glasses but it's still just changing our perspective of an already fully 3D thing from a 2D projection. Everything else is just variations on how you handle 3D.

Though mario going from 2D to 3D didn't really distinguish the leap as amazing, that was more a 3D control decision. They could have literally locked the camera like NSMB and made a Mario in true sidescrolling 3D and it'd still be a 3D game. They could have handled the movement etc all sorts of ways and in many ways the most important aspect is camera controls and they didn't really perfect those on the first go.

A lot of the earlier 3D games on the playstation were fairly dick for the clumsy dpad controls and pseudo-3D that the playstation offered though. The time between 94-00 a lot of games suffered from some significantly bad design choices and with that a lot of low quality developers came out of it and they discovered they don't have to make quality games. It's simultaneously the best thing to happen to gaming and the worst.

>>2226416
Doom and the lake was a big deal over here in the states because we didn't really get any home systems that could do 3D that well. Things like the Archemides and the Amiga and Atari ST just didn't catch on over here for some reason

I more or less stopped playing video games when they made the jump to 3D. I didn't like the way the graphics looked. When I saw GTA3, I got back into games.

>GTA3 came out in 2001
>getting old.jpg

>>2225491
Were there 2D GTA like games? The 3D effects in GTA were fine but I wouldn't consider them ground shattering.

>>2226487
should we tell him

>>2225538
Have you played Wario land shake-it? Is this the type of game your talking about?

>>2226567
It's not retro, but I still consider this an amazing game. I wish they'd do more with the drawn sprites rather than take the 3D model route for everything.

>>2226534
It'd be funnier if we just strung him along for a little while.

>>2225428
It was painful to live through. Controls are more or less standardized these days. Used to be there wasn't a way to control the camera, and there were dozens of control schemes trying to figure it out.

That and 3D models were a step back in a lot of cases because they couldn't come anywhere close to the detail of a sprite.

>>2225473
I like my oldskool blocky 3D graffix, but I absolutely hate those who try to cash in on low-poly now without doing it right.

You have to be as authentic as possible for me to consider it good, and sadly modellers are wasting polys, show their lack of knowledge and are getting away with it too.

>>2226262
>3D games have true X Y and Z coordinates being addressed by the graphics card. They mathematically have 3 dimensions.
A lot of older "3D" consoles didn't even render scenes that were mathematically 3D.

All the technology and money in the world couldn't buy the 64 the love and sheer games the PS1 and SS got.

>>2226701
hey man, haven't seen you around in awhile

>>2226695
>3D consoles

That's not a term. 3D games, yes, but consoles aren't inherently 3D or 2D. Are older PCs 2D computers?

>>2226724
>Are older PCs 2D computers?
Yes, because they cannot rasterize polygons into pixels.

>>2226708
sup anon, sure's been a long time

>>2225512
I was also born in 1996, and I love the PS1. We also had a Mega Drive, and I played a lot of both. However, most people our age that I know never had either and the first consoles they played were the GBA SP and/or a PS2 or Xbox.

>>2226728
Ok so you're trying to miss the point on purpose. Great job.

Anyone here like early 3D games? Not Fifth Gen but late 80s and early 90s. None have aged remotely well but they're interesting

>>2226051

Most gamers I know meet online were twelve and under during that gen. People 35+ are the minority

>>2226742
Nope, it's you who cannot into hardware.

>>2226410
People hate 3D Sonic for a lot of reasons, but "they tried to make it like the 2D games" is definitely not one of them. If anything, it gets more hate for trying to start from the ground up. DK64 also receives a lot of criticism for starting from scratch (or using the Banjo/Mario 64 format really), as some people wanted something closer to Crash Bandicoot and the original DKC games.

>>2226567
Have not played it, but I remember it. And yes, it would be nice to see more games with a similar look.

>>2226745
I love stuff like Mechwarrior, Geograph Seal for the x68000 (basically the predecessor to Jumping Flash), etc. There are certainly some other good examples that I can't think of right now.

>>2225428
Honestly, it disappointed me for a long time. 3D games of the PS1/Saturn era were usually ugly as fuck and it made me sad that the beautiful hand drawn games I loved were becoming rarer and rarer. It wasn't until the Dreamcast that I felt 3D graphics were starting to look decent.

All that said though, I remember playing Tomb Raider for the first time and it totally blowing my mind. At the start I couldn't even make sense of what I was seeing, because I wasn't used to looking around fully 3D environments my brain just didn't know how to handle it.

>being wowed by anything after Daytona USA in 1993

Arcades were always way ahead of both consoles and PCs pretty much until 2000. They were the things that wowed you.

>>2226913
>literally military grade Lockheed Martin 3D hardware
not even fair for consoles and PCs though

>>2226913
By the way, SEGA actually sold the half-assed saturn port as "arcade perfect"

>>2226913
I can get behind this.

>>2226913
I had no idea it dated that far back. That's very impressive.

>>2226230
but oot also runs at 20 fps and plays like complete shit compared to the earlier games.

>live in post communist country
>have grate C64
>then got PS1
>mfw Tenka and Abe on Demo 1

>>2226959
>but oot also runs at 20 fps
A stable, engine-locked 20fps.
> plays like complete shit compared to the earlier games.
implying Zelda 1, 2 and LttP didn't also have occasional bouts of slowdown

>>2226845

This except i though TB looked like shit too. I certainly wouldn't call the leap amazing besides some games like Mario. Like someone said they also fucked up some games by making them 3d just because that was the new thing.

>>2226969
occasional slowdown vs constant slowdown

running at 20 fps is legitimately a bad thing.


and you can't even say it was the hardware's fault because the same company designed the damn thing

>>2226984
Ohh yeah, don't get me wrong I thought Tomb Raider looked like shit as well. Once I got used to looking around in full 3D, it was pretty cool and I did come to really like the game.

But also at that time I was still trying to beat Ecco Tides of Time. And going from Tomb Raider, even with it's fully explorable environments to a game as beautiful as Ecco 2 was pretty hard.

>>2226985
This. 20fps looks like playing a choppy slide show.

>>2226996

Yeah games could still be good and 3d was ofc cool but it sure looked like a bag of shit and triangles.

>>2227000
Yup, and sort of ironically it was Ecco: Defender of the Future that was the first 3D game I thought looked genuinely good enough to hold up.

>>2226985
>occasional slowdown vs constant slowdown
I don't think you know what slowdown means. Slowdown means that something is normal speed and then gets slower.

OoT's engine is designed for 20fps, that is its normal speed - it can't go above 20fps, the engine is locked to 20fps maximum - this was done to achieve smoothness. It rarely drops below 20fps, except when crazy things are going on, much like LttP's occasional bouts of slowdown. So it's not constant slowdown, it's occasional slowdown like LttP.

>and you can't even say it was the hardware's fault because the same company designed the damn thing
OoT was a very ambitious game. I don't remember another game from 1998 that had a free roaming 3D area as big and impressive as Hyrule Field.

>>2227010
>I don't think you know what slowdown means. Slowdown means that something is normal speed and then gets slower.

fucking whatever. wrong word. you know what i meant. oot always feels sluggish. 2d zeldas rarely feel sluggish.


>OoT was a very ambitious game. I don't remember another game from 1998 that had a free roaming 3D area as big and impressive as Hyrule Field.

Didn't most 3d games on the n64 run like shit?
Even Factor 5's games were barely able to maintain 30 fps most of the time. The n64 was a poorly designed console.

I still like the look of ecstatica 2, and the animations are still now good to look at.

>>2227061
>Didn't most 3d games on the n64 run like shit?
Most 3D games in that whole console generation ran like shit. The only ones that didn't were conceptually simplistic or graphically minimalistic.

>Even Factor 5's games were barely able to maintain 30 fps most of the time. The n64 was a poorly designed console.
Factor 5 was trying to pull off PC-style graphics on a console, despite the gulf in hardware between the two being extremely large (the increase of power in 3D graphic cards for PC year by year was never faster than the late-90s period). There aren't any 3D PS1 or Saturn games that look even remotely in the same league of graphical prowess as Battle for Naboo for N64, so you're criticizing it for being a poorly designed console for almost pulling off 30fps trying to do graphics somewhat comparable to much faster PC systems and far beyond its contemporary consoles?

I understand that that period of generation in consoles was like resetting the clock - you went from refined 2D to unrefined 3D. But this irrational hating of early 3D is just stupid.

>>2227080
The n64 absolutely was a poorly designed console.


Factor 5 wanted to hit 60 fps, but they weren't able to without massive limitations. I believe the main problem was the choice of memory.A very small amount of cache(which was normal at the time) along with very high latency main memory was a horrible decision for a games console. I think factor 5 called the memory hierarchy brutal. Good choice of words.

>>2227080
>But this irrational hating of early 3D is just stupid.
Speak for yourself.
>>2226845
>>2226996 here

Early 3D really was incredibly ugly for the most part. Any hatred people have for it is justified.

>>2227101
You don't even know the slightest thing about hardware, you're just (poorly I might add) repeating mangled quotes from articles.

And I've never seen that 60fps thing you're talking about. Sounds made up. But here is an actual quote I found:
>Frame rate -- we've written it into our holy programming bible -- we will try to keep a constant frame rate of 30 frames per second. Constant is, of course, a relative term. It can happen in all three games that everything drops down to 20 frames for a moment, but then it will quickly go back to 30. It's almost impossible to keep a constant frame rate in a 3D game, at least with the detail that we've got going. If you've got a game like F-Zero X, of course, the whole thing runs at 60fps, but then you also have flat-shaded cars, a track that's made up of three textures or a flat background. If you limit yourself to those elements, then you've got total control. But as soon as you want to bring more detail into your game then 30fps are suddenly a real challenge.
http://au.ign.com/articles/1998/02/27/journey-to-the-center-of-the-n64

Star Wars Starfighter on PS2 wasn't even 60fps.

>>2227121
>Early 3D really was incredibly ugly for the most part
Of course, indisputably.
>Any hatred people have for it is justified.
But that doesn't mean you can't appreciate the experimentation. You don't have to approach everything with the mentality of a 12 year old. (which sometimes makes me wonder about the ages of my fellow posters)

>>2227061
>>2227101
If you were around then you wouldn't be saying that. The fps didn't matter because it gave us incredibly detailed environments that were huge and no fog of war.

If you don't like the games of the time that's fine. Sure there's another board or thread for you.

>>2227137
>no fog of war
What's so good about that? Fog of war is a feature you'll find in many 2D games of the time because it adds depth.

>>2227132
I can appreciate the experimentation as experimentation. It didn't make it any less terrible at the time, nor does it make it any less terrible now.

>>2227149
2d games don't use fog of war. That's board size. Now maybe the modern indie games are doing something that I don't know about.
At least on console.

There's a lot of 2d isometric PC games with fog war, mainly RTS.

Fog of war is never used to add depth and if it is the game trash, period. That type of shit is something 6thgen garbage used to hell and back. Fog of war is a hardware limitation or something to add strategy.

>>2227132
I didn't look up any articles, I just remember in an interview Julian(I don't believe he's an actual programmer, but I think he understood the issues) was emphasizing that the n64's memory was a big source of problems they had.

I'm not really an expert on hardware, or much of a programmer, but my brother is, and I have to listen to this kind of stuff constantly.

On the n64 memory access took around 640ns. I know the gamecube was around 6-10ns, but I can't find anything on other consoles right now.

>>2227157
Are you sure you're not confusing fog of war with just plain fog? I'm pretty sure the term fog of war almost exclusively refers to intentionally keeping parts of the map you haven't visited yet hidden, particularly so you can't see what the opponent is doing in strategy games. I've never heard "fog of war" used in the sense of hardware limitations.

>>2227132
>But that doesn't mean you can't appreciate the experimentation.

Yeah that's a fair point. Like with Tomb Raider, that game was ugly to the point of being hard to look at but it didn't stop me from loving the actual game. I'll grant you that hatred is probably a little strong of a word.

I was a PC person from the very beginning. For me the jump was somewhere around Quake.

Duke Nukem 3D and Quake appeared at the same time and although I was the one digging the interactivity that the Build engine provided Quake was the game that changed the game.

>>2227182
"Fog of war" is the term used for the "fog." I've never actually heard it called just fog (pre modern) because then you can confuse it with weather effects which is another thing the 5th gen consoles were able to produce quite well.

Modern gamer terminology would be "fog" being as so few games use fog of war these days. I hear the announcers call it fog in DOTA 2 tournaments all the time. A few of the older ones still call it fog of war or FoW.

>>2227198
>"Fog of war" is the term used for the "fog." I've never actually heard it called just fog (pre modern)

Not the guy you're talking to, but I have the opposite experience. "Fog of war" has always referred to the clouds that obscure parts of the map in games like Civilization.

The fog we got in full 3D games back then was just called fog, or when it was on N64 it was often called Nintendo fog because the system was so known for it. If I was at home I'd be tempted to pull out some old Gamefans and post screenshots, that's one of the places I remember the term being used a lot.

>>2227176
I appreciate you put in some effort to learn about a bit of hardware stuff, but I just want to clear up a few things.

The simplest way to measure memory performance is speed (bandwidth) and latency. The N64's RDRAM does indeed have 640ns memory access, which is terrible. But the bandwidth (by the standards of the day) was incredible - over 500MB/s (iirc, the PS1's VRAM, the fastest RAM in that console, was like 130MB/s or something but the latency wasn't nearly as bad). If you average the two stats you get...just average quality RAM. But it's a little more complicated than that in real world terms: some of the disadvantages of high latency can be offset by well optimized code.

As for the texture cache...well it's a similar situation. People think it means that the N64 is forced to have blurry textures, but all it means is that you just need to put extra effort into programming to get better quality textures.

The Factor 5 games are pretty much flawless in terms of pushing the N64 to the limit, and the result is great. Star Wars Starfighter for PS2 is the same resolution as Battle for Naboo - 640x480, and only has a slightly higher polygon count and slightly higher resolution textures, and the framerate is only a little better, despite being only a fully next-gen console. The N64 wasn't bottlenecked if your programmers were awesome, but you also need to have a reasonable expectation for what the system can do. As the Factor 5 quote said alluded to, the consoles of that generation were simply not designed to do really high detail stuff.

>>2227209
>or when it was on N64 it was often called Nintendo fog because the system was so known for it
Now you're just talking out your ass. The major N64 games don't have fog, they just don't render objects far away. The draw distance was limited like in OoT.
That Nintendo fog garbage came with the Nintendtoddler crap.
>Gamefans
There's your problem.

>>2227209
It's quite funny that the fog on the N64 was actually a selling point for the console, a technical feature that was listed as one of the awesome special effects the console was capable of.

Unlike the PS1, the fogging feature is built straight into the hardware (alpha blending on the CPU - not much processing cost), so it got a ton of use where on PS1 it would just use pop-in instead (doing Silent Hill style fog on PS1 had a much bigger processing cost since it had to be done on the CPU).

What sounded as a cool way to hide pop-up just ended up ruining a lot of atmosphere in games (except Turok, where it worked well).

>>2227226
*meant alpha blending on the GPU

>>2227226
>It's quite funny that the fog on the N64 was actually a selling point for the console, a technical feature that was listed as one of the awesome special effects the console was capable of.
It wasn't.
>Unlike the PS1, the fogging feature is built straight into the hardware (alpha blending on the CPU - not much processing cost), so it got a ton of use where on PS1 it would just use pop-in instead (doing Silent Hill style fog on PS1 had a much bigger processing cost since it had to be done on the CPU).
What ever you're reading you're taking it out of context. Go watch some making of videos.
I don't know where this notion of shaky character models and fog were just happy accidents for the horror games. The developers knew what they were doing and weren't just slapping shit out there like today.

>>2227224
Are you out of your mind? The N64 was synonymous with fog, it was in almost every 3D game on the system as their way of hiding the short draw distances they had.

And are also attempting to imply that Gamefan wasn't one of the best gaming magazines of the day? It was far better than EGM or fucking GamePro.

>>2227216
A few questions then.
Does bandwidth really make up for the latency?
How often do you have to take that 640ns hit?
How effective is the l1 cache on the n64?

According to ERP(pretty sure he worked on the n64, I know he made games on DC, PS2, and XBOX) it sucked.
https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1014564/

>>2227232
Are you from some bizarro world or magical foreign dimension where the N64 didn't have fog in all it's 3D games?

>>2227238
I didn't say none of the games have fog. However, they aren't all riddled with "lol nintendofog get owned nintenyear old".
>>2227234
You just completely ignored what I typed and took the first train to Fuck you town I'm not listing.

Gamefan had a lot of biased shit.

>>2227238
I'm starting to wonder the same thing. I remember it being toted as a system feature as well.

>>2227243
Show me a single 3D N64 game that doesn't use fog to cut off the draw distance then,

>>2227248
Mario 64
OoT
MM
banjo kazooie
banjo tooie

To name a few.

>>2227232
>It wasn't.
Look up old magazines before the N64 was released and you'll see fog right there on the list of features people can expect promoted as a good thing.

Hell check out this ancient N64 hype website where the fog feature is raved about and the guy even explains a little bit how it works - and it uses the Z-Buffer. We know that the PS1 doesn't have a Z-Buffer, so this fogging trick can't work on that console. http://www.futuretech.blinkenlights.nl/dc.html

>I don't know where this notion of shaky character models
Shaky character models are inherent to all PS1 games, it's an unavoidable consequence of low precision fixed point maths. See >>2226695

>The developers knew what they were doing and weren't just slapping shit out there like today.
Nobody is saying they didn't. What the hell?

>>2227257
Is that really your evidence? Some fanboy talking about Turok? Damn I laughed.

I'll stick to what it has almost always been called, Fog of War.

>>2227262
You are the turboautist.

>>2227267
No, I'm just not looking at this with modern eyes. Those mags were all about hype and I can tell you Mario 64's main selling point wasn't "fog" like you claim.

>>2227235
Yeah, ERP is really good. He programmed World Driver Championship, which has fantastic N64 graphics. He calls things as they are, but you have to be careful of cherrypicking, look through his post history and you'll find him having a criticism of every old console in some way or another.

>Does bandwidth really make up for the latency?
Yes. Bandwidth is arguably more important than latency since good programming can make up for high latency but not for poor bandwidth. High latency can certainly drag RAM performance down, no question, but how much it is brought down is the responsibility of the programmer.

This article explains a little about it:
http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/b/bandwidth-latency/bandwidth-latency-3.html

Data streaming is one of the methods to improve performance in situations of high bandwidth.

>>2227278
*high latency I mean
fucking typos today

>>2227262
You can call it whatever you want, but you're still wrong. Look up any definition of "fog of war" as related to video games. It specifically refers to strategy games.

>>2227248
>Show me a single 3D N64 game that doesn't use fog to cut off the draw distance then
launch title

>>2227289
Ok? It's far from limited to them.
>>2227290
Don't bother man. The guy is obviously from /v/ and or young.

>>2227278
>http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/b/bandwidth-latency/bandwidth-latency-3.html

was actually just looking at that

>>2227256
Dunno about the others, but Mario 64 had fog.

>>2227295
>Ok? It's far from limited to them.
No it's not. That's what I'm trying to get through to you. "Fog of war" is a term that specifically refers to a computer's ability to effectively hide information from a player in strategy games. It's completely different from the "fog" that pops up in some 3D games like shooters, which is just an effect some games use. You can call that 'fog of war' for yourself, but you need to understand that that's not the correct use of the term. You can't just take established terminology and re-define it.

>>2227304
Listen kid. Fog of war was used extensively in 1942. That's biggest and farthest from an rts example I can think off. And the fog of war is limited to just that game. A lot of FPS used fog of war. And that is what it was called.
>>2227298
It's being used as an atmospheric effect. Hence why you can still see the background.

You are all turboautists.

>>2227309
>Listen kid.
And I think we're done here if this is what you've reduced the conversation to. "Fog of War" is an established video game term that refers to something specific. I've even been looking for anywhere that defines it the way you do and can't. Call it whatever you want but you're completely wrong.

>>2227330
Sorry I'm not going to listen to some dipshit modern gamer tell me what a term that has been used for over 20 years is and isn't.

>>2227334
I'm not a modern gamer though. I'm pushing 40 and have been obsessed with games for most of my life. I have never once heard anyone use fog of war in the way you are. It's always referred to hidden parts of maps. Fog in games that looks like fog has always just been called that.

Now, I'll grant this. Maybe it's a colloquialism from where you're from where people use the term for regular game fog. But I've honestly been digging while this conversation has been going on and I haven't found anywhere else at all that defines it the way you do.

Niggers

>>2227346
Been used for FPS for a long time.

>>2227346
I'll add to this. If you can find me any reputable source anywhere that defines "fog of war" as the kind of video game fog that pops up in non-strategy games like FPSs and the like. I will fully concede your point.

The only way I can see it being used is when people playing FPS games talk about 'fog of war" as it relates to actual war in the sense of not properly understanding your side's military capabilities versus your enemy. Because I have heard "fog of war" talked about in that sense. But that's not what you're talking about. It doesn't mean literal fog in the atmosphere, it's a metaphor.

>>2227354
Yes, but it's used like this >>2227361 in reference to the "fog of war"of actual war.

Again, find me any reputable source that defines "fog of war" as the obscuring atmospheric fog that appears in FPS games and the like.

>>2227364
>>2227361
What do you mean reputable source? You say you're obsessed with games but haven't heard fog of war and the battlefield games? please...

>>2227384
Sure I've heard of it, in that sense with FPSs as I said. But it doesn't refer to the literal fog in game. It refers to the actual "fog of war" as it relates to battle which has nothing at all to do with "fog" as mist in the atmosphere.

As for reputable. If you can find me anything at all more than just a forum post, where someone defines or refers to the video game atmospheric fog that appears in 3D games as "fog of war" then I will concede that you're right.

>>2227389
I have nothing for a modern gamer. Sorry.
It's what was said in tournaments, lans, forums, and in game chat.
I don't give a shit about some modern gamer saying I'm right either. You stick to your shitty games.

Though I assume in your frantic googleing you noticed a lot of forum posts mentioning the fog of war. Cute to say those don't count. Just wanted to point that out.

>>2227396
>I have nothing for a modern gamer. Sorry.
What are you talking about? What does that have to do with anything? You call me a modern gamer despite having pointed out I don't even play modern games very much. That you've reduced this to an attempt to insult me over my taste in games which you don't even know speaks volumes.

Heck I would take forum posts as well at this point. If you can find anyone calling video game fog "fog of war" I'd like to see that too. But no, I didn't come across any. So if you find posts like that, please do post them.

And again, I'm not saying that people playing war games don't talk about fog of war. I'm saying that when they do, they don't mean actual fog. Except in strategy games where it's an established term that refers to the map being obscured.

To be frank, at this point I'm pretty sure that you thought the term "fog of war" actually referred to physical, atmospheric fog and now you're backpeddling like crazy.

>>2225428
The first games were fun because they were something new, like the SNES games with FX chip, Star Fox and Stunt Race FX.

While Star Fox (star wing in europe) still had the left/right controls of 2d shooters, Stunt Race changed the concept of racing for me completely. The fact that the car would turn in actual 3D instead of just going left and right on a road constantly rushing towards you, that took me with such surprise!

I first thought there was something wrong with the game. The boring part was that later games went back to the old ways, the games operate like 2D but they look 3D, Wipe out and V-rally for Ps1 are examples.

The way a lot of games became streamlined in this way now made games over all less creative in my view. A lot has to be put into 3D graphics but there's little creativity in actual game play.

I prefer 3D to be real 3D, if the games functionality is that of a 2D game it's just an artistic choice if you pick 3D instead of drawings, and it may not even look better.

My favourite example of a "good" 3D game from the 90s would be Twisted Metal 2.

>>2225538

we do have modern 2d rayman games
both Rayman Origins and Legends are critically acclaimed games
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCqPNciKAZA

I think the problem is HD sprites are very expensive to make.
People often think 2d sprites are much cheaper than polygons, but they don't understand how expensive it would be to draw hd sprites for the modern +50 inches 1080p tvs.

King of Fighters XIII is the closest thing we have to an hd sprites game, and many casuals say it looks cheap because it uses sprites, or say "Mortal Kombat II looked better, as in, more real"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61DudVzGsyw

>>2225954
I disagree, many of the best2d 16 bits games barely matched their predecessors, Super Mario World doesn't strike me as better than Bros 3, and Super Castlevania IV doesnt seem better to me than Castlevania 3.
It was a, the same but better jump, all about refining but nothing new.

>>2227421
>To be frank, at this point I'm pretty sure that you thought the term "fog of war" actually referred to physical, atmospheric fog and now you're backpeddling like crazy.
What are you talking about? Is this some kind of mental gymnastics to try to show you're not a shit head modern gamer? Failing pretty badly.
Hell one of the main criticisms of BF3 was no fog of war.

I think you've more than proven you don't know shit about retro games.

Even shit like CS GO has some diehards of the series who just wont give up asking to have fog of war added back.

>>2227430
It's time to stop.

>>2227430
>>2227384
>>2227309
Why the fuck are you shitposting about "modern gamers" when your entire argument is based on a game series that started in 2004?

>>2227431
Ya it may be if modern gamers like you are the norm now.

>>2227421
Not keeping track of anons here, so not taking sides, just going to put this here, it's where I fist saw "fog of war" used, Warcraft 2 for PC in mid 90s.

Below quote from: http://classic.battle.net/war2/basic/fog.shtml

" The Fog of War covers everything that is not within the sight range of units or buildings. When viewing the map, black areas have not yet been explored, while grayed areas have been explored but are not currently within sight range of owned or allied units or buildings. Although terrain can be seen through the grayed areas, enemy troop movements are hidden.

Take note of the Shipyard being built. The black, clouded area has never been explored so the terrain under it is not yet revealed. The grayed area between the blackness and the Shipyard has been explored, but because there are no friendly units or buildings nearby, the Fog of War prevents enemy units from being seen there.

The bright area around the Shipyard is within the sight range of that structure. Terrain there can be seen, as can enemy units (if there were any). The other brightened areas in this screen shot correspond to the sight ranges of the Town Hall and Lumber Mill. The sight ranges of units and structures are displayed when the unit or structure is selected. Catapults, Flying units and Towers have the largest sight range (9). "

>>2227442
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog_of_war#In_video_games

>A computer's ability to effectively hide information from a player is seen as a distinct advantage over board games when simulating war. Fog of war in strategy video games refers to enemy units, and often terrain, being hidden from the player; this is lifted once the area is explored, but the information is often fully or partially re-hidden whenever the player does not have a unit in that area.

No mention of literal fucking fog in games called "fog of war" here either.

Inb4

>wikipedia

I'd also like any source calling literal fog in games "fog of war".

>>2227436
That was just an example because he was talking about how fog of war only applied to rts.
Unless you can think of a bigger one than 1942?

The bigger retro fps usually just have poor draw distance instead of fog. Like quake or unreal. I guess half life could be a good example of fog

>>2226279
I want to try that, which engine is letting you do it?

>>2227442

Dune 2 is the first game that i know of that had it

>>2227449
>>2227442
>I'd also like any source calling literal fog in games "fog of war".
Why do you keep asking for sources? The terms fog of war and fog were used interchangeable. It's like trying to find a source for flipping the ps1 on its side. All you're going to find is forums posts.

The idiot arguing that fog of war is just fog makes me want this to be a incorrect/weird names you had for games/game mechanics.

I rember yelling at my friends when they called boss enemies "bosses" because my dad called them "henchmen", so I just assumed that was the correct term.

>>2227480
If it was synonymously then by idiots who didn't understand it.

>>2227487
Not really when the hardware limitation ends up becoming something to add strategy. That's why fog of war and fog ended up becoming the same thing. Why back then and now you have people that call the fog of war in RTS just "fog".

>>2227450
Battlefield didn't have fog of war, it just had fog. They're not the same and you're stupid for thinking so.

Also kinda funny you keep bitching about "modern gamers" when you use 1942 to refer to a fucking Battlefield game from 2004 and not the actual video game 1942 from the 80s.

>>2227493
How are they not the same? Both cover units and buildings. Both are used for the same kind of strategy.
They're the same.

>1942 to refer to a fucking Battlefield game from 2004 and not the actual video game 1942 from the 80s.
Do you think those games are similar?

>>2227497
>Do you think those games are similar?
Of course not, but I had no clue what you meant by "1942" until you later specified Battlefield because everyone uses "1942" to refer to the actual 80s shmup.

>>2227504
If I'm using 1942 and fog in the same sentence I think it's safe to assume which one I'm talking about... I mean I'm assuming you've played both here. Maybe that's too much to assume?

>>2227509
Literally no one but you uses "1942" to refer to Battlefield.

>>2227512
I heard it all the time when I played. That or people would just say the name of the current game minus the number. People knew what they were saying.

>>2227497
Because fog of war is an intentional game mechanic in RTS and TBS games, and fog is used to hide draw distance.

Fog of War in relation to video games has a very clear and specific definition, and it has for like, 20 years, you can't expect people to not argue it when you interchangeably use terms. It'd be like if me and my buddies called combos "shuffles", and then I went on a Tibetan sky writing website and expected everyone to know what I was talking about.

>>2227518
So in other words, it was limited to the Battlefield playerbase, which is, guess what, modern gamers. So stop bitching about modern gamers using what you think is wrong terminology when clearly you are one.

>>2227523
Again. Everything that fog of war does in an RTS, the fog in BF 1942 does. Which is why the names were interchangeable when the game was played.
>>2227524
No.
Unreal was the name used for Unreal Tournament and same with Quake being called Quake regardless the expansion or later games. That's as early as I get with online multiplayer FPS.

And 1942 is nothing like modern FPS. But you're right in it not being retro.

>>2225468

I feel bad for most kids who grew up with CoDMW2 and beyond. I played games like Dr. Brain, Myst, Theme Park, RollerCoaster Tycoon. Growing up on the Sega genesis and the game gear and playing my brother's gameboy. None of us cared about "graphics" and "gameplay" because developers back then actually cared about the game they made. Myst was such an excellent game and it was just a bunch of pictures and gifs!

Like Starcraft had science fiction writers on their story team, which is great because I think it tells a pretty good story across the expansions.

When Supermario 64 came out and the Playstation came out it was pretty much the starting point of the downfall of videogames. It wasn't noticeable because we were so ingrossed in the analog stick, or the dualshock controllers, or the

>>2227530
Guy who posted that.
I didn't see it that way. I really loved 5th gen. 6thgen was what made me completely give up on consoles. PC gaming fell to the same shit but it was amazing up until the end of the mid 2000s.

>>2227540
Ps1 had a diversity of games and despite the 3D being really rough by today's standards, it added a new kind of games with full mobility in open worlds. Tenchu -Stealth Assissins is my fav example.

The Ps2 added nothing but higher resolution graphics and longer loading times. After seeing it I was so dissappointed I gave up console gaming.

>>2227552
Wasn't even that. The game were just so lazily made. Ya you had a few exception but especially PS2 the games were not as good overall. Especially when I got to the end and played Shadow of the Colossus. Confirmed to me that PS2 games were garbage on the whole and the developers were lazy and money drunk.

I think this thread has reached full grognard retardness. NIce work /vr/.

>>2225491
>But nothing made me say "there's no way this is possible" like Doom did.
Absolutely not /vr/ but Gears of War did that for me

I still look at that game and think" the visuals and camera is fucking genius" and it forever will be

>>2226004
>For the first time, we were completely free to move around within a virtual space that had three dimensions.

This sums up my answer. Besides adding 3D as a feature for every title ie "It's Zelda, but in THREEEEE DEEEEEE!!!", it was more about how games played now. Zelda was a perfect example, you knew you were going to walk around alot in a big world and have a sword, but then you had a targeting system and a quick use item menu and hot button setup and first person range weapons etc

It added a new dimension to games figuratively and literally

>>2225538
>Capcom went 3D with Street Fighter it just looks hideous to me
are you blind

>>2226051
>missed out on yelling out HEY YOU PIKACHU! and playing Smash Bros and Pokemon Snap! on the weekends

heh i bet you havent even caught them all

For the most part, terrible. Developers didn't understand that 3d on 2d screens fuck up control and perspective and dumb nugamers ignored it because they cared more about a game's style over its substance, and this was the sort of "gamers" the 3d gemeration of gaming in the mid 90s courted.

The N64 was one of the worst consoles ever released and it's enshrined as some sort of gaming supermachine these days because of nugamer filth that think games like Mario 64 and OoT were anything but uncontrollable, frustrating embarrassments to true gaming.

>>2227590

>games like Mario 64 and OoT were anything but uncontrollable, frustrating embarrassments to true gaming.

But that's just plain wrong, especially Mario.

>>2227590

>>2227590
Sorry but if you seriously think Mario 64 and OoT were "uncontrollable" then you legitimately have issues with your mental and/or physical development.

>>2227554
you didn't like shadow of the colossus?

>>2227623
I loved it. My problem wasn't with the game. That game made about everything else on the console worthless to me. Was an eye opener to how poorly made the rest of the games were.

>>2227554
What about
SSX
Onimusha
Devil May Cry
Zone of the Enders
Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3
Klonoa 2
Gradius V
Final Fantasy X
All those Shin Megami Tensei games

Surely those were well made, no?

>>2226728
So the first 3d computer was what, a c64?

>>2227640
Some of them were very fun. I enjoyed SSX and DMC a lot. The others not so much.

Two games on the list I should add:
Never played Klonoa 2 actually.
Metal gear I've never been a big fan of so I'll say I have a bias against that game.

>>2226097
>You can just look at the thumbnails of too-big images if you're on dialup.
I just downloaded this page as a test. Total size was 1.30 MB (1,365,264 bytes). That's without an ad banner, too. If I'm not mistaken, on a 56k modem back in '99, that was roughly a four minute download. And not everyone had upgraded to a 56k modem at that point, some were still using 33.6 kb modems, with some unfortunate souls still slaving with 28.8 modems.

So I don't believe that image boards would have been quite as viable during that time period as you are suggesting.

>>2227652
Developers can be lazy nowadays since who will notice a mb? Surely things would be more optimized for lower bandwidth. I am gonna make a big bet that this site isn't thinking about making the page barely any smaller.

>>2226482
>Are one million Atari 2600 E.T. cartridges buried in the New Mexico desert?

oh man

>>2227651
>so I'll say I have a bias against that game.

Then why the fuck do you think your opinion matters if thats the case

>>2225480
Oh wow I remember the bridge part too!
Seeing this demo was like seeing the holy grail.

>>2227675
Come down with the edge. Was just throwing it out there.

>>2225526
Earthworm Jim 3D wasn't so bad, I loved it back then.

>>2227657
This strikes me as a spacious argument.

Saving this page as a txt file yields a 142 KB file. Downloading a sampling of non-OP thumbnails, their sizes seem to median around 4 KB. With 33 images, that gives us a ballpark of 132 KB. So 274 KB. That's just over a fifth the size of the full page download.

Now, in theory a 56k modem can download a maximum of a bit under 7 KB a second. However, realistically, people generally averaged around 5 KB if they were lucky (less if they were using a slower modem, as many still were at that time). So you're looking at a theoretical ideal download speed of 40 seconds (a practical ideal of 55 seconds) to load up the ASCII text and thumbnails of a single thread with 252 replies and 33 images. So about a minute, assuming no problems occur.

That's without the code to actually post content, without any 'update' code (meaning you needed to completely redownload the page when checking for updates), or any of the stuff that makes it a webpage. So I still don't believe that image boards would have been quite as viable during that time period as you are suggesting. I, for one, would have stuck with usenet newsgroups.

>>2227652
You're also running under the assumption that you would get full speed on dial up, keep in mind that in the NE of the US the phone lines fucking suck

>>2226085
I assume they dropped the idea because of the way the game plays.
It worked perfectly in 3D Land, but would probably have been hard to aim or useless in SM64.

>>2227990
Indeed. I was trying to be favorable for the sake of argument, but you are quite correct. Slower speeds and frequent disconnects were very much an issue for many users.

>>2227424
its sad but true. especially 2d animation in hd takes so long time to do its almost never worth it. check out shantae: half genie hero though! (and other wayforward games)

>>2226019
thats when 3d platformers will finally be playable, as we will be able to measure distance in 3d with our eyes, like in real life.

The initial jump from 4th gen to 5th gen consoles felt horrible. Imagine being spoiled by an endless supply of gorgeous, luscious sprite games on SNES and Genesis then suddenly for a period of 2 years or so every game on Blockbuster shelves looks like this and controls like you spilled molasses on your d-pad. The magazines were filled with hype and I just remember feeling like yo what the fuck is this shit

>>2227396
nah sorry bud but no one has ever referred to the fog that hides short render distance as fog of war as far as i and everyone else knows of. idk what people u hang with but fog of war is kinda universally accepted as that blackness/shadowy area in age of empires that prevents you from spying at ur enemies

>>2226694
The worst is when they have shitty textures. I think that low-poly is great, but that we shouldn't limit ourselves to doing craptacular texturing, because it ruins the whole point of going low-poly in the first place.

>>2227614
idk ive been trying to play mario 64 many times and i get maybe 15 stars before i give up. the running and jumping in itself isnt hard but the horrible camera and the weird special jumps makes it near unplayable in many stages/stars imo

>>2226784
The problem with 3D Sonic is that they completely miss the point of Sonic games. There's no rolling, there's no exploration, there's just 'run fast on a straight path'.

They got a little better with Colors and Generations, but those might as well be 2D games with how much they're built like hallways.

I think that fan projects are still the ones to get 3D Sonic right.

>>2226568
I only wish the game wasn't such a slog for getting 100%. It's kind of tiring really.

>>2228635
agreed. i feel like theyve gotten it very right in a few sections of the 3d parts of colors and generations. especially the remade angel island act 2 stands out to me, with others such as green hill act 2 is pretty much a straight path. one can only hope to see more of that in upcoming games, with less superspeed sections and grinding.

>>2226085
I can't imagine that fire flowers even worked very well in an open environment like Mario 64, not without a target reticule.

I think Miyamoto was wise to walk away from powerups for 64. In an exploration game where you may trek the same level for quite some time, you wouldn't want your survivability to be tied to a few powerup boxes which had to be specifically found in each area and would only ever work once.

>>2226301
not to mention it probably contributed to how linear that game is. Mario 3D World is some real shitty design work on Nintendo's part. Totally by-the-numbers and totally uninteresting. Not to mention it completely abandoned exploration, a hallmark of the series. Super Mario Bros. had better exploration than that trash, and it was made 30 years ago.

>>2226317
I've used OR in particular, and yes, it's blurry for text, but that's just because 1) the dev units have low-res screens for modern standards, and 2) no one has really bothered to work on interfaces for them yet, hence people trying to awkwardly adapt straight desktops and text editors directly to the device.

Once we get actual designed interfaces things will really pick up.

I can't say I've gotten a headache from it, or met anyone who has, but that's not really something anyone can prove or disprove with purely circumstantial evidence.

As someone who has used it a few times, I think you are wrong, and that it is going to be as great as people say. It just needs some better design work and less walking simulator horror games.

>>2227717
>>2227652
>>2226078
>>2226071
>>2226062

This is hilarious to read. Of course we had image boards back then. They weren't just like this of course, but the idea was essentially the same of forums of people sharing pictures and ideas. In fact the very reason that 4chan is one of the sites I still visit the most is that this is one of the last places around that actually feels like the old internet of the 1990's.

When you're doing your page size calculations you have to keep in mind that 4chan is running on bloated 2015 coding that barely gives two shits about bandwidth. Back then we had to try and optimize everything, and also the images weren't 5megs. Even images in the hundreds of k's were pretty rare. I just dug back into my old folders and here's a pretty typical one I have from back then. September 27, 1996, 2:46:28 PM Ahh Lunar 2! What an awesome game that still is! I digress...

The other thing you have to remember is that back then the internet was new and fucking crazy balls to everyone. So waiting five minutes for a page to load on your spanking new 28k modem didn't feel like a chore because holy fuck you were on the internet! It really did feel like that. I would set a page to load, go outside or to play a game of MK or something and come back 10 minutes later to look at it and still felt like I was living in the god damned future.

>>2227007
Holy shit fuck this game terrified me. The other Ecco's were hard enough, but in 3D is was so much more. There was something I just couldn't deal with getting lost in all those fucking caves underwater, frantically looking for air and drowning. Fuck.

>>2228631
This is my biggest problem with Minecraft. The idea of the game is actually pretty appealing to me, but the whole thing just visually looks like such complete dogshit and I can't help but feel it's done on purpose..

>>2225428
The jump to 3D was amazing.
The idea was that who knows what they can make next. As a kid, I remember wondering what kind of games we will see in the future.
Now we live in what seems like a dystopia if a person living in the late 90s could see the future. Still, there's still SOME good games these days.

>>2228961
I'm a pretty old fag in terms of gamers and truly and honesly in a lot of ways I think we're living in a golden age of gaming. Sure there's a heck of a lot of crap out there, but there are also just plain way more games in general. You just have to accept that unless you're a mainstream gamer that the games being made that will appeal to you aren't going to be the big AAA titles that many people are talking about. Ignore that though, and I think anyone who can't find new games that they enjoy don't actually like the hobby.

And I'm including old school genres in there. Look at roguelikes for example. These days there is such an active community of roguelike players and developers that there are new games to try all the time. I can't remember the last time I didn't have a backlog of new games I still want to play.

>>2228972
I can enjoy some of today's new games...when they actually try to be video games.

I am just tired of games trying to be cinematic and shove a story down your throat, gameplay-padding skill/talent trees in a lot of games, games that dictate exactly how you should play, etc.

Some of my favorite games from last year were mostly non-AAA games barring like one of them.
DKC Tropical Freeze
Styx Master of Shadows
Woflenstein: The New Order
Super Smash Bros. 4

I also want to play Alien Isolation soon as well.

I'm just not fond of your AssCreeds, your GTAs, CoDs, Uncharteds, Battlefields, and the their clones - Those games kill the industry.

>>2228987
>I am just tired of games trying to be cinematic and shove a story down your throat, gameplay-padding skill/talent trees in a lot of games, games that dictate exactly how you should play, etc

Ohh yes, that's exactly how I feel as well. I have a friend who absolutely loves Uncharted and I played through the first two games because he had brought them over and wanted me to so badly. So I did give them a fair shot, but wow I think they're some of the absolute worst games ever made. In general I have found though that the way I play games and the reasons I like the ones I do, the more story one tries to tell is quite closely related to whether I will enjoy it. I far prefer a minimal narrative where the "story" is pretty much what I've done in game. More into things like Monster Hunter, Bayonetta, Etrian Odyssey, Just Cause 2 etc.

But even with the majority of games being like that, I still always have more that I want to play than I have time for. And when old style games come out, like recently with Shovel Knight, Shantae 3 and a new Rabi Labi it's often a joy.

>>2228859
u could always get a nice texture pack. still tho, i agree. i guess notch had already made many of the textures and set the tone of the game before they hired an actual artist...

>>2225428
>leap to 3D. How was it?
It was amazing. Dem smooth vector lines. And when they went went color. Damn. Tempest and Star Wars are still two of my all time favorites.

>>2225526

Busby was a cute, if annoying, mascot. 3D ruined him

>>2226053

Mario 64 is less about precision jumping and killing enemies and more about exploration

>>2225512
>>2226735
>All these underage faggots

>>2228670
That game came out in 1998.

>>2230356
In what region was that? Europe? It came out in '94 in Japan and then North America got it in '95.

>>2230351

1996 was 19 years ago

>>2230351
>18 years old
>Underage

>>2230521
I think he got it confused with Lunar 2: Eternal Blue Complete, the 32-bit version which was released on the Saturn in 1998.

>>2230613
I'd have thought he could tell that wasn't a 32 bit sprite, but you're probably right.

>>2225428
At the time, owners of N64 went back to playing their old consoles from time to time. The first 3d games were not good. The controls and programming just weren't there sometimes. Ocarina of Time was the first amazing 3d game.

>>2228670
The first time I went on the internet, I felt really guilty because my mom said no one could use the phone. We had internet for a few years prior to that but I wasn't allowed to use it. So there I was, I played a Rugrats game and then went to AOL.com and then I got off the computer because I felt weird. Like first time doing sex. IDK it felt really weird.

>>2231146

Mario 64 was a launch title

>>2226053
Ey man F-Zero is exactly the same just with way more machines.

>>2231146
Dr. Doak says "u wot m8?"

>>2226053
>Another Starfox game like the original
But Star Fox 2 is the best game.
Only complaint I have is it is too easy (well it is a leaked beta after all).

>>2228670
I remember the joy of watching progressive JPEGs load on 56k, just watching it getting more and more detailed.

I feel those were used more back then, since loading a complete image was an affair measured in minutes and having a low-res version viewable ahead of time was useful.

>>2225526
Apparently the guy behind this had no idea how 3D games worked, and was really pissed off when he saw Mario 64 because he could've used it as a template of sorts.

>>2228670
not going to lie, it really was like that

I'd open a few pages/start a download, go eat dinner/play on the SNES, and come back too.

when I finally got DSL in 2005 or so, that was like warping into the future, since the only time I'd seen high speed internet was at school.

>>2225428
How did nobody mention this masterpiece yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA3pTA2DNhc

Even with like 1FPS in this game i was amazed on how big this world was and the missions you had to solve. Mario 64 left me speechless.

>>2228670
>I still visit the most is that this is one of the last places around that actually feels like the old internet of the 1990's.

And here I thought I was the only one that felt like this.

It might be the layout, I don't know, I feel at home here, call me a jaded asshole, I don't give a fuck, this is one of the few places that still reminds me of the internet in its prime, as a real free and awesome thing.

>>2226359
Doom didn't make everyone jizz all over their monitors at the time because 3D graphics were a novel and new thing, but because it looked far better and more realistic than anything before it, was really fast and smooth, and also its sound, music and look and feel were impressive. Ultima Underworld, which came out a year before, is very clunky and primitive by comparison.

>>2225428
When I saw a Sonic Adventure demo on the DC at Toys 'R' Us, I thought it looked visually stunning. Like "holy smokes, this looks so smooth and real".

Looking at it now makes me wonder what I really saw as a kid.

>>2227334
I'm 30 and I've never heard fog of war used to refer to anything except the fog in RTS games that represents unexplored or non-visible terrain.

I hated it. I found early, true 3D gaming (not 2,5D or Doom-style 3D) to be boring with very, very few exceptions (Jumping Flash was one). I still feel this way about 3D gaming, having a strong, seething contempt for the vast majority of it.

Due to my general aversion to most 3D gaming, I fucking hated N64.

I remember the first time I saw a properly 3D game at an arcade, it was Virtua Fighter in 1994.
It was just after Christmastime. There was an arcade on my way to and from school that I passed by a lot. They might have gotten it during the holiday but I didn't go out at all in that direction so didn't see it until school started back up in January.
I tried it on my way back from school. I wasn't at all impressed but figured at the time that given a few years, this sort of thing will take over gaming and ruin my enjoyment of future vidya forever.
And I was right.
I hate being right.

>>2236913
Huh. What do you play anymore?

What makes you so opposed to 3D? Is it the assets or the actually 3D games?

In retrospect,

>3D is the future!

Held 5th gen consoles back. 2D games had a lot of new toys to work with, too.

>more storage space and sprites on screen
>rotation and scaling effects that run circles around Mode 7
>transparency and other blending effects
>redbook audio
>blending sprites with 3D models
>no need for tilemaps

Basically, take the effects that Yoshi's Island could do with its 3D chip and multiply it tenfold.

since they went with 3D games stopped being arcadey and started becoming more adventurous and cinematic

These days you can't make triple AAA arcade titles anymore else reviewers will whine it's too short, etc

>>2236658
Midwinter II was even more impressive (like Just Cause meets Operation Flashpoint or something), but had worse playability than Hunter, largely thanks to its glacial framerate. It was too ambitious for its time. They both came out the same year.

What terrified me in Hunter was walking through an open area and hearing an approaching jeep. I think they liked to go GTA on your ass.

>>2236916
I... don't know how to explain it. There's something about the perspective in most 3D gaming I find to be either infuriating, awkward or unpleasant to look at. Almost like 3D graphics paradoxically obstruct everything for me. That's the best way I can describe it.

As for what I play now: almost entirely 2D or 2,5D games, the vast majority of which is /vr/ stuff, and very few games that don't fit into either (or both) categories.

As for non-/vr/, I've played a handful of PS2 games, about 10-20 or so, and can honestly say that the Katamari series aside, I haven't liked a single one of them. I also own a DS and enjoy a great deal of the games I have for it.
I've never played a PS3, PS4, PSP, Wii, Wii-U, 3DS or any Xbox game other than Karaoke Revolution for a round of drunken fun on 360 at a friend's gettogether.

I have a strong dislike for N64 and DC.

i still love the PS1 look when its done well, reasons:

> dripping with atmosphere and mystery
> unfiltered textures made the world gritty and detailed
> graphics are enough to get the idea of the world without trying to be so "real" that flaws stick out like a sore thumb
> polygon shifting gave some subtle "life and movement" to an otherwise still scene
> your brain fills in details left to the imagination

i dunno i still think it looks cool.. devs focused on art style rather than realism.

That 90s 3D graphics are often considered bad has more to do with more people growing up playing console games than PC games.

1996, N64:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S6myWz3Kzg

1996, PC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8QcFd3x-g8

1998, N64:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o908SWJ8ulc

1998, PC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJNxoIuydGg

>>2225428
I don't really remember much about the leap itself, since I was born in '92.
But I do remember that I didn't really care about 2D or 3D, or if I even really understood what was the difference between them, since I played a lot of both 2D games from Genesis and Super Nintendo and some 3D PC games early on, like X-Wing vs. Tie-Fighter, even before I got my N64 I think.

>>2236995
>pixelated brown vs smooth colors
I dunno...were you trying to put down Mario 64 or something?

>>2237020
The graphics in Quake and Unreal were far more advanced and they also ran better.

>>2237027
Software Quake isn't more "advanced" than Mario 64. Mario 64 is filtered, mip-mapped, perspective correct 3D with reflective mapping and transparencies. Quake just runs a lot better (and in higher resolution) when your PC outspecs the N64.

Unreal was like the Crysis of its day (and was pushing even 1998-era PCs to the limit) so it's a pretty obvious call that its graphics are going to be a lot better than those consoles. Very few people in 1998 had gaming PCs capable of running Unreal at playable framerates though. If you did personally, good for you.

I still remember when I walked by a Circuit City window and saw Sonic Adventure for the first time. It's aged terribly, but in 1998 it was amazing and beautiful.

>>2237037
Even if it has some features that the Quake engine doesn't (which also works the other way around), it still looks noticeably worse. UUW also had at least one feature the Doom engine didn't (sloped surfaces). Still didn't look better.

>>2237045
Mario 64 looks a lot better than Quake played on a typical 1996 PC, there's little question about that.

>>2237050
I bet you also think Ocarina of Time is the most revolutionary game ever made.

>>2237054
You're just projecting now.

>>2237045
Does Underworld look worse than Doom? Or Underworld 2.

>>2237059
So you're saying that I think Ocarina of Time is the most revolutionary game ever made, but I am in denial of it and instead attribute that belief to you? I think it's more likely that you don't know what projection is.

I know Nintendo has some desperate fanboys, and this is nothing but fanboyism. It's like if I claimed that this looked better than Doom, just because I like the Amiga:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BELCO16pwNM

>>2237062
It looks worse, no question about it.

>>2237045
>Even if it has some features that the Quake engine doesn't (which also works the other way around)
Actually the Mario 64 engine is very versatile and supports pretty much every type of visual effect from that era. After all, it was build for real 3D hardware acceleration.

The Quake engine was primarily designed for software mode, running off Pentium processors. The biggest advantage that the Quake engine has over the Mario 64 engine is that it is far more efficient. The Mario 64 engine is a low efficiency engine (can't have many polygons or high resolution textures).

Carmack's biggest genius is not the features of his engines but getting them running on low spec processors. Quake needed to work on even the lowest spec Pentium CPU, supported by nothing but a 2D card, and it did (even if it wasn't high-res). The N64 had both a CPU that was as fast as a low spec Pentium AND a GPU that was true 3D hardware. Had Carmack ported Quake to N64 personally it might have been pretty cool.

>>2237037
Hardware accelerated quake did exist. vQuake came out in 96 and ran on Rendition Verite cards. GLQuake didn't come out till 97 though.

>>2237068
looks doom level, just in much smaller levels

the gibs certainly look better than doom

>>2237068
Why does it look worse?

>>2237068
No, you think that Quake is the most revolutionary game ever, and you try to attribute this fanaticism to me except with Ocarina of Time. That's projection.

>>2237071
Yeah, it was pretty cool at the time. Shame those old Rendition Verite cards had low performance. vQuake in 96 ran at about 20fps.

>>2237070
The bottomline, in any case, is that Mario 64 doesn't look as good as Quake does. If they really had much better hardware--which they even designed themselves--it's pretty sad that this is the best they could come up with.

>>2237076
It looks like complete shit compared to Doom, and the levels are from the Wolfenstein era.

>>2237078
Have you never seen Doom?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPRx_VmfQ2o

>>2237082
I never said or implied anywhere that Quake is the most revolutionary game ever, and nobody in their right mind would claim that it is. Nintendo fans however are likely to make claims like OoT being the most revolutionary game of all time.

>>2237087
Looks worse to me.

I was there and it was awful.

Almost every single franchise was forced into 3D without any sort of thought for the franchise.

The few franchises that did have thought put into them had to change core things about those franchises to make the games work in 3D, effectively creating a different franchise.

It was hell.

>>2237091
It has way more detailed level geometry, better textures and more textures, better rendering, better lighting, dramatically longer view distance, and a much bigger viewport.

>>2226053
>A true 3d transition of the 2d Mario games didn't come until Super Mario 3d Land on the 3DS.

And it was terrible. 3D Mario and 2D Mario are fundamentally different, trying to make one like the other just hurts both.

>>2237095
The low viewing range and illumination is a feature. You can delete shades.dat if you want everything bright.
Small viewing window may be an issue for UW1 but not really for 2. 2 also improved the character sprites.
How is the level geometry better when it doesn't even have slopes?
How many textures do you need?
How is better rendering a matter of looks?

>>2237102

>>2237104
It's not a feature unless the developers have said that it is, and even then it wouldn't be a very good feature. Deleting a data file to make everything bright also doesn't sound like a very good idea. Doom has proper lighting and you don't have to choose between stumbling in near-darkness or having everything fullbright. Although that video doesn't illustrate it well because the player had the gamma too high.

Slopes are not enough to make the level geometry better.

>How many textures do you need?
>How is better rendering a matter of looks?
Do you even think about what you type? And why are you this desperate to white-knight UUW2? Nobody said it's a bad game. It just doesn't look as good as Doom does.

>>2237094
People keep forgetting stuff like racing games. Now that's a genre made for 3D.

>>2225468
A lot of the early PS1 stuff just doesn't look that great to me. Like Final Fantasy 7 was supposed to have mind-blowing graphics at the time but now looks kind of silly. SNES games have definitely aged better.

>>2237095
and yet the art masks most of that.
it's more visually interesting to look at, at least initially

>>2237110
Explain to me why a fully textured game needs more textures.
Doom may have run smoother on the same computer but that doesn't impact how it looks.
To me Doom looks boring and sterile, little better than Wolf3D.

>Doom has proper lighting and you don't have to choose between stumbling in near-darkness or having everything fullbright.
It depends on what light sources you have.
It goes: no light < candle < torch < light spell < lantern < daylight spell = light sphere
Deleting shades.dat is cheating but it doesn't hinder the game in any way.
The developers said they wanted a more dynamic light system but abandoned it because it required too much processing powers.

>>2237138
>Explain to me why a fully textured game needs more textures.
UUW2 has less textures than Doom, so your argument is that games don't need more textures anyway. Sour grapes. You are just grasping at straws out of despair.

>Doom may have run smoother on the same computer but that doesn't impact how it looks.
The way textures are rendered in UUW2 is wobbly.

>To me Doom looks boring and sterile, little better than Wolf3D.
This is complete horseshit. Doom is light years ahead of Wolf3D, which doesn't have anything except rooms and corridors built out of squares, with no ceiling or floor textures.

>It depends on what light sources you have.
Doom's sectors are all individually lit, can have dynamic lighting and are also lit dynamically by gunfire.

>The developers said they wanted a more dynamic light system but abandoned it because it required too much processing powers.
Exactly.

>>2237152
Isn't that more a question of more polygons or higher resolution textures? Saying it has more textures means next to nothing.

>The way textures are rendered in UUW2 is wobbly.
They're wobbly when you look up or down, something you can't do in Doom.

>>2237158
More textures allow for more detailed and varied environments.

>They're wobbly when you look up or down, something you can't do in Doom.
I've seen in videos that they are wobbly even when you aren't looking up and down. And in any case, they wobble and it doesn't look very good.

I'm not reading all this crap. Has anybody mentioned "Elite"? Or are you virgins too young for that

>>2237183
If we're talking about "the leap to 3D," then Elite wouldn't be relevant.

>>2237198
why not?

>>2237206
"The leap to 3D" started in the early 90s. Games started moving towards 3D graphics regardless of genre.

>>2237214
In which plane of existence is elite not relevant?

>>2237226
It came out in 1984, so why would it be relevant to developments in the early to mid 90s? Vector graphics were even phased out during that time.

>>2237235
Nowhere in op is there mention of the 90s. Elite, one of the first 3d games made available is relevant to ANY 3d game discussion

>>2237248
Uh... he's talking about "the leap to 3D." Which occured in the 90s.

>>2237163
I don't think monotony is a problem in UW2. You may have brown and grey dungeons but there's also an ice world, an alien planet and the ethereal void and even the brown and grey walls offer some diversity like wood panels or mossy stones.

>I've seen in videos that they are wobbly even when you aren't looking up and down.
You mean they move when you're standing perfectly still? I can't see that happening.

> How was it? I keep on hearing it was amazing and we'll never have that big a leap again in gaming

What you weren't there?

Damn kiddo.

What is so hard these days that you children can't emulate the good ol' classics heh?

>>2237254
It's not about monotony of the levels, the point is that there are more textures in Doom's levels at any given time, and they are also better quality.

They wobble when you move around and rotate the camera.

>>2237214
I assume you don't mean head bobbing since Doom had that as well. I can see a wobble effect in UW1 but not in UW2.
Do you have a number on the amount of textures the Underworld engine can display? I know it has a limited number of sprites which causes issues from extensive grinding but I'm drawing blank on the number of textures. The whole engine isn't as documented as Doom's with its open source.

>>2226285
Sales mean shit, we are talking about how good those games were

In the case of street fighter, EX 2 was amazing,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjQMryJquvg

>>2226695
yeah but

>good games
>good games
>kek

>>2237303
I have no idea how many textures it can display, I'm just going by the number of textures you can see in the game. It doesn't even have as many surfaces as Doom, so there also isn't room for as many textures. Doom has more complex level geometry.

>>2237313
You're saying this is more complex

>>2237325
than this?

>>2237325
>>2237326
I was quite clearly talking about level geometry.

>>2237329
Also your comparison is lopsided anyway because the Doom one is the first level of the game. First levels are almost always small and simple compared to later ones.

>>2237329
Explain what you mean level geometry.

>>2237336
If you don't even know what level geometry means then why are you trying to argue about the matter?

>>2237338
*tips

when will they learn right?

*unzips

>>2237259
try as you might you can't emulate an era ;_;

>>2237338
Because it seems I'm misunderstanding something.
I'm not saying that UW is a more complex game than Doom because that goes without saying and isn't relevant to the graphics. I'm talking about features in the level architecture showcasing the ability of the engine. The top down view simply gives a better impression the in game view or map.

>>2237334
Feel free to provide a better example.

>>2237350
Doom has more height variations, decorations and details and more open spaces. Like those stairs, pillars and pedestals in the first room before the first door. The environments look more natural.

http://www.classicdoom.com/maps/d1secs/d1.htm

>>2237359
Are open spaces really a sign of complexity? I'm not seeing a big difference in the height.
Does Doom even have polygon objects like chests, chairs, desks, beds, rocks or doors? The common barrels are just sprites.
"Natural" is a fishy term when speaking about a demon overrun Mars base.
What Doom does offer though is a variable ceiling height.

The leap to 3d was like the adolescence of video games. It was awkward and were on some new ground and didn't know the full capabilities of what they were to become.

>>2226053
>A true 3d transition of the 2d Mario games didn't come until Super Mario 3d Land on the 3DS.
That game was shit. It was like Super Mario 64 from an alternate universe where Nintendo made a 3D Mario game based on the framework of the 2D games without taking into mind how the extra dimension affects the gameplay.

>>2226067
If you're this fucking conservative, why did you even play the games in the first place? You obviously won't like it if it isn't exactly the same.

>>2225428
it was amazing back in the day but it hasn't aged well

>>2226053
Mario 2 had no fireflower
Mario Land had superballs
Yoshi's island had those card powerups that disabled your tongue abilty so they were pretty much useless.

Even Mario Kart didn't have fireballs until the gamecube era. Fireflowers aren't that big a staple in Mario. Hell, the first two games with mario in them, fireballs are an enemy.

>>2237087
>The bottomline, in any case, is that Mario 64 doesn't look as good as Quake does
I think in a 320x240 resolution comparison, Mario 64 will look better. The problem with Mario 64 is that it doesn't scale very well to higher resolutions, and the problem with Quake is that it looks like a blob of pixelated brown in low-resolution.

>If they really had much better hardware--which they even designed themselves--it's pretty sad that this is the best they could come up with.
This is a very fair from fair comparison - Mario 64 is the result of heavy experimentation to create a new type of game. The development target for Quake was literally to bring Doom into 3D.

>>2238818
*far from fair

>>2237359
The thing about Doom though was that it was all on one surface just with height variations. So a top down map shows the map perfectly because there are no tunnels or bridges or anything.

>>2228646
>>2228159
I think I know the answer to this, but have you guys played Super Mario 3D World?

The Fire Flower is very usable.

>>2226398
>I'd hazard that manipulability and physics/lighting could be improved.
This really is it. As it stands now, what games really need are better physics and motion capture. It really makes a world of difference.

>>2239771
I also posted about how to implement the fire flower in the 64 mario but I think all you'll get is

>it breaks the flow of the game

>mfw

>>2227334
Fog of was is used to describe areas of the battlefield your troops haven't seen yet. It's for RTS or TBS games. Any other fog is just fog... And this argument is retarded as fuck all.

>>2226695
Low precision 3D is still 3D.

>>2236923
>These days you can't make triple AAA arcade titles
>triple AAA
But, dude, that's, like... 9 As...

>>2237068
>Gloom
I've never played it, but that actually looks pretty fucking cool. Not the AI, or level design that looks like shit. But there's a lot of neat features, like moving walls and that little space ship mini game and such.

Otherwise it's just a target shooting game.

>>2226845
That game does look like a mess now, same with resident evil 1, both of those were my first experience of 3d games, my mate had a ps1 when i was still playing my older brother's c64 and my snes.

I dont remember having an opinion in terms of graphics at all unlike in my adult life, it must of felt 'normal' or the experience was that powerful that i didnt care. All i remember is that they were both challenging and very creepy fucking games that i loved, it's stuff like this that shapes your general taste in things as you grow up. Gaming is fucking horrible now in comparison and it's not just nostalgia.

>>2225428
I actually wasn't that impressed by the first "3D" Games I saw which were old PC games like Carmageddon.

Though I remember the jump from the Snes/Master System to the N64 though and being blown away by Blast Corps. I distinctly remember going "Wow you can actually see him properly running"

>>2227224
Possibly the dumbest thing I've ever read on /vr/. That's like claiming Daytona on Saturn doesn't have pop-up, "they just decided to draw only the part of the track closest to you."

>>2240242
Never played N64. That's nice of you to shitpost about it.

>>2225538
Cuphead is coming.

>>2237070
Does Mario 64 have dynamic or colored lighting? Not the same anon, just wondering, I haven't played it enough to remember.

I still think it's pretty impressive they pulled off limited dynamic lighting from weapons fire in Quake. Half-Life, for example, doesn't have it at all (although it has the flashlight).

>>2237350
Ultima Underworld only has walls at 90 and 45 degree angles at set lengths. They did a great job with it, but that's a pretty big limitation. I don't know why you're arguing with this guy, but purely in terms of its ability to render complicated 3D spaces, the Doom engine is superior. Ultima Underworld is better at a few things, but the Doom engine is better at a dozen others.

Both are great games and neither game could be made in the other one's engine.

>>2240782
He didn't say the engine is superior, he said the game looks better, which is extremely subjective. And he admittedly never played the game and just judged it by videos.

>>2240246
Are you still trying to convince people the N64 wasn't full of fog? lol

Not much of a leap. More like a slow crawl, first with the use of semi-3D graphics. People forget that the Jaguar was running 3D at a very early date. Star Fox on Super Nintendo was one of the first games I saw in 3D, that was enough to just watch. They had been flirting with it for a while, but you would play anything that messed with your sense of space.

>>2225428
>we'll never have that big a leap again in gaming

Scrolling was bigger. When SMB came out and made it so that EVERY game was expected to have a "world", THAT was by far THE biggest "leap" that video games will EVER see.

>>2237259

Emulation is for babies and there's a difference between experiencing it first hand. Nowadays no one gets wowed by SM64 or Crash Bandicoot

>>2237094

>tfw every PS1 game from Japan had to have long CG cutscenes
>tfw no one wanted to play 2D games despite the fact the PS1, Saturn, and N64 made better 2D games than the previous gens

>>2236995

Boring dark, first person games vs bright, stylized games.

Plus SM64 and OOT don't look bad

>it was amazing

No, it wasn't. 2D gaming is the best, always will be, and this 3D crud killed it forever. Nobody wants to make 2D games anymore

>>2228749
>>2227007

Why fuck can't dolphins breath underwater

>>2237068
You're calling people fanboys yet you're the one that's getting mad that someone could actually praise a console game for being innovative.

>>2226053
This Maelstrom bullshit logic really needs to leave this board.

>>2242116
Because they're mammals and have lungs instead of gills.

>>2242224
But then why fish