/vr/ - Retro Games

>>473360
if you think about it, both Sega and Nintendo were pretty amateurishly-run companies. When they only competed with each other, it was fine since both played by the same rules. Neither of them knew how to handle a soulless corporate giant.

No not really
Sega was truly incompetent, and Nintendo was complacent and too full of themselves.

Sega and Nintendo were both clinging to the past. FFVII clearly proved that cinematic gaming was the way of the future, yet one remained fixated on the dying arcade scene and the other failed to appreciate such modern concepts as FMV.

>>473390
Reminds me of that one thread earlier where some 30 yo virgin was whining about cinematic gaming. Fuck him and all who are still living in the cartridge era*

*we're well aware of the irony of saying this on a retro game board, but the smart man appreciates games from all eras

Nintendo and Sony were working together on the Playstation

>>473406
Sony made the SNES sound chip and they collaborated on a CD drive for the console. What happened is that they wanted to add advanced 3D hardware while Nintendo only was interested in something along the lines of the Sega CD. The project fell apart and Sony simply decided to make a standalone console out of their prototype SNES CD addon.

N64 had better hardware than the PS1?

Nintendo was "stomped"?

>>473416
>Nintendo was "stomped"?

30 million N64s sold vs 102 million PS1s

Yeah they were stomped

>>473390
Nintendo was/is living in the past because their main man Shiggy is. He still believes in making games like the 80s and has never embraced FMV and all that shit. But he'll be retiring before too long anyway.

>>473390
>FMV.

You mean the biggest lie in the story of this industry?.

>>473405

Not quite, there was some use of CD's in older times.

>>473427
still both amazing numbers really

>>473432
Everytime "shiggy" mains a game as actual director or game designer, he still knocks it out of the park. So, don't know why the hate.

There were a variety of reasons why the PS1 overtook the Nintendo, but it's hardly anything to do with "shiggy."

>>473432
Shigeru Miyamoto barely had any say in the direction the company went in the 90s

>>473448
>There were a variety of reasons why the PS1 overtook the Nintendo, but it's hardly anything to do with "shiggy."

Not in the 90s, no. Some people say Hiroshi Yamauchi being a stubborn old cuss hurt them though.

Wasn't it easier to make a game on a PS1 than an N64? That could be why a lot of companies jumped ship. Also, discs probably meant you could make longer 3D games, since there were multiple disc games like FF VII and MGS, but no multi cartridge games

>>473438
Agree.

>FMV
>3DO (which I love)
>CD-i
>Sega CD
>Amiga32
>DivX
>Still using FMV as 'IN GAME HURR DURR in 2013'

lol FMV.

>>473472
>>473469
Remember, we're talking the 90s, not today's Nintendo. Shiggy is the most powerful/senior guy there since Yamauchi retired, but that's only been for the last several years.

>>473483
PS1 was the first successful use of CDs in a console. All those early attempts flopped hard.

>>473485
That's pretty much what they said

>>473489
Wing Commander 4 and Mark Hamill would like a word with you.

>>473485
Yamauchi was calling all the shots back when they designed the N64 and we can well assume it was his decision to reject CDs.

>no prior history in gaming

>>473489
I think the Sega CD flopped because it was just a console attachment. Plus only a few games worth playing in it. Not sure why the Saturn went under though

Because they made it incredibly easy for third party developers, that's why.

Saturn was too fucking hard to program and that surprise release pissed everyone off.

And Nintendo are forever mario and zelda. But that's their style.

Basically the same reason android has taken over the mobile world. It's an "open" system.

>>473505
>clone

By that reasoning, Panasonic is still doing just fine.

>>473505
Do you have any idea who many companies made MSX computers?

>>473489

Someone never played Klonoa... and Resident Evil, Gran Turismo, etc...

>>473448

Wii Music.

>>473507
>Not sure why the Saturn went under though

Because:

>dual CPU architecture was expensive to manufacture and hard to program
>no 3D Sonic (that project fell apart)
>Sega of America were massive idiots
>lack of adequate programming documentation or tools supplied to devs

>>473521
Besides, it was made of off-the-shelf parts. Sony didn't design anything in there.

>>473521
How*

>>473512
>And Nintendo are forever mario and zelda. But that's their style

N64 was also a bitch to program. Rareware and Factor 5 deserve medals of honor for doing what they did with that clusterfuck.

>>473541
it had more raw power than the PS1, but getting decent results from the thing was way harder to do.

>>473405
But there's a difference between "this game has cutscenes" and "cinematic gaming". When I think "cinematic" I think something along the lines of Uncharted 3, where a lot of the major setpieces are QTEs within cutscenes; and the actual gameplay is mostly relegated to walking/running/jumping from setpiece A to setpiece B.

I mean, sure, it looks pretty and all, but it's not that fun. At least, not in my opinion.

>>473541
I'll bet the lack of CD-Drive when the other two had 650mb~ of cheap to print data also made things a lot harder.

>>473390
see >>473414
and >>473368
Nintendo was complacent with the Famicom, but stiff competition from Sega and a leg up with Sony's SPC-700 convinced Nintendo to fight the console wars.
Also, you're totally wrong about Sega not wanting to go with cinematic gaming, since December 1991 saw the launch of the Mega CD.

>>473414
The Super FX chip is pretty hard evidence Nintendo wanted to make a committed leap to 3D. The N64 was so late to the party because Nintendo had to build a 3D machine from scratch after the fallout of the CD controvery and being forced to keep cartridges to maintain control over software rights.

Sony wanted to make a fortune on the back of Nintendo, Nintendo threw a tantrum. Sony spent too much R&D on half a console and needed to go all the way to make a return on the investment (Kutaragi put his neck on the line for this). Nintendo burned too many bridges with optical media giants, and had no CD fab of its own, so stuck with cartridges. Pissing off EA wasn't helpful either. Sega buddied with NEC for the Saturn (no idea who made the Mega CD drive), except the Saturn was a 3rd grader's idea of glueing expensive electronics together to make a bigger Megadrive. Sony could make all its hardware in-house, undercutting Nintendo and Sega on hardware pricing, and Sony had a revolving door policy for third party software.

Sony won the 5th and 6th generation because of gross incompetence on the part of Nintendo and Sega.

>>473571
>except the Saturn was a 3rd grader's idea of glueing expensive electronics together to make a bigger Megadrive.

XD

>>473571
>Sony won the 5th and 6th generation because of gross incompetence on the part of Nintendo and Sega

I think certainly their vastly greater resources were a factor since they could produce all the hardware themselves. That goes back to OP's point that Nintendo and Sega both played by the same rules, but Sony didn't and they weren't prepared for it.

>(no idea who made the Mega CD drive)

Probably NEC

>>473571
Yes and really ironically the very thing that had caused their consoles to "win" (easy to make games for, the competing console was too complex) was reversed come the next gen, and it looks like they may have not learned from that mistake

>>473570
But even putting the cartridge issue aside, the N64 still was balky to code for.

>>473571
>and Sony had a revolving door policy for third party software

Which again is likely because they weren't a dedicated game developer and had no real preferences for what games should be on their system, so they just said "Come one, come all!"

>>473603
GC and Xbox weren't any better or worse than the PS2 for programming difficulty, but Sony already had a large foothold plus the huge bonus of backwards compatibility with the PS1.

And then the PS3 just got too overstuffed.

>>473571
>Sony wanted to make a fortune on the back of Nintendo, Nintendo threw a tantrum
More specifically, Sony had this Machiavellian plan that would have resulted in Nintendo gradually turning into a subsidiary of them.

>>473615
The xbox was, x86 was a very well established architecture for decades at that point, and the ease of use the direct X suite provided was fairly reaffirming for developers, especially those coming from the PC. ie, all of them in the 90s.

>>473615
I do wonder why they're throwing backwards compatibility out the window when it served them so well before?

>>473620
If Nintendo hadn't told Sony to get fucked, they wouldn't exist today and we'd be playing Mario on Playstations.

>>473592
That was how Commodore devastated the low-end computer market during the early 80s. They owned a chip fab and could sell their wares for half the cost of Atari, Texas Instruments, and others.

>>473596
Just googled it; tiny amount of vram so you have to use the carts to stream data like a botchy MegaTextures thing, lol

>>473571
>The Super FX chip is pretty hard evidence Nintendo wanted to make a committed leap to 3D. The N64 was so late to the party because Nintendo had to build a 3D machine from scratch after the fallout of the CD controvery and being forced to keep cartridges to maintain control over software rights.


Meh...Nintendo's main reason for sticking wth the cartridge format was strictly based on economics...they didn't want to fork out the money to retool for CDs. Remember, Nintendo owned all of their cartridge production factories.

It's not that weird when you consider the Sony Playstation began its life as SNES-CD.

>>473621
Its all down to manufacturing costs.

It was pretty easy to fit PS1 guts into the PS2 alongside the rest of the stuff, but the more advanced you get, the more difficult it is to include stuff like that.

Although to be fair, I've always been of the opinion that, if you wish to play X-console games, then buy an X-console. I know its not a popular answer, and I know its not financially possible for some folk, but if thats what you want...

Backwards compatibility was a nice thing to have, but to expect it just because it happened once or twice... thats a false sense of entitlement right there. Not saying you are, just saying those who rant and rave about it are.

>>473640
>VIC-20
>started at $350
>eventually $150
>C64
>started at $600
>later $350

Nobody could compete with that. Texas Instruments was selling the TI-99/4A at $525 and then forced to cut it to $150, well below the profitability point. Even though they owned a chip fab (Atari didn't and had to use outside contractors), the computer still cost a lot more to manufacture than Commodore's machines.

>>473673
>Remember, Nintendo owned all of their cartridge production factories

However they didn't own a CD fab and had also pissed every optical media manufacturer off

>>473448
shiggy is a god-tier game designer, but that guy is right, his philosophies are dated, and no one hates change more than the Japanese. I've heard stories of how he flipped his shit when Rare made a better and more memorable Donkey Kong game than Shiggy ever could.

>>473693
That's a good point, but you have to admit, promising and then giving your userbase backwards-compatibility for two gens (fat PS3 had it at first, remember?), especially after they have gotten used to Nintendo rehash-whoring and PC gameing's long shelf life, would tend to spoil some gamers.

>>473710
Exactly.

>>473716
>but that guy is right, his philosophies are dated

He's still living in the cartridge era when space was limited and you couldn't have cinematic stuff or storylines beyond "save girl from bad guy".

>>473716
Honestly Nintendo totally forgot about Donkey Kong for years until the character was revived at that time.

>>473693
I am a little pissed off at it. But in all fairness by the end of the PS2 era I was exclusively playing PS2 games so I guess I am being petty. I still don't hold out much hope for the PS4 though

to make a 40k analogy (that will probably get me laughed at) Sony was pretty much Slaneesh to Nintendo's Eldar. born due to Nintendo's arrogance and poor decision-making.
or at least that's how i see it

>>473716
I agree with the idea that Shiggy's game design philosophies are dated, but I've never actually seen a source that outright says he disliked DKC. Wikipedia threw out the source that most people cite on account of it not existing.

>>473716
I think that was only because people were forcing him to put 3D graphics into Yoshi's Island.

Completely unrelated to /vr/ but it keeps getting brought up. Am I the only one who's thinking the PS4 might be on the right track for a change?
It'll be better than the Xbox 8 for sure at least.

Although a reasonably priced steam box would blow them all out the water

Dumb shits say "Look at all the companies who jumped ship because Nintendo stuck with super-fast cartridges instead of moving onto CDs" then fail to cite a SINGLE company without the word "SQUARE" in its name.

JRPG obsessives were a curse of the era.

>>473745
>cite a SINGLE company without the word "SQUARE" in its name.

Namco, Konami, and others didn't totally abandon Nintendo, but they made like 2 N64 games and 10 PS1 games.

>>473745
Konami with Metal Gear? Mega man X series? A lot of fighting games (Street Fighter, Marvel vs Capcom)? Yeah they weren't companies as a whole, but they did put their big moneymakers of the PS1

>>473749
Nintendo placed limits on how many games each publisher was allowed to release, if I remember correctly.

And the N64 wasn't hugely popular in Japan - so why would Japanese developers prioritise it? Nintendo's ace in the hole, Rareware, was British.

Developers loved the cartridges. There is no developer on record whining about having 32-64MB of virtual read-only RAM with super-high access speeds.

>>473745
Are you serious? No, you can't be serious. Square is the only one that COMPLETELY abandoned them, but just a quick glimpse at the two respective companies catalogues for that gen should make you see how trollish that statement sounded.

>>473481
Storage space doesn't determine how "long" a game is.

For example, Ocarina of Time is a much longer game than Metal Gear Solid.

>>473764
Devs don't promote and publish the games- PUBLISHERS do. I'm sure you knew this already.

Nintendo also bought Rare before they jumped ship.

>>473753
Konami made several N64 games. They had no control over which platform developers chose. The fact Japanese devs favored a console which was popular in Japan means little. The Xbox 360 is the same.
Evangelion was popular, right? Well the Evangelion game was an N64-exclusive. (And it had a shitload of cutscenes, voice acting, etc.)

I apologise to all...I should know better than to feed the end-of-thread trolls. I've just so gotten used to /vr/ being civilized.

Later.

ps1 had bigger library and had been around longer

= more chance they have a game you really want
= cheaper price point

console games where expensive in this era compared to now adjusting for inflation

buying a second console is like -5 games in opportunity cost

both consoles had there 5 star games but PS1 was well established before n64

>>473717
How fucking accurate. But I think this applies for every AAA company, not just Capcom.

>>473826
It's not adjusting for inflation accurately.

>What cost $60 in 2012 would cost $41.53 in 1996.

>Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 1996 and 2012, they would cost you $60 and $87.45 respectively.

Also, this doesn't take into account of the growing digital distribution with decade long infrastructure up. Or the fact that in 1996 video game CD's and DVD's were fairly new (1988-ish CD printing, 1995 DVD) and is now over 30 years old and have long since been paid for hand over fist. Then you consider PC prices have jumped $20 over the last decade (I remember in the late 90s when a PC game was $40 for a AAA title).

If anything, prices should be dropping for media. They certainly have for the manufacturer. The problem is everyone wants a piece of the money and gamers will throw money at the cause (look at SimCity 5). Stupid Consumer + Whiny Publisher = Office Party

>>473739
I've read several anecdotes that seem to reveal that Shiggy's a bit unstable.

>>473743
If half the rumors are true about the next Xbox, it'll bomb hard.
Sony have been dicks for most of their life in the gaming industry, but took a very broish turn recently. I'd like to see them perform well, but the general state of the company makes me very affraid.
I own a Wii U, and like it. I don't think it'll be as successful as the Wii in its early lifetime, but it'll sure do better than the GC / N64.
Valve, yeah, if they play their cards right, they can get a huge success.

>>473864
Errrmm, console games (cartridges especially)were ridiculously expensive back in the day.

Pic-related: take a quick look at the prices of those Sega genesis games. This wasn't an isolated event: NES games were retard-expensive during the NES's heyday, SNES as well, and so on. No one $70 and up for an Xbox 360 game thses days.

>>473940
*No-one pays*

Point being, Nintendo & Friends got fat pockets off of us and grew complacent.

>>473940
Maybe those are probably Canadian prices. I was a kid, but I paid $55 for Sonic 2 out of my own earned money. Around $60 was the norm (I was too young to actually pay for Nintendo and Atari games). But I remember when Virtua Racing came out on the Genesis and I wanted it because it was the "future" and the thing nobody would stop talking about was that it was $100 which was double the average cost of a game and nobody thought SEGA could pull a stunt like that.

But to the point, you're not really arguing with me since I was saying they were expensive then and that inflation as well as dumb consumers and greedy publishers have kept the price higher than it should be.

>>473717
That initially price point of $599 should have been enough of a wake-up call for people to know that hardware BC costs money.

I used my tax return to get the PS3 fat when it came out, and it's still not even 100% BC with PS1 games. Mortal Kombat Trilogy crashes if you have a Sub-Zero vs. Kano match.

Works just fine on the PS1 and PS2.

POINT: hang onto your old consoles if you want to play the games.

>>473940
>almost $100 for toejam and earl

>>473971
N64 games in the US averaged around $80 new. Remember the price of Neo Geo carts?

It's hilarious when you see people griping about the $60 price point of new games, especially considering how much more expensive development costs are

>>473981
In the US, Phantasy Star IV and Virtua Racing were each $100. Final Fantasy 3 on SNES was around $90.

>>473989
>Remember the price of Neo Geo carts?
Jesus Christ I do. It was like $200+ 1990 dollars for a game. $200+ for another controller and $700 for the console (CD version was like $900).

>especially considering how much more expensive development costs are

That's partly due to the dev's fault though. Dark Souls celebrates 2 Million sales and makes a sequel. Tomb Raider makes 2 million sales calls it a commercial failure. Far Cry 3 makes 5 million sales and they're considering canceling the franchise. I sat through about a half hour in credits on Far Cry 3 and Tomb Raider had over 600 people working on it.

I don't think it's anyone's fault but the devs here.

>>473553
It's not fun in general. Only people who don't know better and have no experience with actual games have fun with it.

>>473940
>No one $70 and up for an Xbox 360 game thses days.
In Japan games still have random prices, some of which are riridulous.

>>474006
They should get rid of the goddamn focus groups. Focus testing is the most retarded shit ever conceived. Use your fucking brain, for fuck's sake.

>>474024
Fire half the art staff, the entire focus group thing, hire more QA testers, attempt making fun games.

Easier said than done, but it is something that can be done.

>>474006
I don't know what's more shocking: 600 people working on Tomb Raider, or 2million people actually buying it.

>>474006
I'm referring to the basic fact that a game like Uncharted is incredibly complicated and expensive from a development standpoint compared to the original Tomb Raider.

>>474065
I wasn't talking about the original Tomb Raider. I think that had something like a dev team of 10 or so. No the one with 600+ people working on it was the last one they made (Just like Crystal Dynamics, I've forgotten what number they're at now).

>>473360
Money, my boy. By throwing out money they got all the great third parties to abandon Nintendo and put their best gems on the Playstation.

Funny how now that they've successfully pissed off most of their acquisition and they're returning to Nintendo, they're beginning to fail. Still, Sony was a very important part in Nintendo's development, more so than SEGA ever was. RIP in peace.

The N64 was a bit faster on paper but that doesn't help much if your console is designed like shit. No space because of cartridges and the eternal smudge filter is what killed Nintendo. It's really not that surprising when you think about it, they just fucked up.

>>474094
>An entirely new dimension
>Fucked up

Yeah, because 2D games and fake 3D games are far more common than proper 3D nowadays, right?

>>474081
People like you are the reason why even people who like Nintendo, hate Nintendo fans.

>>474071
I was making a direct comparison between a new-gen title and an old-school title based on genre and using the generation gap as a reference point for the comparison.

Keep in mind, these games take many more resources to make now, and since gamers expect development times to be roughly the same as the older titles, they have to increase the number of devs on the team to get the games out in a reasonable amount of time.

Imagine how long the new version of Tomb Raider would take to develop if they still only had 10 people. This directly factors in to the development cost, since more people need to be on board for faster development.

And yes, selling at $60 is a huge cut for big teams. This is the primary reason why paid DLC is a "thing" now. They give the gamers the option of additional content to recoup losses in dev costs.

Personally, I like DLC being an option, since it prevents games from automatically being $100+ dollars at retail.

POINT: People who complain about $60 retail games are missing the point, and should be grateful they aren't over $100 each.

Well obviously.

Sony can rely upon vast recourses and knowledge from their other departments.
Nintendo and Sega made games and consoles exclusively and have to rely on third parties for their tech and research.

That's how the x-box series managed to stay alive despite being pretty crappy.

Another factor nobody mentioned here that I saw was that the PS1 played CD's (As did the Saturn, Jaguar, SegaCD, 3DO etc.) and kept dropping price and propping up devs until they got to a point where it was only really Sony and Nintendo. Anybody who won't admit the Saturn was dead by 97 is in denial.

The N64 came out with a cartridge, but you can subscribe to the Columbia House Audio Club and get tons of music that you can play on your console! Get that new Less Than Jake album or that Bare Naked Ladies album and play it in your basement when your parents are out! It was a matter of good timing on Sony's part. Just like the PS2. They took an established technology, threw a game console around it and people had to have it. I think that's truly where they fucked up with the PS3. The consumer was still happy with DVD. Sony had its mitts in BR and so pushed it before the public was ready.

Now that the price is lower and the media is popular PS3's are starting to sell (at the end of the console life though).

>>474106
I'd argue that between: the rise of digital distribution, the steep drop in big box sales, the whittling of all parts (instructions online, flimsy DVD cases), the cost of physical production (printing presses etc. have been paid for over a decade easily now), that games shouldn't cost as much.

Games don't have to be this "cinematic". They should be 'fun'. I know it's a dirty word in the industry these days. I know EA doesn't think you know how to have it, but if you're spending millions, and you're selling millions, and you still drop a franchise because you're not recovering your money then you're a terrible manager.

Should prices go up? Well, you don't have a choice, EA is already trying to push an $80 price. Meanwhile a game like Dark Souls did so well for their developers that they're making a sequel. So you tell me why one developer can make a huge game with cinematic cut scenes absolutely gorgeous and fun profitably without DLC and another can't even break even when selling twice the number of copies at the same price and selling DLC.

You want me to believe the game cost is the factor? I suspect that isn't true.

>two happy little game companies suddenly rivaled by a consumer electronics giant
and people actually wonder why sony surpassed them in termsn of sales and marketing?

look at the xbox which was the shittiest console among the big 3 but managed to hold up by artificial suspension through microsoft money

People didn't realize that quality is superior to quantity. The PS had tons of games, but the few games the N64 had were to kill for.

>>474172
that's almost as bad as comparing castlevania 64 to SoTN

>>474186
I enjoyed Castlevania 64 more.

>>474172
Did they just port it into the Ocarina of Time engine?

>>474196
welp, this argument ends here

>>474150
i'm just waiting for the second crash.

>>474172
The only difference I can see in those screenshots is the n64's texture filtering : P

Yeah, nintendo has less shitty titles but shit piles up quickly turning into lovely license based cash.

>>474186
What's the matter, too difficult for you? SOTN is but a shameless clone of Super Metroid, which is only good because it ripped off such a fantastic game.

>>474205
>Caring only about the graphics
>On the retro board

>>474094
To be fair, smudge filtering was better than no filtering when you look at the size of most textures on the N64. Thing had fuck all VRAM.

>>474210
it won't help anything unless at least on decent console maker is left or we'll be flooded with bad crowd funded games

>>474213
I'll have you know that sound is also very important!

>>474150
Marketing and distribution. Also, EA is such a BLOATED company that they have a lot of money floating around in development, and they require huge sales in order to justify their actions.

>>474229
http://www.ign.com/articles/1998/02/25/whats-wrong-with-music-on-the-n64

>>474206
This is the same logic that would dictate Super Metroid being a ripoff of Castlevania 2, which would be a ripoff of Metroid.

Castlevania rips off Metroid rips off Castlevania rips off Metroid.

>>474210
Soon. It's pretty much inevitable at this point. The whole "nerds r kool" thing is dying down, ever so slowly.

Also, as >>474227 said - the things that rise from the ashes are gonna suck unless a console manufacturer survives.

>>474213
>implying that there weren't graphic arguments and other spec arguments all the way back to the Gen/Snes days

>>474250
They should make a name for that. Something like Castletroid or Metroidvania. Naw, it'd never catch on.

>>474245
oh god it's like windows vista

>>474110
It was only "fake" because it lacked a z-buffer and drew things on a 2D space. It still processed 3D data (more than the N64 under standard conditions), the thing that actually mattered.

>>474245
3 words: Killer Instinct Gold

>>474247
You're twisting the argument a bit by adding "and other specs" when he just mentioned visuals.

"Blast processing" , for example, was technically referring to visuals in a sense, but was mainly referring to gameplay.

>>474206
I like both classic and non linear castlevania's, I just started beating the classics far too quickly, there were many "metroid likes" before the NES metroid game

>>474253
I prefer Mestletroidvnia

>>474275
And Berserk came out before Devil May Cry, yet any game afterwards is called a "ripoff of Devil May Cry".

>>474279
Cametletvoidia II - Samus Quest

>>474250
Castlevania 2 was a ripoff of the original Metroid.

>>474253
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant it's of the same genre.

Which Metroid invented.

Which everyone ripped off.

Which made it a genre.

Which makes it OK.

>>474273
Wasn't intending to twist his argument. Merely clarifying that graphics were one of many things gamers have been arguing over between consoles for nearly 30 years now.

Nothing new under the sun etc.

>>474293
Cameltoedia

>>474287
people are dumb, I never called anything a ripoff of anything else

vampire hunter D had more of an influence on devil may cry and had a game released before berserk

>>474292
>Castlevania 2 was a ripoff of the original Metroid.
I'm pretty sure I said that when I said
>Castlevania 2, which would be a ripoff of Metroid

It's not a "ripoff". It has towns and NPC characters to interact with, as well as NO guns, and isn't full of aliens with no other humans. Simon also doesn't have an upgradable power suit like Samus does, and Simon isn't on some alien planet.

Stop using the word "ripoff" when you mean its in the same genre.

>>474292
>Which Metroid invented
it didn't stop posting

>>474316
Any game before Devil May Cry that has the same style of play negates the "ripoff of Devil May Cry" argument. I was just citing an example that was released close to the same time frame.

>>473527
Oh god, that fucking Saturn architecture.

I'm reading a dev manual, and I can tell you RIGHT NOW what went wrong. Sega Japan was used to making arcade hardware. They designed specialized games for specialized hardware. They didn't understand that developers want the simplest, general-purpose computing power possible. The PlayStation was one nice CPU, with a general-purpose vector coproc, and a general-purpose triangle-deformation engine as its GPU. (You can get a near-complete description of the GPU in just a couple pages - Kutaragi was a great hardware designer.) The Saturn, on the other hand, was a few dozen different dedicated accelerators thrown into a giant fucking bucket. "But what if we could do THIS with dedicated hardware! And THIS with dedicated hardware! And THIS AND THIS AND...". It's a fucking mess of a system.

>>474292
>Which Metroid invented.
>invented

>This sub-genre gets its name from the Metroid and Castlevania series. Metroid, published in 1986, was the Trope Codifier, (though the style had previously been utilized in the Atari 2600 game Pitfall II: Lost Caverns)

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Metroidvania

It's the "Devil May Cry" ripoff all over again.

>>473571
>The N64 was so late to the party because Nintendo had to build a 3D machine from scratch after the fallout of the CD controvery and being forced to keep cartridges to maintain control over software rights.
Fun fact: SGI's video-game architecture was developed at the request of Sega, before they decided they'd rather have an even more massive unwieldy clusterfuck.

>>474287
>>474316
You two misunderstand. Berserk was not a big game. Super Metroid was HUGE when it came out, had every magazine talking and reviewers throwing out 10's.

Then suddenly, Castlevania COMPLETELY changes their style of gameplay into an exact copy of said popular game. Look at the map. Look at the save rooms. They're identical.

Oh, and they did it again later, ripping off Devil May Cry which was also HUGE at that time, and God of War which was HUGE at that time. At least Castlevania 64 was their attempt to reinvent the classic games instead of just copying what's big.

>>474342
>Berserk was not a big game

This has no bearing on the genre of the game, which was my point.

>>474330
That mess churned out some masterpieces, though.

I remember reading an article a long time ago about why Treasure ported Silhouette Mirage to PS1, but never did Radiant Silvergun. They basically said they couldn't. The Saturn's architecture allowed them to make RS, and it wouldn't work on the PS1.

And I'll be damned if I see a fighting game like VF2/DOA rn the same way on PS1. PS1 DOA had to be completely rebuilt, and even Itagaki prefers the Saturn port, going so far as to include that version on DOA Ultimate.

>>474347
*run the same way

>>474342
Castlevania 64 was konami's main title and castlevania 2 and vampire killer had already used non linear exploration.

God of war copied Rygar not DMC

>>474352
>God of war copied Rygar not DMC

Didn't say it copied DMC, Castlevania copied DMC and then GoW. Agreed on Rygar, though.

>>474347
pachinn

>>474330
I'm inclined to believe you.

>>474330
I heard that was because the 3D capability was thrown in at the last moment, and they just passed it off to the Model 2/3 guys and were like "make it do triangles 'n' shit".
So they ended up with a system built like an arcade board that rendered things with squares, while the PSX's 3D capability was almost accidental and was really only missing hardware perspective correction that nobody seemed to give a shit about anyway.

>>474347
>The Saturn's architecture allowed them to make RS, and it wouldn't work on the PS1.
Right, there are some things that the Saturn can do VERY quickly that would take forever on the PS1:
>Giant, fullscreen, perspective-correct background planes. Exactly two of them, useless for any full-3D environment
>DSP effects on sounds
>Fullscreen palette-cycling with no redrawing
The point is, unless your game is designed around the hardware, the Saturn is incredibly limiting. SCSP is just a sample player. VDP2 does nothing. The SCU vertex DMA engine does nothing. Maybe one of the SH-2s is just sitting idle most of the time. God knows you're not doing shit with the SH-1.

>>474373
Yes. This explains why the Dracula X (and Suikoden) ports were garbage on Saturn. They weren't built from the ground-up = they were port-overs from PS1, and suffered from HORRIBLE slowdown and visual downgrades.

Konami pulled this crap again with the Xbox release of Metal Gear Solid 2.

>>474368
The PS1 was designed to do 3D in a way that not many other systems were. It had a co-processor that did very quick 3D vertex transformations (and was "fully programmable", because it was controlled in software from the main CPU). It had a GPU that didn't care about "3D" per se, but could warp triangles and do Goraud shading well enough to make good-looking 3D scenes out of the transformed vertex data from the co-processor. Kutaragi knew exactly what was necessary to let programmers make general 3D scenes, with absolutely no frills, and blinding fast 2D performance as well.

The Saturn isn't designed for 3D at all. It's designed with, and I quote, a "sprite processor that can display polygons". The crazy DMA architecture is designed for streaming vertex data from a ROM bank to the graphics chip (great for arcade stuff, not great for a CD system).

>>474387
The PS1 essentially did that backwards with later 2D games. It took single sided polygons and textured them as sprites.

Remember when early Capcom titles were terrible and slow (SF Alpha/Darkstalkers), compared to newer titles like Alpha 3?

This is also why SOTN was horribly ported to Saturn. The fact it was a straight port meant the Saturn was handling polygons that should have be coded as sprites, and it ran SLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW

>>474387
Yet, Sega devs still worked wonders with it. I almost cried the first time I saw Virtua Fighter 2 running on Saturn. I simply couldn't believe it.

>>474387
So basically, Sega tried to make a console by taking high-spec hardware and slapping it all together, never taking the time to make sure it worked together? Did they do it in some kind of panic, because the Genesis is a well-sorted machine engineering-wise, even with the attachments.

>>474412
They basically intended it to be a 2D arcade perfect powerhouse and completely disregarded 3D until the last minute then just hacked it all together so it would be passable.

>>474237
Nope, if you look at emulated N64 games with the filter turned off you see that it looks way better without. They really just fucked up with that.

>>474196
Hahahaha.

>>474292
>Castlevania 2 was a ripoff of the original Metroid.
Actually, both along with Zelda 2 were clear rips on Falcom's Xanadu, just in slightly different ways, just like how Tower of Druaga and Dragon Slayer had a clear influence on the original Zelda.

>>474412
>the Genesis is a well-sorted machine engineering-wise, even with the attachments.
I want to draw something from a CD with the 32x!

>sub-68k initiates CD read into buffer
>sub-68k DMAs data into word RAM
>sub-68k handshakes main-68k
>main-68k DMAs data into main RAM
>main-68k handshakes SH-2
>SH-2 DMAs data into SH-2 RAM
>SH-2 copies data into framebuffer

You're moving data from the disc, to a buffer, to the CD RAM, to the Genesis RAM, to the 32x RAM, to the framebuffer.

What a clusterfuck.

N64 had better graphics therefore it is the better console.

>>474431

>>474431
PS1 supports gouraud shading you know.

>>474431
What's a console worth if you can't play the best games on it?

>>473940
I worked in a game store during the 16-bit era and those prices are waay high. ToeJam and Earl was NEVER $100 and Sonic was never $80. IIRC the highest any Genesis game ever was, was PS IV at $80.

>>474439
>What's a console worth if you can't play the best games on it?
What's a console worth if it doesn't have Perfect Dark on it? Or Bad Fur Day? Or Turok 3? Or Mario 64? Or Rocket: Robot on Wheels?

I ask you? My soul hungers for more than 15 different JRPGS which are all basically the same as each other, and Metal Gear Solid with its load breaks in between every other sentence.

>>474439
The real question is why N64 didn't get the good games in the first place, seeing as it had far superior hardware. Maybe it was shunned by third-party developers for having the worst controller design of all time?

>>474431
Buy Final Fantasy 64 now for the unbelievably low price of 1400$ for 20 cartridges.

>>474451
>What's a console worth if he doesn't have the games I grew up with

okay

>>474453
The controller was fine imo.
Just too complicated for its audience.

>>474451
>being this assmad

>>474439
>>474451
Gentlemen, this is a ridiculous argument as juvenile as elementary school 16bit console war bickering. Both were decent systems that had their pros and cons, their masterpieces, mediocrity and everything in between.

>>474453
>The real question is why N64 didn't get the good games in the first place, seeing as it had far superior hardware
It had technically superior hardware. It didn't have better hardware for making games in 1996. No one cares about texture filtering or perspective-correction or floating-point math if you can only do it on 1/4 the polygons as your competitor.

>>473360
Stomps industries giants.

Next time on greps

>>474453
>Maybe it was shunned by third-party developers for having the worst controller design of all time?
There was no shunning. Most games publishers released games for the N64. And the N64 controller is well-regarded.

You equate the Japanese not making as many games for it as them abandoning it. The truth is that the console was not as popular in Japan, therefore making games for the PSX was more profitable. The N64 has plenty of games in every genre. Nintendo just strictly controlled who could make the games, and how many could be made each year.

>>474459
>>What's a console worth if he doesn't have the games I grew up with
I didn't actually own half of those games. I only discovered them after 2006.

>>474469
>therefore making games for the PSX was more profitable
Not to mention, a $50 PSX game means $48 of profit. A $50 N64 game means $20 of profit.

>>474462
Also, was cheaper to develop and publish on a Playstation than a Nintendo 64, and both publishers and developers were kind of sick of Nintendo's shit when it came to their policies back then.
But quality wise, it doesn't matter, see: >>474463

>>474463
Wait, MML ran at 480i? If not you might want to fix that pic.

>>474462
>No one cares about texture filtering or perspective-correction or floating-point math if you can only do it on 1/4 the polygons as your competitor.
That's not true. The N64 can actually do 3x the polygons on the PSX. Theoretically. Most N64 games had similar polygon counts. Unless we're talking Factor 5's stuff, which was insanely detailed.

The PSX beats the N64 at JRPGs.
The N64 beats the PSX at open-world games and FPS games and racing games and platform games. Oh, and it has some excellent fighting games.

>>474474
>Implying I made that pic
See filename

>>474473
>developers were kind of sick of Nintendo's shit when it came to their policies back then.
Do you have any evidence of resentment during the N64 era?

>>474480
He probably meant on average. The 3x (actually 2x) the polygons could only happen under certain circumstances (with documentation from Nintendo, which Nintendo itself didn't want to share) when the fill-rate wasn't going hugely heavy, and it still sacrificed a lot of features.

PS1 also had less ram to store models and couldn't stream resources like Factor 5 did.

>>474492
>Missing the point so hard.
See filename.

>>474473
>But quality wise, it doesn't matter, see: >>474463

I object to this. Mega Man is not a detailed game. Someone needs to provide some World is Not Enough PSX vs N64 shots. I know for a fact N64 Mission Impossible looks way better.

And let's be honest - nothing on the PSX could touch Bad Fur Day graphically. Let's not try and pretend the PSX could do better graphics than the N64. What it could do is FMV and higher resolution textures without fill rate issues.

The N64 basically had no memory limits because it could stream the entire game from the cartridge. Without this, most N64 games wouldn't have functioned. Or they would have to have been drastically cut back in ambition.

>>474480
Depending on the microcode used, the N64 can transform about as many polygons per second as the PSX (from about 1/3 as many using the slowest microcode, to about 75% more with the fastest). The N64 is absolutely fill-rate limited, though. Those polygons on the PSX are drawn lightening-fast because they're just unfiltered, affine 2D triangles. On the N64, they're filtered perspective-correct 3D triangles.

I'm really trying to find hard fill-rate numbers here but it's proving difficult. Give me some time.

>>474495
>>Missing the point so hard.
>See filename.
It's... an emulated screenshot? Meant as an illustration of the N64's raw lighting and texturing abilities? Not an actually meant to prove anything?

>>474492
You're running in high resolution in an emulator.

Of course N64 games, with accurate coordinate transforms, filtered textures, and lots of color depth are going to look better.

Compare the games on a television at their native resolutions. N64 games don't look any better than the PS1 games, because there's not really enough screen resolution for the more advanced 3D engine to matter.

>>474492
Psx =/= Ps1

>>474498
>>>/v/

>>474502
Well, N64 3d graphics were solid while the Ps1's 3d graphics were always wobbly and the models kept shifting.

>>474502
>N64 games don't look any better than the PS1 games, because there's not really enough screen resolution for the more advanced 3D engine to matter.
It's not about resolution. It's about lighting and texture detail. Here's a 320x240 shot, for what it's worth.

>>474506
This is because the PSX used fixed-point arithmetic. The developers had to decide exactly how much precision they needed. They made that decision based on a 320x240 screen.

>>474506
Not him, and I've nothing to say on N64, but I can't stand people who act like wobbly textures were a big deal back then. Or even now.

>>474508
>>N64 games don't look any better than the PS1 games

With all respect, there is not a single title on the PSX which looks as good as Perfect Dark. Nothing. The PSX simply could not do the sort advanced rendering effects the N64 was capable of doing - heavy use of frame buffering to create fish eye lens effects, transparencies, motion blur, smooth animation, detailed 3D weapon models.

Factor 5 noted that they felt Perfect Dark should have had a more extensive engine rebuild. Indicating that its framerate issues, at least according to Rare's main technological competitor, were not caused by anything but inefficent code.

>>474448
Virtua Racing was $100 at release.

>>474508
It is about resolution.
Top: Emulation enhanced resolution
Below: Actual resolution

>>474516
They are if your characters looks completely different after turning them slightly.

>play FF8
>turn squall a nudge
>looks like he has a broken jaw and nose

>>474516
>I can't stand people who act like wobbly textures were a big deal back then.
Dude... They are a big deal. The N64 may have slightly fuzzy textures, but they never moved. The N64 was also capable of far more accurate character animation, since it could alter and stretch textures better. If Perfect Dark had suffered wobbling textures, it would not be as well regarded as it is today.

>>474492
Games like crash bandicoot an such, while not as crisp definitely pushed graphical fidelity further or at least equal to N64 titles.

>>474518
>transparencies
>motion blur
>smooth animation

MGS managed those things quite well. Konami was the undisputed king of visuals on PS1. SH1 also had god-tier lighting effects.

YES PLZ MORE FMV AND CINEMATIC GAMING INSTEAD OF ACTUAL GAMEPLAY FUCK DOING THINGS WHERE IS MY AUTOPLAY

>>474482
>Yamauchi admitted at the 2001 Nintendo Space World event that he had intentionally ordered the Nintendo 64 to be difficult to program games for. The idea was to repel untalented third-party developers from the console, and hence tighten the quality of third-party games. However, his plan backfired and merely increased the number of poorly developed games for the console. As a result of this, the Nintendo Gamecube was to take a step in the other direction, and provide an easy, smooth and intuitive programming environment for game developers.[6][9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshi_Yamauchi#Nintendo_64

Couple that with bad blood left from Nintendo's (initially necessary) tendency to have their fingers to far up publisher and developers asses in the Nes and SNES days and one can easily see why the PS got all the games and the n64 didn't.
Notice that I'm not saying that the n64 was "worse", but there's a reason PS got more than four times the amount of games than the n64.

>>474518
It's not all about graphical effects. It's about art and design.

The PS1 had a larger texture cache, and more storage space on the disc. It gave developers more freedom to make interesting, detailed worlds.

>>474496
Exactly. I was making the point that comparisons like that don't fucking matter, emulator or real console.
It's just pointless bickering.

>>474531
Yes. And now sony loses all their developers because they're too control addicted.

Like Team Ico who're going to leave Sony after The Last Guardian.

>>474531
>yfw N64 was Cell 0.5

>>474527
>Games like crash bandicoot an such, while not as crisp definitely pushed graphical fidelity further or at least equal to N64 titles.
They consisted of walking down a corridor. Side by side, Majora's Mask and Crash Bandicoot are not comparable. Look at this screenshot. Ignore its emulated origins. Look at the draw distance. The PS1 simply couldn't do this sort of thing.

>>474543
>Look at the draw distance.
It's... nothing? One tree?

>>474547
One tree that would've showed up far later on the Ps1.

>>474540
That seems to also be the factor of Team Ico having development problems on a Sony funded game, being years behind the initial deadline. Sony felt the need to step in to fix that mess, not because they are control freaks, or so it would seem. If you want a read between the lines control freak story, read up on L.A. Noire's development or Red Dead Redemtion's.

>>474548
Actually it could pull it off, if you have smart devs who know how to downscale object quality at a distance.

>>474537
>>It gave developers more freedom to make interesting, detailed worlds.
They had 2MB to put those worlds in. The N64 had 8MB, and a whole 32-64MB cartridge to stream the data off in real time.

I look at that picture and I see a box of a room, with a 2D candle fixture, and prebaked lighting.

>>474548
You don't really understand how this works, do you?

Draw distance itself means nothing. Limited draw distance is implemented to limit the amount of stuff that needs to be drawn. Big empty world, big long draw distance.

>>474547
It's a real life depiction of Alberta, Canada.

>>474543
It could do the draw distance, but if they didn't compress stuff it would go hella slow. MGS1 is a good example for this, as your sight knows no limits, but the framerate drops in half.

MM and OOT didn't have the best rates either. And that tree, while impressive, is there thanks to the expansion pak.

>>474547
>It's... nothing? One tree?
With a whole group of people playing under it. A highly detailed tree which is 3D, not a prerendered backdrop like the PS1 tended to use.

>>474557
>With a whole group of people playing under it.
That's not in the screenshot.

I am a programmer that has worked with people in the games industry that cut their teeth on 5th generation consoles (though I haven't work on any myself).

I always found it quite interesting how the hardware architectures of all three consoles were so different.

There is no question that the Nintendo 64 is *considerably* superior as compared to the Playstation and Saturn in just about every single way, except of course, the famously small texture cache (which was small to save manufacturing money).

A small texture cache means that if want detailed textures, you need to load multiple small textures in a 3D scene. This has a negative impact on the fill-rate. Of course, this weakness did not provide the other consoles a technical edge on the system, as the Nintendo 64's strengths more than made up for it.

The Nintendo 64's fillrate was also consumed by enabling hardware features (none of which the PSX or Saturn supported, mind) on the GPU such as z-buffer, bilinear filtering and perspective correction. Nintendo mandated that these features be always enabled to distinguish the console's graphics from its competitors. It goes without saying that increasing the number of polygons in a scene also has an impact on the fill-rate.

Essentially, despite the machine's superior technology, developing games was a fill-rate balancing act.

Companies like Rareware and Factor 5 did miracles by writing their own vertex shader microcodes (I've been told programming for the PS3's CELL is "trivial" in comparison) to claw back as much fill-rate as possible so they could create games with detailed textures and high-polygon levels (even with all the GPU bling turned on!).

There's little question that Rogue Squadron, Conker's Bad Fur Day and Perfect Dark are well beyond the capabilities of the PSX and Saturn.

>>474552
I heard Sony held TLG back so it can be a PS4 release title.

Not that this is necessarily a bad thing.
They did the same with Ico which was supposed to be a Ps1 release.

>>474557
To be fair, the people under it aren't even rendered in that screenshot.

>>474537
Look at Turok 3. The PS1 couldn't do character models with this sort of detail. Can anyone prove otherwise?

I'm someone who respects both the PS1 and N64. They each have respective strengths. Graphics was NOT the PS1's strength. People who claim it beat the N64 are like people who claim the PSP beat the PS2.

>>474492
>MUH BAD FUR DAY

Nintenyearolds confirmed for furfags, yiff in hell spaghetti sucker.

>>474568
>To be fair, the people under it aren't even rendered in that screenshot.
Fair enough. My point was that high draw distance requires memory. The PS1 didn't have the sort of memory required to store a smooth sloped field, then the underside of a tree with masked children playing. It would theoretically load a completely separate map just for underneath the tree, then use a prerendered backdrop for approaching it.

>>474567
That wouldn't surprise me, but the reason why is probably the one I listed.
It's not being held back as a choice, it's being held back because of development problems on a game that was initially supposed to come out one year after PS3's launch and the reason why its director was forced to resign on the project and work on it freelance.

>>474561
>Draw distance itself means nothing. Limited draw distance is implemented to limit the amount of stuff that needs to be drawn. Big empty world, big long draw distance.

That's not exactly true. The PSX/Saturn have issues with long draw-distance (even low detail scenes) as they do not support mipmapping.

>>474564
Shh. Let him dream. He's got these people playing and having a picnic under the tea complete with basket and cookies and levelled tea cups while the far side of the tree has people playing badmitton. There's little ants crawling towards the peaceful picnic and children folding papercrafts. Let him have his dream.

Don't tell him that it's just a texture on the skybox that'll be replaced by the actual 3D polygons when he gets close enough so that the hardware can actually render shit.

Let the little one dream.

>>474570
Render that screenshot at native resolution.

Now compare it to a PSX screenshot at native resolution.

You've accurately summed up the N64: lots of pretty graphics that you'll never fucking see because it's rendered at SDTV resolutions.

>>474557
Gimme a break, that try wouldn't look that much impressive when playing at the native resolution, and Mario64 used sprites when drawing trees.

Truth is no PS1 game I know had such a free-roaming feature like Zelda on the N64, so making comparisons is retarded.

>>474575
>Render that screenshot at native resolution.
Forget the resolution. I'm talking about the polygon count. The game ran at 640x480, I believe.

>>474580
>The PSX/Saturn have issues with long draw-distance (even low detail scenes) as they do not support mipmapping.
You can simulate mip-mapping by just swapping out textures yourself for far-away stuff. Failing that, you can just deal with the sparklies.

>>474582
>Mario64 used sprites when drawing trees.
Majora's Mask is not Mario 64, which was a first generation N64 game. Most of the backdrops are indeed 3D.

>>474584
Again, polycount doesn't matter if the game is too low-resolution to notice the smoother silhouettes or more subtle parallax.

>>474578
Can you post a wireframe of that scene?

Heightmaps are easier than you think if you're running at low-res without any shading on them. You can make GIGANTIC polygons and no one will notice.

I'm going to follow my post >>474562
with additional comments.

The Nintendo 64 was an easy machine to ring out 'average system performance' from due to its well designed API (based on an earlier version of OpenGL) and its unified memory architecture.

It was an extremely difficult machine to ring 'excellent system performance' from because it was all too easy to hit the fill-rate wall when trying to do anything ambitious. The only cure to the fill-rate wall was to meddle in vertex shader microcode programming, which is insanely difficult.

With the former, you get a very PSX level of system performance. With the latter, you get something WELL beyond the PSX (almost approaching Dreamcast territory).

Perfect Dark, run at near-native resolution. Everything you see - you can go there. Everything is held in memory with no streaming. (Because the cooperative mode wouldn't have worked otherwise.)

>>474578
Both consoles had different strengths, the big difference in my opinion is that the N64 held up WAY better then the PS1 in most cases, but each console had it's advantages. PS1 had higher texture resolutions, and a lot more storage capabilities, allowing full voice-acting and musical scores to function. N64 had better models, memory and generally looked a lot sharper.

>>474595
>(almost approaching Dreamcast territory).

I was with up to this point. Now you're just inflating what it was capable of.

>>474570
Granted there's not much going on there, because this works all on the wonders of RAM alone.

Crash and Spyro had pretty detailed models if you ask me. Specifically Crash, ND came up with some convoluted algorithm to make sure it all fit into RAM.

>>474596
I want to get to the top of that green hill. How do I do it?

>>474596
>Everything you see - you can go there.

I want to go on top of those hills on the other side of the canyon and walk around sniping.

>>474593
Here you go. Hope the image is clear enough, since Jabo wireframes use fog as background.

>>474572
another baitpost

>>474601
ND have always been pretty good at working around limited resources.

>>474607
We're ignoring it. Feel free to report it. This is /vr/ calling out, complaining, and helping shitposting is not how we should do things around here. I wouldn't want this place to become /v/ and neither should you. Just report and hide friend. Report and hide.

>>474596
It's funny how much this screenshot shows off the comparisons. While you have great view distance and clean models, you have some blurry awful texture making up that hill.

>>474567
They need to be held accountable for this crap. They were parading it around as a PS3 title for people to buy the system, and now...this

>>474612
I was talking about the heightmapped terrain one.

>>474598
>I was with up to this point. Now you're just inflating what it was capable of.
Actually, some N64 models are arguably Dreamcast quality. Especially Turok 3's.

>>474603
>I want to go on top of those hills on the other side of the canyon and walk around sniping.
Why would you do that when there is a whole network of tunnels to your left, an observatory, and a whole Villa to explore?

Those aren't hills. They're sheer cliffs.

>>474543
Best screen cap from any zelda game.

>>474570
How fucking dense do you have to be?

Nobody is trying to deny that the N64 had more horsepower. The problem is that it did fuck all because of the SMUDGE. OH MY GOD THE FUCKING SMUDGE. It's fine if you can tolerate it, enjoy you 3 top titles. But for most people that's a deal breaker. Yes, the N64 was more powerful and could display more detailed character models and had better textures etc,... but the games effectively still looked a lot worse than PSX games.

Resident Evil 3 and Tekken 3 look better than anything on N63 could ever dream of. Yes, they "cheated" with the backgrounds but it still looks better and that's what counts.

You're like a Sega fanboy whining about how superior the Genesis is to the SNES because of its faster cpu. It's fucking pathetic. Nintendo lost, they lost big and deservedly so. You can't win every generation. Accept it and move on instead of trying to bullshit everybody, including yourself.

>>474598
>I was with up to this point. Now you're just inflating what it was capable of.

Realistically it could not approach what the Dreamcast could do, but an extremely well programmed N64 game in 320x240 was not too far off in graphical ambition what your average programmed Dreamcast could do in 640x480.

The GPU was actually a very capable one (and ahead of its time), just very much hamstrung by the small texture cache.

>>474547
Doesn't need occupied space, it's about the distance.

>>474570
Are you stupid? Take a look at resident evil for ps1. It's a perfect example of how texturing in game can revolutionize visuals. Nothing stood up against that game.

>>474629
>Resident Evil 3 and Tekken 3 look better than anything on N63 could ever dream of. Yes, they "cheated" with the backgrounds but it still looks better and that's what counts.
It looks better because it's a PICTURE. It's not actual graphics rendered by a console.

>Lays book on table.
>Opens page to photograph.
>WOW! Look at the graphics this book can produce! They're better than a high-end PC!

The PSX could do excellent prerendered backdrops. The N64 managed to do passable ones, as Resident Evil 2 showed.

Hey, and can someone explain to me which scenes are missing from the N64 port of Resi 2?

>>474631
>it's about the distance.
It's about how much the system can put onscreen.

Any system can trivially render a gigantic world full of nothing.

>>474532
>Konami was the undisputed king of visuals on PS1.

I thought Polyphony made Gran Turismo and Omega Boost.

There's also Tekken 3, Tobal 2, and FF9

>>474625
>Why would you do that when there is a whole network of tunnels to your left, an observatory, and a whole Villa to explore?
>Those aren't hills. They're sheer cliffs.

Cliffs are my favorite terrain to snipe from. Why would I want to get in the middle of the enemy and snipe when I've got sheer cliffs to snipe from?

>>474638
>Are you stupid? Take a look at resident evil for ps1. It's a perfect example of how texturing in game can revolutionize visuals. Nothing stood up against that game.
Nothing stood against it because it was blocky 3D models placed against backgrounds rendered by thousands of hours of computer processing time.

also as another follow on to >>474630
I need to say this because people are often confused

The small texture cache was NOT DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for N64 having low-resolution blurry textures. The low-resolution blurry textures are a symptom of both bad fill-rate management by developers (indirectly caused by the texture cache).

>>474642
Like I said they "cheated". It's just a PICTURE... yeah, sure.

Guess what, doesn't matter though, nobody cared. It looks better, that is what mattered and that is why PSX won.

N64 is technically more impressive but practically it looked like ASS. Like absolutely fucking ASS.

No cutscenes, shitty music, no audio samples, SMUDGE EVERYWHERE. It's really no wonder the N64 lost like it did and I am fucking glad it did. It was fucking terrible.

>>474615
see
>>474579
and
>>474552

It's a rare case of probably not being the publisher's fault. These things happen, and the fact that the game is still supposedly in development shows more willingness to make things happen on Sony's part than many other publishers would allow for.
If it were an EA or a Capcom game for example, it would have been canceled ages ago and Team Ico disbanded.

I'm no Sony fan btw, I just think we should give credit where credit is due.

As a follow on to >>474630
I need to say this because people are often confused

The small texture cache was NOT DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for N64 having low-resolution blurry textures. The low-resolution blurry textures are a symptom of bad fill-rate management by developers (indirectly caused by the texture cache) or a lack of creativity to construct large textures out of smaller ones.

>>474570
The PSX didn't just beat the N64, it fucking wiped the floor with it.

>>474646
Yeah, polyphony pulled off that impressive 480i on GT1, but Tekken 3 is nothing too impressive since it uses prerendered backgrounds and a larger horizontal resolution so it can have more detail. FF9 was just as nice looking, but I'm talking about technical achievements here.

I never played Tobal 2, am I a pleb? Should I play it?

>>474669
>PSX won from graphics
Naw dawg naw. PSX won because it had A ton more games and was not run by assholes.

Holy shit, there's so many ignorant sonybronies in this thread it's disgusting.

>>474680
Not the guy, but I thought Tobal No. 1 was superior and recommend it as a non-Final Fantasy Square game.

>>474646
I forgot OB, should I play it too?

>>474680
I personally always thought Tekken 2 looked better than Tekken 3.
Is there a technical reason behind that or was it simply my young mind playing tricks on me?

>>474690
Probably the higher quality backgrounds, the character models looked blocky and stylized in comparison. Tekken 3 somehow made them look more realistic.

>>474532
Will agree with you on that one man, sh1 had some wicked camera angles that immersed the player aswell. We were all scared the first couple of times we played it.

>>474431
Meanwhile in reality...

troll thread?

if it wasn't already stated anon (too many replies for me to read) Nintendo was partnered with sony to make a disk drive but stopped midway through.
Game devs (especially Square) were fed up with Nintendo for using Cartridges and charging high royalties to put games on their system.

Those are 2 of many reasons why Sony was able to enter and dominate the market.

So stop showing your age. Sorry that was mean spirited. /vr is a different place.

I hope you found this informative.

>>474682
This might surprise you but there are people who don't like visuals that look like somebody smeared Vaseline all over your screen.

N64 has by far the ugliest graphics out of ever console out of every generation because of that disgusting oily blur.

>>474669
>No cutscenes, shitty music, no audio samples, SMUDGE EVERYWHERE. It's really no wonder the N64 lost like it did and I am fucking glad it did. It was fucking terrible.
Are you insane? The N64 had great music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W63jrJfxR3k

And it was capable of full voice acting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ETByc-eF94

Are all Playstation fans this ignorant? I've always tried to love the PS1 and the N64 equallty for their strengths and weaknesses. But I'm honestly revolted by the behavior of PS1 fans compared to N64 fans. N64 fans at least openly admit areas the PS1 beat the N64, such as pre-rendered backdrops and storage capacity, though this is obviously offset by compression and the high access speed.

Grief, let's act like adults.

>>474715
That's been filtered by emulators my friend. So that's not 'reality' as by limitation of the console and original coding.

I'd really like to know which Nintendo 64 games supposedly have these ultra blurry graphics and textures as compared to the PSX.

Last I recall, textures in PSX were also incredibly low-res.

>>474715
>Meanwhile in reality...
Everyone knows Ocarina of Time is ugly.

Meanwhile in Majora's Mask unfiltered reality...

>>474683
What's disgusting is that Nitenbabbies are still defending that failed piece of shit N64.

You can call me names all you want but I love the SNES and Gamecube. Doesn't change the fact that the N64 sucks massive ass.

>>474728
N64 had god music, but compared to the PS1, it had pretty lame sound tech behind it, it was MIDI vs CD audio in that battle. And you could never do something to the scale of MGS voice acting wise on N64.

>>474737
>Last I recall, textures in PSX were also incredibly low-res.
They are, and I hate how PSX fans are in denial, as someone fond of the PSX, or PS1 as purists like to call it.

A few games used bigger textures, but the console only had 2MB ram to play with. MGS is one of the worst-textured "great looking" games I've ever played.

>>474704
But am I wrong in thinking that the character moved smoother? Was it running on a higher framerate or were they about equal?

>>474737
The PSX textures were low res and pixely, yes. N64 looked like a 13 year old who just discovered photoshop went out to fix them with the help of his glorious smudge tool.

The result is vomit inducing to say the least.

>>474740
Actually, N64 didn't have midi tools. And if you check some of your psx discs you'll find that for the most part cd audio wasn't used but instead midi, and various wav formats.

>>473489

You forgot the PC-Engine Super CD-ROM. And yes it was popular in Japan, more than the Megadrive.

>>474740
>And you could never do something to the scale of MGS voice acting wise on N64.
Perfect Dark has a lot of voice acting. Bad Fur Day is riddled with it. (But it was a 64MB game compared to Perfect Dark's 32MB.)

Has anyone tried converting MGS's audio into MP3 to see how much space it actually takes up? I would agree it seems unlikely MGS could be crammed into 64MB. But it's not impossible.

>>474728
PSX had CD audio quality, N64 can't touch that.

>>474753
Sure, but you can't argue that the N64 had more advanced audio tech than the PS1

>>474750
Right now I can't check for myself, but I don't think it ran any faster. Still, you might as well be right.

>>474762
>Sure, but you can't argue that the N64 had more advanced audio tech than the PS1

I don't need to:
> IGN64: So the hardware itself contains nothing in the ways of sound? There are no pre-made samples, you have to pack everything onto the ROM yourself?

>Factor 5:

>You have your own samples in the ROM and you can play them either from the ROM or the RAM. There's nothing in the N64 itself.

http://www.ign.com/articles/1998/02/25/whats-wrong-with-music-on-the-n64

>>474752
You didn't mention the names of any games...

>>474752
>N64 looked like a 13 year old who just discovered photoshop went out to fix them with the help of his glorious smudge tool.
It's called bilinear filtering, and it's a valid rendering technique. There's nothing wrong with soft focus.

>>474753
>Actually, N64 didn't have midi tools.
Worth noting the music on the N64 port of Resident Evil 2 is officially better quality than the PSX version's. The N64 sequenced the samples, but there was no real limit on the quality.

>>474762
>Sure, but you can't argue that the N64 had more advanced audio tech than the PS1
>>474767
>PSX had CD audio quality, N64 can't touch that.

Believe it or not, but the N64 (48khz) supports a sound sample rate HIGHER than both the PSX and the CD Audio format (44khz).

Yeah I know it doesn't mean much in practice, but it's still there.

>>474767
Most of the games actually didn't use CD audio.

The PS1 also some better 3d capabilities than the n64. Not all, true, but those which it had also lead to less work-arounds in the games

For example, the wheels in diddy kong racing are just sprites attached to the car because the n64 had issues with proper height mapping and clipping on the 3d objects.

It also goes without saying that devs pushed the technology on the PS1 a lot further than the N64's.

>>474762
>Sure, but you can't argue that the N64 had more advanced audio tech than the PS1
Actually, all its audio was handled by the MIPS and RSP processors, so there was no limit to the audio quality. Just the fact it ate up CPU time.

>>474765
remember, MGS had full voice acting, and a full game, there's no way the N64 could come close to replicating that amount of voice without severely hampering the quality.

You say that like the N64 had better graphics and controls. HINT: it didn't

The N64 was a newer system, so it would be more powerful, but the N64 had its issues with textures and the obvious limitations of the cartridge format. The PS1 had more developers working on it and pushing the technology all the way until 2001, and so probably has more games that really take advantage of the hardware.

All 3D games on the PS1 look pixelated, but may have more content due to CD format. N64 3D games look smooth but may have reduced texture detail, the obtrusive blurry filter and no CGI.

The N64 also had some other technical bottlenecks that prevented it from excelling the PS1. I think what people mean when they say that PS1 games look as good as or even better than N64 games (especially first-party games or Rare games - the only ones that showed any effort from the developers), is because N64 games tend to have really fucking blurry textures hiding all the pixelation.

>>474770
Holy shit this game.

Dat bump-mapping
Dat physics engine
Dat sound system

I even loved the noodle arm.

>>474767
>PSX had CD audio quality, N64 can't touch that.
It did with Resi 2. It officially has better quality music.

>>474796
RE2 is the exception that proves the rule.

And not because of the game itself - but because Capcom literally rerecorded the sound in it.

http://hitmen.c02.at/files/docs/psx/spu.txt

>>474786
>>N64 3D games look smooth but may have reduced texture detail, the obtrusive blurry filter and no CGI.

FMV is bad. And Perfect Dark did fine without it.

>>474786
>The N64 also had some other technical bottlenecks that prevented it from excelling the PS1. I think what people mean when they say that PS1 games look as good as or even better than N64 games (especially first-party games or Rare games - the only ones that showed any effort from the developers), is because N64 games tend to have really fucking blurry textures hiding all the pixelation.
There's more to 3D rendering than texture quality. Such as lighting. And polygons.

>>474803
FMV can be great, and its use in the fifth generation made for visual wonders and technological breakthroughs.

OVERUSE of it is bad.

Watching the N64 try to render Resident Evil 2's FMV's in real-time is pathetic, to say the least.

It's official. Almost everybody in this entire thread needs to enroll in 3D Graphics Programming 101 at their local university before making any more posts.

>>474809
>Watching the N64 try to render Resident Evil 2's FMV's in real-time is pathetic, to say the least.
Actually, the N64 had better video capabilities than the PSX. The problem with the FMV was actually Capcom being rushed, not the storage space. They didn't think people would notice the video codec wasn't up to scratch.

>>474771
All of them.

>>474783
You're really still trying to defend the smudge. That's disgusting, you should be ashamed of yourself.

>>474804
A little nitpick feel free to ignore. The phrase "The except proves the rule" means the plural of proof or put to test. It'd be better stated in modern colloquialism as "The exception puts tests the rule."

Polite sage as this is way off topic and just a pet peeve of mine.

>>474812
>All of them.

So all Nintendo 64 games have worse textures than say a PSX game like Bubsy 3D? Alright then.

>>474809
Fourth generation here. Fifth generation FMV is shit.

Deal with it, nerds.

>>474819
>Why can't you guys accept that both the n64 and ps1 were both good consoles
As a big N64 fan, and a moderate PS1 fan, I'm trying... But the other PS1 fans just want to hate the N64.

Why can't you guys accept that both the n64 and ps1 were both good consoles
I don't want this board to turn into /v/

>>474812
>You're really still trying to defend the smudge. That's disgusting, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Why should I? I don't have a sharp, wobbly texture fetish.
See this - http://images.4chan.org/vr/src/1366203887638.png

That's what N64 graphics look like without the blur filter enabled. Happy?

>>474749
MGS ran at 320x224 so it had two relatively small framebuffers, but they went ahead and FILLED the entire VRAM with textures. You should look at VRAM snapshot, it's embarrassing just numbering the textures it reads every loading.

That, and fill-rate, son.

>>474728

Dude, just no. That sounds nice but it just can't compare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W63jrJfxR3k

SO yeah, that is nice but you are insane if you can't hear that this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cYdRUbAtss

is much better in terms of audio quality.

>>474801
It's a mess of a game but a pioneering mess of a game.
I wish today's market would be more lax so we could have trainwrecks like these happen. Developers tend to learn more from them than AAA polished titles.

>>474813
All I hear is EXCUSES for why the N64 sucked so much and why it's secretly much better but whine whine whine. Give it up already.

>>474826
I do. I'm an idort at heart and at practice. When I did pipe up in this thread it was correct one side or the other when they started going overboard. But it's evening in Britain so I expect the usual morning /v/ to come flooding in until PM US.

>>474826
I like both a lot but there are people in here trying to argue that the N64 i better at literally everything compared to the PS1. Even sound quality, I mean, I love the music on the N64 but it can't compete with true CD audio.

>>474823
For one, they're completely different musical styles. Grant Kirkhope would stab himself to death before creating music which sounds that hyped up and noisy. Or so I think.

>>474818
I'm not saying the textures are worse. I'm saying the smudge filter ruins them. They'd probably look fine without it. Nintendo just went full retard with that shit.

>>474836
>All I hear is EXCUSES for why the N64 sucked so much and why it's secretly much better but whine whine whine. Give it up already.
All I hear are excuses for the PSX's load times, tiny ram, inferior image quality etc.

>>474765
The entire game minus voice acting and cutscenes actually takes 64MB, but only because there are lot of copycat rooms and sounds. MGS1 only worked because every stage had a kernel and rules/scripts of its own. Every room was streamed to the console, next to nothing was kept into RAM, save for Snake, maybe.

>>474839
But you're comparing subjective taste based arguments.

The PS1 soundtrack is technically superior.

>>474820
On a proper CRT that would look much better than with the smudge. Hell it already does look better like that, raw on a LCD without shaders. So yeah, that makes me happy.

>>474840
>Even sound quality, I mean, I love the music on the N64 but it can't compete with true CD audio.
The problem is it COULD. Even if it didn't often. Resident Evil was originally a CD soundtrack, and the N64 version was better. There's no technical reason the N64 can't play extremely high quality audio samples arranged into music.

>>474828
It was buggy sure, but far from unplayable.

I've completed it 3 or 4 times without any problems
and I'm a pretty casual gamer who always chooses easy mode.

Granted though, the hardest part in the game is the crate stack puzzle with the destroyed staircase
due to the wacky physics.

>>474842
>I'm not saying the textures are worse. I'm saying the smudge filter ruins them. They'd probably look fine without it. Nintendo just went full retard with that shit

Are you actually trying to claim bilinear filtering is a bad thing? Holy shit, you are actually going against about half a dozen 3D graphics PhDs with that opinion.

Protip: Bilinear filtering actually makes textures look higher res than they really are.

>>474839
I'm not talking about the style of music though you ignoramus. the AUDIO QUALITY is subjectively better. It could be country music or fucking eurobeat, it would still have a better sample rate and sound better.

Also, shame on you for trying to shit on Tekken 3. That's just shameful.

>>474851
>On a proper CRT that would look much better than with the smudge. Hell it already does look better like that, raw on a LCD without shaders. So yeah, that makes me happy.
Actually, the side effect is that shadowing and special effects play up because they rely on bilinear filtering. You get this sort of thing.

>>474857
Really? Then explain >>474847

Because that shit going on N64 does not look higher detail. It looks blurred and smudged to oblivion.

>>474852
>no technical reason
Aside from the fact that it couldn't and never did. Sure it's supposedly limitless but it still can't match the quality heard in PS1 titles because it lacks the power.

>>474857
>Protip: Bilinear filtering actually makes textures look higher res than they really are.
The aliasing caused by sharp pixel boundaries makes things look higher-res.

The complete lack of high frequencies caused by bilinear filtering just makes it look muddy.

>>474863
>it would still have a better sample rate and sound better.
N64 had higher sample rate support.
>>Also, shame on you for trying to shit on Tekken 3
My apologies. I didn't mean to.

>>474852
So fucking what? It doesn't matter if it COULD since it rarely ever fucking DID!

How fucking delusional can you be? It could have been therefore it is? No it, it didn't and therefore it wasn't. You snooze you loose and Ninty came down with a massive case of the hay fever.

>>474867
Maybe it's not the best example since it's a port.

>>474867
Because of the N64 limited texture cache. Bilinear interpolates, so it's supposed to be good.

>>474857
Oh my god, you have no idea how hard I'm laughing at you right now. You don't even know how fucking retarded you are.

>>474867
That has nothing to do with bilinear filtering.

>>474868
>The aliasing caused by sharp pixel boundaries makes things look higher-res.

Do you have a source behind that statement?

>>474865
It actually looks pretty neat.

>>474887
>That has nothing to do with bilinear filtering.
The ignorance is strong with this one.

>>474894
Yeah, because these are exactly the same version of the game and the only difference between them is one has bilinear filtering enabled and the other doesn't.

We don't know what resolution image the N64 uses for the backgrounds and what resolution base image the PS1 uses for the backgrounds..

PSX fans accuse N64 of being blurry.
N64 fans accuse PSX of being a wobbly, pixelated mess.
PSX fans accuse N64 of not having FMV.
N64 fans ask why anyone would want FMV.
So on and so forth... Dear God, we all know the N64 has texturing issues. But N64 fans have objectively decided texture blending is better. They chose it. Nintendo chose it. This is fucking PAL vs NTSC all over again.

"NTSC is blurry."
"PAL flickers."

>>474872
Yeah, support. Support that it never used because the storage wasn't there. Again, horse power means nothing if you don't have anything to apply it to. It's like a huge truck driving around without a fucking trailer. It's not gonna do you any good and while a pickup truck is much smaller and less powerful you still can haul around more with it.

>>474915
>"NTSC is blurry."
>"PAL flickers."
What do they mean by that? NTSC isn't blurry, it's just faster, and PAL doesn't flicker.

>>473414
I always heard the console was mostly finished with Sony and Nintendo, and Nintendo went shopping around for cheaper disc hardware, to which Sony took offense. Being that Sony had all the patents for the system, they released it themselves

>>474923
NTSC has colourbleeding

>>474931
wasnt because sony wanted to have control of the playstation, making nintendo a third party of they own console?

granted i hear so many versions who knows what really happen

>>474937
That's actually the composite output, it looks fine on RGB (which isn't NTSC to begin with, nor PAL)

I thought he was referring to 50hz and 60hz.

>>474906
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64
>One major flaw was the limited texture cache of 4 KB. This made it difficult to load anything but small, low color depth textures into the rendering engine. This small texture limitation caused blurring due to developers stretching small textures to cover a surface, and then the console's bilinear filtering would blur them further.

>and then the console's bilinear filtering would blur them further.
>and then the console's bilinear filtering would blur them further.
>and then the console's bilinear filtering would blur them further.

>bilinear filtering would blur them further
>bilinear filtering would blur them further
>bilinear filtering would blur them further

>bilinear filtering would blur
>bilinear filtering would blur
>bilinear filtering would blur

>bilinear blur
>bilinear blur
>bilinear blur

>>474949
>actually using Wikipedia as a source

http://www.stark-labs.com/craig/resources/Articles-&-Reviews/Debayering_API.pdf

>Craig Stark, PhD

>Bilinear interpolation is also quite fast and produces clearly superior results to nearest neighbor (Figures 3c and 4c).

yeah it's to do with photography but the same principles apply

ITT

People quoting Wikipedia instead of, say, Factor 5, in regards to the N64's texture systems.

>>474956
>bitches about wikipedia
>cites something completely unrelated to vidya

LOL

and to follow on from >>474956

http://www.stark-labs.com/craig/resources/Articles-&-Reviews/Debayering_API.pdf

>Nearest neighbor interpolation is blisteringly fast but suffers from both a loss of resolution and from color error at the edges of objects (Figure 3b and 4b).

>While fast and easy to implement, nearest neighbor interpolation is very low quality.

>>473405
You are right.

What I don't know exactly it's why we need to unnecessary add things ruining other parts of the game or lower the budget a little instead of having a plain good game.
I won't say "Cinematic is shit" but when it comes almost unanimously that every game needs to have that stuff up your ass, even when it's not necessary or ruins the game, hurts.

TL;DR I want variety in the industry, there isn't only one big market.
This also:
>>473571
>>473553

>>474967
>textures have nothing to do with vidya

>>474956
>same principles apply

No they fuckin' don't. A photograph is nothing like a three dimensional rendering controlled by user input.

Many people seem unable to understand "blending" texture and "smearing" them are different. Goldeneye has smeared, low resolution, mostly black and white textures with colour filtering. Perfect Dark has fairly crisp, blended textures which are mapped generally accurately, with minimal distortion.

>>474975
A photograph is a picture. When you put a picture in a video game it is called a texture. How kindergarden level do I have to get with you?

>>474752
Bi(/tri)linear filtering is not a 13 year old with a smudge tool, it is objectively better than point sampling from a signal processing perspective. You are being retarded.

>>474963
>>474956
>dat anal devastation

>>474993
>>>/v/

>>474923
NTSC has fewer lines (blurrier) and worse color fidelity while PAL has worse field rate (choppier) maybe the flickering part refers to some other specific problem I can't think of.

>>473405
I made such a post earlier and it's a pity you obviously missed the point. it's not about AAA titles being "cinematic". it's about AAA titles slowly turning into movie simulators while ditching actual gameplay content in favor of looking like a really bad and generic hollywood blockbuster.

>>474974
>implying the PSX used nearest neighbor
>implying they aren't working at vastly higher resolution than what videogames have
>implying the shit you cited is even remotely relevant to vidya

gtfo

>>473592
I highly doubt NEC made the Mega CD. The PC Engine was still going strong in Japan at that point and I doubt they would of made hardware for the competition.

>>475002
What's field rate?

>>474987
The result is the same.

>>475032
fps
>>475039
point is the resampling method that results in highest possible degree of aliasing. Think that over for a moment.

>>475028
>implying the PSX didn't use nearest neighbor

holy shit

oh my god

>>475062
Of course it has worse FPS, it takes the cap from a maximum of 60 through a maximum of 50. But those very 10 frames free up cycles that can be used to make the game run smoother, or at an higher resolution which they almost always did. Only square remained reluctant because of aready prerendered 224p backgrounds.

>>475068
It didn't. I see how you might get confused about it because I'm sure your emulator has that as an option but no, the PSX did not use nearest neighbor filtering.

Your ignorance and underage is showing.

>>475112
and there I thought /v/ was for trolling and /vr/ for serious discussion

>>475112
implications

>>473360

I still remember the commercials Sega ran dissing PSX

"Can sony's plaything fly?"
>guy dropping PSX out of window
"Fly plaything fly..."

Goddamn Sega was a horrible mess of a console back then.

>yfw you discovered the PSX could play regular CD's

>>473623
This, porting games from PC to Xbox was extremely easy, i think the only ones who had problems with the Xbox where Japanase developers (most of them have almost no experience with x86 processors)

>>474463
The graphics don't matter when the game is in the picture is total crap.

Jesus, this thread was fucking hardcore.

Can most of us just agree on:
> N64 has better hardware but gimped by cartridge space
> N64 does better graphics than the PSX on a good day, but the smudging is god-awful
> most important part, vidya
> PSX simply has a lot more games that can be considered good by someone (and that's excluding the obvious shovelware that one guy in Arkansas managed to like) over the N64
> zero contest on RPGs, equal footing on platformers (don't even pretend SM64 and banjo are quantifiably better than crash and spyro), action/adventure depends on taste
> N64 takes the multiplayer cake, if only because of innate 4-pad support

Sales figures and historical 'legacy' are proof that the PSX was the better console of the two. I don't plan to demean the N64 fans with this, it's not like what 15-year-old console you enjoy affects me in the slightest.

>>474770
All those games made as a reaction to The Lost World.

>>474949
Ehhh, that's a PC screenshot with lowered textures.

>>475362
We're still yet to hear which N64 games have this 'smudging' that everybody keeps talking about. We want names. Names that aren't shovelware.

>>473620
>>473627
Any more info on this? I assume it's just hearsay, probably no TOP SECRET TAKEOVER documents watermarked by Sony flying around on the Internet, but what's the logic behind this?

>>475449
Perfect Dark (>>474596), the rock walls to the left and right. The rest isn't smudged because it's way far.
Majora, (>>474543), ground, lesser case.
Mega Man 64 (>>474463), just compare the goddamn floors.

If you don't see it, i really don't know what to say.

>>475362
>zero contest on RPGs
Not true, the psx had many good RPGs too like Suikoden 2 and Grandia.

>>475474
I actually giggled a little. But really, did the N64 have anything other than Quest 64? Honest question.

>>475485
>Holy Magic Century
>Paper Mario
>Quest 64
>Ogre Battle 64
>Eltale Monsters

>>475496
Ah, i forgot about Paper Mario and OB64. Are the other ones japanese or something?

>>475362
You're forgetting about 3D fighters. PSX absolutely owned that genre and it was brand new and exciting back then.

Sure N64 has smash bros but people forget how late that game came out, just one year prior to the PS2 release. So regardless what you think of it, it came way late to the party. PSX and Saturn were dominating the 3D fighter genre. And there were loads of great different titles out there at that time tekken, doa, soul blade, virtua fighter, toshinden, tobal no, bushido blade, bloody roar etc and they were all unique gameplay wise and N64 had non of those for the longest time. It's pretty much the same with every other genre too except for platformers and action adventures. those are the only two genres the N64 was competitive, everything else was ruled by the playstation. just because the PSX excelled at JRPGs doesn't mean that's the only genre it dominated. It's a joke that just because there's so many great JRPGs for the PSX that's being used against the console by falsely claiming that's all the PSX had or dominated. That's some revisionist bullshit.

>>475496
Uh, aren't Holy Magic Century, Eltale Monsters, and Quest 64 the same game?

>>473926
All geniuses are unstable in some kind of matter.

>>475439
This better?

>>473769
Metal Gear had quite a lot of more voice acting, which takes a whole lot of space. It was 2 discs too, though, I'm not dismissing your point, games on 64's cartridge can probably just as long as games on CDs, but when discussing games it's easy to just cherry-pick games to fit your argument.

>>475156
Find me any citation that says the PSX used nearest neighbor or any other method of filtering please. Because I am pretty sure it had no filters whatsoever.

Feel free to prove me wrong but I don't think you can.

>>475783
Yes, on PS1 the textures were put into scale and perspective by the Japanese gods.

>>475535
>but when discussing games it's easy to just cherry-pick games to fit your argument.

I'm saying that storage space doesn't determine length. You've provided examples of what takes up space, and it's not related to the "length" of the game.

It's not cherry-picking. It's literally brought you to cite an example of what the space is used for. It's not game length.

>>475783
"Nearest-neighbor" or "point sampling" means unfiltered. It takes the nearest raw pixel at each point and uses it.

I'll let these videos speak for themselves.

Ridge Racer 64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-S0BwVQ5Vo skip to 2:00

Ridge Racer Type 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnjie2G7_gQ skip to 7:30

>>475894
>>475937
So that clears that up. I knew the PSX had no filters. I just wasn't familiar with the term nearest neighbor. I thought it meant breaking up the pixels into smaller ones and reassembling them based on the nearest neighbor.

So yeah, I was about as right and as wrong as I could be. I still stand by my point that bilinear at low resolutions looks like ass.

cinematics and stories are overrated and distract from what games are supposed to be about: the hecking gameplay

>>476152
Have fun playing your mindless shooter and puzzle game crap.

The N64's textures are not smudged. They are filtered. This is the exact same argument as whether NES games should be filtered or left at their native resolution.

Quake 64 has shitty graphics, but some neat lighting effects. The N64 did not like the Quake engine. The Sega Saturn port of Quake looked cool, but used a totally new engine.

The N64 Mega Man shot looks better, IMO. There is nothing inherently wrong with bilinear filtered textures.

And remember - the Majora's Mask screen of the town square is unfiltered. It is horribly jagged. Frankly, it would look bettered with smoothed textures.

And will people stop saying the N64 has no fighting games? It had heaps of them. The fact fighting games on the N64 weren't popular doesn't matter. It had Killer Instinct Gold.

You can't get any more high profile than Rareware making fighting games.

Every time N64 critics say "N64 had no Y", and someone cites multiple examples of Y, the N64 critics refuse to listen. It's sad.

>>476172
>puzzle game crap.
Nigga you did not just say that.

>>476172
>mindless shooter and puzzle game crap.

Oh yeah, those RPG games with angsty spiky-haired teens saving the world are VERY thought provoking.

>>478470
>It had Killer Instinct Gold.

and MK4
and Dual Heroes
and MK Trilogy
and Bio Freaks
and SSB
and Dark Rift
and Rakuga Kids
and Fighter's Destiny
and Clayfighter 63 1/3
and War Gods

and others

>>478553

What's the best version of Puzzle Bobble? There's an arcade version I'm fond of but is there better?

>>478704

Sadly none of those can compete with Street Fighter, KOF, MvC, Tekken, Virtua Fighter and many others.
The Saturn is actually the best console for fighting games (excluding Tekken which was Sony exclusive at the time), it has the best arcade ports, and also Virtua Figther 2 (the best-selling game on the system)

N64 really was short in the genre, Rakuga Kids is the only game I find interesting and worth playing more than once in that list. (aside SSB of course, and KIGold, although I thought KI 1 was better for some reason, maybe the roster)

The reality is that the N64 has some gems that really shouldn't be overseen by videogame enthusiasts, such as the Treasure games, or the Goemon titles... and it also has the classics everyone knows. Growing up with only a N64 wasn't as bad as some people say, but having owned all 3 major consoles at the time I can say it was the best thing, some games were just incredible on the 64 and I don't think it would have been the same on the PS1, OOT for example.
Saturn was great, but sadly I didn't fully explore its catalogue until I got to try all the japan-only releases. Still, I had games like Panzer Dragoon Zwei back then that blew my mind and convinced me it was well worth owning a Saturn too.

As for Sony, I didn't think much about it when I was a kid, I had a 3DO before the PS1, so I was used to see CD-based systems made by multinational electronic companies, but it was clear the PS1 had a much better plan than those like the 3DO or the CD-i

>>479297
KI 1 was broken because of Cinder's infinite, and it was a turtle-fest because of the lack of throws (yes, it had overheads to break crouch-blocks, but they came out slow enough to where you could stand up and continue blocking)