/vr/ - Retro Games

We call that jagged SOVL.

The PS1 had fixed point math rendering.
But it also had a much higher texture resolutions and much better framerates on average.

>>7955031
The N64 just had more hardware features for 3D graphics.
>texture filtering
>z-buffering
>anti-aliasing
>floating point calculations

>>7955038
>This looks pretty bad

>>7955031
PS1 was made with better texture capabilities in mind so that 2D games would still be viable, it's 3D isn't "true 3D" and often flipped or mirrored images, which is where that weird motion jag comes from, the console is trying to render the angle it thinks it's being seen at.

The N64 was better at rendering actual polygons but lacked in textures so it used bilinear filtering and heavy anti-aliasing, which made pixels much harder to notice and gave the illusion of a more complex texture at the cost of appearing blurrier.

>>7955038
Mega Man 64 is a poorly made port all around, multiplatform games at that time were still iffy between versions. If a game was made first for the PS1, that version was typically better. If a game was made first for the N64, that version was typically better.

>>7955041
>>floating point calculations
How many N64 games actually took advantage of floating point math for matrix multiplies? I would assume many if not most would simple use the RSP's fixed-point multiplier to save CPU resources.

>>7955031
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8TO-nrUtSI

>>7955038
game?

>>7955038
I wish I had MML on the n64 so I could see what this screenshit looks like when you turn off both the software and hardware blurr effects that gets applied to every game.

>>7955038
This is purely nostalgia and Banjo Kazooie talking, but I prefer the window on the right. It feels more mysterious somehow and triggers my imagination. I've always liked N64 smearing.

>>7955279
Mega Man Legends / Mega Man 64

>>7955038
>Increase internal res exponentially on emulator
>See guys it looks bad
pathetic

>>7955314
OP's picture is literally the same thing. It's free game on your ass, you fucking faggot.

>>7955356
I include everyone who does this, as well as OP

>>7955284
It's mostly the same but some textures are definitely about half the size, if not less

How will psfags ever recover

>>7955031
the left is just the right but heavily blurred and with poorer lighting

>>7955447
take them both to native 240p and it's a very different image

>>7955031
Imagine thinking the vaseline blurred ass of the 64 looks better than the crisp jaggies of the PS1. That's just tardation.

>>7955031
A CRT will blur the PS1 just enough to make it look good instead of the vaseline N64 graphics

>>7955031
Nintendo does what playstationisgay.

I've played this game on both consoles. Sorry Playstation. It's better on 64.

>>7955571
This is true, I mean people have their opinions on the subject but the truth is when you're a little kid you never really think about shit like texture filtering or the PSX parkinsons textures and polygons.
Game quality is all that really matters and while the N64 was more powerful on paper it poured too much computing power into the Billinear filtering and Z Buffers that could've been poured into something more tangible for the target audience of 7 year olds, as Carmack put it, it was premature.
That's not even mentioning the Cartridge issue, which lead to situations where even though the N64 is perfectly capable of high quality audio, it all has to be compressed to shit to fit on the cartridge, really if Nintendo went the same direction as Sony did that generation they really could've won in America atleast.
N64 still good tho.

>>7955636
Are you as fat as you are long winded?

>>7955639
Sorry I didn't put more reddit spacing like you're used to.

>>7955031
It really depends on your personal preference. I personally hate the low res smeared textures of the N64. And whilst it is true that many PS1 games look bad, the good ones look absolutely stunning, and still hold up today.

Lack of the smooth sexy hardware baded linear filtering. Very prestigious and sought after at the time.

>>7955639
Another ADHD-addled zoomer filtered by words

>>7955031
>a machine capable of proper satisfying 3D graphics?
still doesn’t exist today

I owned a N64, but I prefer the PS1 graphics, the jaggies and warping gives the games a pulse, the characters feel alive, and the pixel perfect textures look so clean and crisp. I really wish there was PS1 style plugin for N64 emulators

64 games look like shit compared to psx games, the warping and jitter are hardly a problem unless you're some 8k widescreen emufaggot, meanwhile the 64 has this permanent horrible texture filtering on textures that are usually lower resolution than psx games so even if you're an emufaggot and turn off the texture filtering they still look like shit

>>7956776
in addition to this, there's a reason indie devs have latched on to the psx aesthetic and not the 64 one, texture filtering was hot shit when it was new (see GLquake and quake 2) but no one likes it now (see the fact that every modern quake engine is trying to look more like software than hardware mode)

>>7956669
>the jaggies and warping gives the games a pulse
A wobbly pulse.

It really depends on the game itself.

>>7956790
>GLquake
People actually liked GLquake? When I first tried GLquake long before I knew anything about graphics I thought it looked like utter shit compared to the dos version. Every time I ever saw openGL games I always thought they looked like shit.

>why does console released in 1994 look worse than console released 2 years later
dumbfuck

>>7955031
One of those has SOUL anon, and it's not the one you think.

The PS1 had the best 3D graphics you could get in a consumer product in 1994. The compromises it made were the most sensible compromises to make at the time. The N64 certainly added some improvements, but that was 2 years later, and it still fell short in some ways.
I honestly think the Playstation is one of the best designed consoles out there from a specs standpoint.

>>7956968
Looks much better if you turn off the smudge filter and animation interpolation. Consider doing that with a port like QuakeSpasm or something.

>>7955031
both consoles have pros and cons that make certain games look better or worse. to be honest, I think megaman legends looks way better on ps1, the lack of filtering actually does the graphics a favor and makes it feel like its more of a 3D translation of 2D megaman sprites. Silent Hill and MGS1 also both benefit from the textures looking grittier.

Zelda on the other hand looks great on n64 and I don't imagine it could look as good if it were done on ps1. 64 textures are best utilized when they're used to create smooth gradients and shifts in color rather than actual sharp texture. it definitely suits cartoonier art styles better.

>>7957040
PS1 didn't have good geometry, majority of games have completely flat stages full of corridors, what it did have was nicer textures, sprite work and music

>>7955639
cringe

>>7955031
Ps1 games looked better than their contemporaries. Through optimization kept up with the dreamcast, and some outlets even considered late ps1 games as good looking as launch ps2 titles. Any attempt to sell the console short is pure revisionism at this point.

>>7955639
He's right though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HunGvGcpbJ4

>>7955031
If you think ps1 had bad 3d try playing doom on a 386 or quake on a 486.

>>7957040
Ps1 came out in late 1994 so basically 1995. At that time many people were using 486's. If you tried to run the game screamer on a 486 it would run at about 5 frames a second. I think having some slight texture glitches is worth having spectacular graphics at 30 fps.

Is there a reason why the 3d modeling was way better on the ps1? Character models especially.

>>7958271
Also, the one thing the PS1 was truly king at compared to the Saturn, N64, and even PCs at the time was alpha blending effects. Look at what's in the webm you posted or just things like SotN or the Final Fantasy Games. The level of transparencies being stacked on top of each other and all the lighting effects are just nuts for 1994 hardware.

>>7958271
game?

PS1 cant do true 3D. Its still pretty good for its capabilities and what the devs tried working around to make it work

>>7958285
>>7957040
This is honestly an underappreciated aspect of the PSX, it's amazing how cheap hardware from the early-mid 90's was actually able to keep up throughout the rest of the decade, Take Quake II for example, a high end AAA released years after the PSX's hardware, ported and running at fullspeed.

I dunno OP, the PS1 could do 2D well enough, had awesome audio hardware, solid FMV playback, even more so when you factor 1994 release date. Also the games didn't run a 15fps. The n64 in a vacuum is already below average, but once you put them side by side it's a complete joke.

>>7955031
> PS1 Draws 2D triangles without the vertex depth into consideration thus cannot correct the perspective warp of the texture
> workaround is to place the triangles dense on the environments
> need to do that anyway as there is no Z Buffer (no pixel sort) the only option is to sort by triangles
> warping and swimming is hard to notice on CRT so it's ok
so on one hand it's basic bitch 3D
but on the other hand because 3D was not an afterthought it still worked pretty well compared to others eg:
> Saturn has the same problems with perspective and sorting, but the texture coordinates are fixed so for a textured 3D model with 300 quads you need 300 textures
> Jaguar hardware only helps with drawing pixel strips much slower as games were forced to use more CPU resources to draw graphics

>>7955031
>N64 shot rendered at least 2x the hardware resolution
They're both 240p games. You could have at least provided native resolution screenshots for both of them. You didn't have to cheat to prove your point. The answer is: the PS1 is older and wasn't running on practically alien, generation-ahead SGI technology that would pave the way for OpenGL and all the hardware acceleration standards and staples (like texture filtering, AA, and perspective correction) moving forward. The N64 sucked at being a GPU driven platform. It was bottlenecked as fuck regarding texture memory and pretty slow in general because it had to be affordable, but it was the first console to render graphics more or less the way they are now. In 1994, when the PS1 came out, being able to spit out so many textured polygons at the speed it did was more than enough. Filtering and z-buffer be damned. Gotta remember Quake and Descent weren't even out at that point. The N64 is two years newer than that and gave consumers tech that was still borderline unheard of on DOS/Windows PCs.

>warp fetishism
Stop. Always sucked. Even as a kid I was wondering what the fuck was up with that shit. Damn straight I enable PGXP whenever I can.

>>7955031
They were forward thinking, with modern emulators you can make PS1 games look better.

>>7955031
why are we pretending they both weren't ugly as fuck?

>>7958579
For their time they weren't, you have to have a firm grasp of context to appreciate such things, which most zoomers (like you) lack.

>>7958404
Omega Boost.

>>7955038

from looking through modelsresource, the average N64 texture was 32x32 and the average PS1 texture was 64x64, with larger textures having double the res on each system

that's a massive difference on systems as old as these

>>7957195
>Zelda on the other hand looks great on n64 and I don't imagine it could look as good if it were done on ps1
Zelda wouldn't even run on the PS1, neither would SM64 or Wave Race, that's the point. The majority in this thread are so obsessed with graphics and frame rates that they can't see anything else going on. Take F-Zero X for example.

>>7958682
Not really a massive difference considering both output in SD.
Plus the PS still had the texture warping issue

>>7958689
Texture warping isn't the issue people pretend it is, especially when outputting the games at SD

>>7958894
>Texture warping isn't the issue people pretend it is, especially when outputting the games at SD
It looks like shit and has always been noticeable no matter how you output it.
It's not a huge deal or anything but it's not something you magically don't see if you're playing through composite or whatever. It's there, it's an issue, it isn't pretty. Sorry.

>>7958685
Driver and Driver 2 are much bigger games with more things going on in the screen than OoT, and PS1 could run them.

>>7958894
Vertex jitter isn't so bad at SD resolution, but texture warping is. Any texture containing straight lines at right angles looks plainly distorted.

>>7958902
that's not sd, that's emulation. If you use real hardware you don't really see it much. It can be found if you look for it, especially in earlier games where devs weren't correcting for it.

>>7958898
you only emulate, I get it. You don't know what PS1 actually looks like, but this is what the texture distortion looks like on real hardware in real time.

>>7958907
Higher resolution doesn't make a difference to texture warping. The objects depicted in the texture are still misshapen whether it's in HD or potato resolution, and more or less detail doesn't change the fact that it's the wrong shape.
Here's one in SD and the floorboards are still crooked.
>especially in earlier games where devs weren't correcting for it.
This is the key part. PS1 games have to design their art so that texture warping becomes less noticeable.

>>7958927
As you can see, you struggle to even use a different example. If you look for it, you'll find it. It's really not a big deal especially in motion...considering we play these games in motion, it's only really a problem for emulaters. Here's another example of how severe texture warping can get. It's a non-issue, overblown solely thanks to emulation.

>>7958940
>As you can see, you struggle to even use a different example.
I'm using the same game to demonstrate that the resolution isn't the problem. If you want another game, here's an easy one.
https://youtu.be/9Y1wop3v1Qw?t=1717
>It's really not a big deal especially in motion.
In motion it looks even worse because the amount of distortion is constantly changing. Something being the wrong shape is bad enough, being the wrong shape and also changing shape is even worse.
> it's only really a problem for emulaters. It's a non-issue, overblown solely thanks to emulation.
Emulation makes no difference to this. Textures are still clearly crooked whether you emulate or don't.

>>7958971
>1996
already addressed. The issue was worse in earlier games. Once devs began mitigating it, it became a non-issue. Why are you over blowing something so demonstrably not an issue?

>>7958974
>already addressed. The issue was worse in earlier games.
Yeah, I agreed with that back in >>7958927. Developers had to design their assets to make the warping less obvious. It was an issue though, and pretending like it wasn't there at all or didn't make any games uglier is fanboyism.

>>7958976
>and pretending like it wasn't there at all
Nobody is doing this. It has been addressed plainly and clearly that "it does happen." Warping however is never some catastrophic issue unless blown up in an emulator. In most games it is actively corrected by clever programming. Claiming it is denied when it has never been denied, only downplayed, is a clear as day desire to look for a bias as an out for your own intense bias.

It's not going to work anon. You don't play enough PS1 to make a compelling argument about texture distortion.

I love both N64 and PS1, however:
I would take clean higher res textures that are occasionally not perspective correct, over low resolution and blurry textures.
I would take some polygon warping at the side of the screen but at 30 or 60 fps, over perfect polys that never hit 30, and typically spend their time from 15 to 24 frames per second.

>>7958986
>Warping however is never some catastrophic issue unless blown up in an emulator.
I have addressed this several times. "Blowing it up" makes no difference. A rhombus doesn't look any more like a square no matter what resolution you render at or how clear your video signal is. Let me be absolutely clear: texture warping is exactly as noticeable on real hardware as it is on an emulator that doesn't do perspective correction hacks. The games that design textures well in order to minimize the impact of warping look good on emulator or on console, and the ones which don't look bad on emulator on console. There simply is no distinction.

>>7958986
>>7958994
You guys are arguing over which thing bothers you personally more, which is ridiculous.

Back in the day many people complained about PS1's swimmy textures, and many people also didn't care that much.
At the same time, good chunk of people also complained about the muddy smear if N64, and the generally low framerate, but there were still plenty of people who just lived with it, or didn't know any better.

I lived with the N64 back in the day, but going back to both today, I would personally rather play on the PS1. Framerate and image clarity just matters to me more now than perfect polygons.

Speaking of texture warping, did the Saturn's forward texture mapping or quad primitives actually reduce it, or was that just made up?

>>7958940
>It's a non-issue, overblown solely thanks to emulation.
lol

>>7959004
>You guys are arguing over which thing bothers you personally more, which is ridiculous.
Not really. I didn't say anything about N64 low res textures or bad framerate which, for the record, I find more bothersome than texture warping.
But the warping is still there.

>>7959010
for flat square walls, yeah.

>>7959025
agreed, the n64's visual flaws far more drastic than occasional texture warping. They actively impede the play experience and low resolution textures shouldn't have been the target.

>>7955031
>the N64 looked clean and crisp
it's blurry and less detailed

The 5th gen was very much a "pick your poison" kinda deal with how 3D was handled with its pros and cons per system. Except Saturn. Saturn just sucked ass at it.
>inb4 that scripted Shenmue shit, full of close up/low fov shots, that was still low framerate
Not saying the platform didn't have good games, but it was in spite of the hardware. It had like a few more frames of 2D animation here and there, though, that has to count for something.

>>7955031
if it has to look ugly at least keep it vanilla ugly and not smooth as baby butt ugly

>>7955375
Obviously if I were to sacrifice a game it would be CV64 but I dunno... once you get over the clunk it's a solid and unique title. I feel like it's somehow better out of its era and free

>>7958907
It's pretty but kind of dull, I find.

>>7959158
I disagree about the Saturn. Games which were capable of using VDP2 like Panzer Dragoon Zwei looked great. If the game just isn't made for it, though, then it does admittedly run like shit.

>>7958685
>Zelda wouldn't even run on the PS1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6ooUt2Dyxo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PblTbTUVXBY

Now as the dev said you'd need to do a lot of reworking to get the game to to work on the PS1 as all the models and textures are built around things that just don't make sense on the PS1 (Large polyons, texture tiling, etc.). But that doesn't mean the PS1 couldn't pull off a game like Zelda if the models, textures, etc. were all redone to be something that makes more sense on PS1.

>>7959229
>unfinished early techdemo
Every time.

>>7959158
>Except Saturn. Saturn just sucked ass at it.
Saturn is perfectly capable of handling 3D:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ_awpdw0C8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGQfCACK9I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah35ClRlQtY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxvEUV7ypkA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpkyF7X4O3s

>>7959229
Games like Zelda already exist on the Playstation. That said I think it would be a challenge to accurately replicate Hyrule Field with its large size and draw distance.

>>7959258
>Games like Zelda already exist on the Playstation.
Name 5.

>>7959239
It's still being worked on. That said it does show you could pull off a game like Zelda on the PS1.
>>7959258
The issue isn't the draw distance, it would be having to rework the area to use smaller polygons and then setting up a LOD system to handle it properly. People need to realize that when it comes to comparing the N64 to the PS1 or even Saturn, it's strength is NOT how many polygons it can render or how fast it can render them. In both those categories PS1 and even Saturn outclass the N64.

The N64's strengths are that it can draw very large polygons without any issue, it can tile textures across polygons, it has texture filtering, Z-buffering, etc. which gives games a very smooth look without any of the warping issues the PS1 or Saturn have. But that comes at the cost of speed as all those nice effects aren't easy to do. This is why a lot of your N64 games (Zelda included) are running at 20fps or lower while similar games on PS1 are usually targeting 30fps. That Zelda demo for example is hitting a solid 30fps and is running at a much higher resolution than the N64 game.

>>7959271
>It's still being worked on
These projects never get completed.
>That said it does show you could pull off a game like Zelda on the PS1
>a game like Zelda
In other words a very different game.

>>7955031
a screenshot does not tell the story of Megaman Legends / 64. The Playstation version runs much smoother and the N64 framerate constantly sucks wind.

>>7959272
>In other words a very different game.
Well if you actually completely ported Zelda to the PS1 you'd probably have Nintendo come down on you with a Cease and Desist. That said, why do you think the PS1 couldn't run Zelda? What part of that game is doing something that you think is technically impossible on the hardware?

>>7959275
>What part of that game is doing something that you think is technically impossible on the hardware?
Everything. As evident by how different that techdemo looks.

>>7959278
>Blanket statement.
Give specifics. What technical part of the game do you think isn't possible on the PS1? Otherwise we'll just sit here as you keep moving the goal posts when evidence is given that proves you wrong.

>>7959271
>The issue isn't the draw distance, it would be having to rework the area to use smaller polygons and then setting up a LOD system to handle it properly.
Easier said than done. Spyro is one of the best Playstation games I can think of in terms of large open environments with innovative LOD technology and its levels are not as expansive or seamless as Hyrule Field.

>>7959280
>when evidence is given that proves you wrong.
Such as? Walking around an unfinished tiny room as a scuffed Link model? Well I'm convinced, that's basically a full game.

>>7959283
Yeah, it would be a lot of work to redo all the models and textures in the game to be something that makes more sense on the PS1, but it would be doable. Remember Hyrule Field does use quite a few tricks, some areas in the far distance are just 2D objects that then become 3D as you get closer, there's obstacles to prevent you from seeing the entire thing at once, etc.
>>7959286
>It's not the whole game!
Yeah, as it's being made by 1 person in his spare time. Now, quit dodging the question. What technical aspect of Ocarina of Time do you feel is not possible to pull off on the PS1?

>>7959306
It's not that it isn't the whole game, it isn't the game at all. It's bootleg tier, just Link walking around rooms more basic than anything in OoT with no actual mechanics or anything.

>>7959306
I'd be interested to see how that actually looks but I don't think it could be translated without non-cosmetic redesigns to the geometry and structure of the map.

>>7959309
Do you think the PS1 couldn't handle having Links Mechanics implemented?

>>7959315
It couldn't handle the levels, enemies and game mechanics all running at once. In other words it couldn't handle the game.

>>7959314
Yes, the Geometry would need to be redone. That doesn't mean it would be simplified or modified to hide things or something. It would just need to be redone so the structure makes more sense for the PS1.

Remember the N64 can get away with drawing very large polygons and tiling textures. Ocarina of Time abuses this quite frequently. So the overall polygon counts aren't that high, but they're so large you'd get very bad texture warping issues if you tried to use them as is. So you'd need to subdivide them into smaller polygons and rework the textures as a result. That doesn't mean you couldn't get something that looks close to if not the same as what you see on N64,

>>7959320
What particular part of the game do you think wouldn't be doable on PS1? Which level is too much? Which enemies are too much that it wouldn't be able to handle Link's mechanics along with the level?

Most of the action in Zelda takes place in the Dungeons which are smaller rooms. Your big open areas like Hyrule Field typically don't have a lot lot of enemies and action going on. Also, don't forget the game is capped at 20fps and is usually dropping below that.

>>7959330
The closest thing to OoT on Playstation is Soul Reaver. Take a look at the drawdistance, framerate and model complexity of that game and you'll see that OoT is clearly impossible on Playstation.

>>7959252
Homebrews don't count.

>>7959332
>Soul Reaver Like OOT, Not as good!
Again you're not really giving any kind of solid evidence here or pointing to something technical in OOT that you think the PS1 couldn't handle. There's plenty of platformers on PS1 that have better draw distances than Soul Reaver while still having pretty involved mechanics.

Honestly I'm getting the feeling here that you're just a blind fanboy who's never actually looked into the technical limits of any of these consoles to really understand what can and can't be done on them.

>>7959341
Why not?

>>7959348
I'm getting the feeling you have never made a video game before and have no clue what you're talking about.

>>7959352
I've worked on some homebrew stuff on the Saturn, and I'm also in quite a few different homebrew communities where stuff like this gets discussed frequently by people who know far more about the subject than either of us. And the general consensus is that things like Zelda would definitely be doable on PS1.

>>7959361
We've reached peak LARP.

Which can handle more polygons, the PSX or the N64?

>>7959363
>LARP!
So you still can't point to a technical aspect of Zelda that you think the PS1 couldn't handle?

>>7959369
Can you post what homebrew you've made, or maybe one of your leet game dev buddies explaining how OoT would totally work on Playstation?

>>7959365
In raw numbers PS1. But N64 can draw significantly larger polygons without having texture warping issues or having polygons just disappear. So it kind of balances out.

>>7959348
What are those platformers? I think Soul Reaver is a fair comparison because of its similarities to Zelda gameplay, and because it's clearly very technically competent in other ways.

>>7959262
Not him, but Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver is at least one, and it looks pretty good. Has very little loading as well.

You could probably also say the Tomb Raider games are kinda like Zelda. Third person camera, running around multi-layered 3D environments and Dungeons.

The various Mega Man Legends games would likely also count. Same or similar concept, though different combat mechanics.

Tail Concerto also is not unlike Zelda, though perhaps that's more of a stretch.

It's interesting how bast the PS1 library is. There's actually not very many games like Zelda on the N64 now that I think about it.

>>7959373
N64 could probably exceed Playstation's polygon count in edge case games using wizardlike microcode such as World Driver Championship, but I don't think that's representative of the console in general.

>>7959252
That is incredibly impressive

>>7959341
Why not? Homebrewers have less resources than devs did, so it's even more impressive that it exists.

>>7959369
I am not him, but I think the N64 can draw very, very large polygons, and generate very large (though simple) play spaces. You see this used in some games like Shadow of the Empire in the Hoth and Train level, and also in Ocarina.

I think the PSX could likely push more polygons inan single scene, and do it very quickly, but your scene would have to be very small, which worked for many games that relied on small rooms or various loading zones.

You look at something like Spyro, and you can see all the twists and turns and things they do do obfuscate the full play field.

Keep in mind, though, just because this is a kind of technical difference, it doesn't mean you couldn't design a game around these limitations and still achieve much of the same goals. Having a giant play zone like the Hyrule field isn't integral to the game, though it obviously was a very impactful experience of the time. Many people actually don't like returning to that field much of the time, and some more interesting in-between zones with more detail and specific activities might have actually been more enjoyable.

>>7959375
For just draw distance there's again the Spyro games. Metal Gear Solid also has some decent draw distances in some areas, though the default camera doesn't always show it. It's also a pretty complex game. The later Tomb Raider games on the system aren't bad either in this aspect.

I'm not saying Soul Reaver is a bad example, I'm just saying that the draw distance it has could simply be the result of what developers made it, not necessarily a limit of the hardware.

>>7959420
Spyro uses LOD to drop a lot of detail to achieve its draw distance. Distant scenery is often untextured for example. I'd say it's a more noticeable reduction in quality than whatever Zelda does on Hyrule Field.

>>7959413
>incredibly impressive
every game there looks noticeably worse than any N64 game released at launch. it's impressive only when considering the generally terrible looking games om the Saturn.

>>7959428
Sorta disagree. I would have preferred racing games like GT2 to employ the LOD techniques from spyro over the fog that most N64 racing games had.

>>7959417
The scene wouldn't necessarily have to be small, you'd need to have a decent LOD system though. A couple of Saturn homebrew developers have been getting pretty insane draw distances using only VDP1. So if Saturn can pull that off I'd imagine the PS1 could as well.

>>7959428
>Spyro uses LOD to drop a lot of detail to achieve its draw distance
What do you think Ocarina of Time does? LOD systems are pretty common and Ocarina of Time does use one. Things that get really far away in OOT even become 2D objects.

Now you don't have to switch to untextured polygons like Spyro does, but for cartoony graphics it works. The other method is to switch to lower detailed models with different textures. The guy behind Hellslave on Saturn has an LOD system where he's switching to different sized quads and textures as things get further away and it's pretty convincing.

>>7959451
>A couple of Saturn homebrew developers have been getting pretty insane draw distances using only VDP1
It's always the unfinished techdemos.

>>7959438
The Draw distance, lighting, and texture quality is better than Turok. It also pulls of 4 player splitscreen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DN4aU-Km9o

>>7959458
>unfinished techdemos.
The FPS one could pretty much be released as a game at this point. The Engine is mostly done, he's just making more levels and content at this point. He also wants to see if he can implement online multiplayer through the Netlink modem or the Serial Port.

And that's the one that's getting some of the most impressive draw distances.

>>7959451
I know it's only anecdotal, but I noticed LOD a lot more in Spyro than in OoT. I didn't even know OoT did that until you pointed it out.

>>7959464
>The FPS one could pretty much be released as a game at this point
Are Saturn standards really that low?

>>7959470
The fog and filtering really helps hide it. Now you wouldn't get something looking exactly like what you see on N64, the hardware is different after all. But you would probably get something that has the same level of scale and gameplay, but certain things would be handled differently and thus look different, some aspects might look more rough, but others might look a lot better due to the differences in hardware.

>>7959478
It's pretty good for a game made by 1 person.

>>7959487
That doesn't mean it's up to the quality of a retail game.

>>7955031
N64 added filtering and ps1 didn't. It's just budget cuts on Sony's part back then

Other than that they're the same probably

N64 added a blur filter though

They both suck without extra mods

>>7959194
>great
Ehhhh, feel like it's a "for the Saturn" kinda great. We really gonna put it up there with Rareware N64 efforts or Vagrant Story/MGS? Of course you will be cause it's 4chan and we gotta crank the contrarianism at all time, but come on. Saturn is a kneecapped system for 3D and you know it.

>>7959252
>concentrated autism wayyyy after the fact matches PS1, and still has Saturn's shitty lighting capabilities and low framerate
ya dun showed me

Is there a single free-camera N64 game running at 60 FPS? It seems like nothing can manage that, no matter how simple the world is.

I feel like Saturn fans don't understand that just because someone toiled away at making the Saturn strain and shit out something competitive with other consoles, doesn't mean it's on par with other consoles or great at 3D. If the same autism is applied to N64 or PS1 it will and did stomp the Saturn. DOESN'T MEAN THE CONSOLE DIDN'T HAVE GOOD GAMES OR ISN'T VALID OR ANYTHING either, you insecure fucks. It was just shitty 3D hardware. Simple as, full stop.

>>7959714
no the n64 doesn't really do high framerates

Why people compare hardware between ps1 and n64? there's 2 years of difference, you should compare n64 with dreamcast too in that case

>>7958453
This is the first time ive read about the ps1 artifacts in any detail, and i'm reminded that some ps1 games use to make me nauseous due to the shimmering/swimmy movements which i couldn't really describe and which my friends use to not know what i was talking about. By this point i'd played lots of early 3d PC games and n64 games.

>>7959714
the N64 would have more 60fps titles if it were offering up 3DO-tier jank and 2D arcade ports like other consoles of the era.

>>7955031
soulless vs soul

I think texture filtering works in favor of some games, OoT and MM especially.

>>7956810
fuck the ff9 characters were ugly as fuck. ff7 was super low poly and ff8 were samey but at least they weren't horrifying nightmare fuel

>>7955636
It's such a shame we never got to see what Nintendo and Sony could've created together

Do people think that the PS1 couldn't handle ocarina of time because of the big field? PS1 didn't have trouble with that sort of thing.

>>7961674
if you think that screenshot represents an environment as complex as OoT's Hyrule Field, you are medically retarded.

>>7961686
Those reaverbots definitely have more complicated AI than what's in hyrule field, I think leveraging some of the PS1's tricks would make hyrule field very doable at a solid framerate (30) on the PS1. Obviously it would have a slightly different look to it, but I don't see it being an impossible task.

>>7961541
Id love to see a PlayStation trying to run something like Wave Race. It wouldn't even get past the title screen.

I just want a 5th-gen retro console with unfiltered textures, decent blending, and no jaggies or wobbling. Is that so much to ask for? I would take carts or CDs.

>>7962005
So emulated Playstaion?

>>7961835
>blocks your path
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHdY_wMNsc

>>7955031
>the N64 looked clean and crisp
get your fucking eyes checked, moron

>>7955284
Now this but Link has less polygons and the entire thing is jittering

>>7962005
Check out the 3DO

>>7955284
How come the ground textures have all those square patterns?

>>7961674
>>7961709
I am absolutely in support of saying people out up some cool stuff and the PS1 and created incredible fully 3D experiences with n all genres, but I do want to point out that a very simple technical difference between the PS1 and N64 gives the N64 a bit of an advantage in these specific scenarios, and certainly visually.

As cool as the culling and LOD systems are in these examples, they're also quite obviously culling the environment in and out of existence, whereas in the N64 you could see from one side of Hyrule Field to the other, with full texture detail, and even if it was a little foggy, it was still obviously there, and only character models, sprites, and other details were being called, which is what made this segment so impressive for the time.

This doesn't make Mega Man Legends 1 and 2 bad though, it's just a bit of a technical advantage in the favor of N64, but MML still works within the PS1 limitations well, and this is still very impressive

>>7962264
Anon must be blind

>>7957040
The N64 also had the best 3D graphics could get in a consumer product in 1996, at least for a few months until the first Voodoo graphics card came out.

>>7962339
The N64 was certainly an impressive machine, but it was hamstrung in a few ways. Custom microcode wasn't taken advantage of as it could have been and games frequently choked on the limitations of the small texture cache and high memory latency. The N64 was a good machine but it wasn't quite as well balanced. The Playstation didn't have quite so many bottlenecks.

>>7958974
Oh come the fuck on, it's immediately noticeable even in this clip if you have eyes. Look how that tower platform Spyro is flying towards jiggles starting at 7 seconds in. It doesn't make the games unplayable, but it's ugly as sin next to the N64 which had puny texture resolution but at LEAST had polygons sitting in place. In close-up angles like MGS1's cutscenes it's unbelievably blatant how bad the jiggling is even on original hardware or emulating accurately at native resolution, just watch and compare to the PC version (which isn't perfect itself mind you, but has stable geometry at least).

>>7962042
>that water
>good
The water physics are decent but the colors, my god those pink and white splotches look atrocious

>>7962381
MGS1 is a good looking game in regular gameplay because the top-down perspective means textures practically don't warp. It also simplifies sorting logic a lot so polygons don't z-fight much. I guess that's the advantage of making a 3D game that's basically 2D.

Then a cutscene starts and all the flaws become immediately apparent.

>>7957040
This post is dead on

>>7962324
My guess is the grass consists of 2 textures layered over each other, with the larger-by-scale one deciding the color pattern and the smaller one giving it a (by actual definition) texture. It looks like there are weird square patterns because both of them are now unfiltered/deblurred, making this texturing style stand out more.

>>7962354
Basically my opinion as well. More custom microcode like: https://olivieryuyu.blogspot.com
probably would have helped. The texture cache as it was would have been more manageable if main system RAM was lower latency, such as SDRAM or EDO, but at 64-bit width.

>>7962394
Zoomer boy you would never understand.

>>7958271
>some outlets even considered late ps1 games as good looking as launch ps2 titles.

Fucking what are you smoking?

There isn't a single PS1 game that comes close to looking like Ridge Racer 5, literally the first PS2 launch game to be completed. There was no "keeping up with the Dreamcast" either, even the laziest of PS1 to DC ports (shit like Test Drive 6 or Tony Hawk's Pro Skater) still looked significantly better on the DC than any games ever released on the PS1.

>>7958685
i'm just talking entirely theoretically. of course it wouldn't run, but if it could, the lack of texture filtering would hinder the art style of OoT.

>>7962701
>Fucking what are you smoking?
Am I some outlets?

>>7962707
>I am just referring to a shit take guys, it's not my take
then why would you even bring it up

>>7962329
>whereas in the N64 you could see from one side of Hyrule Field to the other,
No you can't. Hyrule Field has multiple hills and objects to block the players view in spots. You can never see more than maybe 1/3 of it at a time. Ocarina of Time also uses it's own LOD system. There's a lower detailed 3D model that's used when things get farther away, and when things get to a really far distance they become 2D background objects. As you get closer they become 3D models, and as you get even closer higher detail versions pop in. The fog and low resolution helps hide this.

>>7962701
Holy fuck if only Ridge Racer V was not a field rendered game, because that single handedly ruined it for me

You needed about at least a GFLOP to do anything useful with 3D graphics, which is why the Dreamcast was such a massive leap at the time.

>>7962785
cuz they said it cuz ps1 games look good

>>7955314
>Increase internal res exponentially on emulator

It's not? The jaggies would go away if that were the case.

>>7962701
i agree with you mostly but have you ever played the dreamcast versions of urban chaos or demolition racer? they're fucking terrible

>>7958902
>>7958907
>>7958927
>>7958940

At the time these games were made some people noticed the texture warping but it was not considered a glitch at the time, it was just accepted on all consoles and pc's at the time that you if you wanted high performance back then you would have to use tricks and that included texture clipping and warping. These days I can notice it but at the time it was just the way graphics looked.

It would be like if in 20 years people looked at current gen games and said wow that is so glitchy, look how the grass and shrubs just pop in with games like red dead redemption 2 as an example or the ray tracing glitches you see or how shadows pop. If you said that to most game players they would just say of course it does that, that's just how games look.

Just saying that all generations of 3d games had their glitches that were considered acceptable at the time to get good performance. Just look at flight sim 2020 which is considered one of the best looking games, it has massive geometry glitches and pop in of detail.

16 bit games are one of the few where most of the games don't have glitches in some form to look better.

>>7962973
>It's not?
you obviously haven't seen 240p in 3D before

>>7958421
>Take Quake II for example
The 3d engine used for quake II shares no code with other versions. It's an original work with levels designed to mimic Q2

>>7963182
So what? It still looks and plays very nicely and even has 4 player splitscreen.

>>7963074
I disagree, i noticed the vertex wobbling on ps1 back in the day and it made some games hard to play. I also noticed flicker whenever using a crt < 80 Hz.
In the same way, LOD has always been a tradeoff between visible popping and squeezing out extra performance, but it was always possible for devs to hide the LOD popping better by being more conservative with it. The fact that modern games still have visible LOD popping is mostly a business decision to spending less on optimizing and spend more on marketing.

>>7962042
i dont know why anybody thinks spyro looks good. even putting aside the wobbling and distortion that all PS1 games have, that is not a very visually complex scene and the environment is plain.

>>7958907
>you only emulate, I get it
You're a fucking retard

>>7958974
>it became a non-issue.
completely delusional, past the point of non-return