/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1576642]

I always hear people say the 32 bit era aged horribly compared to the 16 bit one.

ITT: 3D titles that hold up well today

Aside from Link's teenage model I think the game looks pretty good

[Anonymous No.1576649]

It looks better than other N64 games at the cost of running at 20 FPS.

[Anonymous No.1576654]

Spyro 3 looks great in my opinion. It's well stylized.

The characters look better in-game then they do in Enter the Dragonfly or in the manual art

[Anonymous No.1576702]

>>1576642
Well, the fourth generation was just about perfecting a series of techniques which had been already stablished. There was innovation, but developers were mostly doing better what they knew already how to do well. There was a tradition and a solid knowledge about low-resolution pixel-by-pixel design, and the boundaries and possibilities were understood.

The fifth generation introduced mainsteam use of 3D models and environments, and not every developer knew what to do with that. The clever ones understood the limitations and made the most of them through a conscious art direction based on the combination of stylized designs and a certain degree of realism (like, indeed, in the Zelda games). The ones who lacked vision, well, created gigantic deposits of hilarious tumblr material for 13 year olds to mine.

[Anonymous No.1576716]

>>1576642
>I always hear people say the 32 bit era aged
horribly compared to the 16 bit one.

The only reason why that's considered true is because to most people, low-res is the same as being low-quality. To them a game only ages well if it looks sharp and clean. It's sad how people can't appreciate the artfullness and surrealism of low-resolution. Gaming really missed and opportunity when they decided to move it from it completely.

Horror games, for example, would still be scarier in low-res 3D especially if the models were of different style than the environments.

[Anonymous No.1576720]

Bits are just buzz words.
"aging" is entirely subjective.

[Anonymous No.1576723]

What? I think Link's adult model looks fantastic in OoT. He actually looks pretty mature and badass, I don't think there's been a better looking Link. They made it look worse in the 3DS version.

[Anonymous No.1576725]

>>1576723

He looks goofy and angular. Nothing like his official art. He looks older than 16 as well

[Anonymous No.1576728]

Even so, I still go back to 32 bit games more than 16 bit ones. There's a weird charm with the blocky, sometimes origami-like character models.

[Anonymous No.1576738]

>>1576725

It doesn't say his age anywhere in the game, so it doesn't matter. Also it doesn't matter how well he matches the concept art, what matters is how well he looks in the game. The Link in the 3DS version is closer to the art but also looks way more goofy and walks goofy.

I don't know, I guess I just feel like Adult Link is pretty badass. You really feel like you're controlling the Hero of Time, someone mature.

[Anonymous No.1576743]

>>1576738

He's canonically sixteen.

His model always looked reall weird, his nose and eyes especially

[Anonymous No.1576814]

Was never a fan of the "aged poorly" argument. For instance, I love Star Fox. The game is still the same as it was in 1993. I don't think it got any worse. In fact, it's still my favourite in the series.

[Anonymous No.1576836]

>>1576642
"Aged poorly" is a term used both bg children who are so spoiled by modern games they can't get into older ones, and elder graphic whores who never liked the games to begin with only the graphics when they used to be cutting edge.

[Anonymous No.1576842]

I don't really understand the poor aging argument. If you're into retro games, graphics aren't going to be a consideration anyway. Sure, OoT has some pretty low polygons and pixelated textures, but Zelda 1's sprites practically look like Atari blobs. I still play both games, thank you very much. In fact, it seems like I replay OoT at least once or twice a year. I have the GC disc with the Master Quest version, so I tend to alternate between the two versions for some variation.

[Anonymous No.1576851]

>>1576642
>>1576649
OoT looks pretty bad. Mario 64, Wave Race, Star Fox, the Banjo games and Mischief Makers are probably the only N64 games that aged well enough.

[Anonymous No.1576858]

OoT and MM look amazing to be honest. An incredible blend of fantastical with mundane looking elements. I'm a big fan of the paint-like backgrounds of the Hyrule Market, it's so atmospheric to me. I love the blend of 2D in 3D environments, like these statues, or in houses you'll see chairs, barrels and fireplaces that are 2D. I think it looks really cool.

[Anonymous No.1577354]

While OoT is one of my favorite games, it can look pretty awful to me. I've spent a lot of time in the Deku Tree lately practicing Ganondoor, and every texture in there is different shades of vomit. Some places look nice like inside Ganons castle, but that's probably because the texture variety doesn't have a single piece stretching across an entire room like the dungeon I just came from. OoT is an example of both how good a N64 game can look, and also how ugly it can get.

[Anonymous No.1577379]

I like old school 3D games personally, but they were the du jour graphics when I was first living on my own and having a great time so part of it might be nostalgia... Even if it is, I'm glad I have it to get past the aesthetics and into the game play of those early 3D game - some of which had neat innovations that have been left behind in the wake of what became 3D conventions

Although I do hate when a first person game that requires you to look up and down assigns those functions to the shoulder buttons

[Anonymous No.1577393]

>>1576836

No it's not. It just refers to a game that looks subpar compared to what we used to think of it when it was new

[Anonymous No.1577395]

>>1577354
N64 was the ultimate "you can't be lazy developers" console. The system had a hard limit of texture size per draw (4KB). If developers were lazy they'd just stretch one 4KB texture over a big polygon and call it a day. Better developers would blend and layer lots of little textures together.

It's clear that Nintendo were trying to push visual boundaries with OoT (like Hyrule Field), but they've never been ones for consistent large-scale technical showcases.

[Anonymous No.1577417]

>>1576836
>>1577393
I honestly can't imagine that anybody ever though the N64 looked good. I never did.

[Anonymous No.1577423]

>>1576858
I always liked the pre-rendered backgrounds. Hell, this goes for pretty much every game that has them. I know they're not retro, but the Resident Evil remake and Final Fantasy X really impressed me with theirs, and I played them both for the first time not too long ago.

[Anonymous No.1577426]

>>1577417
>I honestly can't imagine that anybody ever though the N64 looked good.

Some N64/PSX games were super impressive when they first came out. And also arcade shit like Virtua Fighter was tits because HOLY SHIT 3D

They don't look all that impressive now, though.

[Anonymous No.1577427]

>>1577417
Maybe you got into the system late? At launch the N64 had better graphics than PCs since it predates the Voodoo by a few months.

[Anonymous No.1577551]

>>1577417
First time I saw OoT i thought that it looked as good as reality. Being nine years old was awesome.

[Anonymous No.1577819]

Bastardized graphics in emulators that don't even display all the graphical features of the original system are NOT an indicator of how well a game "aged". Maybe it's an indicator of how good the game models look when you render them at high resolution, but it just doesn't represent the actual game properly.

Most N64 games "aged" strikingly well if you see it in 240p coming from a real 64. Though pixelated, your mind quickly fills in the unseen details. It's the power of a good art style that overcomes those limitations.

I put "aged" in quotation marks because, in reality, games don't age. They play exactly the same as they did back in the day, given the right hardware.

[Anonymous No.1577826]

>>1577423

it makes it feel like there's a lot more there. it really helps your imagination

[Anonymous No.1577830]

>>1577819
I only play N64 games on my N64 because the emulation is crap. I still think they look like crap now.

[Anonymous No.1577837]

>>1577819
>Lakilester

[Anonymous No.1577847]

I always loved how Gothic looked.

[Anonymous No.1577848]

>>1577423

I love the background of wet dry world so much. It looks even cooler if you use c-up to look at it. I just love really awesome 2D backgrounds.

[Anonymous No.1577851]

>>1577819
>That water texture

[Anonymous No.1577852]

>>1577848

Love this one as well.

[Anonymous No.1577879]

>>1576649
I always have to cringe when I see people on /v/ or /vr/ complain about FPS.
As if you'd need more than ~24 FPS.

[Anonymous No.1577884]

>>1577879

it begins.webm

[Anonymous No.1577890]

>>1577879
It all depends on the game design honestly. Ocarina of Time certainly doesn't need it. Games like Transport Tycoon don't either. Guilty Gear better be running at 60fps though.

[flying traps !eVsTXN/YDg No.1577897]

I prefer 8 and 16 bit games in general, graphics wise. That being said, the first two spyro games were really beautiful.

[Anonymous No.1577901]

>>1577879

Here's a /vr/ flavored comparison just for you.

[Anonymous No.1577904]

>>1577890
The other problem is that when people talk about sub-30FPS they tend to imagine a game that is TRYING to be 30FPS but is getting slowdown and framerate dips.

Ocarina of Time natively runs at 20FPS. It's a smooth, consistent 20FPS.

[Anonymous No.1577908]

>>1576642

N64 games always look so barren because of the low quality textures. For that reason I prefer PS1.

[Anonymous No.1577920]

>>1577901
They look exactly the same.

[Anonymous No.1577921]

>>1577904
That's true. I'll take a slower average frame rate if it's more consistent.

[Anonymous No.1577924]

>>1577908
>N64 games always look so barren because of the low quality textures
No, they look barren because unlike Playstation games, the areas are bigger than a few cubic feet.

[Anonymous No.1577925]

>>1577879
You absolutely do for shoot'em ups, that is all.

[Anonymous No.1577930]

>>1577920
Focus solely on one, then the other and you'll see a clear difference.

[Anonymous No.1577938]

>>1577925
That's not necessarily true at all.

[Anonymous No.1577939]

>>1577908
At least the textures didn't wobble all over the models on the N64.

Ps1 looks really weird sometimes.

[Anonymous No.1577951]

>>1577930
Nope. Not at all.

[Anonymous No.1577952]

>>1577938
I was thinking of horizontal scrolling, it kind of is, scrolling start to hurt your eyes, the input lag DOES make a difference when micro streaming or whatever they call it, and the bullet formations get a lot harder to predict.

Feel free to disagree but I'll take the opinions of the pros.

[Anonymous No.1577954]

>>1576851
I second this post

Do you know how many years it took for me to recognize the steps on the stairs? I always thought it was just some funky design they put on the slopes so they dont look boring. Hell, Mario 64 had stairs, and I know that from that creepy endless stairs

[Anonymous No.1577956]

>>1577848
>>1577852
>>1577423

problem with these backgrounds is that when the polygon resolution is increased, it makes them look out of place

[Anonymous No.1577957]

>>1577951
Your flash plugin is skipping frames, then.

[Anonymous No.1577958]

>>1577951
Then there's something wrong with your eyes or you're on a shitty browser.

[Anonymous No.1577959]

>>1577952
Well I hate to break it to you smart guy, but I'm a bit of a "pro" myself.

I don't even know where you're getting this input lag stuff either, that's a separate topic from frame rate.

[Anonymous No.1577960]

Kirby 64 has a lot of levels that look REALLY nice and charming.

[Anonymous No.1577961]

If anything has aged really fucking badly it's 90s CG renders. They just look god-awful and have always looked god-awful.

[Anonymous No.1577967]

>>1577837
More like lackluster
#rekttt

[Anonymous No.1577970]

>>1577819
You know you can set PJ64 to render fullscreen at 240p, it looks pretty close to the real thing then.

>m-muh invisible authenticity!

[Anonymous No.1577978]

>>1577959
>pro myself
I was thinking of the system11/shoot the core faggots.
Input lag is real when playing at 30fps, though. I don't know what to say, should be noticeable in 2d games.

[Anonymous No.1577985]

>>1577978
>>1577959
How about this, when you press a key you should see the action being performed in the next frame.
At 30fps you'll see the action after two frames.
If the game itself already has a bit of input delay, like most hardware narutally does, all this can add up.

[Anonymous No.1577997]

>>1577978
Well I post on system11 too with those other turbofaggots occasionally. "They", whoever you're referring to, are not the authority on frame rate. As for Shoot The Core that's been dead for ages and never really had much of a community driving it per se.

And again, input lag is not the same as frame rate. But if you want to get into that, it also has become incredibly overblown on that shitty site such that people think you can't netplay shmups at a high level or that you should emulate a game inaccurately because it has 2 frames of delay natively. Playing shmups at a high level (as with anything else really), relies much more on memory than perception and reflexes anyway.

[Anonymous No.1578005]

>>1577985
As with frame rate, it still all depends on the game design. Metal Slug, Super Metroid, and some Raizing games like Armed Police Batrider all have a bit of input delay normally and yet they can still manage to play excellently and in Batrider's case extremely fast-faced. Is instant response ideal? Sure, but it's not absolutely mandatory such that it's a big negative against any game that doesn't have it.

[Anonymous No.1578013]

>>1577957
>>1577958
I'm playing it in a media player.

[Anonymous No.1578015]

>>1577997
I thought for a moment shoot the core was the old name for the site, nevermind.
Let me try this again, SPRITE based shooters don't work in 60fps, not to mention the scroll makes everything look bad. That's why most Naomi and DC shooters run at 60fps even though they use polygonal backgrounds.
On the other hand the PSX didn't have enough power for that so we got stuff like R Type Delta, Einhander, etc that run at something like 20 fps BUT it's somewhat reduced in there because those games do fancy shit with their camera perspective. Even then they'd play much better at 60fps.

And the lag is still there, specially if it's a 2D game.

[Anonymous No.1578023]

>>1578013
>Comparing a PC game from 2001 to games made on hardware from the mid-90's

[Anonymous No.1578037]

>>1578015
The camera perspective in r-type and einhander is sometimes slightly angled so you can ships coming and a bit of the level design.

[Anonymous No.1578053]

>>1578023
You could also play Max Payne on an old PC so that's not really an argument.
Perfect Dark is form 2000 as well and uses the expansion pak.

[Anonymous No.1578124]

The early Resident Evils (especially the Dreamcast and PC versions) have aged pretty well in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.1578193]

>>1577848
Does anybody have a full screen version of Wet Wet Dry World's background that I can use for my desktop background?

[Anonymous No.1578196]

>>1578124
Agreed. Some of the best graphics work of the generation if you ask me. I mostly attribute this to their entirely realistic proportions.

[Anonymous No.1578208]

>>1578193

[Anonymous No.1578212]

>>1578208
That's 500x500...

[Anonymous No.1578213]

>>1578208
That city looks like a stock image.

[Anonymous No.1578221]

>>1578212
What did you expect from a n64?
I'm afraid that's as high as you'll get, sonny.

[Anonymous No.1578230]

>>1578213
If I go through with my dreams and ever become a college professor, that's going on my powerpoint slides.

You know, when I rarely do powerpoint slides, because I'm more of a fan of lectures and discussion guiding the classroom.

[Anonymous No.1578234]

>>1576743

Looks completely fine to me. Only thing that looks sort of off is his nose, and since you hardly ever see it much in the game it doesn't have much of an impact. That's honestly the best looking model of Link the series has ever had.

[Anonymous No.1578236]

>>1578013
VLC I bet.

[Anonymous No.1578261]

>>1578236
Media player classic

[Anonymous No.1578280]

>>1577961
>Hey, Blizard, Is the video done?
>Yeah, but I just cut this one clip, and I haven't left the audiobar locked so the whole things out of sync and the last line of dialogue is cut out.
>Perfect. render it out and distribute this professional piece of work all throughout the world.

[Anonymous No.1578291]

>>1577920
inb4 VGA cable instead of DVI

[Anonymous No.1578316]

>>1577930
they are the same, the game is 2d.

[Anonymous No.1578319]

>>1578212
Yeah, that's the full size of the image.

Super Mario 64's resolution was 320x240.

[Anonymous No.1578337]

>>1578023
Then compare Max Payne to FFX and Shenmue.

Still looks eons better.

[Anonymous No.1578365]

>>1577920

It took me a few seconds to see the difference, but it's definitely there.

That being said, I feel like the one on the right is closer to what I'm used to...?

[Anonymous No.1578381]

>>1578316
Bwahahaha, I like how confident in your retardation you are.

[Anonymous No.1578421]

>>1576720
You got it backwards. Words are just bits.

[Anonymous No.1578492]

>>1577970
Play it however you want, but don't go saying a game aged poorly when you set it up that way.

[Anonymous No.1578538]

>>1577901
I can't tell the difference

[Anonymous No.1578550]

>>1578221
Can't you do a higher render in an emulator?

[Anonymous No.1578565]

>>1578550

>thinking you can increase the resolution of a texture/image like in CSI

[Anonymous No.1578571]

>>1578565
Is this now a "CSI Plays Videogames" thread?

[Anonymous No.1578584]

My stepmom gave me her N64 with OoT and out of nostalgia I played my old file on the cartridge. Even if the graphics are "bad" by today's standards, walking outside of the temple of time as Adult Link and looking at the cutscene where Link notices what happened to Hyrule's Castle after Ganondorf took over gives me terrifying chills.

[Anonymous No.1578641]

>>1578538
There is a discernible difference while they're side-by-side like that, but ultimately it doesn't really matter.
It's hardly as bad as judging PAL games with poor conversions against their NTSC counterparts, or comparing ports when there were arcades, and a shed-load of 8/16-bit home systems to be catered for, each with wildly variable specs.

[Anonymous No.1578668]

>>1578641
>tfw growing up in Europe

The N64 Zelda games ran at fucking 15 fps

[Anonymous No.1578671]

>>1576642
Aren't we technically still in the 32-bit era?

[Anonymous No.1578673]

>>1578671
The Xbox 360 had a 64bit processor.

[Anonymous No.1578678]

>>1578673
Which I'm pretty sure not a single game exploited in any meaningful way. Same as with the PS3 core architecture.

[Anonymous No.1578679]

>>1578571
Oh please yes, I love it when Hollywood thinks they know anything about games or tech.

[Anonymous No.1578696]

>>1577890
> Ocarina of Time certainly doesn't need it.
Yes it did. Very yes it did. It had first person view for fuck sake. Panning was terrible as shit, aiming bow? terrible. Aiming sling, terrible. Every time I play it's disgusting how slideshow it is.

[Anonymous No.1578698]

I'm playing Tekken 3 for the first real time. I used to watch my older brother play it constantly when I was a tot...

The game looks really nice for a PS1 game. Not quite PS2 quality but still less blocky than other fighters I've seen

[Anonymous No.1578703]

>>1578291
There's nothing wrong with VGA cable unless you've got a shitty LCD that breaks VGA input. VGA is fucking fine.

[Anonymous No.1578705]

>>1578538
>>1577920
stahp

>>1578365
One on right looks like I'm playing in an emulator on a toaster-class machine.

>>1577997
Batrider's delay makes me kind of sad.

on the other hand, it's not fucking Garrega (what is this game even doing)

>>1577819
Mario 64 still looks fairly nice. Solid framerate (nearly no one expected 60fps on console at the time for most 3D games -- constant 60fps 3d was arcade-spec only back then, unless you were playing a 3D fighter), bold art design, knew the N64's limits well. I still say it's the only good looking N64 game.

OOT's textures and framerate are hilarious to look at. MM is more of the same, slightly worse framerate, better textures.

Although I still like the way F-Zero X looks more (it's ugly as sin, but in motion, it's captivating as fuck).

that screenshot is hilariously ugly though

>>1577395
That hard limit made a system that should have just straight shat on the PS1 suffer.

>better 3D hardware
>same CPU but better
>still delivers worse average framerate
>muddy ass textures

also, Nintendo's insistence that devs not use the faster but less refined microcode (wow)

>>1578671
Nope. We 64bit now.
well, I dunno what's in the Wii U, but the PS4/XBO are x86-64

[Anonymous No.1578707]

>>1578671
Weren't PS2 and Dreamcast 128 bit systems? This shit confuses me.

[Anonymous No.1578708]

>>1578668
Sonic 1 on Mega Drive was just fucking dandy until I got the Internet, discovered emulators, and modded my MD for 60hz output.
Now I can never go back.

[Anonymous No.1578709]

>>1578698
Tekken 3 looks nice. Panoramic backgrounds save polygons for the character models to use, and it keeps a constant framerate.

Also, it runs at a relatively high res for PS1 (512x240 or something).

[Anonymous No.1578717]

Spyro is one of those few 3D games that I feel as aged perfectly. The models are done so stylized that it just works so well. Not to mention nearly everything is done in 3D, including the font, so it can all be rendered in HD without looking out of place.

[Anonymous No.1578747]

I think most good PS1/N64 games hold up extremely well. That said I really don't get caught up on technical graphics that much, and focus more on atmosphere and art direction.

[Anonymous No.1578857]

>>1578208

what levels do these go to? i don't remember tbh other than wet dry world i don't remember looking at the backgrounds

[Anonymous No.1578858]

>>1576642
Ridge Racer Type 4.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnjie2G7_gQ

look at that shit
I still say it's more impressive than Ridge Racer 5 (especially since R4 is actually a stylishly designed game, unlike 5).

[Anonymous No.1578935]

>>1578857
I think the 1st one is peach's castle

[Anonymous No.1578946]

>>1578857
Row 2:

>Hazy Maze Cave or Dire Dire Docks
>Lethal Lava Lad or Bowser 2
>Shifting Sand Land
>Big Boo's Haunt

Row 3:

>Wet-Dry-World
>Bowser 3

[Anonymous No.1578952]

Rayman 2

[Anonymous No.1578956]

>>1578565
>not knowing about hi-res texture packs

[Anonymous No.1578970]

just checked the game

the sky backdrops were stretched heavily, probably why they are unrecognizable

[Anonymous No.1578982]

>>1578956

But those texture packs aren't the hi-res versions of the original textures, they're completely new ones. Only Nintendo has the hi-res version of this background.

[Anonymous No.1579121]

A few 3D titles from the Gen 5 still look very nice by today's standards (if a little chunky). Off the top of my head, I thought RE2 looks/ed really nice (RE3 strangely looks worse in the character-model department), but more pertinently, Einhander and RayCrisis: Series Termination have some very well-done 3D going on, with very solid models and textures (none of the wobbly PS1 3D going on).

A lot of the N64 Rare games share that quality as well.

[Anonymous No.1579126]

>>1578970
Yeah, I never remembered being able to see the edges of the skybox on the 64

[Anonymous No.1579274]

>>1578982
>complaining about using non-original textures in an emulator

[Anonymous No.1579334]

>>1579274
Now would be a good time to take a break and actually read the argument chain that you hopped in on.

[Anonymous No.1579568]

>>1578705
The hard limit on texture size was more of a thing to annoy developers than a technical limitation.

N64 games had lower frame rates because they were significantly more ambitious than PSX games.

>proper 3D image quality (filtering, perspective correction, etc)
>very large full 3D areas
>very little use of pre-rendered backgrounds to cheat

[Anonymous No.1579878]

>>1578280

I only found out yesterday that the version of Lost Vikings I played was actually a remake of a SNES game that looked exorbitantly prettier.

[Anonymous No.1579937]

>>1578013
Your media player has a problem or your vision does.

Try playing it half speed in your media player. You might then seen what it looks like to the rest of us.

[Anonymous No.1579989]

I know it's a different gen, but does anyone here actually miss Dreamcast graphics? I liked them. There was a sort of appeal to them that I feel doesn't necessarily apply to even the early PS2 games.

[Anonymous No.1580263]

>>1579989
I thought the Dreamcast was amazing when it first released and I got one at launch. There's something about the Dreamcast to me that makes it a really special console, maybe it has something to do with it's short life span? It had a pretty decent library. It's a shame that Sega is fucking terrible at marketing and everything because the ground it could've covered would've been incredible if it had lasted through that entire gen along with the PS2. It lasted what, about a little over 2 years? It had some serious potential imo.

[Anonymous No.1580273]

>>1579989
It was the first console which had graphics with the "good enough" factor. Plus everything was generally smooth, colorful and anti-aliased.

[Anonymous No.1580282]

>>1577961
I don't think that shit EVER looked good. Even Toy Story was more of a case of "oh cool, they managed to make an entire (actually good) movie on a computer" It wasn't pretty.

[Anonymous No.1580362]

Animal Forest looks right at home on the NGC when it's a 64 bit game. It's only a little blocky compared to other games

[Anonymous No.1580440]

>>1580362
Animal Crossing does indeed look beautiful on Gamecube. Doubutsu No Mori honestly looks pretty nice on N64. Some textures look a tad muddled and it's very apparent that Gamecube is where it belongs, but it wasn't a bad first attempt by any means.

[Anonymous No.1580463]

>>1577970
>You know you can set PJ64 to render fullscreen at 240p, it looks pretty close to the real thing then.
Is that a feature in the latest version?

[Anonymous No.1580474]

>>1580263
By mid-2000, they had no money left to market it.

[Anonymous No.1580475]

>>1578213
It's almost certainly a picture of a real place that's been edited.

From a guess, I'd say it's Jerusalem or Turkey.

[Anonymous No.1580524]

>>1578857
Absolutely beautiful

[Anonymous No.1580540]

>>1580524

in game - this is with filtering off

[Anonymous No.1580551]

>>1578946
Row 2 first picture is Bowser 1. I'd imagine they're all in order of levels too, with later levels sometimes reusing earlier ones?

[Anonymous No.1580557]

>>1577920
time for eyeglasses or to stop lying

[Anonymous No.1580560]

>>1578234
But his sword is in the wrong hand.

[Anonymous No.1580563]

>>1579989
DC games look good even today through VGA because they're low on jaggies compared to early PS2 games. Just compare DOA2 on DC to the PS2 version.

[Anonymous No.1580571]

>>1576642
The world is nonsensical and feels like a theme park.

>five radically different races who all live basically right next door to eachother
>a single farm with three workers provides the food for an entire kingdom

It doesn't feel like an adventure, it feels like the Small World ride at Disneyland.

[Anonymous No.1580587]

>>1580571
It's enough for imagination to fill the gaps.

[Anonymous No.1580909]

>>1578707
Come to think of it, do 128-bit systems even exist? I thought it was a marketing buzzword like "blast processing" that just means a 32/64-bit system with multiple cores.

[Anonymous No.1580913]

>>1580540
Do you have it with filtering on?

[Anonymous No.1580938]

>>1580587
So is Zork.

[Anonymous No.1580960]

>>1580913

[Anonymous No.1580976]

>>1579878
only thing the PS1 version has going for it is Major Glory Voicing Eric the Swift.

[Anonymous No.1581032]

>>1580571

Well, I'm thinking with how fast day and night cycle (some wiki says one game hour is 12 seconds of real time), it could probably be argued that it's a much bigger expanse than presented if you think of it in the sense that moving across the field takes much longer in "real" time than the speedy pace it actually cycles in game.

Fuck if I know, I'm just throwing guesses.

[Anonymous No.1581062]

>>1581032
I guess scale isn't really the issue here, but perspective.

After all, it's not like the Zelda games' worlds were ever really that big. In Zelda 1 you explore a world that's probably less than a square mile to scale, but since you explore it one small screen at a time, it feels a lot bigger than it is.

However in Ocarina of Time, you can see the full expanse of Hyrule Field. When you can be standing on the edge of Gerudo Desert, and still see Death Mountain and Hyrule Castle in the distance, it kind of breaks the illusion that this is supposed to be a sprawling kingdom.

[Anonymous No.1581078]

>>1577379
You're talking about Kings Field aren't you.
>Never played Kings Field series
>Buy Kings Field 1 and 2 because they are apparently "must plays" for PS1
>Testing them
>Kings Field
>Die in literally 2 minutes to those spider enemies (I managed to pop their top part, it kept coming at me, then a second one showed up)
>Works, pop in Kings Field 2
>Watch cutscene
>Walk to a river
>It looks waist deep
>Go in
>Die
>Die at 1 minute in

I think these will take some getting used to.

In regards to OP: I think its because generally sprites hold up better to early low poly models. Ps1 had some very well done sprite games that still hold up, but a lot of the games like FF7 for instance, look like shit no matter how you slice it, just the character models in the over world though, everything else looked pretty good.

[Anonymous No.1581084]

>>1578124
>>1578196
Pretty sure having Pre-rendered backgrounds lets you put more resources into things like Character models, which in Resident Evil's case was a very good thing.

[Anonymous No.1581085]

>>1581062

Yeah I get what you mean. OoT Hyrule has always felt cramped to me, and now it's even funnier to think of now that I'm aware of:

>>1580571
>five radically different races who all live basically right next door to eachother
>a single farm with three workers provides the food for an entire kingdom

[Anonymous No.1581104]

>>1581078
FFVII had a tough time being a particularly groundbreaking game for Squaresoft.
In contrast, FFIX, which was very late in the PS1's lifecycle, is far superior to VII.
It's still rather rudimentary by some people's standards, but it's charming character models, consistent with the backdrops and in-battle graphics, allows it to hold up a lot better.

[Anonymous No.1581145]

a lot of these early polygon based games with limited resources consoles had to offer really needed heavy stylization, and or texturing / shading. Otherwise you end up with some really horrible looking stuff.

Shogo: Mobile Armor Division is another great example of all this, so no the PC was not immune either.

[Anonymous No.1581150]

>>1576642
When was this 32 bit era? The big gaming companies jumped from 16-bit to 64-bit. The only 32-bit console I can think of is the GBA

[Anonymous No.1581184]

>>1581150
not sure if serious

[Anonymous No.1581194]

>>1581150
The whole bit thing was just marketing and never made any sense to begin with.
There are like 3 games on the n64 that use 64 bit instructions.

[Anonymous No.1581201]

>>1581150
The whole bit thing was just marketing and never made any sense to begin with.
There are like 3 games on the n64 library that ever use 64 bit instructions.

[Anonymous No.1581210]

>posting emulator screenshots

nigga i know CRT threads aren't really popular but a game hasn't aged badly just because its low res graphics are presented in hd screens

like for real even the lighting looks off in this one >>1576858

[Anonymous No.1581236]

>>1581150
There was this console called the PlayStation that was 32 bit, it was pretty obscure though, you've probably never heard of it.

[Anonymous No.1581367]

>>1579334
Sorry. It's a long thread and I confused you with people who were spouting opinion instead of fact

[Anonymous No.1582171]

>>1579989
How could I miss something I play all the time?

>>1580463
>latest version?
Yeah. I think it's only been there since 0.1

>>1581150
>When was this 32 bit era?
It was was around the time Sega stuck a 16/24/32 bit processor in the Genesis and called it 16 bit with blast processing.

[Anonymous No.1582191]

>>1581150
1987 until today.

[Anonymous No.1582193]

>>1582171
The term "blast processing" came more from its processor speed being much faster than the SNES' processor speed (7.67 MHz compared to 3.58 MHz). The Genesis had lower specs in pretty much every other category though but why mention that in the ads?

[Anonymous No.1582206]

>>1582193
Clock speed tells you next to nothing about processing power, particularly not if you compare CPUs from different architectures. The only case when there's a direct connection is between different variants of the same product line. For instance the Neo Geo has a 12 MHz Motorola 68000 compared to the 7.67 MHz on the Genesis.

[Anonymous No.1582331]

>>1582193
Blast processing actually referred to a specific usage of DMA that wasn't possible on SNES.
>>1582206
Of course, but there's little doubt that the Genesis CPU was substantially faster, even if it wasn't double.

[raquiel No.1582343]

>>1582331
>Of course, but there's little doubt that the Genesis CPU was substantially faster, even if it wasn't double.
Yeah the SNES CPU was slower (I think it was the same as the NES's), but there were coprocessors that would handle specific tasks: this explains why some early games had such slowdowns (super R-Type...), third parties weren't used yet to proficiently use the coprocessors

[Anonymous No.1582346]

>>1582343
Yeah, but that's not to say the Genesis VPU co-processor was a joke (aside from the color count).

[Anonymous No.1583890]

>>1582331
>Blast processing was a marketing ploy

[Anonymous No.1583897]

>>1582343
>snes coprocessor
Huh? I never heard of that before, I thought only the genesis had both a motorla and a z80 that was mostly used for sound effects.
AFAIK most early snes games used slowrom and/or lorom or something that let developers manipulate ram with more ease at the cost of processing speed, it wasn't until the end of its lifecycle like you mentioned that they started using fastroms with hiram or whatever. I'm not good with the computer.

[Anonymous No.1583995]

Conker still looks great.

All Rare N64 games are still visually beautiful because they use their colours, textures, and lighting so well.

[Anonymous No.1584206]

Majora's Mask

[Anonymous No.1584237]

[Anonymous No.1584442]

>>1576723
His eyes are way too close together and his eyebrows are huge and fiercely angled. He looks deformed, or at least spectacularly ugly. I remember thinking he looked weird when I was eight years old and a 3D Zelda game on the N64 was the definition of happiness to me. His face looks weird to most people; that's all there is to it.

[Anonymous No.1584452]

>>1584442

looks fine to me, a lot of girls in the game are cute

[Anonymous No.1584489]

>>1577819
What is that disgusting monstrosity--please burn it with fire.

[Anonymous No.1585248]

>>1582331
>Of course, but there's little doubt that the Genesis CPU was substantially faster, even if it wasn't double.
Actually there is significant doubt.

No one has done a significantly indepth code comparison for games and the 6502 is known to perform more efficiently and have more mips.
But whether they optimized the 68K games well enough to perform better is the question.

It's best to just drop it compare the games as they come because no one's going to ever gain ground in that argument until someone drops a significant research bomb.

Also, SNES had DMA support.

[Anonymous No.1585273]

>>1577904
>It's a smooth, consistent 20FPS
Well, you're half right.

[Anonymous No.1585275]

This thread is useful in showing that there is literally something wrong with people who defend low framerates. Their brains actually cannot process anything faster than 20 frames per second.

[Anonymous No.1585319]

>>1576723

I know what you mean. The models on the remakes are more faithful to the original character design, while the N64 models are more like an aproximation due to not being able to pull of a big amount of polygons yet. Look at Bowser from SM64, then look at his new model from SM64DS. He looks more like his actual design on the DS, but the original 64 model looks badass.

[Anonymous No.1585515]

>>1577879
"Film look" is pure shit. You'll never see a realistic fight scene in a movie because it's literally impossible to see. Fast motion doesn't work at 24fps. Thankfully some high profile directors (Peter Jackson, James Cameron) have realized the problem so we'll see some improvement in the future, although 48fps still isn't good enough. Even Showscan (60fps, which I've watched) isn't really enough for very fast motion.

[Anonymous No.1585526]

>>1585515
I'll never accept high framerate movies. It makes everything look like a soap opera.

[Anonymous No.1585559]

>>1577901
The only difference is that the speed blur effect is removed, but I like that so 30 fps is better for me.

[Anonymous No.1585560]

>>1585515
High fps on film doesn't accurately emulate real life vision and would be a bad choice for movies with a lot of action.

[Anonymous No.1585564]

I'm not gonna argue this anymore but are you fags watching the webm in fullscreen?
It's a lot easier to notice like that.

[Anonymous No.1585572]

>>1576642
>OoT
>Holding up well ever

[Anonymous No.1585579]

>>1585526
You are literally cancer.

[Anonymous No.1585583]

>>1578698
>Tekken 3
Muh nigga.

[Anonymous No.1585606]

>>1585560
You're right, but only because "high framerate" in the context of modern film means 48fps, which isn't high enough. It's still a shitload better than 24fps. It's a great choice for action (and panning scenes, and really anything except static talking scenes).

Film ideally needs 200+ fps, much higher dynamic range, and full dome screen. This is theoretically possible but so ridiculously expensive (high dynamic range on a dome screen is very difficult, only practical method would be an emissive rather than reflective screen) that the only change of ever seeing anything like this is with future VR headsets.

[Anonymous No.1585738]

>>1585560
Film doesn't accurate real life. It may never. You have to account for dynamic user focus, shifting perspective, three dimensional imaging.

But that's not the point of HFR. The point of HFR is to capture video better than it was previously and that, HFR does since 24 FPS is all the failings of capturing real life vision that HFR at a horrifically shitty frame-rate. HFR is direct upgrade.

[Anonymous No.1585742]

>>1585606
>and really anything except static talking scenes).
You mean, and also static talking scenes. They get a great benefit from them since you can actually see good actors work. You also see bad actors fail because HFR let's you see facial motion more clearly. It's literally better in every single application.

[Anonymous No.1585748]

>>1585579
>literally

[Anonymous No.1585804]

>>1585248
>Actually there is significant doubt.
No there isn't. It's straight from the mouths of every developer who worked on both systems ever.

The 6502 is more efficient, but not to the extent that it can make up for half the clock speed.

>Also, SNES had DMA support.
Yes, but not to the extent of Genesis.

[Anonymous No.1585854]

>>1577901
Definitely prefer the one on the right.

[Anonymous No.1586635]

>>1585804
Disregarded.