[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 538 KB, 598x417, 98 graphics.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2523148 No.2523148 [Reply] [Original]

I just wanted to share people some pics of an old game made in 1999/2000. It is called 'The New Adventures Of The Time Machine'.

I find the graphics really impressive for its time!

>> No.2523245

Donkey kong country man, still fucking awesome

>> No.2525019

interesting, did you find a pirated link? that is not 0 seeders torrent ofc

>> No.2525038

>>2523245
great game but i never thought DKC's graphics were 'stunning' the way people described them. kinda overrated in that regard. it looked decent, but 'stunning'? come on.

DKC came out nov 1994 and Tekken 2 came out '95. Now Tekken 2 was a game that WAS actually 'stunning' at the time. I remember going to my friend's house after school and seeing his playstation and tekken 2 running on it for the first time. My jaw dropped it looked so fucking good. that's a game that, at the time, I could definitely describe as 'stunning'.

of course, as with all early 3D games, I'd imagine tekken 2 hasn't aged particularly well while dkc still hasn't lost its charm.

another game that looked incredible to me was Extreme-G on N64. Again, the first time I saw it at my friend's house was something that stuck with me. It was fast, beautiful and had an awesome soundtrack to boot, too.

Hmmm, what else... er...

>> No.2525054

>>2525038
Either you weren't alive then or you just don't remember. DKC was just absolutely mind-blowing in how it looked at the time. And yeah I'm with that other anon, it still looks pretty good even today.

>> No.2525063

>>2525054
I'm born in 1986 and you are a tryhard faggot.

>> No.2525075

ITT: People who are fooled by pre-rendered graphics

>> No.2525114

>>2525075
Just because something is pre rendered doesn't make it any less impressive.

>> No.2525120

>>2525114
It kind of does, though, because it's not indicative of hardware capabilities, and oftentimes was designed on entirely separate systems like SGI workstations.

>> No.2525124

>>2525120
So we're supposed to only be impressed by the process of a game's development rather than the game itself?

>> No.2525138

>>2525124
There's just a huge difference between the game itself generating the 3D models and therefore being able to move them around in any way and display them from any angle as opposed to games that use pre-rendered graphics that may have taken much longer to create on much more powerful machines and then basically just displaying a picture of those models.

The latter is just an aesthetic choice by the graphic artists, one made to speculatively make a game appear the way it could have reasonably and accurately been predicted that games would actually look in the future.

The thing is that when you use this method you could just as easily make static images of real photographs or the paintings of the great masters.

Just because the games effectively simulated the graphics of future games doesn't necessarily make the graphics "great" although you might call them "visionary"

>> No.2525139

>>2525054
I don't know man. I was born in the eirly 80s and DKC always looked meh to me. Its a neat art style but nothing impressive from a technical standpoint.

But my family also had a decent PC at that time (100MHZ Pentium 24 MB of RAM) so when DKC was making the rounds I was also playing games like Doom and whatever amazing shit was in the Arcades at the time. Since arcades up till the PS2 still had the best there was to offer.

>> No.2525146

>>2525124
If you want to be impressed by prerendered graphics, that's your prerogative. I'm not, because it has nothing to do with artist talent or programing skill.

>> No.2525147

>>2523148
Outcast is also worth checking out
http://www.gog.com/game/outcast

>> No.2525165

>>2525146
>because it has nothing to do with artist talent

Not that Anon but that's pretty dismissive. Of course it has to do with artist talent. The backgrounds didn't materialise from thin air. An artist or artists had to make them. If they then look nice and are aesthetically pleasing then that is an artistic achievement. I do, however, agree about the technical side. Pre-rendered graphics were used for the exact reason that they aren't terribly demanding on hardware for what they can portray, so no, they're not really impressive in a technical way.

>> No.2525228

who is talking about hardware

this isnt a discussion about xbox5 having better hardware than ps5

what matters is that the decision to use prerender, if will fit the genre / specific playstyle without being a hinderance, with it will cost more/less to produce, if it will have with 1 or 4 90º camera angles

desnt matter if it is an statement about artistry/programming/cost risking/customer fooling/biz vision

what matter is it gives you DKcnoutry on snes in 1994.
diablo in 1996 in shitty computer
dablo 2 in 1999 (?) with 64 MB RAM and onboard graphics (cheap pc at time)

>> No.2525262

>>2523148
OP's thread was derailed. I think he just wanted to talk about his own game lol and none of you even commented on it. OP is crying somewhere what a fag lol.

>> No.2525263
File: 75 KB, 256x224, Metal_Warriors_1618.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2525263

I know they aren't in game graphics, but the cutscenes from Metal Warriors look so good.

Also, while I like the backgrounds and the look of the stages in DKC, I think the characters themselves look really, really weird. Never saw pre-rendered graphics back in the days, so I have no nostalgia for it.

>> No.2525272

>>2525263
You, my friend, should do yourself a favor and play some PC-98 games.