PS1 vs. PS2 Graphics

[Anonymous No.8396443]

Video for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24gdOQYgvs4&t=84s
Was this the biggest graphical leap of all time in one family? The contenders I can think of are SNES to N64 and PS2 to PS3.. Regardless, we really hit the point of diminishing returns after the 7th gen.

[Anonymous No.8396535]

>>8396443
>we really hit the point of diminishing returns after the 7th gen.
People will say I'm wrong and point out autistic tiny details, but I really haven't seen graphics make a big jump since the PS2's late games. Everything still looks like a videogame just as much as Resident Evil 4 or Smash Bros Melee does.

[Anonymous No.8396560]

>>8396535
This. Extreme graphical stagnation. Games look the same to me as they have since 2001-2002, just with higher res textures.

[Anonymous No.8396565]

Videogame graphics improvement over time is logarithmic.

[Anonymous No.8396569]

>>8396565
Obviously.

[Anonymous No.8396587]

>>8396535
I agree, and the last time I was legitimately mindblown by graphics was either Tekken Tag Tournament 1 or Crysis. It's been absolutely ages since I noticed or cared.

[Anonymous No.8396596]

>>8396569
yeah no shit, genius

[Anonymous No.8396603]

>>8396596
Obviously.

[Anonymous No.8396640]

>>8396535
For me, my father got our first 1080i LCD HDTV right when my brother bought a PS3 at launch. So hooking it up to a brand new TV as opposed to the consumer CRTs we'd had for a decade made a big difference. My mind was absolutely blown.
This is in contrast to when I played a PS5 for the first time in January (mind you I never even had PS4) on a 4k TV and the visuals, while pleasant, didn't feel ground-breaking. Graphically I think the PS4 is good enough for any type of game, or even PS3 if all its games ran at 1080/60fps. I still think Modern Warfare 2 looks great.

[Anonymous No.8396665]

>>8396640
I remember Halo 3 looking amazing on a 1080p Plasma TV in 2007 coming from PS2 games on a CRT. Now in 2021 Halo 3 looks like drab shit in the MCC.

[Anonymous No.8396693]

>>8396665
>>8396640
I think the increase in display resolution from 240p to 1080 is huge, but if you upscale older games to the same resolution, the difference isn't as huge. I mean look at Resident Evil 4 HD, it looks fantastic and all they did was up the resolution and get the same textures but use higher res versions of those too. It's the same reason all the HD remasters of PS2 games lately look great.

[Anonymous No.8396697]

>>8396665
Halo 3 "cheated" using shitloads of bloom which was seen as amazing back then. Now its horrible

[Anonymous No.8397634]

>>8396443
The first one might be a capture card, but the second one is an emulator shot set to higher resolution. The jump is big, but not as big as you're making out.

[Anonymous No.8397654]

>>8396443
>we really hit the point of diminishing returns after the 7th gen
I dunno about that, it’s really dependent on a per game basis
I recently played a game called ascent threats fully 3D and looks so much like what 2D isometric PC games tried to be

[Anonymous No.8397674]

>>8396443
>Tekken 3 image is streched
>TTT image is emulated and HD
What a dishonest comparison lol. T3 had much better art direction anyways.

[Anonymous No.8397680]

>>8396443
No 4th gen to 5th gen.
5th to 6th was literally just more polygons and better res textures.

[Anonymous No.8397683]

>>8397680
Nah, there were already great 3D graphics in the arcade at that time

[Anonymous No.8397695]

>>8397683
There were super good looking games on PC before ps2 too.
Your point?

[Anonymous No.8397703]

>>8396443
The SNES to N64 leap was mindblowing for the time, but then it was all in 3D (more or less). Seeing/playing Mario in 3D for the first time was amazing but also a totally different experience. The big shift to 3D was where stuff got really interesting - a little painful at first, but interesting.

>>8396640
>Graphically I think the PS4 is good enough for any type of game
I feel exactly the same way. The same games run on ps4 and ps5, the difference is just mildly tweaking it. Hell, you look at the graphical difference between GTA5 on the PS3 compared to the PS4 and yeah there's a difference but it's not worthy of a "generational leap".

[Anonymous No.8397710]

>>8397695
That it was a natural progression
There was no massive leap in graphics
It’s just that “gens” are arbitrary cycles

[Anonymous No.8397817]

>>8396640
>Graphically I think the PS4 is good enough for any type of game

That's what I think about that gen as well. If these consoles had solid state drives at that time then there would be no need for next gen anymore.

[Anonymous No.8397848]

>>8396693
6th gen was 480, youre thinking of 5th gen and under

[Anonymous No.8398204]

Young me thought the leap from Smash 64 to Melee was fucking amazing

[Anonymous No.8398221]

My first memory of being blown away by graphics were my birthday when I booted up Jak and Daxter on my ps2 the first time. I remember thinking
>Everything is so.. round!
I do remember thinking that ps1 wasn't impressive to me graphically but I liked the games. I still preferred the look of the SNES that I had though. PS3 was a big jump, but it didn't blow me away. As others have said we're getting diminishing returns. I think that we will get other things besides graphics that are impressive though. I'm still waiting for games with persistent destruction and debris as well as games that use physics rather than animations and scripts.

[Anonymous No.8398237]

>>8396640
dreamcast on a pc crt had all the visual clarity that an HD display had with lots of 60fps games.

[Anonymous No.8398242]

>>8397703
>SNES to N64 leap
SNES was 5 years too late. N64 paled in comparison to Voodoo graphics. Nintendo innovated nothing. The real graphical leaps that happened were:
Atari 8-bit (1979, capable of high speed raycasting, fractal, and wireframe 3D rendering) -> Amiga/ST (1985, capable of high speed flat shaded 3D rendering) -> Acorn Archimedes (1987, capable of rendering high speed, high poly flat shaded 3D, and slow texture mapped 3D) -> 486 (1989, runs doom and even faster 3D games) -> PowerPC (1992, capable of GPU assisted high speed texture mapped 3D with transparency effects at a fraction of x86's cost).

[Anonymous No.8398247]

I remember thinking NES to Genesis was a pretty big leap. Suddenly game didn't run like shit, there wasn't any flickering, sound was infinitely better, you could see all the characters, and didn't have to use your imagination to make out what they were supposed to represent. And you could play actual arcade games at home. Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat were awesome in the Genesis, and it was shocking to see something that looked so close to the arcade at home.

Obviously PS1, Saturn, and N64 were pretty significant, because it was 3D, but it was so exploratory. Games all felt and looked odd a lot of the time. You were stunned, but it it all didn't play or run especially great.

Then you get Dreamcast and PS2, and all of a sudden games are 60 fps, they look incredibly sharp, the detail is insane, and there's actually shadows and shit. It's not just stenciled blob sprites, but actual shading and shit. The characters have depth.

I would say that transition was just like NES to Genesis. Really mind blowing when shit actually works.

[Anonymous No.8398248]

>>8398242
>amiga
Irrelevant trash.

[Anonymous No.8398256]

is it weird that i find the levels in tekken 1 more interesting than tekken 3?

[Anonymous No.8398283]

>>8396443
Here's a free (You).

[Anonymous No.8398287]

>>8398248
Here's a free (You).

[Anonymous No.8398295]

>>8398287
Thanks but it doesn't change the fact the Amiga was never relevant.

[Anonymous No.8398505]

>>8398237
Dreamcast with that setup looks excellent, however it couldn't produce that clarity on a big screen. 1080p makes a huge difference for large displays.
Was Xbox 360 the spiritual successor to the Dreamcast? I think so

[Ramblin' Joe No.8398509]

>>8396443
What about the Saturn to the Dreamcast?

[Anonymous No.8398519]

>>8398509
I thought about putting that one as well. It's pretty much the same as PS1 to PS2 so I didn't include another 5th -> 6th gen leap.

[Anonymous No.8398923]

>>8396443
>Was this the biggest graphical leap of all time in one family?
no
>The contenders I can think of are SNES to N64
it was this obviously

[Anonymous No.8399345]

>>8397634
>>8397674
It’s probably not emulated. I think it’s the HD version from the Tekken Hybrid release on PS3 (and maybe Xbox 360). Still an unfair comparison, but I was compelled beyond reason to let you guys know something that doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous No.8399359]

7th gen is was the end for great ghraphics, anythinh after uses too many shitty effects and filters not too mentiom boring colors and shittty lightning, nothing stands out anymore

[Anonymous No.8399716]

Arcade vs PS2:
https://youtu.be/0pNkEg6wQeM

Arcade vs Dreamcast:
https://youtu.be/Da4tdPeoSfc

As impressive as the PS2 was at launch, it didn't seem to be a massive leap to someone like me, who already owned a Dreamcast previously.