Quantcast
View Post
fatslob-:O said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Even the first post calls the N64 Blurry by comparison, the 3rd or 4th post mentions the poor texture cache of the system and Vaseline smearing AA is also called out.

Yes, the first post pointed out that the N64 had blurry games but it doesn't go into details for the reasons beyond that ... 

No one mentioned anything about the "texture cache" or it's "vaseline AA implementation" in the first 20 posts as far as I can see ... 

Just about at least a quarter of the posts in this directly mentioned the upsides of N64's hardware and it wasn't until maybe after 40 posts that we saw other criticism against it aside from mine ? Heck, the Sega Saturn in here just got as many criticisms as the N64 did and this thread isn't even about that system! 

Not everyone has an understanding of how hardware works.
It's also easy to look back at old systems with fond memories and it's not until you go back and revisit those games that you realize how poorly they have aged.

d21lewis said:
Both look pretty horrible today but, in general, N64 just felt more solid while PS1 games often felt flimsy.

Music, details, cutscenes, all go to PS1 (I never played Saturn). PS1 even had more content 99% of the time. Hell, games like Gex2 even had better draw distances over their foggy counterparts. To me, N64 games just had "weight" to them.

Definitely Audio, that was a massive advantage for the Playstation 1.
Not only could it play back CD audio music... But the console even had a mighty fine audio chip, ironically the chip was the successor to the Audio chip found in the SNES, which for it's time was also a mighty fine chip.

The Nintendo 64 felt like a step back from the SNES in many aspects on the audio front and had to use more CPU cycles to boot.

Doesn't mean there wasn't some great audio on the N64 though... Conker and Perfect Dark were pretty memorable.

fatslob-:O said:

Yes, the first post pointed out that the N64 had blurry games but it doesn't go into details for the reasons beyond that ... 

No one mentioned anything about the "texture cache" or it's "vaseline AA implementation" in the first 20 posts as far as I can see ... 

Just about at least a quarter of the posts in this directly mentioned the upsides of N64's hardware and it wasn't until maybe after 40 posts that we saw other criticism against it aside from mine ? Heck, the Sega Saturn in here just got as many criticisms as the N64 did and this thread isn't even about that system! 

Who cares? Many people pointed out the visual perceived differences without getting into the technical nitty gritty details.

Alby_da_Wolf said:

It was a very lucky period for PC gaming, during 1999 the first entry level GPU (more expensive than those we can buy now, but costing a half or less than its bigger sister) had become available and in 2000 RAM even on entry level gaming PCs was 8 to 16 times larger than in 1997, while Windows still was relatively frugal in RAM requirements, devs were free to make very ambitious games for their times, with complex stories, rich gameplay and interactivity and free roaming in large levels or even whole undivided worlds. Unfortunately a little time after XBox RAM smaller than initially predicted forced devs of PC/XB multiplats to accept compromises, for example in Morrowind they had to separate indoors parts from the luckily  still undivided outside, while in Thief III Garrett "unlearned" to swim, and even levels smaller than the largest Thief I and II ones had to be split in two parts, breaking the immersion in most cases, only in the Cradle they managed, thanks to both level design and the level narrative, to split it without breaking the immersion.
Even comparing it to such PC golden age, what the older N64 could do when pushed to its limits was impressive.

The PC ended up getting many PS1 ports (I.E. Final Fantasy) but the PS1 ports on PC looked like a pretty big step up over your average N64 titles, especially when operating under 3dfx Glide... And especially at high resolutions. (You could have had 1080P back in 1995 for instance! Although older voodoo cards were resolution limited.)



But yeah, late 90's/early 2000's the PC was doing allot of "experimenting" with games... We had one of the best games of all time, Sacrifice, we had Black and White, Giants: Citizens Kabuto, Battlezone 2, Dark Reign 2, Homeworld... List goes on, was definitely a "golden age". - But far from being "early 3D" as the Geforce GPU was on the minds of PC gamers at that point rather than TNT, Rage, Virge, Verite or Voodoo. etc'.

But the early era of 3D Graphics on PC was happening around 1996 with the advent of "Quake" and when running on a Rendition GPU, it had improved lighting, bilinear filtering, 16-bit colour, dynamic lighting, anti-aliasing was an amazing experience.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--