Quantcast
Which early 3D "look" stands up better to you?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Which early 3D "look" stands up better to you?

I prefer...

Sharper but jagged/unstable 14 29.17%
 
Smooth and solid but blurrier 34 70.83%
 
Total:48

Apples and oranges I'd say - PS1 had fundamental problem in its design (if I understood correctly it boils down (simplified) to fact that dividing is expensive operation and that is what made its graphics wooble due to inprecise coordinates)....so even if you have somethiing like Zelda visuals (in Crash Bandicoot for example), it will wobble.

https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/5019/why-do-3d-models-on-the-playstation-1-wobble-so-much



Around the Network

is there anything on the N64 that looks as good as say Final Fantasy 9? imo no.
There where alot of PS1 games that looked much better than anything on the n64.

That said from that time periode, mario64 was still my favorite game.

Sheep dog & wolf (PS1) is amasing btw (graphics, gameplay decent):

Bugs bunny lost in time:

Chrono Cross:

Breath of Fire IV (okay this is 2D sprites, but its awesome looking) :

Final Fantasy IX:

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 24 June 2019

Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

JRPGfan said:

is there anything on the N64 that looks as good as say Final Fantasy 9? imo no.
There where alot of PS1 games that looked much better than anything on the n64.

(...)

Given how the OP is written, I don't think games with prerendered backgrounds qualify. Prerendered backgrounds are still images and as such don't consist of polygons. They were a regularly used method to get around the PS1's lackluster rendering of 3D graphics.

On topic: N64 games hold up much better, because examples like the Spyro trilogy are rare on the PS1. Most PS1 developers couldn't get results close to the N64.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

I'm an N64 supporter for life, but I've flipped on this one. The blur filter that Nintendo employed muddied assets that should have been kept crisp. The PS1 has some awful examples of 3D pixels crawling all over the place, but I now prefer the sharper image of Sony's machine through my elobarate chain of line-doblers and uoscalers.




Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: More than Just a Genesis? Analogue Mega SG Review

JRPGfan said:

is there anything on the N64 that looks as good as say Final Fantasy 9? imo no.
There where alot of PS1 games that looked much better than anything on the n64.

Perfect Dark.
N64 Footage:



FF9 Footage:


Perfect Dark simply has superior texturing, lighting, shadowing and geometric details... Not to mention when Final Fantasy 9 looks it's best is when the pre-rendered backgrounds are on-scene.

....And to think Perfect Dark isn't even the best looking N64 game.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
JRPGfan said:

is there anything on the N64 that looks as good as say Final Fantasy 9? imo no.
There where alot of PS1 games that looked much better than anything on the n64.

(...)

Given how the OP is written, I don't think games with prerendered backgrounds qualify. Prerendered backgrounds are still images and as such don't consist of polygons. They were a regularly used method to get around the PS1's lackluster rendering of 3D graphics.

On topic: N64 games hold up much better, because examples like the Spyro trilogy are rare on the PS1. Most PS1 developers couldn't get results close to the N64.

Thats true, the benefit of keeping the perspective locked, allowed them to make use of 2D backgrounds, that 3D models walked around on.
Still the effect works, it looks great, its simply doing alot with little. The character models ect are 3D.

And I agree alot of the best looking games on the PS1 are actually sprite based.
While nintendo really went all in on the 3D aspects.

still theres some PS1 games that really blow nintendo out of the water:

Vagrant story:

Like in terms of textures & detail... some of these PS1 games are impressive considering the hardware they where on.

vs

Super Mario 64:

Like if you compaire the face details... or the character models.

In vagrant story the character models hands, has all 5 fingers.... vs mario that just has a round ball, for a hand, and 2 fingers pop in, when he does a peace sing.

Same if you look at the face, look at the hair/eyes/ears... even has a neck :p

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 24 June 2019

Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

In general I find ps1 holds up best,but really it's game dependant. Super Mario 64 holds up pretty good because it doesn't use overly detailed or noisy textures, ocarina of time looks pretty bad. Tomb Raider looks pretty bad, crash bandicoot looks good. Etc



PS4 Pro, Nintendo Switch, PC: i5-4670k, RX470.

Pemalite said:
JRPGfan said:

is there anything on the N64 that looks as good as say Final Fantasy 9? imo no.
There where alot of PS1 games that looked much better than anything on the n64.

Perfect Dark.
N64 Footage:



FF9 Footage:


Perfect Dark simply has superior texturing, lighting, shadowing and geometric details... Not to mention when Final Fantasy 9 looks it's best is when the pre-rendered backgrounds are on-scene.

....And to think Perfect Dark isn't even the best looking N64 game.

Its hard to compaire a 3D world, vs a lock perspective + 2D background.
But in terms of character models (which both have) FF9 blows Perfect dark waaay outta the water. Like thats not even close.

So geometric detail, model vs models isnt close.

Shadows are the same, just a blurry blob underneat the character models feet, in both games.
Lighting? maybe it goes to Perfect dark, but again its hard to compaire when the 2D backgrounds kinda get in the way of that sort of compairsion.
Textures are better in FF9 too, theres much higher detail there.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 24 June 2019

Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

JRPGfan said:
RolStoppable said:

Given how the OP is written, I don't think games with prerendered backgrounds qualify. Prerendered backgrounds are still images and as such don't consist of polygons. They were a regularly used method to get around the PS1's lackluster rendering of 3D graphics.

On topic: N64 games hold up much better, because examples like the Spyro trilogy are rare on the PS1. Most PS1 developers couldn't get results close to the N64.

Thats true, the benefit of keeping the perspective locked, allowed them to make use of 2D backgrounds, that 3D models walked around on.
Still the effect works, it looks great, its simply doing alot with little. The character models ect are 3D.

And I agree alot of the best looking games on the PS1 are actually sprite based.
While nintendo really went all in on the 3D aspects.

still theres some PS1 games that really blow nintendo out of the water:

Vagrant story:

Like in terms of textures & detail... some of these PS1 games are impressive considering the hardware they where on.

vs

Super Mario 64:

Like if you compaire the face details... or the character models.

In vagrant story the character models hands, has all 5 fingers.... vs mario that just has a round ball, for a hand, and 2 fingers pop in, when he does a peace sing.

Same if you look at the face, look at the hair/eyes/ears... even has a neck :p

You're comparing games with completely different artstyles that were released 4 years apart. You'd be better off comparing games with a similar style that came out at a similar time. 



Mario 64 vs Vagrant is a terrible comparison. One was a launch title, the other came out years later. One is much larger in scope, the other is small closed off rooms. Don't get me wrong, both are good games, but drastically different.  Mario is processing castles, waterfalls, trees, etc.  There isn't much going on in Vagrant, which is why the character models look good.   

In terms of power, it isn't even close, the N64 buries the ps1. The ps1 was a better console because it had better games, but look at Banjo... the ps1 couldn't even begin to pull that off. There is a reason a lot of AAA ps1 games used CG and pre-rendered backgrounds.

The better comparison is spyro vs banjo.  Or jet moto vs wave race.

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 24 June 2019