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
fatslob-:O said:
mZuzek said:

Why, exactly? Aren't exclusives normally the best showcase of each system's graphical capabilities?

Again different code/content means that you can't isolate hardware performance in the real world. OP can attest to this ... 

You don't see it on the PC side where we use different sets of software for each different sets of hardware when we're doing benchmarks for hardware comparisons ... (I bet hardware vendors would love to use so called 'exclusives' to showcase their hardware but that's not how it works in reality)

Okay but this is clearly not a comparison about power or benchmarks at all. And also, consoles aren't PCs, not even in 2019, and they certainly weren't in the 90's.



Around the Network
mZuzek said:

Okay but this is clearly not a comparison about power or benchmarks at all. And also, consoles aren't PCs, not even in 2019, and they certainly weren't in the 90's.

@Bold That is irrelevant and as for the former, from the posts in this thread I was lead to believe that this was a 'power' comparison ...



Tobal 2

Last edited by Hynad - on 25 June 2019

  • PSN: Hynad
  • NN: 3519-6016-4122
  • XBL: Hynad
  • Steam: Hynad81
curl-6 said:
vivster said:

They both look terrible, but they both achieved their vision when they were released, which is good.

The poll is missing the option "Neither, because it's 2019 and we shouldn't have to choose".

You don't have to choose, you are completely free to not vote in the poll and not post in the thread. :)

"Having a poll in a thread without catering to neutral responses is inhumane" ~ Gandhi



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
curl-6 said:

You don't have to choose, you are completely free to not vote in the poll and not post in the thread. :)

"Having a poll in a thread without catering to neutral responses is inhumane" ~ Gandhi

Why do I feel like that isn't the right quote?



Around the Network

I like the floating point coordinates of the N64 and Saturn, but I also like the blocky textures of Saturn and PS1. I'm pretty sure Saturn could do perspective-correct textures, so that one's my cup of tea :)



Mr_Destiny said:
I like the floating point coordinates of the N64 and Saturn, but I also like the blocky textures of Saturn and PS1. I'm pretty sure Saturn could do perspective-correct textures, so that one's my cup of tea :)

As far as I know Saturn didn't support perspective correct texturing either, but it had less texture warping as a result of using quads as polygonal primitives instead of triangles like PS1. (And N64)



curl-6 said:
Mr_Destiny said:
I like the floating point coordinates of the N64 and Saturn, but I also like the blocky textures of Saturn and PS1. I'm pretty sure Saturn could do perspective-correct textures, so that one's my cup of tea :)

As far as I know Saturn didn't support perspective correct texturing either, but it had less texture warping as a result of using quads as polygonal primitives instead of triangles like PS1. (And N64)

Yeah. The Saturn used Quadratics just like nVidia's first ever graphics processor... It also meant that Saturn games got ported to the PC really easily too. (Keep in mind this was before Direct X.)

In short, it did mean that texture warping was less of an issue but still present as it wasn't perspective correct.



curl-6 said:
Mr_Destiny said:
I like the floating point coordinates of the N64 and Saturn, but I also like the blocky textures of Saturn and PS1. I'm pretty sure Saturn could do perspective-correct textures, so that one's my cup of tea :)

As far as I know Saturn didn't support perspective correct texturing either, but it had less texture warping as a result of using quads as polygonal primitives instead of triangles like PS1. (And N64)

That must be what I was thinking of. On the other hand, it had some weird texture mapping if I recall correctly.

Last edited by Mr_Destiny - on 25 June 2019

fatslob-:O said:

Is this supposed to be secretly a N64 vs PS1 thread ? If so then only multi-plats are valid for hardware 'comparisons'. Not fair at ALL to use exclusives ...

Let's just keep to the likes of RE2, Tony Hawk, and the others. I think the reason why the N64 looked 'blurrier' is down to the possibility that it had a shit memory system and it's low memory cartridge space meant that games often shipped with lower resolution textures in comparison to the other systems ...

And then there's stupid hardware accelerated post-process AA as well that made things worse ... 

Ok well if we are only going off games that appeared on both systems let's talk about how the N64 was capable of handling ports of PS1 games very well but when companies would try to port the other direction it would end in disaster. For example take south Park 64. Not the greatest game, and arguable not incredible visually do to the simplicity of the art design, however the game was made using the Turok 2 game engine which provided more power than a South Park game could arguable need, but also more power than a PS1 could handle. The port is a hideous disaster and Acclaim even repeated the same mistake with armorines project swarm (not the most incredible game on the N64 either but a damn sight more playable than on PS1). In fairness though I believe the debate at hand isn't who was actually more powerful but if we prefer the blur or the population.



Check the link below. (note to Admins: it's not really porn please don't ban me!)