Sony did with PS3 what history told it not to do.

[freedquaker]

SmokedHostage said:
The N64 and Saturn were more powerful than the PS1.. BUT!

The N64's catridge format was limiting, also the N64's cache was its Achille's heel.

Also the Saturn was too difficult to program on and few developers used all it's processing power.

 

   N64 can be considered more powerful than PS1, but it was very hard to utilize the whole potential out of it.

 - Its GPU was more powerful but didnt have the polygon power ps1 had. Games usually looked too soft & blurred due to extreme compression (again because of capacity limitations), and memory limits. The environments also lacked variability.

- Its CPU was far more poweful but confined by the limitations of its GPU, memory and capacity

- Its Sound capabilities were as good as PS1 but this hardly ever showed up due to cartdridge limitations.

- Many multi-platform games sucked at N64 due to capacity limitations (like missing levels, inferior sounds, no cinematics etc.)

 

   Saturn is not more powerful than PS1 in absolute terms, though it was superior and inferior in some aspects.

- Its double cpus were more powerful together but most programmers used only one of them, which made it look inferior.

- Its sound capabilities were better but didnt make much difference in that day's environment.

- Its GPU memory was superior, but this was hardly ever used due to poor 3D performance of the system.

- Its loadings were considerably lower due extra buffer memory, and slightly faster CD-rom drive.

- Its GPU had better 2D performance (which is why there were a lot of first gen. 2D fighting games) but it need heavy utilization of both CPUs to get a similiar 3D performance (which rarely happened by third party firms) due to much weaker 3D performance of the GPU.