artur-fernand said:
selnor1983 said:
artur-fernand said:
Seems like a tricky question. Being 2 years newer and 64-bit, the N64 is obviously more powerful, but cartridges SEVERELY limited its potential. CD's were a HUUUUUUGE advantage for the PS1.
In my mind, the best example is FFIX. The animations are unbelievably fluid for a 32-bit game. The N64 just doesn't seem capable of that, I don't know. It seems to me that since they could make pre-rendered scenarios on the PS1, all the horse power went to the character models. Also, FMV's. |
Hunh? Is thiz serious? Ff9 gameplay animations were jerky as hell. Fmv dont count. Its cgi. N64 could do cgi to. Resi 2 which was 2 discs fit on 1 512 mg cart with all fmv cutscenes and better 3 d models.
Psx 3 d games were next to unplayable due to choppy animatikn, bad frame rate and the polygons jumping around. Not to mention n64 with the expansion pack did double the res of psx.
|
"Unplayable"? "Jerky"? You can't be serious. Metal Gear Solid, Crash Bandicoot 3, Spyro, all three FF's... yes, they're all unplayable due to "choppy" animations.
Your post is the very definition of "exaggeration".
|
Basically what we have here is n64 around 3 times more power than psx. Triple the ram, double the cpu speed and double the data transfer. As well as operating at 64 bit as opposed to 32 bit.
Games that ran ok on psx were not true 3 d games or games with 2 d backdrops. Every ff game was 2d backdrops. Until the battles where the framerate slowed down considerably due to rendering in realtime 3d. Metal gear was an isometric view on the action. Not a free roaming camera etc. Games like perfect dark, conker, turok 2, banjo kazooie, f zero x, killer instinct gold all were so much more technically impressive than any psx it wasnt even fair. Play cool boarders 3 then 1080 snowboarding. It was like playing snes vs psx.
