N64 lost to PS1 because Nintendo was lazy.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] and yet, most people don't seem to mind the seaming. they seem to complain why most Saturn games don't bombard them with special effects though , ignoring resolution and other things.Darkman2007

Yeah, and when you mention that N64 had smooth textures you always get the "blurry" argument :P

Not saying that it couldn't have had better texture detail but the difference in texture detail wasn't that huge as some try to make it seem. apply some texture smoothing on PS1 games and you get similar results to N64 (perhaps even worse textures because they're initially "squary").

Well PC games were quite blurry at the time too:

That perception that N64 had a blurry picture comes from the initially lower resolution and in some cases worse texture detail.

Here is a comparison between the low-res Star Wars Racer and higher-res, expansion pack enhanced SW Racer on the N64:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlWYsQ6sN-E

As you can see it looks a lot clearer.

Here is a comparison between the low-res Star Wars Racer and higher-res, expansion pack enhanced SW Racer on the N64:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlWYsQ6sN-E

As you can see it looks a lot clearer.

nameless12345

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Here is a comparison between the low-res Star Wars Racer and higher-res, expansion pack enhanced SW Racer on the N64:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlWYsQ6sN-E

As you can see it looks a lot clearer.

Darkman2007

Yea, Turok 2 was basically unplaylable in it's hi-res mode. Some people even overclock the N64 so they can play some games smoothly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbFxseisiSs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1NqQL5nsU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXesXdk6Atg

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Here is a comparison between the low-res Star Wars Racer and higher-res, expansion pack enhanced SW Racer on the N64:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlWYsQ6sN-E

As you can see it looks a lot clearer.

nameless12345

Yea, Turok 2 was basically unplaylable in it's hi-res mode. Some people even overclock the N64 so they can play some games smoothly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbFxseisiSs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1NqQL5nsU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXesXdk6Atg

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] of course, though you also tend to notice (not really in this case though) , that alot of games that use the expansion pack also seem to have more slowdown when in high resolution. and PC games werent blurry as such , they were really the best of both , sharp and smooth (if youre using a voodoo card) funny enough looking at that VGA shot, it looks quite a bit like Saturn Quake.just brighter.Darkman2007

Yea, Turok 2 was basically unplaylable in it's hi-res mode. Some people even overclock the N64 so they can play some games smoothly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbFxseisiSs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1NqQL5nsU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXesXdk6Atg

True, it doesn't even have a cooler fan, just a heatsink.

Nintendo was busy fantasizing over wii u,v,w etc while developing n64..and just forgot to add a diskdrive...SammaySarkar

What? The Wii wasn't even conceptualized during the N64 time. And they had a disk drive for the 64 - 64DD:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHVkSf_MnSE

It was Japan-only and a massive flop though.

Hey hey i was just musing...The wii part. By the way, don't you think nintendo vs ps1 is really highcapacity cd's vs carts?SammaySarkar

And to think about the disks themselves. What good is a 64mb disk? I believe nintendo was addicted to low capacity media.SammaySarkar

N64 will always be a winner to me,though. I practically grew up playing mario64 and pilotwings.SammaySarkar

It was a "platformer heaven" imo. Had some quality racers and FPSes too. But lacked in fighters and JRPGs (unless you believe the Zelda games make up for that).

the n64 was great for the wrestlinggames that were by far the best in it's day and still are in a way. that's the reason I really bought one

Well out of the "big three" (i.e. Saturn, PS1 and N64) N64 is easily my fave. And that's because I view the Saturn and PS1 as the "poor man's arcade machines". Just my opinion.

Well out of the "big three" (i.e. Saturn, PS1 and N64) N64 is easily my fave. And that's because I view the Saturn and PS1 as the "poor man's arcade machines". Just my opinion.

nameless12345

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well out of the "big three" (i.e. Saturn, PS1 and N64) N64 is easily my fave. And that's because I view the Saturn and PS1 as the "poor man's arcade machines". Just my opinion.

Darkman2007

However, you could also play a lot of Saturn and PS1 games on the PC in superior graphics which is another reason why I like the N64 better. Namely it had more exclusives you couldn't play anywhere else (except via PC emulators which we all know aren't exactly 100% legit).

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well out of the "big three" (i.e. Saturn, PS1 and N64) N64 is easily my fave. And that's because I view the Saturn and PS1 as the "poor man's arcade machines". Just my opinion.

nameless12345

However, you could also play a lot of Saturn and PS1 games on the PC in superior graphics which is another reason why I like the N64 better. Namely it had more exclusives you couldn't play anywhere else (except via PC emulators which we all know aren't exactly 100% legit).

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] I can see where youre coming from , but saying the Saturn or PS1 only have dumbed down arcade games is silly, in fact the majority of games on either system are not arcade games.Darkman2007

However, you could also play a lot of Saturn and PS1 games on the PC in superior graphics which is another reason why I like the N64 better. Namely it had more exclusives you couldn't play anywhere else (except via PC emulators which we all know aren't exactly 100% legit).

Well I know the Need For Speed and Tomb Raider games are superior on the PC. And pretty much any FPS.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

However, you could also play a lot of Saturn and PS1 games on the PC in superior graphics which is another reason why I like the N64 better. Namely it had more exclusives you couldn't play anywhere else (except via PC emulators which we all know aren't exactly 100% legit).

nameless12345

Well I know the Need For Speed and Tomb Raider games are superior on the PC. And pretty much any FPS.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] still makes no sense, most Saturn and PS1 games are not on PC. heck sometimes they were worse on PC (Virtua Cop 2 looks good on the PC......but no light gun support , FF7 is on the PC, but the music sucks)Darkman2007

Well I know the Need For Speed and Tomb Raider games are superior on the PC. And pretty much any FPS.

Well you also got Virtua Fighter 2 (Saturn port but with Model 2 characters and D3D support), Daytona (D3D), FFVII and VIII (Glide, D3D), MGS (comes with VR missions I think), Pandemonium, Gex 3D, Panzer Dragoon, Sonic-R, all Resident Evils, ect. Of course some games didn't make it and some were sloppy ports but it was still more of them than N64 to PC ports (out of which only the Turok and Star Wars games come to mind).

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well I know the Need For Speed and Tomb Raider games are superior on the PC. And pretty much any FPS.

nameless12345

Well you also got Virtua Fighter 2 (Saturn port but with Model 2 characters and D3D support), Daytona (D3D), FFVII and VIII (Glide, D3D), MGS (comes with VR missions I think), Pandemonium, Gex 3D, Panzer Dragoon, Sonic-R, all Tomb Raiders, ect. Of course some games didn't make it and some were sloppy ports but it was still more of them than N64 to PC ports (out of which only the Turok and Star Wars games come to mind).

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"]Not a fan rant or anything but I have looked through and through and have found no reason that the N64 did not win or at least be as powerful as it should have been. Obviously Nintendo was lazy. It has poor 3D rendering in a lot of the games on the system, lacked cutscenes, could have had a more have handled sound a lot better than it did and the fact they only spend so much on certain games and even some of those games they were lazy. Basically in simple terms. -It could have had better detail on objects such as wall but they did not do it, -While passable in some games, the N64 could have easily had better sound and music then what was given. -Just because the they use carts does not mean they can't do cutscenes that don't involve the engine. -The character models could have been smoother and slightly more detailed but they did not do it. Movement of objects could be more animated than some games like Banjo did, especially when you saw the creature walk over to the queen, what was that? 3 frames per second?! -The system could have handled more things going on in the screen at once (Some games needed it to heck to fill those empty large spaces.) but Nintendo didn't do it. -etc. Nintendo is lazy. The only other possible excuse is that they randomly though their system was just a suped up Super Nintendo and had similar limits or they had no idea what the N64 could do and went in blind. But so far it seems they are lazy. gary3dsfan

and what else? its not like the only games on the PS1 and Saturn are Need For Speed, Tomb Raider and Quake.Darkman2007

Well you also got Virtua Fighter 2 (Saturn port but with Model 2 characters and D3D support), Daytona (D3D), FFVII and VIII (Glide, D3D), MGS (comes with VR missions I think), Pandemonium, Gex 3D, Panzer Dragoon, Sonic-R, all Tomb Raiders, ect. Of course some games didn't make it and some were sloppy ports but it was still more of them than N64 to PC ports (out of which only the Turok and Star Wars games come to mind).

[QUOTE="gary3dsfan"][QUOTE="Pegalamp"]Not a fan rant or anything but I have looked through and through and have found no reason that the N64 did not win or at least be as powerful as it should have been. Obviously Nintendo was lazy. It has poor 3D rendering in a lot of the games on the system, lacked cutscenes, could have had a more have handled sound a lot better than it did and the fact they only spend so much on certain games and even some of those games they were lazy. Basically in simple terms. -It could have had better detail on objects such as wall but they did not do it, -While passable in some games, the N64 could have easily had better sound and music then what was given. -Just because the they use carts does not mean they can't do cutscenes that don't involve the engine. -The character models could have been smoother and slightly more detailed but they did not do it. Movement of objects could be more animated than some games like Banjo did, especially when you saw the creature walk over to the queen, what was that? 3 frames per second?! -The system could have handled more things going on in the screen at once (Some games needed it to heck to fill those empty large spaces.) but Nintendo didn't do it. -etc. Nintendo is lazy. The only other possible excuse is that they randomly though their system was just a suped up Super Nintendo and had similar limits or they had no idea what the N64 could do and went in blind. But so far it seems they are lazy. Pegalamp

what the heck are you talking about? what the heck is a "slightly more powerful cart"?

the Saturn does not need a cartirdge format because it uses a higher capacity CD , and it had cartridges for any memory expansion that was needed,

and yes, FMVs were an issue, the N64 is perfectly capable of them , but since most N64 games were less than 32MB , with only a few being 64MB, FMV of any decent length would simply have issue fitting without massive compression like in RE2.

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"][QUOTE="gary3dsfan"] If Nintendo would of made the n64 just slightly better in graphics and had cutscenes we just might of had Final fantasy 7 on it. They cancelled the game on n64 to ps1 because of this reason.Darkman2007

what the heck are you talking about? what the heck is a "slightly more powerful cart"?

the Saturn does not need a cartirdge format because it uses a higher capacity CD , and it had cartridges for any memory expansion that was needed,

and yes, FMVs were an issue, the N64 is perfectly capable of them , but since most N64 games were less than 32MB , with only a few being 64MB, FMV of any decent length would simply have issue fitting without massive compression like in RE2.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"] No the N64 could do cutscenes, the whole carts can't do cutscens is a complete and total lie. Heck, if the Saturn kept its current specs and used Carts slightly more powerful then SNKs it would have been more powerful then the N64 in most areas. Final Fantasy 7 on N64's only problem would be the game would be blocky and Nintedo CLAIMING the game can not do any sort of cutscene at all because of Carts even Cgi, the in-engine cutscenes would also be blocky (and have characters move 2 frames per 4 seconds like Banjo.)Pegalamp

what the heck are you talking about? what the heck is a "slightly more powerful cart"?

the Saturn does not need a cartirdge format because it uses a higher capacity CD , and it had cartridges for any memory expansion that was needed,

and yes, FMVs were an issue, the N64 is perfectly capable of them , but since most N64 games were less than 32MB , with only a few being 64MB, FMV of any decent length would simply have issue fitting without massive compression like in RE2.

and what the heck does an executive know about the hardware? youre refering to some pretty shoddy source.

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"]No they CLEARLY said they couldn't do it, It was mentioned on magazines back then and I remember reading about a Nintendo Executive saying the same thing. As for the Neo-Geo, the biggest size I have senn is 346MB. So unless Nintedo is using Weaker hardware... Oh and the Neo-Geo did have games run FMVS.Darkman2007

and what the heck does an executive know about the hardware? youre refering to some pretty shoddy source.

No they CLEARLY said they couldn't do it, It was mentioned on magazines back then and I remember reading about a Nintendo Executive saying the same thing. As for the Neo-Geo, the biggest size I have senn is 346MB. So unless Nintedo is using Weaker hardware... Oh and the Neo-Geo did have games run FMVS.Pegalamp

If they CLEARLY couldn't do it, what happened with resident evil 2?

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Pegalamp"]No they CLEARLY said they couldn't do it, It was mentioned on magazines back then and I remember reading about a Nintendo Executive saying the same thing. As for the Neo-Geo, the biggest size I have senn is 346MB. So unless Nintedo is using Weaker hardware... Oh and the Neo-Geo did have games run FMVS.Pegalamp

doubt its 120MB, though I guess its possible (actually you might be right on 120MB)

and Im saying the N64 is more capable in most ways, the Neo Geo does have a very efficient sprite engine as well as very fast access to the animations in ROM (meaning it needed alot less memory)

at the same time, for 3D , the Neo Geo was quite pathetic (it wasn't attempted much for a reason).

the reason why alot of Neo Geo ports to the PS1 or Saturn were either not perfect or needed a RAM cartridge was due to the fact there was not enough RAM to load all the animations at once (the Neo Geo did not need that)

if youre to compare outright specs though , the Neo Geo is frankly outmatched quite a bit by the PS1 and Saturn.

and what the heck does an executive know about the hardware? youre refering to some pretty shoddy source.

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] ive got a feeling thats not 346 Megabytes, but Megabits, which is different. 1 Megabyte = 1 Megabit. and the idea that the Neo Geo has weaker hardware than the N64 (or PS1 and Saturn for that matter) is ludicrous.Darkman2007

doubt its 120MB, though I guess its possible (actually you might be right on 120MB)

and Im saying the N64 is more capable in most ways, the Neo Geo does have a very efficient sprite engine as well as very fast access to the animations in ROM (meaning it needed alot less memory)

at the same time, for 3D , the Neo Geo was quite pathetic (it wasn't attempted much for a reason).

the reason why alot of Neo Geo ports to the PS1 or Saturn were either not perfect or needed a RAM cartridge was due to the fact there was not enough RAM to load all the animations at once (the Neo Geo did not need that)

if youre to compare outright specs though , the Neo Geo is frankly outmatched quite a bit by the PS1 and Saturn.

and what the heck does an executive know about the hardware? youre refering to some pretty shoddy source.

[QUOTE="gary3dsfan"][QUOTE="Pegalamp"]Not a fan rant or anything but I have looked through and through and have found no reason that the N64 did not win or at least be as powerful as it should have been. Obviously Nintendo was lazy. It has poor 3D rendering in a lot of the games on the system, lacked cutscenes, could have had a more have handled sound a lot better than it did and the fact they only spend so much on certain games and even some of those games they were lazy. Basically in simple terms. -It could have had better detail on objects such as wall but they did not do it, -While passable in some games, the N64 could have easily had better sound and music then what was given. -Just because the they use carts does not mean they can't do cutscenes that don't involve the engine. -The character models could have been smoother and slightly more detailed but they did not do it. Movement of objects could be more animated than some games like Banjo did, especially when you saw the creature walk over to the queen, what was that? 3 frames per second?! -The system could have handled more things going on in the screen at once (Some games needed it to heck to fill those empty large spaces.) but Nintendo didn't do it. -etc. Nintendo is lazy. The only other possible excuse is that they randomly though their system was just a suped up Super Nintendo and had similar limits or they had no idea what the N64 could do and went in blind. But so far it seems they are lazy. Pegalamp

Why do you think it would be blockier on N64 than PS1? On the PS1 is was one heck of a blocky. Here is a FFVII compared to Ocarina:

Not only the characters look worse, it's also got static, pre-rendered backgrounds opposed to fully 3D places in Ocarina.

Yeah, the N64 had a lower poly count in the Fast3D mode than PS1 did, but that doesn't really mean much when you use custom microcodes.

And I don't understand why you think Banjo looked bad. It was one of the best-looking N64 games in it's time.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"] oops I meant 120 MB. Looked at the wrong number on the back somehow Are you saying YES THE N64 is technically weaker than Neo-Geo or are you saying that the N64 Hardware is stronger than the Neo-Geo because based off the last few posts I can't tell. Because if the first you proved my point slightly.Pegalamp

doubt its 120MB, though I guess its possible (actually you might be right on 120MB)

and Im saying the N64 is more capable in most ways, the Neo Geo does have a very efficient sprite engine as well as very fast access to the animations in ROM (meaning it needed alot less memory)

at the same time, for 3D , the Neo Geo was quite pathetic (it wasn't attempted much for a reason).

the reason why alot of Neo Geo ports to the PS1 or Saturn were either not perfect or needed a RAM cartridge was due to the fact there was not enough RAM to load all the animations at once (the Neo Geo did not need that)

if youre to compare outright specs though , the Neo Geo is frankly outmatched quite a bit by the PS1 and Saturn.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Pegalamp"] And people listen to Shoody sources that come from within Nintendo. So regardless of whther it is BS Nintendo played off it and said nothing to counter what the Nintendo Exec. said. Even funnier that it wasn't from Nintendo Japan either, but you do realize when you talk about the N64 Vs. PS1 with a person who prefers the N64 he WILL MOST LIKELY say that the system couldn't do it AT ALL?Pegalamp

yes it gets most of these claims from silly uninformed people and gaming magazines with a bias.

I own over 80 Saturn games I know what its capable of and what is impressive on that system (not the "VF2 is the best looking game on the Saturn" claim thats completely bogus)

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"][QUOTE="gary3dsfan"] If Nintendo would of made the n64 just slightly better in graphics and had cutscenes we just might of had Final fantasy 7 on it. They cancelled the game on n64 to ps1 because of this reason.nameless12345

Why do you think it would be blockier on N64 than PS1? On the PS1 is was one heck of a blocky. Here is a FFVII compared to Ocarina:

Not only the characters look worse, it's also got static, pre-rendered backgrounds opposed to fully 3D places in Ocarina.

Yeah, the N64 had a lower poly count in the Fast3D mode than PS1 did, but that doesn't really mean much when you use custom microcodes.

And I don't understand why you think Banjo looked bad. It was one of the best-looking N64 games in it's time.

What a biased comparison. FFVII is known for its terrible character models.

Here, let's look at a game that's fully 3D:

(It's hard to find large screens of Vagrant Story).

And as for what the PS1 was capable of WITH prerendered backgrounds ...

Again, hard to find good screens of PE2. But the character models in the game are easily better than those in Ocarina or Majora's Mask. It is true that using prerendered backgrounds probably contributed to that.

But really, the difference in the capabilities of the hardware is exaggerated. People will tell you that it's "twice as powerful as PS1," but really, the only systems that appear "twice" as good are the ones in the following generation.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Pegalamp"] No the N64 could do cutscenes, the whole carts can't do cutscens is a complete and total lie. Heck, if the Saturn kept its current specs and used Carts slightly more powerful then SNKs it would have been more powerful then the N64 in most areas. Final Fantasy 7 on N64's only problem would be the game would be blocky and Nintedo CLAIMING the game can not do any sort of cutscene at all because of Carts even Cgi, the in-engine cutscenes would also be blocky (and have characters move 2 frames per 4 seconds like Banjo.)hakanakumono

Why do you think it would be blockier on N64 than PS1? On the PS1 is was one heck of a blocky. Here is a FFVII compared to Ocarina:

Not only the characters look worse, it's also got static, pre-rendered backgrounds opposed to fully 3D places in Ocarina.

Yeah, the N64 had a lower poly count in the Fast3D mode than PS1 did, but that doesn't really mean much when you use custom microcodes.

And I don't understand why you think Banjo looked bad. It was one of the best-looking N64 games in it's time.

What a biased comparison. FFVII is known for its terrible character models.

Here, let's look at a game that's fully 3D:

(It's hard to find large screens of Vagrant Story).

And as for what the PS1 was capable of WITH prerendered backgrounds ...

Again, hard to find good screens of PE2. But the character models in the game are easily better than those in Ocarina or Majora's Mask. It is true that using prerendered backgrounds probably contributed to that.

But really, the difference in the capabilities of the hardware is exaggerated. People will tell you that it's "twice as powerful as PS1," but really, the only systems that appear "twice" as good are the ones in the following generation.

in terms of polygon capability , the DC is about 15 times the capability of the PS1 and Saturn, and those 2 couldn't do the effects the DC could.

as for the visuals of the N64 and PS1, both had their advantages and disadvantages over the other, same goes for the Saturn.

the 3DO in case youre wondering , looks alot like somewhere between the sty-le of the PS1 and Saturn , but worse than both.

I think the main strength of the N64 is really the overall smoothness of the picture (resolution?)

I think the main strength of the N64 is really the overall smoothness of the picture (resolution?)

hakanakumono

Sometimes the "smoothness" of the textures makes the games look blurry though, imo.

N64 had some pretty cool effects though. In a probably lesser known game Beetle Adventure Racing for N64, you could see the reflections of trees etc on the tops of the cars. And the water was amazing.

I need to get around to buying NiGHTs.

Sometimes the "smoothness" of the textures makes the games look blurry though, imo.

N64 had some pretty cool effects though. In a probably lesser known game Beetle Adventure Racing for N64, you could see the reflections of trees etc on the tops of the cars. And the water was amazing.

I need to get around to buying NiGHTs.

hakanakumono

thats partially due to the low res textures often used, as well as the filtering being overdone by some developers.

actually the reflection effects were also possible on the other systems to a lesser extent.

for instance on the Saturn it was done using the VDP2 to replicate the sprites and backgrounds onto VDP2 floors and backgrounds

this was done in Sonic R

this effect was actually missing from the PC/PS2/GC versions

(from the PS2)

and in Winter Heat

Some of the effects on the saturn give me the impression of using the 2D engine though. I still think Banjo Kazooie had the best water I had ever seen in that gen. Keep in mind the amount of N64 games I actually played was fairly limited.

Some of the effects on the saturn give me the impression of using the 2D engine though. I still think Banjo Kazooie had the best water I had ever seen in that gen. Keep in mind the amount of N64 games I actually played was fairly limited.

hakanakumono

well yes it is a 2D engine, as the floors are 2D, but the wave (at least somewhat), so its not exactly flat.

the N64 was best with effects though no doubt about that, and you didn't need to get the effects through some roundabout way like you had to on the Saturn.

VDP2 is still very important though , and potentially a source of alot of potential.