Concerning the DS's Graphical Capabilities

The technicalities are so minimal, they don't really matter; DS games look better, thanks to the smaller screns (high resolution) and new developer "tricks" (no 64 game can match Ninja Gaiden's 60fps goodness, for example). I think the DS technically is slightly inferior, but you wouldn't know it playing some of these games.WAIW

Also, N64 could do 640 x 480 resolution, but all games (except one, probably crappy game) were low res.

DS has TWO screens which display at, 256 x 192. Not all games render graphics on both screens, but one of the DS's best looking games Phantom Hourglass uses both screens for bosses and still looks great.
N64 can display resolutions of 256 x 224, 320 x 240, or 640 x 480 (nor used).

The DS has done well :D

I've only played Phantom Hourglass so I can't say much about the system so far.

Even though they are completely different styles in terms of gfx, I don't even think PH looks close to anything the N64 did with the Zeldas. It is indeed a good looking game for sure, but it seems like everything in the game is like a bunch of pixels if you pay attention. Shading, water, explosions, etc. Again, you can't really compare the two because the they are just different. Tis a shame that a OoT remake, or a similiar style isn't made.

I remember seeing that handheld Gamecube, that flipped open like a GBAsp. That thing was one bad little machine. Too bad it wasn't the new DSi. WW would've been fun with a stylus.

[QUOTE="_great_waddles_"][QUOTE="walkair"]

You will realise that the graphics are much better than what?It says it can do N64 graphics,but i don't see any game with N64 graphics on it.And N64 had better graphics than PS1 as far as i remember.It was the same with GBA,they said it's the same as SNES,but it wasn't.Look at DK games on the GBA,they look like crap compared to the ones on SNES.Nintendo is really pissing me off with lying about the capabilities of their handheld consoles.

walkair

Im sick of brats spewin lies. First: Nintendo never said it can pull off N64 Graphics. People did, Nintendo didnt. Same with the GBA.

Just because no DS game has come out looking its best doesnt mean they wont. As time goes on, Graphics get better. Watch FF3's intro, never seen the GameCube pull that off, let alone the N64.

I believe I read an article saying its like an Overclocked N64 in someways. However, aprojectionTV will produce a crisper image thenourscreen.No, it wont stun with graphics, but, its good enough.

SNES:16-bit CPU 3.58 mhz,WRAM for CPU:128kb,VRAM:16kb,Max color on screen:256,total colors available:32,768,SPRITES 128 max size 64x64,8 bit 8 channel Sony

GBA:32 bit ARM 16.7 mhz,with embedded memory RISC,256kb WRAM,VRAM 32kb + 96 kb in CPU,32.768 colors,SPRITES 128 max size 64x64,8 bit 2 channel + GBC sound.

So basicly,GBA should lose to SNES only in sound quality.I'm too tired to look for DS vs N64 specs right now.

Actually, did you guys know that the N64 max amount of CART space is 512 MB. Resident Evil 2 and Conkers Bad Fur Day were both 512 MB. Somehow Capcom compressed 2 CD (Resident Evil 2) into the N64 carts. I Know that wikipedia says that the max amount of Memory spacefor an N64 Cart is only 64 MB but I have know its not correct. Rogue Squadran was 128 MB, Killer Instinct Gold was 96 MB, Mario 64 was 64 MB (128 MB uncompressed). The Legend of Zelda:OOT was 256 MB and had an hour of full motion video.

Side note: It doesn't take much processing power to run a Prerendered Cinema. All that is simply creating the video on a High powered system and then outputing it in a format that can be ran on the DS. And yes, the N64 had the full version of the Resident Evil 2 on its cart plus Capcom added the Hulk mission or whatever they were called. The graphics were grainier and but they were sharper because they were running on a cart rather then a CD. But regardless, Capcom was able to port Resident Evil 2 to the N64 without cutting anything out.

Now as far as the DS vs N64. Sure they are powerful systems in their own right. I even remember NintendoPower magazine saying that the Super Mario 64 didn't use much of the N64processingpower. I'm sure that the DS could handle any N64 game. After all, its not DS space thats the problemas 1 gig is enough to hold any N64 memory. In fact, I would think, I'm assuming here, that the DS couldn't display as much colors at the same time as the N64. It being a smaller screen in all. You'd just have to take into consideration the DS Screen vs the N64 game display counterpart.

Oh yea, Capcom did try to port RE 2 to the GBA. If you look it up on Youtube. You should be able to see them.

Now the Super Nintendo was very slow but it used the Carts to process its data. Super FXChip anyone? ..haha. By doing this allowed developers to decided how much power they needed for their games.

No.

No.

xinoeph

+1

Point being... if you plan on buying a Nintendo system/handheld, etc. don't be expecting a graphical powerhouse. Far too many people have positioned themselves into an elitist mentality that graphics are everything. I know because I am one of those people. I used to be a PC gaming snob and then I began with Xbox and what not and worked my way to where I am today. That being said something along the road clicked and I realized (as dumb as it may sound) that the games with the most resources in terms of production were merely relying too heavily on established name/brand power and weren't really bringing anything new to the table aside from some "oohs" and "aahs." Thankfully the PS3 came along which in my view blends visual quality and gameplay quality into such masterpieces as Demon's Souls, Uncharted and Heavy Rain. When I got my DS I knew it wouldn't be a graphical monstrosity but I didn't expect nor want that. I wanted something different, a unique and portable experience, I got that in the DS.

I've only played Phantom Hourglass so I can't say much about the system so far.

Even though they are completely different styles in terms of gfx, I don't even think PH looks close to anything the N64 did with the Zeldas. It is indeed a good looking game for sure, but it seems like everything in the game is like a bunch of pixels if you pay attention. Shading, water, explosions, etc.

danger_ranger95

I agree with you that PH doesn't look as good as the N64's Legend of Zelda but there are ways around that kind of pixalization. They could redo the game in prerendered graphics and then outputtobe displayed on the DS.Don't forget that Legend ofZelda:OOT used prerendered graphics. It looks like the PH glass Zelda has more polygons then the N64 one. But how many times did you get to see Zelda face in the game? Its been a while since I played so i might be wrong. I'mjust guessing. Anways, it all depends on the approach thedevelopers use.

My guessis that they used the same character model whenLink was fighting and solving puzzles as they did when they used for his close ups but who knows.

And to follow up on what someone said about cartridges: In an age when USB sticks can be made to fit 20 GB in a space comparable to the size of the DS cartridge, size is not really a limitation on DS games. It's really all about the money. Production of the larger cartridges is expensive, and so is paying programmers the extra hours to fill that space.

poetsoul

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said that the max amount, as in the biggest amount of MEG that the N64 can have is 512 MB of space. USB were introduced in 1996 and USB sticksor flash sticks weren't avaible till the year 2000. I also didn't say that that SIZE IS A LIMITATION. What I was saying is that the DS cartridge has a larger size (1 GIG) then in comparision to the N64's 512 MB CARTRIDGE. But your right that its all about the money and that production of cartridges are expensive and paying programmers. But once again, I did not say that the DS size is a limitation.

What I want to know is why are you comparing the DS cartridge size to a USB STICK? Where did I write about DS CARTRIDGES BEING A LIMITATION TO USB STICKS? SERIOUSLY.. WTF MAN?..HAHA

Oh yea, it looks like Wikipedia finally updated its N64 page when it talks about the N64 carts being 512mb instead of being 8mb..haha

The DS's hardware is worse than the N64, but with the screen size, the DS looks much better than the N64.

From what I've heard, the DSi is more powerful than the N64, but they just haven't used its potential.

[QUOTE="poetsoul"]

And to follow up on what someone said about cartridges: In an age when USB sticks can be made to fit 20 GB in a space comparable to the size of the DS cartridge, size is not really a limitation on DS games. It's really all about the money. Production of the larger cartridges is expensive, and so is paying programmers the extra hours to fill that space.

Kbs64

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said that the max amount, as in the biggest amount of MEG that the N64 can have is 512 MB of space. USB were introduced in 1996 and USB sticksor flash sticks weren't avaible till the year 2000. I also didn't say that that SIZE IS A LIMITATION. What I was saying is that the DS cartridge has a larger size (1 GIG) then in comparision to the N64's 512 MB CARTRIDGE. But your right that its all about the money and that production of cartridges are expensive and paying programmers. But once again, I did not say that the DS size is a limitation.

What I want to know is why are you comparing the DS cartridge size to a USB STICK? Where did I write about DS CARTRIDGES BEING A LIMITATION TO USB STICKS? SERIOUSLY.. WTF MAN?..HAHA

Oh yea, it looks like Wikipedia finally updated its N64 page when it talks about the N64 carts being 512mb instead of being 8mb..haha

I hope you don't think the DS uses cards up to 1gig as in 1 Gigabyte

It doesn't

It currently has games using up to 1 gigaBIT. 1 gigabit is 256MB (megabytes)

So technically if the N64 had 512MB games, those are bigger than the DS's few 256MB titles