• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How much more powerful was the N64 compared to the PlayStation anyway?

Italia64

Neo Member
I never called nothing z-sprites, I was quoting you that called billboard sprites (z-sprites) the Turok fire of the flame-thrower, adding that it's not polygonal.
And I reported you that you simply was wrong.

"Polygonal fire"? That's just a bunch of billboard sprites, just as any fire particles ever.

If you want discover more about the Turok 2 polygonal real-time completely adjustable by player fire, read here:

https://www.google.ro/search?q=turo...droid-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Everybody used to talk about it back in days, because it was amazing. It's a very famous graphical achievement.

I understand that you want to escape by the bad figure, but it's not a problem. Everybody can do mistakes, don't worry.

Even me sometimes remember bad something.

You wrote Turok 2 flames weren't polygonal, instead they are.

Humans can do mistakes, it's not the end of the world man.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Any Shadow Man fan here?

(actual console screen)
free image upload

Shadow Man was an impressive game on the console.
High-res, clean visuals, detailed textures, immense environments (some places are endless), smooth frame rate, and much more.

The first time I beaten it on Dreamcast. Two years ago on N64.

I personally compared the three console versions of the game.

It's impressive how much they cut graphics in the PS1 version. The sky textures aren't animated, no lights, very trembling and pixelated, worse frame rate, cut in architecture, lower res. Incredibly even the sound department was worse in many parts, add the loading times and basically you have one of the worst ports ever made.
There is no reason to play this version.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
FIFA 99 is another game who looked considerably better on N64.

(actual console screen)
hostare immagini

The N64 used high-res and with the benefits of the N64 capabilities everything was smoother and cleaner.
This game is not blurry at all.

What a pity they didn't improve the animation in the N64 version. ISS 2000 was much better in animation department.
 

HTupolev

Member
I checked the video again, and it does seems Turok 2 uses some crossed planes for some of the flames instead of, huh, "z-sprites". I'm not really sure why they did that: perhaps in their engine it was cheaper to just add a few extra triangles to those than use CPU time to keep them facing the camera.
It might be specifically to make it look stable with respect to parallax/rotation, at the cost of being a bit intrinsically janky-looking.

Crossed geometry is pretty common for long glowy things. Make sure the two planes are lit seamlessly at the intersection, fade the edges away with alpha, throw some bloom at it, it looks great. Especially for things like projectiles, where it's fleeting and you can't easily stick the camera right at the intersection to admire where the effect breaks down.

Neither the N64 or the PS1 have "true" sprites, everything is made using triangles under the hood, even 2D games.

And when talking videogame graphics, polygons = triangles. Unless you're talking about the Saturn, of course, lol.
According to this and this, PS1 and N64 do support rectangular billboard primitives.
 

SolVanderlyn

Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.
I'm learning so much in this thread.

So if N64 used CDs it would have blown PS1 out of the water, pretty much? (just graphically speaking)
 

D.Lo

Member
I'm learning so much in this thread.

So if N64 used CDs it would have blown PS1 out of the water, pretty much? (just graphically speaking)
It still had a small texture cache, so PS1 would have a small advantage there, and you lose the utility of carts themselves, eg it would lose the ability to stream game data from the cart, Banjo's dynamic music for example, or huge levels with no load time (it would need Metroid Prime style workarounds for stuff like moving between rooms in Zelda dungeons). And it would still be harder to get top results from. But otherwise yes, CD was 90% of the PS1's advantage.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Guys I repeat that I'm talking about the flamethrower fire, not about every fire in the game.

By the way yes CD would helped a lot to fix some problems,but honestly I would loved N64 much less thinking about my favourite games with loading times. I'm quite allergic to loading screens.

With CD would been best in every possible aspects but the textures problems would been the same: crappy or low quality textures in many games and great textures only in games developed by skilled/motivated/well paid programmers.

Have good textures in N64 games requires a lot of extra-work, because you have to avoit the console obstacles (not limits, obstacles).
I remember an interview made to a Rareware developer about N64 textures work. It gave the headache imaging all that work, while the same thing was relatively easy on PS1.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
OFF TOPIC (but not too much).

Have you ever heard about Racer X for XBox?

It was supposed to be an XBox launch title and it's the World Driver Championship sequel. Racer X was a provisional name, they wanted to call it World Driver Championship 2 but Midway wouldn't agreed with that.

The engine was the WDC one, and as you can see in the video the cars are incredibly rich of polys.
Despite it was a not even finished launch title, and the first attempt of the developers on the console, the cars models have nothing less than the best racers of the 6th generation. And they still had to add the sparks over the body car and other effects, try to figure the final result.

You can see even very nice touches like leaves flying all around when the cars pass.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1R2mJ21Cdw


Unluckily Boss Studios run out of money when the game was 90% complete.
I would loved to see a WDC sequel, what a pity.

Boss Studios were among the skillest developers at the time.
 

Celine

Member
On-topic: Did any PS1 games have fog as bad as Quest 64? N64 had a serious fog problem. Or maybe what my young mind remembers as "fog" is "really bad draw distance".

13-Quest64Usnap0092.jpg
In that pic fog is actually used well to give an effect of mist in the distance.
Graphics was one of the only thing which were decent in Quest 64 lol.
Superman 64 or the first Turok are infamous for the extreme fog (short drawing distance covered by fog).

As for your question:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaV8EqnqqWI
 

Saven

Banned
Looking at the thread myself, I'm pretty sure this is the information that Spanish guy (Conker64) was mentioning regarding the hardware:

This pic is the real camera and the actual polygons are sent to be rendered (just the view was zoomed out on the blender for the pic). However these extractions have no back-face culling and may have some polygons out of the screen as well, with a deduction comes close to a bit more 3000-3500 polygons on scene rather than 5000-6000.
2Av4sfC.png


It could be a bit weird if a game does not use cull back since it improves performance on most of the conditions (options from early SDK test)
IrhMUWG.jpg


Actually these are pretty common numbers for N64 or PSX, 1000-2000 polys per frame for the first gen games, 3000-4000 for the late ones depending on the framerate targets, (3252 triangles here for reference: its Beattle Adventure Racing but it says Need for Speed on the N64 debugger, interesting :p) and yet it may be with or without cull back or clipping, so the numbers per frame on the N64 case always needs some analysis.
etEnIie.jpg


This second pic its just a segment of geometry loaded on memory (even backwards camera).
s5KZMfY.png


Turok 2 intro probably has one of the highest polycount scenes of the console.
Ykxi1rt.gif


Around 3000 polygons each model, plus other big details like the portal, however as said before, you need to do some analysis of the data.
fgj38jq.gif


One of the most complex PSX model is the T-Rex dinosaur of the tech demo, here is the complete model of it (faces/tri on top).
8MXwzu9.png


Another example of complete models are Crash Bandicoot.
njJsZtf.png


Snaaaake!..
J2c0REv.gif


On the N64, Link.
KshGWhS.gif


One random enemy from Goldeneye.
RB8vm3A.png


One random enemy of Perfect Dark (200 polys more than Goldeneye that could explain the more common slowdowns when there are many on the screen).
9AkamOK.png


Conker when closer/detailed LOD, a bit uncommon a 1200 poly char for a platform game on that gen.
7X2avZ1.png


He has a shadow projection, but other games such as Jet Force Gemini did that as well.
YnwKLlI.gif


Then you have the fighting games that usually push about 900-1000 polys on the 3D models and very simple scenarios or more complex ones depending if the target is 30 or 60fps. N64 had no stellar projects on that area from a technical standpoint. This is a pic of Tekken 3, Conker64 has removed the OSD and the background, with cull back, and the real number comes close to 1300 rather than 1800-2000 of combined models, with everything else its around 90K performance-wise.
vNpLx3p.png


PSX needs more polygons for building the areas, due the lack of perspective correction.
Perspective_correction.jpg


N64 can push giant backgrounds with less polygons (the clipping microcode on Fast3D is actually optimized for that and not really recommended for busy backgrounds as it does way too many checks). Better be a custom microcode (Factor 5, Boss Studios, etc) or good programming, 3D objects on the other side uses a faster reject box. Conker64 believes that exclusive games on the N64 pushes a good amount of polys on chars and enemies as seen on the previous pics.
nGKaWO8.gif


But it's a matter of choice, Perfect Dark not only has high poly enemies (for its generation), but even the basic walls are plagued of poly work to create static light/shadows or more detailed texture walls.
Zy1uNUr.gif


The PSX screen extractions have back-face polygons already removed, so the numbers are more close to real performance, but note that some polys are out of the screen in some cases. Tobal is probably one of the best examples with around 120K/sec at 512x480 resolution.
9yTU5z8.png

W9n45T4.png


A peak performance point found on the snowy level, as any other extraction, these are average numbers and they have to be taken into consideration.
35clCUy.png


The original PSX specs actually had a more detailed list:

3D
--
Flat
4bit Texture - 200K
8bit Texture - 100K
15bit Texture - 60K

Goraud
4bit Texture - 140K
8bit Texture - 70K?

Depending on the texture depth and lighting, the performance may vary, and these are just theory numbers, we don't even know the size of the poly/texture and which conditions. Tobal uses many flat shaded polys, especially on the chars where the big amount goes, some gouraud shading and very few textures for whole scenes, they obviously will fit the 2KB texture cache in 1 step.

If we look at Tobal 2, it uses less polygons per frame than the first part (about 90K). Why? Because it pushes more textures and gouraud shades into the models, and makes it look better, but slowdowns the process.
JTAHHGp.png

NyOA7P9.png


Another one, the engine is very clean and sends commands in a very optimized way, Conker64 mentioned that he didn't have to remove any polygons from out of the screen.
dyfkY4G.png

qG0rb3C.png


A peak performance point of Metal Gear Solid (low res), Conker64 wasn't for sure if the framerate is stable on this spot, some geometry out of the screen have to be deducted.
4PR5sSS.png

5MbdL8l.png


Some games like Crash Bandicoot can be around 60K most of the time (locked off camera) which gives the impression of detail, while others can be 10K, then 20K, then peak at 60K, even MGS can be pretty low poly-wise due the top camera angle.
v3I3ki7.png

xBRPmrP.png


Analyzing custom microcodes in World Driver Championship could be great but many tools don't work with this game, and the emulation has been always more focused on emulating libultra than the real hardware.
--

About 2D, Conker64 has done some tests running on real N64 hardware, 8 scroll full layer test (320x240x16bits) with 32x32 tiles.
PwtY1zC.gif


A sprite test, each Mario here is at a 16x32 texture of 16bits (4bit textures could work faster and 32bit textures or 32bit mode are slower)
bYagAOV.jpg


The following results:
- 921 sprites max at 60fps
- 1972 sprites max at 30fps

Anyway these tests are coded in C with libdragon and are not optimized at all, TMEM fills each frame with the same data and the framebuffer is fully cleaned and each frame with a RDP has a primitive draw mode. The results could be better for this example or worse if you have to refresh TMEM with more data per frame (like animations or different sprites), but the machine is very capable for 2D.
 

nkarafo

Member
That Beetle Adventure Racing / Need for Speed picture is very interesting. Was that game going to be a NFS game originally?

Also, i'd like to ask those who don't like emulation photos in comparison topics, is this picture OK?

Untitled.png


It's still emulation but at native internal resolution. The plugin itself is pretty accurate (GlideN64).
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Crazy how many polygons has Conker character considering the type of game. Would be a very high poly character even for a game with prerendered backgrounds.

Rareware...
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Here some very heavy stuff:

http://www.oocities.org/zeldaadungeon2000/polygonchart.html


You can have an idea about how many polygons can push Rush 2049.

Or take a look at NFL Quarterback Club 2000, 007 Twine, the selection screen of F-Zero X, Perfect Dark, Majora's mask etc.
Very impressive numbers.

I have the word of a Naboo developer who claimed 180.000 polygons per second at 30 FPS. I hate emulation but I should try to check by myself this kind of informations, because I remember for each game the most polys intense zone.

I'm very curious about the number of Naboo, Indy, Conker, Perfect Dark, WDC, etc.

I have many ripping data about games, but nothing exhaustive enough for me.
 

nkarafo

Member
I'm not surprised about Rush 2049 using a lot of geometry. The game has crazy amounts of background detail and almost unlimited draw distances.

Only bad thing is the ugly midway-ish art design and garish colors.


I have the word of a Naboo developer who claimed 180.000 polygons per second at 30 FPS. I hate emulation but I should try to check by myself this kind of informations, because I remember for each game the most polys intense zone.
Well, you will have to wait until the game is finally properly emulated since currently its not.


I wonder how many polys WDC is using when all cars are on screen, on a busy background area.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
I'm not surprised about Rush 2049 using a lot of geometry. The game has crazy amounts of background detail and almost unlimited draw distances.

Only bad thing is the ugly midway-ish art design and garish colors.



Well, you will have to wait until the game is finally properly emulated since currently its not.


I wonder how many polys WDC is using when all cars are on screen, on a busy background area.

The most polys intense moment in WDC I think is Las Vegas Strip. Would be interesting to rip that moment with 8 GT1 cars on screen (GT1 cars are more polys rich).
Sometimes in that moment you can have slowdowns, but a lot of times the game runs fine and you can hear problems with the sound department (just for a second). Because Boss Studios used the CPU for the audio.

This is the strip in a replay of mine
https://youtu.be/48X0jJCQucc


N64 can easily push even 200.000 polys per second at 60 fps just not using all the N64 additional features. But Nintendo never allowed that utilise of the hardware because they didn't want PS1-like visuals.
Not to mention how ugly are N64 textures not filtered if you don't do a lot of work.

This is a pity because a lot of shitty N64 graphics would been much better in PS1 style. I mean, are better PS1 visuals than N64 games extremely blurry, blocky and foggy.

About Rush 2049, I personally don't like the polygonal models of the cars. But I understand that with that exaggerated number of immense buildings and endless draw distance, they had to cut somewhere.
 

nkarafo

Member
Man, I wonder what devs could have done on n64 if it weren't cart based.
The cart itself wasn't the reason why many N64 games looked bad.

It was the combination of a small texture cache and the mandatory use of several filters at once, that gave most games a blurry image and also, the mandatory use of other demanding features that required a lot of power that the developers would rather use elsewhere (like how WDC devs avoided using the z-buffer).

At least that's my take on it. In the end, the few developers who tried to overcome these issues managed to release some truly impressive games.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Many people make the mistake to underestimate Ridge Racer 64.

But please watch just one lap.
https://youtu.be/E80gFQHi7S0

The quality video sucks, but this is not important. Because what I want to show is the sense of speed further in the game.
It's extremely much more faster than Ridge Racer Type 4, and it's the fastest RR of that generation.

The night tracks are wonderful, I prefer much more them than the cartoonish look of the daytime races.
Not to mention the motion blur trailights effect, marvellous.

I think I have a sort of world record in tie last track, at least never seen a better one in magazines or YouTube.

Make perfect laps with that sense of speed is something really hardcore.


I don't like the low poly cars.
 
I have the word of a Naboo developer who claimed 180.000 polygons per second at 30 FPS.

N64 can easily push even 200.000 polys per second at 60 fps

Guys, that's not how this metric works. You're using two "per second" references. It's redundant. Take 200k polygons per second, for example. Running that at 60fps isn't better than running it at 30fps; it would still be pushing the same number of polygons per second...namely, 200,000 of them.

If it's running at 60fps, that just means you have 3,333.33 (repeating, of course) polygons, or fewer, in the scene. If it were 30fps, the scene could contain double the polygons.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Guys, that's not how this metric works. You're using two "per second" references. It's redundant. Take 200k polygons per second, for example. Running that at 60fps isn't better than running it at 30fps; it would still be pushing the same number of polygons per second...namely, 200,000 of them.

If it's running at 60fps, that just means you have 3,333.33 (repeating, of course) polygons, or fewer, in the scene. If it were 30fps, the scene could contain double the polygons.

Write the fps is useful to understand the polygons per frame. That's all.

And more the FPS count is high, more is good the performance at the same number of polys. I always love when people specify both informations.

Fot instance, in Goldeneye you can use cheats and search for a respawn enemies level. You set invincibility and you can have 200.000 or more polygons per second with tons of enemies.
But it would be 1 or 2 fps.

Always write fps guys.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Many persons underestimate Zelda Ocarina graphics. Yes it was more blocky than Banjo or Turok 2 and the texture wasn't at the level of Iguana or Rare.

But the less impressive graphics was made in order to achieve in other parts the most impressive, amazing and outstanding visuals ever seen.

Yes from a graphical standpoint Banjo was better. But watch this video and you will understand the N64 difference.

https://youtu.be/eGI-gIMSQMQ
 

Italia64

Neo Member
This is a very rare example of N64 CRT quality available on Internet.
Obviously the colours aren't vivid because the camera is recording the CRT, but with the flickering fixed the image is more reliable than all the videos available on YouTube that show more blurry images, or bad upscaled looking of the actual capture "best" systems.


https://youtu.be/sZp-un28IT8
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Here some videos in order to understand how good N64 was graphically. I put games usually not mentioned enough, plus some very famous graphics on the system.


Another amazing graphics game on N64, Turok 3. Unfortunately this video doesn't show the lip synch and the immense bosses.
https://youtu.be/0y98nyRdl-k

Turok 2 promo video, stuff like Medal of Honor and Quake 2 are a generation behind
https://youtu.be/cTrinFYBf14

Not a great graphics game on N64, but pretty good looking. Definitely the best Roadsters version, better than the Dreamcast and PlayStation ones.
A good example of very clean graphics on N64.
The PS version is horrible.
https://youtu.be/DksY3Dvn_ZQ

If it wasn't for the frame rate PD could be easily mixed for an early PS2 game. Outstanding visuals.
https://youtu.be/G9qqUNc49jY

Also Top Gear Overdrive was a good looking game (with Expansion Pak on). It definitely puts Need For Speed PS1 games on shame graphically (not in gameplay in my opinion).
https://youtu.be/EHRCalhiJG0

A good quality capture of Rayman 2 (not amazing like on CRT).
It puts on shame the PSX little downgraded brother.
https://youtu.be/cg8S6pDPYvI

Rush 2049 N64 vs. Dreamcast vs. XBox
https://youtu.be/7ApboC53ynA

Look at 6m23s...Amazing
https://youtu.be/hWm-IjK7Vjc

Obviously there are not PS bike games with this graphics, look at the outdoor tracks, marvellous.
https://youtu.be/n5mu37ElFww

Top notch stuff
https://youtu.be/ScqGrcLJ2UE

How not to mention 1080°. Much better than Cool Boarders
https://youtu.be/PeSWmWX6THU</blockquote></blockquote></quote>

1997 but very, very good graphics
https://youtu.be/Yt81aorLEcM

Quake not trembling, jaggy and pixelated in the 5th generation? Only on N64 of course
https://youtu.be/7C4DxfDvTdI

Majora's Mask is awesome
https://youtu.be/AYsC5NEF8M8

Sin and Punishment is another game more near to Dreamcast than PS
https://youtu.be/k2BmYhpqcGA

You can see something like this even on PS...during FMVs :p
https://youtu.be/q_jexKVlvY4

These videos aren't for downgrade PS1, which is an amazing console.
Are just linked in order to understand how many N64 games showed the N64 superiority.
And I linked just few.
 
Trivia: on N64 there is also V-Rally, that is a Need For Speed game.

That was only because EA handled Eden Games release in the US. It came out first in Europe as it's made in France and it was published by Infogrames. It really has nothing to do with the NFS franchise other than being branded under it in the US.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Great work by everyone in this thread. This was one of the most interesting reads I have had in a long time.

Thanks for reading


That was only because EA handled Eden Games release in the US. It came out first in Europe as it's made in France and it was published by Infogrames. It really has nothing to do with the NFS franchise other than being branded under it in the US.

Of course V-Rally has nothing to do with NFS from a gameplay standpoint.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
Umpteenth vulgar display of power.
NFL Quarterback Club 2000 not only is a sport game with graphics never seen on PSX, that runs in 640x480, with an unmatched level of animations and realism, infinite number of features and options, but look at here:
https://youtu.be/C6BR_4jrWHc
Find something like this on PSX or Saturn it's like find it on SNES, it's not gonna happen.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
NBA Courtside 2 was an amazing game. I beaten it recently and it's impressive for many aspects.
For some reason very good graphics in basket games arrived on the 6th gen, but this game is better than anything seen on PS or Saturn.
Hi-res without Expansion Pak, smooth, not trembling, nice reflections, amazing animations (all the famous players have their actual special moves and animations) and take a look from 3:56 for istance: good facial animations. It wasn't something common in that gen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=298b7JupHBg

Such a great hardware guys.
 

Muninn

Banned
IDK but besides warping, which can be fixed on PS1 emu, that system can look okay at times. The N64 has aged the worst by far IMO because of low detail grossness in so many games. At least the PS1 had great 2D games that still look stellar today.

For 3D sure it can look better but it's all garbage from this era. Tainted for the most part. Besides the glorious 2D.
 

c0de

Member
NBA Courtside 2 was an amazing game. I beaten it recently and it's impressive for many aspects.
For some reason very good graphics in basket games arrived on the 6th gen, but this game is better than anything seen on PS or Saturn.
Hi-res without Expansion Pak, smooth, not trembling, nice reflections, amazing animations (all the famous players have their actual special moves and animations) and take a look from 3:56 for istance: good facial animations. It wasn't something common in that gen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=298b7JupHBg

Such a great hardware guys.

The thing is that if there was no port for PSX, then you can hardly infer anything off that. Yes, it looks good but facial animations is dedication to work from devs more than capabilities of the hardware.
And to the long post before with the videos: Videos showing replays, games with using more ram with the expansion pack and a video showing the same game on n64, dc and xbox... Well. I mean, it's obvious that you really like the N64 but don't overdo it. It wasn't in the same league as DC.
 

Muninn

Banned
Of course. Everything is better than emulators.

Is it? Not really. Emulators give you access to all kinds of things to make the graphics look better. This era of gaming looks like dogshit. xBRZ and various 3D shaders can actually make the games look playable on large screens.

The problem is Mario 64 was the pinnacle of the N64 and also a launch title. Still holds up to this day, but can't say I have any other game I would care to replay today from the N64

Literally, the only game I will even play on the system. Ocarina looks so bad it's not even funny. A texture pack makes it bearable but you still realize you are playing ancient history.

Mario 64 is the only one that actually holds up decently and it's only barely because of the cartoon style IMO. Yet it has nothing on SMG 1 or 2 anymore. Times they change.
 
I started reading this topic a few weeks ago and read a few pages here and there, eventually reaching the end. It was interesting, but wow some of you wear your bias on your sleeeve! His name escapes me now but somewhere between page 15 and 20, if i saw this guys name I just skipped everything he said. The one that said the n64 controller is the best ever made and the first dual analog controller (wah??).

I guess those digital c-buttons somehow count as a second analog stick...if thats the case then the dualshock 2 has 4 analog controls. Since the dpad and face buttons were all analog =/
 

Italia64

Neo Member
The thing is that if there was no port for PSX, then you can hardly infer anything off that. Yes, it looks good but facial animations is dedication to work from devs more than capabilities of the hardware.
And to the long post before with the videos: Videos showing replays, games with using more ram with the expansion pack and a video showing the same game on n64, dc and xbox... Well. I mean, it's obvious that you really like the N64 but don't overdo it. It wasn't in the same league as DC.

Never put N64 and DC on the same league, not even once in my life :p
If we want to talk about ports in matter of sport games we can take Madden 99 for istance.


from IGN review of Madden NFL 99

Gone are the sprites. Gone are the little cruddy little v-poly players from yesteryear. The game is now polygonal, texture-mapped, and Gouraud-shaded, and players look pretty damn good.
Is it the best looking game out there? Hmm... The details are there. Uniforms wrinkle, crease, and highly detailed textures create a depth that's hard to match. Players are sharp looking, and moderately crisp. Madden 99 looks a lot better than it did last year, and they're better than NFL Extreme and EA's own NCAA Football 99. But is the game the best looking game on the block? No.
First, the N64 version of Madden looks a hell of a lot better (and it actually plays and move better, too), than the PlayStation version, a little gripe we're obligated to mention (being PlayStation guys!).


Get the point?
Madden 99 on N64 was much worse than NFL Quarterback Club 99, but it was still much better than the PS counterparts and than games like Gameday 99.

In matter of sport games N64 demolishes PS library.

- Better graphics
- No loading times (in sport games are unbearable, try to play whole seasons waiting 30 seconds before every match)
- Better animations (All-Star Baseball, NFL QB Club, ISS, International T&F, NBA Courtside 2, etc.)
- Higher number of 4 players game
- A lot of 640x480 res games


All the ports I played or compared were graphically better on N64, and in almost all cases even enanched in other aspects.

FIFA 98
FIFA 99
Madden 64
Madden 99
Madden 2000
Madden 2001
Madden 2002
NHL Breakhaway 98
NHL Breakhaway 99
NHL 99

And you can continue with other 15-20 titles probably.
 

c0de

Member
Never put N64 and DC on the same league, not even once in my life :p

from IGN review of Madden NFL 99

Gone are the sprites. Gone are the little cruddy little v-poly players from yesteryear. The game is now polygonal, texture-mapped, and Gouraud-shaded, and players look pretty damn good.
Is it the best looking game out there? Hmm... The details are there. Uniforms wrinkle, crease, and highly detailed textures create a depth that's hard to match. Players are sharp looking, and moderately crisp. Madden 99 looks a lot better than it did last year, and they're better than NFL Extreme and EA's own NCAA Football 99. But is the game the best looking game on the block? No.
First, the N64 version of Madden looks a hell of a lot better (and it actually plays and move better, too), than the PlayStation version, a little gripe we're obligated to mention (being PlayStation guys!).

I see you have a lot of ammunition but you don't have to convince people. In terms of power, the N64 could do more than PSX.

In matter of sport games N64 demolishes PS library.

- Better graphics
- No loading times (in sport games are unbearable, try to play whole seasons waiting 30 seconds before every match)
- Better animations (All-Star Baseball, NFL QB Club, ISS, International T&F, NBA Courtside 2, etc.)
- Higher number of 4 players game
- A lot of 640x480 res games

Eh? Really, this reads like fanboy wars but you are almost 2 decades late...

FIFA 98
FIFA 99
Madden 64
Madden 99
Madden 2000
Madden 2001
Madden 2002
NHL Breakhaway 98
NHL Breakhaway 99
NHL 99

And you can continue with other 15-20 titles probably.

And I am sure you can continue with that dedication you are showing here.
To me it doesn't make any difference - the controller was horrible and the graphics looked way too muddy on a TV screen to really look way better than PSX, sorry.
 

Italia64

Neo Member
I see you have a lot of ammunition but you don't have to convince people. In terms of power, the N64 could do more than PSX.

And it did


Eh? Really, this reads like fanboy wars but you are almost 2 decades late...

Not fanboy stuff. As you can read there is a lot misinformation about N64. I love the console and I like to demistify and debunk.
I like to see that my work is having good feedbacks all around.
I don't want to put PS1 under a bad light, it's among the greatest consoles ever.

And I am sure you can continue with that dedication you are showing here.
To me it doesn't make any difference - the controller was horrible and the graphics looked way too muddy on a TV screen to really look way better than PSX, sorry.

Controller is matter of tastes, a lot of persons love it. We don't have to mix our tastes and facts.
There are also tons of N64 games that aren't muddy at all. You should try them.
Once you have played stuff like Perfect Dark, Battle for Naboo, Rogue Squadron, Turok 2, Iguana sport games, Excitebike 64, WDC, Roadsters, and so many others, you will agree that only a very ignorant would call them muddy.
And are great games too,so I advice you to try them.
 
Top Bottom