Yeah I did notice that, sorry should have mentioned it, I guess I was just trying to say we should look at DC exclusives as examples of what wouldn't be possible on the previous generation.
Sorry, misread about Shenmue (I was thinking Soul Calibur...), but for a PS1 version of that, look at the original, unreleased Saturn version; the PS1 could have done something like that, I'm sure.
Anyway though, you're right that looking at exclusives is best, but as I said, many of its exclusives aren't much of a step over 5th gen either, apart for those three categories. Speed Devils, TrickStyle, Red Dog, Pod 2, etc? Good games, but in terms of geometry, are they much above 5th gen levels?
Because the N64 had more RAM which allowed for larger environments, while the PSX can draw more polygons which allowed for more detail?
Look at Donald Duck Goin' Quackers... the N64 can do corridor platforming fine, it's just that only that one game tried (assuming you don't count Rayman 2 as one, even though a lot of the game is like that).
I only deleted it cuz I couldn't find a comparable shot of RR64. Here it is again
That looks better than anything on RR64. That game is fucking ugly, I find it incredible you're actually defending it against R4.
No way, R4's a jaggy mess. As I said, it looks nice for the PS1, but it's no match for RR64.
Barely any color, the fug? R4 may have the single best use of color in that generation. The deliberate, pastel, dreamy visuals add so much to its visual flair. Each stage has a specific look. RR64 is just color puke, with car models that look like they belong on the very first Ridge Racer game. Look at the hideous skybox on RR64 compared to the intelligent use of a soft gradient on R4. Gawd, I can't believe I'm reading this crap. R4 is one of the prettiest games of that era, RR64 is the redheaded stepchild of the franchise.
When it comes to speed that's the first race on R4, the campaign starts out really slow and gets progressively faster. Both games are locked at 30fps.
R4 doesn't look THAT special, though... decent to good for a later PS1 racing game, but certainly not one of the prettiest games of the era. And as for "best use of color that generation"... yeah, no way. Absolutely not. And RR64's visuals look pretty good, what's wrong with using a lot of colors? It looks good as it is!
Can't acutally believe you are defending this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isUYwKh_FLs
Looks better then this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-S0BwVQ5Vo
Not only is it a jaggy mess with barely any color, but it also feels like you are going at 20 kph and the collision detection is hilariously bad.
Nice comparison there, and yeah, RR64 definitely looks better between the two videos, I would say.
The only way to reduce it is to have versions of the objects split into more polygons, even for flat surfaces. I hesitate to use the word tessellation because a lot of people on GAF get over excited by that word. The shapes of the polygons themselves are perspective correct, it's just the textures aren't, so the more polygons you use, the better it looks.
I think Metal Gear Solid does some of that, When you're crawling through the vents, as you get nearer to them, the surfaces pop into a more corrected look. Or I might be remembering it wrong.
Of course if Font Mission 3 was purely an isometric style view, there wouldn't be a problem because not much perspective would be involved.
Yeah, I mentioned this, that the PS1 has to cover for its lacking hardware by overlapping polygons, while the N64 can use lower-poly models that look just as good or better, because of the perspective correction.