Cute Dragon Here
Member
Pretty sure that was 40 MB, if I remember correctly.
I've always wondered what could have happened if the N64's texture cache was 512 KB instead of 4 KB (looking to the DS).
-
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?
- Thread starter Snakeyes
- Start date
Pretty sure that was 40 MB, if I remember correctly.
I've always wondered what could have happened if the N64's texture cache was 512 KB instead of 4 KB (looking to the DS).
neohwa
Junior Member
agreed totally.
To me Mario 64 was better looking and more technically advanced than all PSX games, and it was a day 1 game! Although banjo kazooie looked great too.
Yeti 3D for GBA
Yeti 3D ported to 32X
Yeti 3D ported to VB
Yeah, I'm just trying to save this thread from RR madness
Rhazer Fusion
Member
To me N64 games, especially the models or characters always looked lower poly than PSOne characters. N64 games looked smoother,a little richer in resolution and color though. Got to admit that Killer Instinct, Turok 2 and Perfect Dark looked amazing when I first played them. Games like FF7, FF8, Tekken 3 and Crash Bandicoot impressed me also though on PSOne. I thought the consoles were relatively close in power back in the day. To me, N64 felt like PSOne with smoothing options on.
Clearly the N64 version has worst textures, though.
Lord Error is one of the better posters of this forum. And he is certainly not blind(and deaf) with bias like you.
They only take the track designs from RR1 and Revolution. The Revolution track in RR64 certainly has a farmyard/countryside aesthetic. An ugly as all fuck aesthetic.
RR64 has Ridge Racer 1-sounding track that fall far away from the music style it strives for. Technically, the sound quality is also complete garbage. The samples in the music sound like tinny, muffled crap just like nearly every N64 game out there. The car engines sound like lawnmowers.
R4 has an eclectic assortment of music, ranging from electronica, funk, electropop, techno, rock, trance and whatnot, with a unique chill vibe that perfectly complements the aesthetic and stylings of the game. The compositions themselves are magnificent and work just s well outside of the game. It'd be remiss to forget that it is high quality redbook-level audio. Sound and sample quality is sublime.
You know what, no. I'm tired of you hiding behind the idea that an opinion can never be wrong. Your opinion is wrong as all fuck.
Actually, R4's menu are amazing looking, and among the best in in all of gamedom. A excellent sample that simplicity can be beautiful. Someone that is actually skilled in graphic design thought up and constructed the black text on a yellow backdrop motif that is prevalent throughout the entire game(NST sort of tried to use similar colors in RR64 but failed miserably at reproducing what R4 achieved), along with the carefully made boxes that are used in all the menus which are consistent in the whole game. Unlike the garish, jumbled piece of shit mess that permeates the ugly garbage you continue to insist stands up to R4. Buddy, the menu design in RR64 isn't fit enough lick the collective assholes of Namco's artists.
And another generic render of Reiko appears in RR64's options screen
So you're now imagining stuff about Ridge Racer 64. Animation? Ah yes, "Ridge Racer" scrolling on the bottom of the screen in two different fonts next to a random static screen of a CG girl sure is stylish. That's sarcasm in case your detector is malfunctioning.
Cluttered?
These are the title and main menu screens for both games.
To the left, a hideous mess of cluttered randomness, simultaneously attempting to ape R4's color scheme and failing at it.. To the right, graphic design excellence in simplicity.
You are right, a generic polygonal spinning track(again, something lifted from another Ridge Racer game, the very first one) on top of a ghastly background is infinitely more stylish and better designed than R4's unique bitmap versions of its tracks on top of it's carefully designed black on yellow color scheme.
Frankly comparing the graphic design of R4 to RR64 makes me feel almost dirty.
RR1 Hi-Spec runs at 60fps and in high resolution. It is an amazing technological showpiece, 2 cars on screen or not.
F1 on PS1, 24 cars on screen.
So what's next A Black Falcon, you gonna say that RR64's intro is better than R4's classic CGI intro? I would so love that to hear that.
ResidentDante
Member
Destruction Derby 1 and 2 had 20 cars per race, but DD1's tracks were tiny and strangely designed. I don't recall them having any slopes and they didn't have draw distance since they were so tiny.
DD2 had som really cool tracks, 20 cars and damage to the vehicles. It was acutally impressive at the time, and it didn't dip in framerate. DD2 looked grainy though, but still good enough imo.
LOL I can't believe this thread has descended into Ridge Racer Wars of all things.
Let's just say it caught my eye in a way other series haven't and leave it at that.
Let's just say it caught my eye in a way other series haven't and leave it at that.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
You know that what I'm saying is true, and I think it's going to be hard to find anyone who will disagree while providing a good argument. I've just said the exact same thing several other people in this thread are saying, only more bluntly. There's such minimal effort spent on visual styling in RR64 compared to R4 that it's not even worth comparing. Even if you happen to prefer that kind of look, it's still a result of a lesser talent and a lesser effort.
The best kind of wars! This forum hasn't been this entertaining to me in years. :lol
If we want to talk about N64 racers which are technically impressive, we should be talking about Beetle Adventure Racing, which features massive levels fulls of destructible objects, and has in-game reflections, as well as trilinear filtering on the textures, always a plus in racing games.
Plus it has a freaking T-Rex. How many racing games have a T-Rex? Ridge Racer doesn't have one.
Plus it has a freaking T-Rex. How many racing games have a T-Rex? Ridge Racer doesn't have one.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
One of the most impressive technically, for sure. Same team made the very good Stuntman Ignition arcade racing game couple of years ago.
If we are looking for the best looking racer on these consoles...
ROFL not even a contest.
F-Zero X and Wipeout games come after. Then maybe the Ridge Racer games.
Oh, I almost forgot to mention Excitebike 64. Definitely up there with the other racers mentioned here, especially in the hi-res mode. Some great texture and lighting work in this game.
If we are looking for the best looking racer on these consoles...
ROFL not even a contest.
F-Zero X and Wipeout games come after. Then maybe the Ridge Racer games.
I love Wave Race 64, my favorite racer of that generation, one of my favorite games of all time, and my favorite Nintendo 64 game by miles. 16 years later and it still plays beautifully.
But, the only thing that looks good about it is the water. The racers are literally made out of a few boxes, the scenery is very simple and it runs at 20fps. R4's aesthetic is much superior to WR64's. Wipeout3's as well.
F-Zero X sacrificed everything to run at 60fps...but because of that it has aged really well anyway.
It did, it and Mario 64 made a massive impression on me back in 1996. WR64's visuals were really ridiculous back then. Not a single game in that generation approached its water effects.
I remember clearly that I played it at a Blockbuster the first time. I was glued to the machine. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Keep in mind I only had a SNES and my PC was crap.
Nearly everything about it was new to me. I ended up renting the console for the weekend, managed to beat the game by Sunday. A few weeks later I rented it again and got all 120 stars. I'd get a N64 of my own eventually some time later. 
A Black Falcon
Member
Sure, Beetle Adventure Racing blows away anything in the Ridge Racer franchise in both graphics and gameplay. Of course, so does Rush (for gameplay, and 2049 for graphics), etc, but yeah, BAR's fantastic. Good graphics, great gameplay, fun levels, and more... it's certainly a classic.
My only issue with it is that I think that Rush 2049 is better, and I've often thought that BAR gets slightly overhyped in comparison to it... it's a great game, but 2049's better (and yes, also has reflections)! BAR's overlong courses feel more Rush 1 or 2 than 2049, for instance, though at least they did pack them full of shortcuts and jumps the whole way through (Rush 2's failing was that its tracks are far too flat and shortcut-light...). But yeah, it is a fantastic, fantastic game. It sort of feels like Rush crossed with Need for Speed.
Wave Race 64 has the best water, and is one of the N64's best racing games, but on a graphical basis, while the water is absolutely incredible, the clearly early polygon models for the characters and environments drags it down a bit versus later N64 games like BAR or Rush 2049 (or Hydro Thunder, for another water-racing game). The water and wave effects, height, and physics are all spectacular in Wave Race 64, though... even today, very, very few games come even close to matching it in real water-racing feel! The music all fits it great too, and the track designs are outstanding.If we are looking for the best looking racer on these consoles...
ROFL not even a contest.
F-Zero X and Wipeout games come after. Then maybe the Ridge Racer games.
Heck, were there even any 6th gen water racing games with real waves like Wave Race has, apart from Wave Race: Blue Storm of course? Stuff like Carve or Splashdown are all flat-water racing games, like Hydro Thunder and others... pretty bland, compared to Wave Race. Well, Hydro Thunder's not at all bland, but those others are, and it IS true that, as great as Hydro Thunder is (and it's one of my favorite racing games ever), it doesn't have much in the way of real waves.
Excitebike 64 is one of the best, and best looking, games of that entire generation. Absolutely spectacular game. I played that one in low res though, I disliked the letterboxing and the framerate takes a hit (and it did bother me a little, compared to low-res; framerate matters more in racing games than some other genres). But it looks incredible in low res too, really blows away most other games that gen. I certainly haven't seen any other motorcycle games that generation that come close to it visually, and few come close in gameplay either... of the other four N64 motorcycle racing games my second favorite would be Top Gear Hyper Bike, which actually is a pretty good game that's fairly under-rated, but the other three, Road Rash 64, Jeremy McGrath Supercross 2000, and Supercross 2000 (EA Sports) are really bland, average-or-below titles. Of course the PS1 has lots of motorcycle racing games, but none can match Excitebike 64 in graphics, and I don't think any of the dirtbike ones can match it in gameplay either.
... On that note, it is odd how the N64 has no superbike racing games. The only road-racing motorcycle game on the system is Road Rash 64. Yeah, that's not good. The PS1 has some good ones, like Moto Racer 1 or 2... they're way better on the PC, but even so, it's too bad those weren't on N64 too. Blame EA and its very weak N64 support... Need for Speed somehow never was on N64 either.
(RE2) So? That's somewhat minor compared to the removal of jaggies, increased polygon counts, etc. Jaggies are much more noticeable than textures.
What he said is even more ridiculous and insulting than just about anything you have, which is really saying something. That comment was deserved.
As for blind fanboyism, I think someone is being a blind fanboy here, and it's you, the massive Ridge Racer fanboy.
I haven't played PS1 Ridge Racer Revolution so I can't say what it looks like there, but the N64 one mostly looks like it's in the mountains or something, with bridges, tunnels, a cliffside road, etc. There is a pasture part too, I guess, but that's not most of the track. It's a somewhat bland environment, but well designed.
More baseless N64-hate here, not much to actually respond to.
What, so your opinion that Ridge Racer is amazing is more right than mine that it's not that good because you say so? Hah! Sorry, I just don't think much of Ridge Racer as a franchise. At best it's right on the borderline between average and good, nothing more. And yeah, in my opinion if all things were fair Saturn Daytona USA should have wiped the floor with Ridge Racer 1 in sales. (I'd mention an N64 game too, but it wasn't out yet in '95 of course.)
On a related note, I played RR64 again today, and after more tries, finally managed to win a race (I started over some time back, but had given up on the Revolution Expert track...). It was pretty satisfying when I finally managed it. Overall, I'd put the game in that "just manages to get into good" category I mentioned above. It's certainly not one of my favorite N64 racing games, but it is good, anyway (and remember, the N64 is my favorite system for racing games).
Now HERE'S fanboyism in its finest form. There's very little truth to it of course, in your extreme exaggerations and falsehoods and such, but I somehow doubt that you care much about that... (NST didn't "try to use similar colors", they sort of reversed it, with black as the main color and yellow as the secondary. I like that look more than yellow primary and black secondary. They also removed all of those silly boxes around the menu options, a design I definitely prefer. There's nothing garish or jumbled about RR64's menus; they're all consistent in design, with the same font used throughout, similar design styles, etc. Nice simple menus to get you into the game quickly. Basically, I'd say that RR64's menus look slightly above average, while R4's are average.)
True, but it's not doing any harm there.
[quote[So you're now imagining stuff about Ridge Racer 64. Animation? Ah yes, "Ridge Racer" scrolling on the bottom of the screen in two different fonts next to a random static screen of a CG girl sure is stylish. That's sarcasm in case your detector is malfunctioning.[/quote]
True, both menus have probably overall similar amounts of animation.
Uh, there's no clutter on that RR64 menu, so I don't know what you're looking at. Also, "graphic design excellence"... no. Apart from that though, I think I've covered the menus already above. (Also, when I said cluttered, I meant the menu system in general, not just the main menu.)Cluttered?
These are the title and main menu screens for both games.
To the left, a hideous mess of cluttered randomness, simultaneously attempting to ape R4's color scheme and failing at it.. To the right, graphic design excellence in simplicity.
Right, right, ""ghastly" versus "carefully"... you're certainly quite the fanboy.
Eh, it makes for a decent techdemo, but with only two cars, it's not much of a game.
I remember clearly that I played it at a Blockbuster the first time. I was glued to the machine. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Keep in mind I only had a SNES and my PC was crap.
I remember a similar experience with Goldeneye. That was the first "dual analog" experience ever and I was motion sick and disoriented and wrote the game off as unplayable
Damn good times. PS1 and 64 were still the golden days of gaming to me...
A Black Falcon
Member
... Starcraft 64, good? Did you not own a computer or something? Those 5th gen ports of PC RTSes were all terrible, whether you're talking about the PS1 versions of C&C, C&C: RA, or WC2, or Starcraft 64. I think C&C for the N64 holds up slightly better because that wasn't just a port, it was a remake with fully redone 3d graphics. It's still far worse than the PC game of course, but at least it's not an ugly low-res tiny-sprites mess like those others are.
I mean, even if SC64 was good for the hardware, there's no way that Starcraft could have been done well on consoles that gen. It was impossible.
It was planned by Paradigm then we got BAR instead.
We got a better deal IMO.
Here's a little tidbit you might appreciate about Wave Race 64 and Blue Storm. All of the waves in the courses are pre-animated, they always move and react in a certain manner when you reach a certain point of a track, varying from lap to lap. It's what I noticed from extensive playing. It's really nice trickery and fools everyone into thinking its generating waves on the fly or whatever. It's almost like an additional track layer of sorts, only that it moves.
Well I'll say this much, RE2 in high-res cleans the the IQ so much(comparatively to the PS1) the textures actually look better when a character model is far way from the camera. But the backdrop and cg quality is so important to the presentation of the game that I still give it to the PS1. Frankly at the end of the day, jaggies are still there in the N64 port and they can be quite noticeable as can be seen in the comparison site above, anyway.
I think what he said about comparing porn to Mona Lisa was appropriate. I also feel that strongly about the subject.
I don't hide it, I loves me some RIIIIIIIIIIIIIDGE RAAAAAAAACEEEEEEEEEEEEER
Revolution has the same coastal look as the first game.
Sure, but the engines in RR64 do sound like lawnmowers and the overall sound quality is really poor.
It's not really my opinion on the game itself, just on graphic design that I do believe I'm way far on the right. You can see the effort put forth in R4 right there to have a stylish but functional and a deceptively simple but cohesive aesthetic.
Honestly, gameplay-wise it probably wasn't too bad for its time...I did manage to get to the end so I must've liked it to some extent.
I already made my point, even provided visual evidence several times, I have nothing further to add. I rest my case.
I have quite the pair of eyes I'd say!
Actually it kind of is a game, it has a surprising amount of content for a freebie. Has all the tracks from RR1, unlockable cars and bonus car challenges.
Ridge Racer 1 has 12 cars on screen, same as RR64.
R4 has one of the best intros of all time
There's a bunch of people have pointed out your crazy opinions.
I remember a similar experience with Goldeneye. That was the first "dual analog" experience ever and I was motion sick and disoriented and wrote the game off as unplayable
Damn good times. PS1 and 64 were still the golden days of gaming to me...
I tried playing GE again some months ago, man that thing is truly just unplayable now. :lol
The first true dual analog game I played was Mega Man Legends 2. You can have it control like any current third person game. Very forward thinking to have that option, and is what has made it age really nicely control-wise.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Need For Speed 2 actually lets you race as a T-Rex statue, so there's that.
A Black Falcon
Member
Oh, BAR was originally going to be a NSF game? I'd forgotten that... yeah, we did probably get the better deal. I like the NFS games, but BAR's a great game, and I'd rather see that on the N64 than a NSF port, if it has to be one or the other and not both.
NFS2's an okay game and was pretty good when it released, but it's aged pretty badly... BAR's the far better game.
Goldeneye plays fine, when you set it to Turok-style controls (C-buttons move, stick aims). Turok-style FPS controls, which you also see as the standard on the Dreamcast, are great. I've never thought much of dual analog at all, I'd rather play FPSes with the N64 controller than any dual-stick pad... I like button movement. Of course mouse and keyboard is by far the best way to play FPSes, but of console controllers, I'd rather use the N64 controller. And I know, almost no one agrees with me on that one (I've seen a few people, but very few). Sorry, I'm something of a dual-analog skeptic. The N64 and Saturn 3D Controllers are, in my opinion, both better than any dual-analog gamepad... (As for non-FPS use, analog camera controls are nice, sure, but hardly necessary.) I don't think controllers with one analog stick are any worse than ones with two. I do, however, think that controllers with only four face buttons are not as good as ones with six (DC and GC vs. N64 or Saturn shows that one off well, the Dreamcast and Gamecube both are badly missing those two removed face buttons)... but anyway. Yeah, I really dislike the Playstationization of controller design that's taken over over the past two generations. It's tragic.
Yeah, I've noticed that before. The waves are in the same places each time, and the tracks (and waves) do change each lap. I particularly notice those specific larger waves that always hit at the same time, but it makes sense that the other waves are in the same places too. Still though, even if it's just an illusion of real wave action, it's an extremely well done one, and as I said, almost no other games in the genre seem to try anything similar. I guess this gen we finally do see actual waves in water racing games, sometimes at least, but on the other hand there aren't many of them... Wave Race 64 is still probably the best water racing game ever.Here's a little tidbit you might appreciate about Wave Race 64 and Blue Storm. All of the waves in the courses are pre-animated, they always move and react in a certain manner when you reach a certain point of a track, varying from lap to lap. It's what I noticed from extensive playing. It's really nice trickery and fools everyone into thinking its generating waves on the fly or whatever. It's almost like an additional track layer of sorts, only that it moves.
Not many jaggies, though... far, far fewer than on PS1.
It's completely delusional, that's what it is.
Well at least you admit it now.
There's still an ocean in RR64's Revolution track, on that note...
N64 audio quality is good, I've never had any kind of a problem with N64 sound effects. They're good enough, and the cars certainly don't sound like lawnmowers.
Sorry, it's more bland than anything else. Apart from that track animation, those menus don't look that special. Yellow and boxes... RR64's aren't special either, but I like the style slightly more.
I guess it's still Ridge Racer enough for you to like it some, then.Honestly, gameplay-wise it probably wasn't too bad for its time...I did manage to get to the end so I must've liked it to some extent.
You made your point that you like boxy yellow menus, sure. You certainly didn't make any kind of point that they're objectively better (artistically or otherwise) than RR64's.
"All of the tracks from RR1"... :lol Yeah, it has all 1 1/3 tracks from RR1. What a massive accomplishment, must have been hard to fit so many courses on one disc! And they're so long, too...
Seriously, I can't possibly imagine how people thought that that was okay, even back in '95.
Huh, so why did R4 cut it back?
R4's is probably a little better than RR64's, but that kind of CG FMV has aged, a lot. Your comment there reminds me of the people who insisted that the Soul Blade intro CG FMV was so, so amazing... I assume that it's a "you had to be there at the time" kind of thing in that case, because yeah, looking back on it it sure didn't seem that way (and the game, of course, hasn't held up at all). Anyway, that R4 intro's amusing, but "one of the best intros of all time"? No way whatsoever. I will admit though, nostalgia value factors heavily into what people think of as great intros, so that one would be really hard to measure objectively.
If by a bunch you mean a couple, and that just as many agreed with me as with you, then sure, you'd be right. You might want to go back and look at the thread again.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
A certain someone (Black perhaps) might want to be more careful with quoting - I think one of my posts was mixed up with someone else's.
Speaking of audio, I think PS1 is better if only because it did had the media advantage and a dedicated sound processor. The same thing also goes with N64 with regards to a DS - if your CPU has to deal with a low performance ceiling, compromises.
Speaking of audio, I think PS1 is better if only because it did had the media advantage and a dedicated sound processor. The same thing also goes with N64 with regards to a DS - if your CPU has to deal with a low performance ceiling, compromises.
ResidentDante
Member
This. The intro I have watched the most times ever.
Visual evidence was provided, case has been rested!
I realized my snafu afterwards. :lol ...but I'm still technically correct! Haha.
I know you're blind and all, but R4 features considerably more graphical detail and visual effects everywhere.
As for the rest...
Goldeneye plays fine, when you set it to Turok-style controls (C-buttons move, stick aims). Turok-style FPS controls, which you also see as the standard on the Dreamcast, are great. I've never thought much of dual analog at all, I'd rather play FPSes with the N64 controller than any dual-stick pad... I like button movement. Of course mouse and keyboard is by far the best way to play FPSes, but of console controllers, I'd rather use the N64 controller. And I know, almost no one agrees with me on that one (I've seen a few people, but very few). Sorry, I'm something of a dual-analog skeptic. The N64 and Saturn 3D Controllers are, in my opinion, both better than any dual-analog gamepad... (As for non-FPS use, analog camera controls are nice, sure, but hardly necessary.) I don't think controllers with one analog stick are any worse than ones with two. I do, however, think that controllers with only four face buttons are not as good as ones with six (DC and GC vs. N64 or Saturn shows that one off well, the Dreamcast and Gamecube both are badly missing those two removed face buttons)... but anyway. Yeah, I really dislike the Playstationization of controller design that's taken over over the past two generations. It's tragic.
Okay!
Does it depress you, ABF? To know just how alone you really are?
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Preferring the godawful N64 controller to dual analogue controllers has to be one of the most insane things I've seen on GAF in a long time.
one mo to the list!
RR4 does look better than RR64. However, all that proves is that Namco did a lazy N64 version. The fact that Beetle Adventure Racing and San Francisco Rush 2049 look considerably better than either is far more relevant.
And outside of racing games there is nothing on PS1 that is close to the graphics on Perfect Dark.
And outside of racing games there is nothing on PS1 that is close to the graphics on Perfect Dark.
MrCunningham
Member
I would almost say that the GBA was closer to the Panasonic 3DO in terms of hardware. The Panasonic 3DO used an ARM60 at 12Mhz while the GBA used an ARM7TDMI at 16Mhz. Though the 3DO did use its own custom math processor, two dedicated graphics chips and one dedicated sound chip. The GBA relied more on on it's CPU. Though the 32x didn't have a strong set of graphics chips either. And was mostly reliant on its two Hitachi CPU's. Though from what I understand the 32X didn't suffer from the same problem that the Saturn did where both CPU's would share the same bus. So both CPU's could access the systems memory pool without having to wait for the other one. Though maybe I could be wrong on that. Would be nice if someone could correct me.
Need For Speed 3DO
VS.
V-Rally on the GBA
Need for Speed is definitely pushing a larger draw distance and more polygons per frame. But the GBA game holds its own rather well. Considering the hardware.
Namco didn't really make Ridge Racer 64 though, that was made by Nintendo Software Technology. Namco probably just handed off a bunch of art assets to NTS to use, and they did all the rest. I don't imagine that Ridge Racer 64 was a huge production like RR4. It was really was an attempt to get more PS1 franchises on the n64. Resident Evil 2 also came out in the same year.
MrCunningham
Member
I wouldn't say it was better in most cases. But I really did like the N64 controller for FPS's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmViSPAxLpM
The textures on the characters seem to be less detailed on the N64, and blurrier obviously, but that's a given huh?
At the end of the day it's an inferior version of the game. Backgrounds are way blurrier and the FMVs are compressed to hell. It's a really impressive achievement though.
It looks like they redrew some of the textures for the N64 game to me. The PS1 textures do have more detail though, but it is hard to say if they are actually lower resolution.
And yeah the videos were compressed to hell. Though one of the developers of the game did say that in hindsight they could've found ways to improve the video more-so to make them look closer to the PS1 game.
Jett, did you see his comment on music...
I have to admit, I enjoy these Black Falcon discussions. Very few other posts actually respond to each and every point and it's fantastic. We may disagree heavily on things, but I enjoy the back and forth discourse.
Whether you enjoyed the audio or not is irrelevant when it comes to judging quality.
Falcon, what are your thoughts on successive Nintendo systems? While I dislike the Nintendo 64, I actually feel that the Gamecube and even the Wii were enormous improvements and stand up as great machines. The Wii gets a lot of shit but it has a wonderful lineup of software that far FAR exceeds the Nintendo 64 in my eyes.
Does that sound like the opinion of a man who you could convince one way or another?
I have to admit, I enjoy these Black Falcon discussions. Very few other posts actually respond to each and every point and it's fantastic. We may disagree heavily on things, but I enjoy the back and forth discourse.
It was lazy. Namco themselves did not even develop the game.
How can you actually claim this. The N64 audio quality was extremely poor. The system did not even feature a dedicated sound chip and producing sound had a surprisingly significant impact on system performance as a whole.
Whether you enjoyed the audio or not is irrelevant when it comes to judging quality.
Falcon, what are your thoughts on successive Nintendo systems? While I dislike the Nintendo 64, I actually feel that the Gamecube and even the Wii were enormous improvements and stand up as great machines. The Wii gets a lot of shit but it has a wonderful lineup of software that far FAR exceeds the Nintendo 64 in my eyes.
That's a bit harsh.
The majority of the games in the series are excellent. Whether you appreciate them or not is irrelevant.
Case in point, consider something like Pokemon. I find the games to be extremely repetitive and dull. Some of the least interesting RPGs ever made. Yet, despite that, they are well loved games and when I consider the way people play them I can recognize the quality. Suggesting that they are "shit" would wrong. It's simply a case where I dislike them.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
I don't think I've laughed/smiled/shaked head in disbelief reading a thread since the epical arguments with Lazy8.
Yeah the music stuff is just wow. And I've said it before but it has been highly enjoyable, and apparently I like to talk more about R4 than I thought.
When R4 vs RR64 was first brought up I was actually going to mention how unfair it was to compare them as R4 was a massive in-house project at Namco with their top artists and engineers on it treating as a premiere release and RR64 was a tiny thing offloaded to Nintendo's newish NST studio(it was their first N64 game). But then ABF actually started claiming that RR64 was better in every single way conceivable oand f course things snowballed into the realm of weirdness.
It just can't be stated enough how terrible sound and music were in N64 games. There's a couple of games that manage to somehow get around the limitations of the machine but by and large it was terrible.
Well "sorry" for the derail, but this has been going since page 2 actually. :lol This thread would be dead without the current discussion, anyway. I do appreciate the N64 pics you posted, though.
RR is a quality series though, and R4 is one of the probably top 3 best looking games on the PS1, so it's not all that out there that the it became the center of the discussion.
HAHA yeah friggin Lazy8s...and I'm reminded of Deadmeat as well.
While the PS is no doubt superior in regards to this, the audio quality on N64 can actually be pretty good, with some restrictions of course, precisely because you have to/can program the sound system yourself. But since it ate performance like you mention, developers couldn't realistically have great sound while also having great everything else. The New Tetris for example has pretty good sound, largely because it's a 2D Tetris game with not much else going on.
And here's a recent demo for the N64 which uses an mp3 track for the soundtrack, running on a real machine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoO0Cif72vY
It's not redbook quality but it's not extremely poor either.
Also there's homebrew for the N64 to play Amiga MODs. Can the PS do that? I think not!
(warning, emulated. It's supposed to be 60fps.)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzN4Qz6vDpw
And while we're on the subject of demos, here's one with rather impressive graphics running on an actual N64. It's only one scene, and the framerate sucks as you would expect, but lots of effects in that one and textures on everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MByHz4gA_Yg
Well, to be fair, the PSX was flexible as well. It worked similarly to the SNES, in fact, which makes sense considering Sony engineered both sound chips.
Most games actually shy away from using pre-recorded digital audio for music and using sequencing instead. The beautiful music of Chrono Cross, for instance, is created entirely from samples and run in realtime on the system. It's not pre-recorded audio and it uses just a fraction of the space that digitally stored files would require.
If Nintendo could have implemented something like this I think we would have seen much more impressive results but instead they completely omitted any sort of sound processor. You can certainly achieve some impressive results for the system but that doesn't change the fact that the audio aspect of Nintendo 64 was very poorly handled. Clearly pre-recorded audio was not necessary to achieve great sound.
Speaking of...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_60V8UdYEY
Near CD quality on the SNES!
Also there's homebrew for the N64 to play Amiga MODs. Can the PS do that? I think not!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzN4Qz6vDpw
Hehe, guess what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bTxaXcq0-k
A SID emulator for the SNES!
Homebrewers always develop impressive tech demos no matter the hardware.
Oh wow, it really is like arguing with Lazy8s.
Good times!
He was the dude arguing that Crazy Taxi's city was as complicated as GTA3's, if I remember right.
I'm a pretty gigantic Crazy Taxi fan and I was impressed by the city and all but holy shit
ResidentDante
Member
Sounds like a fun read, any links to the best threads?
Rendered in 1080p on a PC, the PSX definitely looks sharper and clearer, and the textures are just great.
But the N64 has much better scale in terms of environments, and the 3D is much stronger (could OOT really have been possible on the PSX? I doubt it).
I still don't have an answer.
But the N64 has much better scale in terms of environments, and the 3D is much stronger (could OOT really have been possible on the PSX? I doubt it).
I still don't have an answer.