Support NeoGAF

[nkarafo]

IMO

Banjo-Kazooie is the perfect showcase of the N64, with a good balance of great graphics, a huge variety of textures, unlimited draw distance, good animations and overall good frame rate.

WDC is probably the best looking game all around, technically.

Shadowman is another proof of N64's technical superiority over PS1. N64 port looks great and even if you use the expansion pack for high-res, it doesn't suffer from slowdowns like most other games that use it. The PS1 port looks and moves like shit in comparison. It just can't handle the size of the environments.

Waverace shows how well the N64 handles polygons with it's plygonal water effects, plus it's a very early game. Although it runs at 20fps, but it's stable.

1080 Snowboarding was the best looking game of the genre, it even had a neat cloth physics effect to simulate the wind every now and then.

Conker has the best facial animations and it even has the best looking real time shadow i saw back then. You can see Conker's shadow being projected on walls, for instance. I don't remember any other game doing that during that generation. If there are, it's very rare.

Beetle adventure Racing had real time reflections on the car bodies. It's also the second best looking racing on the N64 IMO.

Rush 2048 has ugly art direction but the background detail level is ridiculous.

Star Wars: Battle For Naboo looks way too advanced to be replicated on PS1 as well IMO.

Episode 1 Racing is also a very good port. PS1 never got one though and i wonder why since it was a popular game and got released on all platforms (PC, Dreamcast, N64) at the time except PS1 (Saturn was dead). Maybe it was too much for the system?

 

[DonMigs85]

I think Chrono Cross had the best character models of any game in that generation, especially the hi-res models in the menu.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

Conkers runs in super low res of less than 300x220.

There's more to image quality than just resolution, is what the point was I think. Conker may have been 220p, but it still turns in a perceivably better image.

 

[heringer]

I think putting Nintendo DS in the discussion would be more interesting.

 

[DonMigs85]

I think putting Nintendo DS in the discussion would be more interesting.

The weird thing about DS was its fixed triangle limit and lack of texture filtering, but pretty much every 3D game had "free" antialiasing and ran at 60 or 30FPS.

 

[UnNamed]

Of course, I think Square employees are sincere.

Both models are composed of about 3000 polygons and appear in the same cutscene.

What game is this?

 

[EctoPrime]

What game is this?

Turok 2

 

[SmokedMeat]

I think there's no clear cut win. N64 was capable of displaying cleaner looking graphics, but PS1 had better texture detail.

 

[jett]

you can't be serious, right?

I know that Tobal runs much smoother and looks cleaner but there is just no way that it's as detailed as Mace which also features animated interactice 3D backgrounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6UeaAMkIM0

the hidden characters are even more detailed:

Here's a hi-res screen from an emulator so you can look at these character models in all their "glory"

And for comparison's sake, here's Soul Blade, a PS1 fighter, also in a screen from an emulator to better take a look at the character detail.

Well, would you look at that. Looks like higher-res textures and more detail to me.

False. Some of the best graphics on the console didn't use Expansion Pak:Conker's Bad Fur Day, Banjo-Kazooie, WDC, Banjo-Kazooie, etc.
Perfect Dark is better than any PS game even without the Expansion Pak.

About Ridge Racer. I prefer the more serious Ridge Racer Type 4 style than Ridge Racer 64. RRT4 looks more realistic, but RR64 is graphically better. It runs in higher resolution, filterings and perspective corrected, not trembling, a bit better draw distance, smoother images, etc.
And it required much less work, try to imagine if they worked on it like Namco did for RRT4.

Visually: RRT4 is better
Graphically: RR64 wins

Both games run at the same resolution, 320x240, and both run at 30fps. R4 never drops, and I don't remember RR64 dropping either.

RRT4 looks better though, by far. I don't think RR64 wins anything.

 

[nkarafo]

Well, would you look at that. Looks like higher-res textures and more polygonal detail to me!

You are ignoring the arenas though. Also, some characters are better looking. Like Lord Deimos, the Viking guy and the secret War Machine character.

That being said, Soul Blade is much more detailed than Tobal 2 as well. It's probably the best looking fighting game in all 3 consoles.

The N64 was admittedly shit in fighting games. But at least Mace was an OK attempt.

 

[petran79]

Mace had much better backgrounds that also had multiple platforms like in VF2 & 3. Some were interactive. Eg if you touched lava you'd lose energy. As opposed to the flat surface in Soul.

 

[nkarafo]

Mace had much better backgrounds that also had multiple platforms like in VF2 & 3. Some were interactive. Eg if you touched lava you'd lose energy. As opposed to the flat surface in Soul.

The backgrounds were more "3D" in general.

Like in this stage:

You can travel back in the distance and those pillars can get in the way during a fight. It's not just a flat surface with a 3D building in the distance. It's a proper 3D environment.

 

[jett]

You are ignoring the arenas though. Also, some characters are better looking. Like Lord Deimos, the Viking guy and the secret War Machine character.

That being said, Soul Blade is much more detailed than Tobal 2 as well. It's probably the best looking fighting game in all 3 consoles.

The N64 was admittedly shit in fighting games. But at least Mace was an OK attempt.

The scenery in Soul Blade is actually mostly polygonal.

https://youtu.be/OjKAPraSw4k?t=560

There's a stage where you fight on a raft moving through river.

And Tobal 2 does a few things different than these two other games:

First, it runs at twice the framerate (60fps) and in higher resolution (512x480) this cannot be overlooked. Polygonal scenery took a backseat.
Second, it mostly eschews the use of textures on the characters to use gourad shading, which gives it a wholly different look. In my opinion it's a forward-thinking aesthetic decision that has made it stand the test of time versus the now dated textures that Mace and Soul Blade use.
And there's the animation which is honestly basically a generation ahead.

This makes Tobal 2 the best looking fighter of the generation easily, for me anyway.

This thread isn't about aesthetics, but T2 is such a more visually pleasing title, even with its flat 2D backdrops, which I wholly prefer 100% to the 3D stages in either Mace or Soul Blade.

 

[nkarafo]

N64 loses in fighting games for sure.

It had the best looking 3D platformers though.

I especially like the tech behind Conker. The character himself is the best looking and most expressive character

His shadow effect was also pretty advanced for the systems at the time. Not only it was a proper shadow, it could even be casted on walls and other objects. In 99% of games at the time, shadows were only casted on the floor. Jet Force Gemini had a similar tech but it was limited in certain areas and didn't look as good.

 

[Italia64]

As I said RR64 graphically wins. Although I prefer RRT4 visuals.

And RR64 is not even in the top 5 racing graphics on the console, while RRT4 is.

If in a graphical comparison we don't consider perspective correction, filterings and AA, we're simply random forums users which say random stuff.

I like more RRT4 visually, but it's not graphically better.

And try to play RRT4 in a normal screen, it's not remotely good as it looks in small GIFs. You can count pixels and see several small flaws. It has also perspective correction issues.

They did a great work, I love RRT4 and I played it a lot. But on N64 you have far better graphics in racing games.

I think that RRT4 is a games without real flaws and artistically incredibly. They also used a draw distance friendly track design, so the game is always fluid and it looks more overall better than the graphical superior GT2.

If we start to talk about World Driver Championship of course both RR64 and RRT4 disappear.

 

[Italia64]

Conker's dynamic shadows are incredible. Not even a PS game can stand in front of Conker graphically.

 

[Italia64]

Just to have an idea about Conker's Bad Fur Day dynamic lighting and shadows

https://youtu.be/IUQ1kIzNd5w

 

[fireflame]

The question of power back then, was not the real cause for the choice. When i asked my father, "what about N64?" he told me he thought there would be more choice on PS1.
Back then, we had paper catalogues where you could order clothes but also board games or video games. And when you looked at the page, you could see there were more Playstation games, and that there was a huge price gap for games. So i think all that helped my father choose the Playstation and i did not regret this gift.

All the cool games with a big story were happening on the Playstation, and on tv chains, when they talked about N64, theyshowed mostly mario, golden eye and zelda. While Zelda looked cool to me, i did not feel attracted by the rest.

As far as the Saturn is ocncerned i barely played it with one friend at his house, but otherwise, and i insist on that, i never heard about it on tv nor saw a single advertising for it.

Also, for some reason i would say that the idea of using a cd felt cooler than using a cardridge. I even letmy parents used music cds once.

 

[Freshmaker]

The backgrounds were more "3D" in general.

Like in this stage:

You can travel back in the distance and those pillars can get in the way during a fight. It's not just a flat surface with a 3D building in the distance. It's a proper 3D environment.

Those pillars are sprites tho.

 

[HoodWinked]

its kind of neat back then that they had to design hardware in a way where they had to essentially build a box with severe flaws and severe strengths just to keep them cost productive. PS1 affine texture mapping looked like shit and the best games ended up using flat textures like tobal or final fantasy, but N64's low storage sorta mandated their games to be less detailed but with very nice filtering.

Megaman Legends is a nice use case. You can see the problems with the playstation hardware with the ugly affine texture warping and its inability to perform subpixel rasterization so you'd get jittery polygons. The N64 is much better technologically but in the end both look fine because the art style sorta lends itself to the sharp jaggy edges.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ua0VclnUvw

 

[nkarafo]

Damn Megaman is such a bad looking game on both consoles.


Personally, i wouldn't use it to demonstrate anything about them.


N64 had problems with texturing in most games. But i think Doom 64 is one of the few that looked great on that front:

Visually, this game wiped the floor with any other Doom console game and even the PC original.

 

[Septimius]

its kind of neat back then that they had to design hardware in a way where they had to essentially build a box with severe flaws and severe strengths just to keep them cost productive. PS1 affine texture mapping looked like shit and the best games ended up using flat textures like tobal or final fantasy, but N64's low storage sorta mandated their games to be less detailed but with very nice filtering.

Megaman Legends is a nice use case. You can see the problems with the playstation hardware with the ugly affine texture warping and its inability to perform subpixel rasterization so you'd get jittery polygons. The N64 is much better technologically but in the end both look fine because the art style sorta lends itself to the sharp jaggy edges.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ua0VclnUvw

I wonder how much is bias and how much is preference, but I am so turned off by the 64 version. The sound is terrible, because of it's.. what is that, some crappy compressed 8 bit sample depth at 22KHz? The better filtering but with extremely low res textures due to size restrictions gives a feeling that just doesn't appeal to me. I don't know if it's an association or a genuine preference, but looking at video from RR64, I can just feel the N64 controller in my hands, and it just doesn't appeal to me. Feels more like association, though. But, trying to be objective about it, the sound is terrible. When the games are built around the restrictions, it's obvious just how glorious the games can be. Mario 64, Zelda and Mario Kart show that. But with Megaman there, it's obvious that the game isn't built to use the strengths of the N64. Relying on textures and sampled voices has storage be 0KB free from the get go. Low res textures with good filtering makes everything too soft. The lacking filtering of the PS1 on the other hand gives a poorer representation of a great product, while the N64 counterpart in this case makes a poor product, and filtering on top of that doesn't really help.

 

[Italia64]

A small video to understand some N64 capabilities.

TUROK 2 DYNAMIC LIGHTING ANALYSIS

Here's a Turok 2 video recorded by me - every single second shows multiple dynamic lighting but here some notes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OLTbS27oIU

0:09 real-time lighting and real-time explosion, polygonal fire completely controlled by the player

0:40-0:51 real-time lighting that lights very deep, exactly like a flare. You can direct it in every direction.

0:56-01:00 real-time lighting with polygonal line of fire

01:10 lens flare blue effect

03:21-04:08 gradient effects, from dark to light and from light to dark in a gradually way (unfortunately the place wasn't completely in the dark but exist several of them further in the game), green lens flare effects when you move around the flare, real-time lighting while you move the flare, whenever you want and in every single second, textures are colored by the light

04:08-4:44 same above plus polygonal fireline

4:48-5:22 amazing combo of real-time lighting, real-time explosion, coloured lens flares, electric shock effect, followed by coloured real-time lights from behind - unmatched

06:25 flare put on the ceiling enlightening the room plus great lens flare effect

06:54-end the Nuke, real-time lights over the fully polygonal and animated weapon, real-time lighting all over every centimetre of surface, real-time enormous multiple explosions, all the room changes colour.

(select the highest resolution available)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OLTbS27oIU

 

[LordKasual]

i dunno but I never was a fan of how super blurry everything was on N64.

I preferred the sharper, more pixelated feel of the PS1 TBH

 

[Italia64]

Watch this video from start to end and analyse every detail (select at least 720p or more).
https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcgzS63Ma0c

I was playing this mission before and I was astonished by the graphics of this game. The texture quality in this level is remarkable.


I strongly recommend you to play this game on a good Sony WEGA, it's incredible.

In this video:

- smooth frame-rate
- impeccable draw distance
- dynamic lighting
- interactive environment
- amazing texture quality
- high quality of pre-lit
- unmatched reloads animations (the best of the generation without any doubt)
- enemies has thousands of different and realistic animations
- realistic face mapping (usually this system was bad, but in PD was perfect)
- motion blur
- polygon intense
- extremely complex level's architecture
- unmatched use of transparencies (I seen a level like this only in Conker and Tooie, and never something similar on PSX)
- perfect blood which hits the surfaces
- many dead enemies don't disappear

What else say? Probably other 100 things as in Rareware games every single room was plenty of details and finesses.

This game is the testament of the graphical achievements of the 5th generation. Nothing without the Rareware logo in the beginning can stand in front of him.

And in my whole life I never seen a game with more attention to details than Perfect Dark. After 16 years I'm still discovering secrets and easter eggs. Not to mention the infinite replay value, without any doubt on paper is the biggest of the entire generation.

Probably less than 5 people in the world actually completed it 100%. And surely nobody have tried all the possible games in the combat simulator.

When I play PD I understand why it took so many years, so many money and so many persons. It's infinite. And they stored it in a 32MB cart...crazy.

Here's my pros/cons list:

PERFECT DARK (2000) 97%
Developer: Rareware
Publisher: Rareware (NA, Eu), Nintendo (Jp)
+Best FPS ever made
+ Incredible and shocking graphics:
fantastic textures
real time lights, plenty of reflexes
impeccable draw distance
great level design
very good cut-scenes
+ Unmatchable weaponry, so innovative, huge and varied
+ Great, deep and articulate plot
+ Varied gameplay, plenty of things to do, perfect balancing between action and stealth
+ Objectives and missions' paths change when you change the difficulty
Almost endless replay value:
Combat Simulator is a game apart, everything is customisable, tons of options and modalities, all in single player against Simulants or in multiplayer
shooting range and training room are very nice features
single player campaign playable in cooperative 2 player mode too
entire campaign playable with player 2 using enemies, very innovative
+ Best local multiplayer I ever seen
+ It's a Rareware game...soundtrack is mind-blowing
+ Tons of different and perfectly recreated sound effects
- Some frame rate issues
- They removed the Transfer Pak feature...grrr!

 

[My words exactly!]

Italia64 on point

 

[Toadthemushroom]

Watch this video from start to end and analyse every detail (select at least 720p or more).
https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcgzS63Ma0c

Thanks for posting this and the Turok 2 video, cool stuff! Would like to see more with the more technically accomplished N64 games that really pushed the boundaries.

 

[Haganeren]

But if the N64 wasn't that powerful compared to the Playstation, why Rayman 2 have been butchered so much on its PSX version ? I mean, Ubi Soft always try to have the best of each platform so i always find it surprising and it was the absolute proof of the superiority of the Nintendo 64 for me.

 

[Italia64]

But if the N64 wasn't that powerful compared to the Playstation, why Rayman 2 have been butchered so much on its PSX version ? I mean, Ubi Soft always try to have the best of each platform so i always find it surprising and it was the absolute proof of the superiority of the Nintendo 64 for me.

N64 version of Rayman 2 was incredibly superior, right.
And think about Shadow Man, the difference is probably even deeper.
The World Is Not Enough, Roadsters, Re-Volt, Amorines, Attitide, FIFA 99,Gauntlet Legends,Spiderman, Vigilante 8 and many other examples shows the graphical superiority of the N64 versions.

On N64 you also have lazy ports (Gex 64, Toy Story 2,A Bug's Life, etc).

But when N64 ports was better (almost in every case) the game was extremely more good looking and often with the add of the four player mode.

Also, you won't never find a great graphical game which is better on PSX (Rayman 2,Shadow Man, Re-Volt, 007 TWINE, etc). When the multiplatform game was a pushing graphics game, in 100% of the cases it was better on N64 and all the reviews wrote this. Guess why?

Think about Vigilante 8,play the PS version and after watch this:
https://youtu.be/cB-Pi1sua_c

It's not emulated, it's on original hardware, crazy.

 

[Italia64]

Thanks for posting this and the Turok 2 video, cool stuff! Would like to see more with the more technically accomplished N64 games that really pushed the boundaries.

You're welcome. I'm going to post other graphical analysis soon ;-)

 

[XgorreKrusadeX]

Watch this video from start to end and analyse every detail (select at least 720p or more).
https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcgzS63Ma0c

I was playing this mission before and I was astonished by the graphics of this game. The texture quality in this level is remarkable.


I strongly recommend you to play this game on a good Sony WEGA, it's incredible.

In this video:

- smooth frame-rate
- impeccable draw distance
- dynamic lighting
- interactive environment
- amazing texture quality
- high quality of pre-lit
- unmatched reloads animations (the best of the generation without any doubt)
- enemies has thousands of different and realistic animations
- realistic face mapping (usually this system was bad, but in PD was perfect)
- motion blur
- polygon intense
- extremely complex level's architecture
- unmatched use of transparencies (I seen a level like this only in Conker and Tooie, and never something similar on PSX)
- perfect blood which hits the surfaces
- many dead enemies don't disappear

What else say? Probably other 100 things as in Rareware games every single room was plenty of details and finesses.

This game is the testament of the graphical achievements of the 5th generation. Nothing without the Rareware logo in the beginning can stand in front of him.

And in my whole life I never seen a game with more attention to details than Perfect Dark. After 16 years I'm still discovering secrets and easter eggs. Not to mention the infinite replay value, without any doubt on paper is the biggest of the entire generation.

Probably less than 5 people in the world actually completed it 100%. And surely nobody have tried all the possible games in the combat simulator.

When I play PD I understand why it took so many years, so many money and so many persons. It's infinite. And they stored it in a 32MB cart...crazy.

Here's my pros/cons list:

PERFECT DARK (2000) 97%
Developer: Rareware
Publisher: Rareware (NA, Eu), Nintendo (Jp)
+Best FPS ever made
+ Incredible and shocking graphics:
fantastic textures
real time lights, plenty of reflexes
impeccable draw distance
great level design
very good cut-scenes
+ Unmatchable weaponry, so innovative, huge and varied
+ Great, deep and articulate plot
+ Varied gameplay, plenty of things to do, perfect balancing between action and stealth
+ Objectives and missions' paths change when you change the difficulty
Almost endless replay value:
Combat Simulator is a game apart, everything is customisable, tons of options and modalities, all in single player against Simulants or in multiplayer
shooting range and training room are very nice features
single player campaign playable in cooperative 2 player mode too
entire campaign playable with player 2 using enemies, very innovative
+ Best local multiplayer I ever seen
+ It's a Rareware game...soundtrack is mind-blowing
+ Tons of different and perfectly recreated sound effects
- Some frame rate issues
- They removed the Transfer Pak feature...grrr!

No PSX game can reach all those visual and gameplay features....End of discussion. N64 wins! (i own and love both systems)

 

[jett]

I like how Perfect Dark's garbage performance is waved away as "some" framerate issues. Even worse, calling the framerate in that video "smooth."

 

[Elman]

Think about Vigilante 8,play the PS version and after watch this:
https://youtu.be/cB-Pi1sua_c

It's not emulated, it's on original hardware, crazy.

Image quality is definitely better, but the framerate wasn't sub 15 FPS on the PSX..and I wouldn't favor image quality for the shitty MIDI port of the game's soundtrack. I had no idea it was that terrible on the N64.

 

[Italia64]

No PSX game can reach all those visual and gameplay features....End of discussion. N64 wins! (i own and love both systems)

Right, PSX can't, not even in dreams. But in 2016 some people are blind.

 

[Italia64]

Image quality is definitely better, but the framerate wasn't sub 15 FPS on the PSX..and I wouldn't favor image quality for the shitty MIDI port of the game's soundtrack. I had no idea it was that terrible on the N64.

You have frame rate issues only in ultra high-res. With normal and high-res the game is very fluid.

N64 version of the game is way better

 

[Italia64]

I like how Perfect Dark's garbage performance is waved away as "some" framerate issues. Even worse, calling the framerate in that video "smooth."

Perfect Dark is on Metacritic the best FPS ever, all the reviews agreed to say taste while the frame rate issues were present, them weren't never enough bad to let the gameplay down.
Maybe all the reviews were wrong and they didn't notice the garbage performance.

A lot of persons are annoyed by the frame rate drops, it's true. Luckily I never had this kind of problems and I enjoyed PD from start to end.

But if you hate frame-rate drops keep in mind:

- You can play it in normal resolution
- The whole combat situation mode (half of the game), never has frame rate noticeable drops (unless in 4 players, or very unplayable if you set 4 players with 12 characters in the same arena)
- A lot of missions don't have frame rate issues not even in high-res mode (just watch the game I linked, you can notice very small slowdowns and never enough to affects the gameplay, just watch the video and see that).

If its average score is 95-98%, there is a reason. If the slowdowns were such bad it wouldn't be a such praised game. This for sure.

If me and other millions of gamers never complained about frame rate issues, maybe it means that the problem is subjective more than objective.

We have to be unbiased and discover that what is valid for us, maybe is not valid for everyone.
So if I don't have problems with PS frame rate, maybe I'm an exception. So I get informations, I read the reviews, forums, YouTube comments, gamefaqs walkthoughs etc. and I discover that frame rate issues for the majority of reviewers and gamers are only bit annoying in that game. And that are the only thing which divides PD from the 10/10.

 

[XgorreKrusadeX]

I like how Perfect Dark's garbage performance is waved away as "some" framerate issues. Even worse, calling the framerate in that video "smooth."

Can you name a PlayStation top tier (talking about visuals) FPS with better performance? There is no single title in PSX with the visual features Perfect Dark sports, and i don´t recall Medal of Honor, Delta Force Urban Warfare, Quake 2 or 007 the World is not enough having exactly ultra smooth framerate.On those times the framerate issues of Perfect Dark were acceptable. In fact, those games looked amazing for PSX, but none of them matchn Perfect dark, or even Turok 3 visual levels. Even Quake and 007 are for N64 too, and they look better on Ninty machine.

 

[Italia64]

Can you name a PlayStation top tier (talking about visuals) FPS with better performance? There is no single title in PSX with the visual features Perfect Dark sports, and i don´t recall Medal of Honor, Delta Force Urban Warfare, Quake 2 or 007 the World is not enough having exactly ultra smooth framerate.On those times the framerate issues of Perfect Dark were acceptable. In fact, those games looked amazing for PSX, but none of them matchn Perfect dark, or even Turok 3 visual levels. Even Quake and 007 are for N64 too, and they look better on Ninty machine.

Come on, don't ask impossible things. He can't name a PSX game with graphics like Perfect Dark. You're putting him in a very bad situation.

PSX has some very good graphics: MGS, RRT4, GT2, Soul Reaver, Tekken 3,etc. But when you put them near Perfect Dark...It's embarrassing.

About 007 TWINE...on N64 it used to push far more than 100.000 polygons per second (no PS games can do that), it had 4 players mode, a lot of big levels, etc.

On PS not only is jaggy, trembling and pixelated like all the PSX FPSs, but has less levels (only 11 I recall), no multiplayer, and worse in every aspect.

Simply there is no contest.

 

[Version 3.0]

Can you name a PlayStation top tier (talking about visuals) FPS with better performance? There is no single title in PSX with the visual features Perfect Dark sports, and i don´t recall Medal of Honor, Delta Force Urban Warfare, Quake 2 or 007 the World is not enough having exactly ultra smooth framerate.On those times the framerate issues of Perfect Dark were acceptable. In fact, those games looked amazing for PSX, but none of them matchn Perfect dark, or even Turok 3 visual levels. Even Quake and 007 are for N64 too, and they look better on Ninty machine.

I didn't play all the way through it, but I have played it fairly recently, on N64 and PS1, and Quake II is extremely impressive on PS1. High resolution and runs great. One could make a case that the PS1 version is more impressive than the N64 version. Just giving credit where it's due.

That said, I will say once more: the idea that the PS1 is as powerful as, must less more powerful than, the N64 is absurd. It's literally as ridiculous as wondering whether the 3DO or Atari Jaguar is as powerful as a Playstation. The answer is no. There's over a year of tech advances in between, during a time when graphics technology was moving very fast.

 

[Italia64]

Often people compare Quake 2 on PS and N64. It's not fair, as the N64 one is a completely different version, only the first level is the same.

Both games have their pros and cons.

This review is very useful to understand the N64 pros:
https://youtu.be/ZYLJ4eW04xY

This is not the case of 007 TWINE. In that case the game is very different because PS couldn't manage to run that graphics, despite the fact that it not even had to use, z-buffer, etc.

 

[jett]

Can you name a PlayStation top tier (talking about visuals) FPS with better performance? There is no single title in PSX with the visual features Perfect Dark sports, and i don´t recall Medal of Honor, Delta Force Urban Warfare, Quake 2 or 007 the World is not enough having exactly ultra smooth framerate.On those times the framerate issues of Perfect Dark were acceptable. In fact, those games looked amazing for PSX, but none of them matchn Perfect dark, or even Turok 3 visual levels. Even Quake and 007 are for N64 too, and they look better on Ninty machine.

I also can't recall a single PS1 game that I owned that routinely ran at 10fps or less.

 

[Italia64]

This is typical of people who tries to defend a weaker thesis.

One side showed an huge list of graphical features all on screen at the same time, and the other side tried to spot a weak point and focus on it.

This happens always in N64 vs. PSX graphical comparison.

On N64 library you have:

- the highest polygons count (WDC, Battle for Naboo, Perfect Dark, 007 TWINE, Rush 2049, NFL QB Club 2000, etc.)

- better dynamic lighting (Conker, Tooie, Turok 2, etc.)

- better real-time shadows (Conker, ASB 2000, etc)

- the best frame-rate/polys/effects coefficient of the entire generation (Battle for Naboo)

- the best lip synch and animations (Conker)

- far better animations in sport games (NFL QB Club games, ASB Games, ISS games, etc.)

- the highest texture quality reached (Tooie, Conker, Perfect Dark)

- the best transparencies (Conker, Tooie, Perfect Dark)

- the best draw distance (Battle for Naboo, Rush 2049, Tooie, Indiana Jones, Majora's Mask etc)

- about 30-40 games running on 640x480 (if you add the whole PSX and Saturn libraries you don't reach this number)

- the best real-time explosions (Turok 2)

- best physics (WDC; Rocket Robot on Wheels, Wave Race 64 etc.)


...and I can continue for a day or two, you get the point yet. And the N64 games I listed show the features in completely 3D games with completely free camera, with all filterings running.
It's much more difficult than show graphics features in on-rail cameras games, games with cameras which moves in one axis only, games with prerendered backgrounds, etc.

How is not possible to recognise the N64 graphical superiority in matter of 3D graphics?

So for you N64 is not better despite tons of things impossible for PS1 I listed, only because frame rate issues? Not a problem man, we can play your game and talk about:


Battle for Naboo:

Watch the air missions in this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poV3KN7JgPE

- frame rate always between 30-60 fps, even with dynamic lightings and a lot of enemies on screen
- 640x480 resolution
- dynamic lighting
- probably the best draw distance of the generation
- very high number of polys on screen (often much over 100.000 per second)
- complete freedom of movement
- slick animations

Can you mention a PS game capable to do that?


Or we can talk about World Driver Championship:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg9JFWFu2nk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtPEsa2jHg4

Here's a sample of the poly count
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48X0jJCQucc

- smooth frame rate even with 8 very high polys cars on screen at the same time (better overall frame rate than GT2)
- one of the most polys intense games of the generation
- 640x480 res without Expansion Pak
- physics system more advanced than RRT4 and GT
- great draw distance
- great backgrounds realisation with high polys models
- clean, detailed and crispy textures
- pre-lit better than GT, fake reflexes at the same level
- best lens flare of the gen
- perfectly rounded curves, not squared like GT2
- not trembling or pixelated

And this is GT2, the best graphics on PSX.
Look at the backgrounds...are embarassing. It's a great graphic for the system, but there is no doubt about what is better. And look how is trembling and pixelated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuuXJx6a9BE


So, for people who thinks that N64 is capable of impossible visuals for PSX only because it sacrifies the frame rate, weel I showed they're wrong.

 

[Ruud_Luiten]

I like this thread!

Anno 2017 most Nintendo fans are all about gameplay, not tech / graphics.

Time changes alot.

 

[Italia64]

I like this thread!

Anno 2017 most Nintendo fans are all about gameplay, not tech / graphics.

Time changes alot.

I miss when Nintendo had the best hardware, because I want to play some franchises even noticing graphical amazing new features, etc.

 

[nkarafo]

I'm team N64 here as well but we have to be fair.

Perfect Dark did have serious frame rate issues even on normal resolution mode. Not in all levels but some.

Turok 2 on the N64 was unplayable for me. Fuck that port, i don't even care how great it looks. It's only worth it on the PC.

Quake 2 on the PS1 is witchcraft. It's the most impressive game on that console for me.

Having said that, N64 still wins. There's nothing on the PS1 that looks as good or "demanding" as Doom 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Conker, Shadowman, WDC, 1080 Snowboarding, Battle for Naboo, Episode 1 Racer, etc.

N64 was especially good for 3D platformers. Being able to use big surfaces with less polys thanks to perspective correction and also things like instant loading and a very fast cartridge medium, allowed for some very complex and big sandboxes that the PS1 would never be able to handle without huge compromises.

 

[Italia64]

I'm team N64 here as well but we have to be fair.

Perfect Dark did have serious frame rate issues even on normal resolution mode. Not in all levels but some.

Turok 2 on the N64 was unplayable for me. Fuck that port, i don't even care how great it looks. It's only worth it on the PC.

Quake 2 on the PS1 is witchcraft. It's the most impressive game on that console for me.

Having said that, N64 still wins. There's nothing on the PS1 that looks as good or "demanding" as Doom 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Conker, Shadowman, WDC, 1080 Snowboarding, Battle for Naboo, Episode 1 Racer, etc.

N64 was especially good for 3D platformers. Being able to use big surfaces with less polys thanks to perspective correction and also things like instant loading and a very fast cartridge medium, allowed for some very complex and big sandboxes that the PS1 would never be able to handle without huge compromises.

I repeat that frame rate issues are subjective. I always played Perfect Dark in high-res and I spent hundreds of hour on it, and like me a lot of other persons did it. If it was unplayable how this would been possible?

I think that IGN review is very unbiased and talks in a proper way about the frame rate:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2000/05/20/perfect-dark-3

By the way, for people allergic to frame rate drops I also linked incredible graphics with very smooth frame rate.


By the way, I think that with my previous post nobody will have doubts about what is the best 3D graphics console of that generation.

 

[c0de]

From a CPU point of view, the N64 ran circles around the PSX. But that's of course not the only parameter when looking at console performance.

 

[LinkNL]

Lmao at those Sony, fanboys trying so hard to compare Crash bandicoot, against Mario 64.

One takes you on a giant adventure packed with so many stuff to do, while the other is boring as fuck, totally unsatisfying gameplay actually.

Sigh,,,, why dont people understand what real gameplay is, and recognize boring and lazy gameplay.

 

[nkarafo]

By the way, I think that with my previous post nobody will have doubts about what is the best 3D graphics console of that generation.

You should post some videos of WDC Australia stage or whichever is the one with the big metallic bridge.

Also, there is another stage where you are driving through an airport or something and you can see how behind the glass they modeled the interior.

Lmao at those Sony, fanboys trying so hard to compare Crash bandicoot, against Mario 64.

One takes you on a giant adventure packed with so many stuff to do, while the other is boring as fuck, totally unsatisfying gameplay actually.

Sigh,,,, why dont people understand what real gameplay is, and recognize boring and lazy gameplay.

I agree.

I mean Crash looks better in still screenshots. And it does have much better textures. But It's an on rails game. You can't control the camera and it's barely just a "runner". Mario may look worse on spots but you have to take into account that it's a free roaming 3D sandbox where you fully control the camera. Banjo-Kazooie is even better with even bigger and more complex areas and even better textures. PS1 efforts like Croc or Spyro simply can't come close to that.

 

[Timu]

Italia64 on point

Yep, agreed with this.