• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

I hated PS1 visuals

I can go back and play everything from the 2600 on up, until I hit the psx/n64/saturn era, then I just have to jump over that whole blurry/framey/janky mess of an era then pick back up from Dreamcast on up

me too... such an ugly era.

No wonder we get so many remakes from that period
 
I can only play PS1 through emulator, either from my pc or my vita. Preferably vita because the games look decent and it's more comfortable to play on a portable. PC if I want them to look as nice as possible, but that's rare when going up against the comfy bed and being able to move the screen effortlessly.
Thank you!! Everyone always praises comfy couch and console/PC gaming and I thought I was the only one who prefers comfy bed and handheld where I can move it at will.
 
Not me. The PS1's visuals are really clean compared to the dirty muddy mess that was the N64. Other than the graphics looking unclear, the frame rate in N64 games were abysmal.

I'll take PS1 visuals over N64 any day. This period is the awkward period though. I view it like the 8-bit period where things looked good, but not great. The SNES for example aged a lot better visually compared to the NES, and I see this era being the same. In the end, it is a matter of taste.
 
i remember going back to majora's mask in 2006. it was a rough experience for the first thirty minutes, but i got used to the visuals quickly. what i hadn't expected was how nicely everything animated. i was used to the slow zombielike movements from playstation games like final fantasy viii. instead, majora's mask was a lot more expressive.
 
The lack of z-buffer was the thing I noticed most. For the time it was great though which is obviously reflected in how many sales they had. Medievil and Crash/Spyro were amazing.
 
They're okay. After I tasted Dreamcast graphics, they looked pretty bad. I'd be lying if I said my lil Genesis owning ass wasn't salty about PS1 though, for the longest damn time. Never got one, just had to fucking deal. I wanted to play fucking Dino Crisis and shit. I only began to play PS1 games after I got a PS2, using said PS2 and my local rental place. Dino Crisis 2 and Resident Evil 2, are still the absolute shit.

I only beat RE2 for the first time, like a year or 2 ago. Excellent game.

Edit: Rayman 2 was an absolutely fascinating case-study to observe growing up. Enormous visual disparity of fundamentally, the exact same game. I noticed that my Rayman on Dreamcast, did not look like my cousin's Rayman on Playstation, at all. Felt special and sad at the same time. Really just wanted my cousin to have what I had.
 
I always love PS1 vs. N64 comparisons because it's so subjective. I can really understand the hate for the texture warping, but personally I don't have any penchant against seeing the pixels themselves. Having grown up with the N64, I prefer the PS1 to this day. Yes, many of the PS1 games used a mix of 2D and 3D, which isn't the same as rendering everything in 3D as was common on N64, but ultimately the games probably looked better for it. Technical comparisons aside, the PS1 was ultimately the better vehicle for games with strong art direction that generation in my opinion.
 
When up close, I agree. Those faces still haunt me.
6877-468x-Metal%20Gear%20Solid%20-%20Snake%20and%20Meryl.JPG

This was mind blowing at the time. I hadn't even imagined one could make a video game with the kind of cinematic qualities found in Metal Gear Solid. Watching those early 3D games, I thought it was a really cool time to be growing up and playing video games.
 
They should have gotten Ken Kutaragi to design the sound chip.
Nah Kutaragi was well done with Nintendo after the add-on fiasco. Can't blame him, either.

But the idea of a console by that point in the industry lacking a dedicated sound chip is crazy.

They're okay. After I tasted Dreamcast graphics, they looked pretty bad. I'd be lying if my Genesis owning ass wasn't salty about PS1 though, for the longest damn time. Never got one, just had to fucking deal. I wanted to play fucking Dino Crisis and shit. I only began to play PS1 games after I got a PS2, using said PS2 and my local rental place. Dino Crisis 2 and Resident Evil 2, are still the absolute shit.

Lol yeah, went Genny -> PS1 here. My dad went and got the package that came with Madden, it's probably the most time I've ever put in a sports game...which still isn't that much. Wasn't until I started picking up stuff like Gaires and SFII Champion Edition that I went beast mode on that thing.

My original PS1 worked for all of two fucking months before the lens piece cracked in half. While playing Crash 2 at the time, no less (not in the system, it was just the game of the moment). Didn't pick one up again until '03 or so; that sonofabitch is still working :)

I always love PS1 vs. N64 comparisons because it's so subjective. I can really understand the hate for the texture warping, but personally I don't have any penchant against seeing the pixels themselves. Having grown up with the N64, I prefer the PS1 to this day. Yes, many of the PS1 games used a mix of 2D and 3D, which isn't the same as rendering everything in 3D as was common on N64, but ultimately the games probably looked better for it. Technical comparisons aside, the PS1 was ultimately the better vehicle for games with strong art direction that generation in my opinion.
100% agreed. N64 games are really hurt by the low-poly counts. PS1 and Saturn games always had more detail, and I'd even say those systems were better at 2D/3D mixes than N64.

I'd even go as far to say N64 was the most crippled system that gen, even moreso than Saturn, due almost entirely to the cartridge format and (learning this now) lack of dedicated audio hardware. Mind-boggling.
 
I love the big chunky pixels and low-res unfiltered textures, they have a certain appeal compared to blurry N64 graphics. And I love the unique expressiveness you can get out of the low poly models. But the texture warping can ruin it in some cases. Nothing good about that shit.
 
You're remembering wrong. It had no problem bilinear filtering textures. Couldn't do mip mapping tho (except through software), so far away textures became a pixelated mess.

PS2 could do mipmapping but they messed up the implementation and it couldn't take angles into account. That's why PS2 games always have more texture aliasing than other systems from that generation.

Dreamcast had proper mipmapping but almost no games used trilinear filtering so textures would just jump from one level to the next.

N64 could actually do trilinear filtering better than either of those consoles, it's just that the texture cache kept them from using it as much as would be ideal.
 
You aren't alone op, I hated the overly polygonal look PS games had. Plus the warping made it even worse. Other than Virtual Boy the PS1 had the ugliest looking games I ever seen. I liked the look of the N64 and Saturn games much more. Then to top it off that generation has aged horribly, so sadly it makes it very had to go back to those games.
 
This was mind blowing at the time. I hadn't even imagined one could make a video game with the kind of cinematic qualities found in Metal Gear Solid. Watching those early 3D games, I thought it was a really cool time to be growing up and playing video games.

Metal Gear Solid was one of those games where great direction and an entertaining storyline, that it just out weighed the technical limitations of the game. But even then, it was quite a good looking title on the PS1. Jeremy Blaustein's impressive localization also went along way in helping create an immerse atmosphere for the game.

As far as modeling goes in a 32bit console game, I was impressed with with the Shenmue Saturn demo. Obviously Shenmue used different models for different sequences. But the texture work and modeling was quite impressive by Saturn standards.
 
On the beginning of 3D, 3D looked ugly. Nice.
On its time, that ugly 3D was almost the best a system could put out. You can only say it's ugly from today's tech perspective, which isn't fair.

Back then noone cared about bilinear filtering, antialiasing, resolution or fps, and everyone had tons and tons of fun.

Not playing PSX games because of its 3D is... well, your problem I guess.
 
I thought a lot of the PSX games were ugly. However, the system had a lot of games that used pre-rendered backgrounds, and I really liked the way those looked. They made the games feel ahead of their time. Mostly RPGs used it, as well as some other games like the Resident Evil series.

In terms of 3D graphics, I found PSX games to be ugly. There are a few games that looked great though, like Crash Bandicoot. There were a few games that actually gave the best N64 titles a run for their money. That's not to say that I thought the N64 was amazing graphically either. The games ended up looking really blocky, blurry, with shitty textures. One thing I noticed is that while the N64 was better at some things, PSX games always looked more vibrant.
 
I loved the PS1 and its library during its time, but I was never impressed with the visuals at all. The N64 impressed me over and over with the first party stuff and anything from Rare. Plus PS1 load times were HORRIBLE

PS1 = fantastic library, awful tech
 
I was 4 when the N64 came out.

The graphics were pretty much bordering on real life to me.

I still remember.
 
There were some great looking games like Sheep Dog n Wolf
beb646dd592cc22667f808305d0b2239.jpg

and seeing Gran Turismo for the first time, I didn't think that game graphics could possibly get any better in the future.
 
You guys must be very young, ofcourse ps1 3d looks ugly, but back in those days they just blow our mind!

MGS1 ugly???? nahhh, i'm sorry but you are mistaken.
 
I love it when people praise the graphics on the n64 as if they were any better. A blurred mess...
 
PS1 games have their charm but I do prefer the N64 look. I bought the N64 with Super Mario 64 and gaming changed forever for me after that. Later I bought a PS1 with Final Fantasy VII and I remember thinking it looked bad compared to Final Fantasy III on the SNES. It didn't even occur to me to directly compare it to the visually superior Super Mario 64.

PS1 graphics have grown on me thanks to the PSP and Vita.
 
You guys must be very young, ofcourse ps1 3d looks ugly, but back in those days they just blow our mind!

MGS1 ugly???? nahhh, i'm sorry but you are mistaken.

I'm not young and always found the 3D on the ps1 really ugly. The N64 was slightly better on this.
 
I don't remember anyone talking about texture quality, resolution or fps back then, or people were not near as problematic back then.
 
ITT we side with the console we had at the time.

I owned 'em all. They all had great games.

Though that generation hasn't aged as well as others, as it was a transitional generation. It was the first/worst gen where polygon graphics were the norm, and companies were learning how to transition 2D games to 3D (or in some cases, 2.5D).

Of course, I'm of the opinion that some franchises should have just stayed 2D.
 
I judge graphics according to the hardware and the time when the game was developed.

I can still play games like Ridge Racer 4 on my original PlayStation and say: "Wow, this looks amazing". Seriously, this game is full of details on the tracks, and it all was done on such a 'weak console'.

I guess I'm a lucky gamer. I can still go back to any game of the past, and be amazed by it's technical qualities. If a game was amazing looking back then, it still looks amazing to me.
 
I judge graphics according to the hardware and the time when the game was developed.

I can still play games like Ridge Racer 4 on my original PlayStation and say: "Wow, this looks amazing". Seriously, this game is full of details on the tracks, and it all was done on such a 'weak console'.

I guess I'm a lucky gamer. I can still go back to any game of the past, and be amazed by it's technical qualities. If a game was amazing looking back then, it still looks amazing to me.
I'm the same way.
 
Top Bottom