• 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.

Nintendo 64 Vs. PlayStation: Which console was more innovative?

RemyL

Member
Hardware wise, probably the N64. But the following generations of gaming followed more in the footsteps of the PS1 in terms of more cinematic/story driven kinda games targeted towards a more mature audience than prior generations.
I was thinking of a similar response to write but after reading your comment I realized I couldn't have phrased it any better.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Even without knowing older not so famous systems brought CD first, people do know the Saturn released first in that gen, right? How can they cite CD as PlayStation's innovation, or twist logic with how dual analog is still used so it was an innovation but a single analog stick isn't used now so it wasn't? Like, dual analog sorta needs one first, then a second. Or pretend higher capacity media was Sony's idea like cartridges didn't also strive to be higher capacity over time or have their own advantages like loading speed. CD is no longer used, does that mean it wasn't innovative then (and the last few generations even with discs for distribution the games still needed to be installed on other devices because disc media just freaking suck ass in terms of read speed)? Or now that Nintendo's not using discs but something closer to cartridges then N64 brought that innovation and it's not just a matter of different and new media for different and new purposes? We're moving toward digital and/or streaming. Wtf @ singling out N64 as the one outdated visually system like PS (or any system from back then) 3D games at 240p to 320p (or weird like Tekken 3's 384x480 stretched, lol @ calling all this "crisp") look great on a 4K TV with those jaggies, seams, the warping, wobbling, common interlacing, because as fanboys they're more used to certain deficiences. But OMG the evil fog, like most great N64 games like the epic Ocarina of Time weren't so much more ambitious in their sprawling 3D vistas than anything on the PlayStation which had low draw distance even in blocky games like Tomb Raider. But sure, the top-down Metal Gear Solid looked ace @ 320p with all above issues and fps drops akin to GoldenEye, a cinematic stealth FPS in large sandbox levels.


All videos from real hardware. Here's some underrated Saturn too. F-1's framerate is rock solid if the TV style view (also available as mirror) is disabled (unlike here sadly) even with 24 cars. The other title is a very neat drifting around traffic/rivals while upgrading your car and parts game.

PS: you guys don't know that arcade joints were basically bars where young and old adults hanged day & night in many parts of the world? Wipeout being played in clubs (people never played video games in clubs, stop listening to PR bs) means PlayStation brought vidya gaemz to adultz!​
 
Last edited:
Pc engine and mega cd were add ons unless we count the pc engine duo which was an all in one. The 3do is the first cd rom system released without need for add ons.

That's a good point and key distinction.

A bit off-topic regarding innovativeness and dont know if it has been mentioned before, but the PS1, as far as I know, was the only one of the two that was hacked. You could basically buy the console, have a chip soldered on for fairly cheap and buy games for 10 euros from anyone who could copy them. This might have made the PS1 even more mainstream.

Yeah PS1 was almost dreadfully easy to hack and pirated games were really popular in parts of South America and the Middle East for example. I don't think pirating was a big thing tho in the biggest markets (U.S, Europe, Japan).

I believe personally Nintendo shot themselves in the foot with the wrong decisions on both N64 (convoluted controller, carts limited to very small storage, carts pricing) and GC (smaller discs again insisting on smaller storage, can't be used as a media player was such a shame at a time media players were a thing). It's not the power that's the problem.

Those things were definitely bigger reasons N64 & Gamecube didn't gain traction compared to PS1 & N64. Those choices caused Nintendo to miss out on a ton of games that were starting to shape gaming, that Sony ended up getting practically exclusively because Nintendo's systems in those eras didn't seem like much of options, Sega was basically on its last legs as a platform holder, and Microsoft jumped in too late to sway a lot of early 3P support from PlayStation.

I'd still want an iQue tho just for the rarity factor.

Alexios Alexios Yeah people might be a bit out of pocket calling the CD "revolutionary" in PS1; the industry was trending CDs even from the late '80s and very early '90s (and some theories have about PS5 today, like using Tempest Engine for graphics work, there were literally Sega Saturn games like Shining Force III that did that with its Yamaha audio processor!!). And N64 absolutely put 3D controls as we know them today on the map, Mario 64 alone became the foundation for modern third-person 3D gaming that virtually every other game of that template has followed since.

PS1 did bring a lot of innovations that gen, especially when it came to simplifying the development process and democratizing game dev pipelines and costs, not to mention innovative marketing (even if they just built off of Sega's Genesis ads, they took that and did it bigger & better). But I think some are sleeping too much on Saturn & N64's innovations that gen, too.
 
Last edited:

Dream-Knife

Member
I believe personally Nintendo shot themselves in the foot with the wrong decisions on both N64 (convoluted controller, carts limited to very small storage, carts pricing) and GC (smaller discs again insisting on smaller storage, can't be used as a media player was such a shame at a time media players were a thing). It's not the power that's the problem.
Every generation in the 3d era has been won by the weaker system. PS1, PS2, Wii, Switch. Nintendo saw the PS1 and 2 and realized it didn't matter.
I do think carts were a mistake at the time (appreciate it now as carts are more durable though), the controller wasn't difficult for anyone back then.

GC using mini-dvds was a mistake. We all wanted them to play DVD. I was in this group, but ironically after getting an Xbox rarely used the function as internet file sharing took off then.


Side note: since Sony was pushing MiniDisk back then I'm surprised they didn't go that route. Or Nintendo didn't. Piracy wouldn't have been an issue and larger storage at the cost of speed.

One could say Nintendo pioneered faster smaller storage with the N64, something that the PS5 copied.

I kid.
 
Last edited:

nkarafo

Member
Weren't the CDTV and Philips CDi before the 3DO?

Anyway, it seems like a lot of young people where the PSX was their first system post here. Its one thing posting something you don't know about but arguing agsinst others who know more is funny to me.

The PSX was NOT the first CD system, not the first CD system that didn't need an addon, not the first system with CD audio or FMVs, or voice acting, or cinematic cutscenes.

These aren't arguments that would need some inside info and can be discussed like "who came up first with the rumble feature". These are obvious to everyone who was gaming in the early 90s, before the Playstation was even a concept.

The thread has too many pages already and these points have been covered. Please, at least use google if you want to prove others wrong. There are people here older than you who were gaming years before you discovered gaming with your Playstation.

If you are really interested about gaming history i would suggest to also download a ton of old magazines of the time so you can live those times and see how things really were.
 
Last edited:

tygertrip

Member
Weren't the CDTV and Philips CDi before the 3DO?

Anyway, it seems like a lot of young people where the PSX was their first system post here. Its one thing posting something you don't know about but arguing agsinst others who know more is funny to me.

The PSX was NOT the first CD system, not the first CD system that didn't need an addon, not the first system with CD audio or FMVs, or voice acting, or cinematic cutscenes.

These aren't arguments that would need some inside info and can be discussed like "who came up first with the rumble feature". These are obvious to everyone who was gaming in the early 90s, before the Playstation was even a consept.

The thread has too many pages already and these points have been covered. Please, at least use google if you want to prove others wrong. There are people here older than you who were gaming years before you discovered gaming with your Playstation.

If you are really interested about gaming history i would suggest to also download a ton of old magazines of the time so you can live those times and see how things really were.
Damn straight! Anyone who says the PS1 innovated CD-ROMs immediately outs themselves as not been gaming at the time. Good god, it's like virgins talking about sex!
 

BbMajor7th

Member
It's PlayStation guys, Nintendo basically admitted that when they made their next console a disc-based, pop-lid box with two memory card slots and switched the controller to a dual thumbstick device with four face buttons, four shoulder buttons and a d-pad. PlayStation's domination of that generation clearly informed the direction Nintendo took - Sega too.

If the N64 had been influential in any particular way, we'd have seen it in the PS2's design, but instead, they pushed their own innovations like pressure sensitive buttons, DVD playback, backwards compatibility, USB integration, online functionality - all of which (except for the analogue buttons) became industry standards in the years that followed.

Damn straight! Anyone who says the PS1 innovated CD-ROMs immediately outs themselves as not been gaming at the time. Good god, it's like virgins talking about sex!

Innovation and influence aren't the same thing. Fortnite didn't invent Battle Royale, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been hugely influential in popularising the genre.
 
Last edited:

marquimvfs

Member
my point that PSX had CD-quality audio is still valid
Only partially valid, because it was common on Playstation (and no, it isn't availablein every game like some like to think. Low quality audio is used in some games, mainly the ones that were launched in the beginning of the lifecycle and don't make use of redbook audio.) Albeit not very used, N64 was capable of the same audio quality, and even supported Dolbly Surround. The higher quality audio wasn't very used because it required too much space in the media (but that changed later in the console lifecycle, because of better compression techniques), and because N64 hadn't an dedicated audio chip, meaning that any audio was processed in the CPU, using resources that could be important in other areas (that also changed, because of modern codecs used in the custom microcodes). In other words, the simplest the game, the better audio quality it had, and it improved with time, but that doesn't mean it couldn't make audio just like playstation.
 
Last edited:

Trimesh

Banned
Side note: since Sony was pushing MiniDisk back then I'm surprised they didn't go that route. Or Nintendo didn't. Piracy wouldn't have been an issue and larger storage at the cost of speed.

By that point, I think Sony had pretty much given up on MiniDisc - it had a spec that was not bad at the point it was introduced, but since it was leveraging what was basically CD technology (780nm IR lasers and EFM) and the discs were small the capacity was extremely limited and the technology couldn't be changed without breaking all the backwards compatibility. UMD was intended as a higher capacity next generation update of the same idea, but in the end it never got any traction beyond the PSP. In fact, UMD video was so unsuccessful that a lot of people seem to have forgotten it ever existed.
 

tygertrip

Member
It's PlayStation guys, Nintendo basically admitted that when they made their next console a disc-based, pop-lid box with two memory card slots and switched the controller to a dual thumbstick device with four face buttons, four shoulder buttons and a d-pad. PlayStation's domination of that generation clearly informed the direction Nintendo took - Sega too.

If the N64 had been influential in any particular way, we'd have seen it in the PS2's design, but instead, they pushed their own innovations like pressure sensitive buttons, DVD playback, backwards compatibility, USB integration, online functionality - all of which (except for the analogue buttons) became industry standards in the years that followed.



Innovation and influence aren't the same thing. Fortnite didn't invent Battle Royale, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been hugely influential in popularising the genre.
The thread is about innovation.
 
Only partially valid, because it was common on Playstation (and no, it isn't availablein every game like some like to think. Low quality audio is used in some games, mainly the ones that were launched in the beginning of the lifecycle and don't make use of redbook audio.) Albeit not very used, N64 was capable of the same audio quality, and even supported Dolbly Surround. The higher quality audio wasn't very used because it required too much space in the media (but that changed later in the console lifecycle, because of better compression techniques), and because N64 hadn't an dedicated audio chip, meaning that any audio was processed in the CPU, using resources that could be important in other areas (that also changed, because of modern codecs used in the custom microcodes). In other words, the simplest the game, the better audio quality it had, and it improved with time, but that doesn't mean it couldn't make audio just like playstation.
Actually the sound was supposed to be made on the RSP part of the RCP. Some devs offloaded audio to the CPU to free resources from the graphics side of the RSP but in theory the RSP did both audio and graphics.
 

Dream-Knife

Member
By that point, I think Sony had pretty much given up on MiniDisc - it had a spec that was not bad at the point it was introduced, but since it was leveraging what was basically CD technology (780nm IR lasers and EFM) and the discs were small the capacity was extremely limited and the technology couldn't be changed without breaking all the backwards compatibility. UMD was intended as a higher capacity next generation update of the same idea, but in the end it never got any traction beyond the PSP. In fact, UMD video was so unsuccessful that a lot of people seem to have forgotten it ever existed.
1994 wasn't even close to when Sony gave up on minidisc. They were still pushing it in the early 2000s. Some Vaios had built in MD players, and MD had a spec refresh at that point ; I think it was called NetMD. I had a MD player in 03 during its last push in the American market. It was cool, but ultimately had two fatal flaws:
1. It wasn't much better than a CD player, it was just smaller
2. The Sony software had DRM which in the age of Napster, Kazaa, Limewire, etc was a deal breaker.

With the iPod taking off in 03/04 with the introduction of the 4th gen, as well as the mini, the writing was on the wall; and by the 5th gen with the 30gb video and 2 and 4gb nano the MD was dead. However that was 10 years after the PS1.

Ironically the #2 point would be very beneficial to the PS1 which experienced mass piracy.

UMD wasn't successful due to price and there wasn't any real reason to use it since DVDs had been mainstream for several years at that point and DVD really hit its stride by the time they came out in 04-05.
 
Last edited:

IFireflyl

Member
Only partially valid, because it was common on Playstation (and no, it isn't availablein every game like some like to think. Low quality audio is used in some games, mainly the ones that were launched in the beginning of the lifecycle and don't make use of redbook audio.) Albeit not very used, N64 was capable of the same audio quality, and even supported Dolbly Surround. The higher quality audio wasn't very used because it required too much space in the media (but that changed later in the console lifecycle, because of better compression techniques), and because N64 hadn't an dedicated audio chip, meaning that any audio was processed in the CPU, using resources that could be important in other areas (that also changed, because of modern codecs used in the custom microcodes). In other words, the simplest the game, the better audio quality it had, and it improved with time, but that doesn't mean it couldn't make audio just like playstation.

Only three N64 cartridges were 64MB, and that was the largest cartridge produced for any N64 game. CD-quality audio is roughly 44 MB for 5 minutes of audio. So whether or not it technically was powerful enough to play the audio, nobody would ever be able to play a game with CD-quaility audio because 5 minutes of audio tracks would take up almost 69% of the storage space. And again, only three games even had 64MB cartridges. The rest were 32MB or less, and 5 minutes of CD-quality audio would be greater than the total storage space they had, even if they didn't include any game with the audio. The Playstation could actually play music CDs as well, and I remember using that a lot with a Breaking Benjamin CD that I had back in the day. So audio-wise, Playstation was superior. It doesn't matter what theoretical support N64 had when nobody could use the features in actual implementation. At least, that's how I see it. Maybe you disagree, but I don't see how anyone could claim "innovation" when the think they're saying is innovative cannot be used in practice.
 
That's a good point and key distinction.



Yeah PS1 was almost dreadfully easy to hack and pirated games were really popular in parts of South America and the Middle East for example. I don't think pirating was a big thing tho in the biggest markets (U.S, Europe, Japan).



Those things were definitely bigger reasons N64 & Gamecube didn't gain traction compared to PS1 & N64. Those choices caused Nintendo to miss out on a ton of games that were starting to shape gaming, that Sony ended up getting practically exclusively because Nintendo's systems in those eras didn't seem like much of options, Sega was basically on its last legs as a platform holder, and Microsoft jumped in too late to sway a lot of early 3P support from PlayStation.

I'd still want an iQue tho just for the rarity factor.

Alexios Alexios Yeah people might be a bit out of pocket calling the CD "revolutionary" in PS1; the industry was trending CDs even from the late '80s and very early '90s (and some theories have about PS5 today, like using Tempest Engine for graphics work, there were literally Sega Saturn games like Shining Force III that did that with its Yamaha audio processor!!). And N64 absolutely put 3D controls as we know them today on the map, Mario 64 alone became the foundation for modern third-person 3D gaming that virtually every other game of that template has followed since.

PS1 did bring a lot of innovations that gen, especially when it came to simplifying the development process and democratizing game dev pipelines and costs, not to mention innovative marketing (even if they just built off of Sega's Genesis ads, they took that and did it bigger & better). But I think some are sleeping too much on Saturn & N64's innovations that gen, too.
Just 2 small things.
The first console with a Cdrom was the Philips CDi in 1991 and later FmTowns Marty and Amiga CD32 came before 3DO in 1993.
The second thing is that Psx was WIDELY pirated in Europe at least that i know off. And i mean EVERYBODY and their mama had the Psx with the Chip that allowed pirated games to work.

Also i dont know what you mean by "simplfying development" . the Psx was not a nice nor easy to work with machine. It was a pretty crappy machine its just that compared to Saturn (which in the words of Lobotomy devs was an "abortion") and the N64 (which was a much more complex machine) it was the lesser evil.
 
Only three N64 cartridges were 64MB, and that was the largest cartridge produced for any N64 game. CD-quality audio is roughly 44 MB for 5 minutes of audio. So whether or not it technically was powerful enough to play the audio, nobody would ever be able to play a game with CD-quaility audio because 5 minutes of audio tracks would take up almost 69% of the storage space. And again, only three games even had 64MB cartridges. The rest were 32MB or less, and 5 minutes of CD-quality audio would be greater than the total storage space they had, even if they didn't include any game with the audio. The Playstation could actually play music CDs as well, and I remember using that a lot with a Breaking Benjamin CD that I had back in the day. So audio-wise, Playstation was superior. It doesn't matter what theoretical support N64 had when nobody could use the features in actual implementation. At least, that's how I see it. Maybe you disagree, but I don't see how anyone could claim "innovation" when the think they're saying is innovative cannot be used in practice.
First of all stop acting like Psx was the first console with CD Audio IT WASNT IT DIDNT INNOVATE WITH THAT STOP IT

And second. Do you know that something called COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION exists?
44mb of audio wouldnt be 44mb on a N64 cartridge.
 
Last edited:
Started the gen with N64, didn’t like it. Wanted Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, and Resident Evil, traded it in for a Playstation lol. 3rd parties literally ditched Nintendo because of the cartridge format, Nintendo made the wrong bet.
 
Last edited:
Just 2 small things.
The first console with a Cdrom was the Philips CDi in 1991 and later FmTowns Marty and Amiga CD32 came before 3DO in 1993.
The second thing is that Psx was WIDELY pirated in Europe at least that i know off. And i mean EVERYBODY and their mama had the Psx with the Chip that allowed pirated games to work.

Also i dont know what you mean by "simplfying development" . the Psx was not a nice nor easy to work with machine. It was a pretty crappy machine its just that compared to Saturn (which in the words of Lobotomy devs was an "abortion") and the N64 (which was a much more complex machine) it was the lesser evil.

I get what you're saying WRT CDi, FM Towns Marty and CD32, but the CDi wasn't originally positioned as a games console, rather a multimedia center device. They decided to pivot their marketing afterwards but another issue there is the CDi really lacked the hardware possible for even decent sprite-based 2D games, let alone 3D ones, so its "games" were usually pretty rudimentary compared to other consoles. But if we're just talking technically speaking, it would qualify as the 1st non add-on home console with CD.

As for PS1 and ease-of-use, I wasn't saying it was super-easy or anything. However, Sony did craft up a SDK package that took a lot of the growing pains normally associated with early console software development out of the picture. Devs didn't have to spend as much time with Assembly on PS1 compared to Saturn or N64 (N64's other crippling problem was poor microcode, which Nintendo enforced on almost everyone who wasn't them or Rare).

I do think Saturn's difficulty is exaggerated by some devs (I mean you have Lobotomy's quote, but then you have devs like Treasure who considered it easier to work with compared to the PS1), but it's generally known that you had to put in more effort for comparable 3D performance on Saturn versus PlayStation, that's just the way it was. Sega's initial SDK tools weren't great, but even with the SGL 2.0 that came later in '95 for the average 3D programmer, Saturn was still more "work" to do to get similar results vs PS1.

And, that mainly came down to how the systems were designed for 3D. Sony had more control over in-house chip production and integration, so that allowed them to design a more closely-knit SDK and have a lot of things automated through their APIs. Saturn's hardware wasn't as vertically integrated, so devs needed to study more of the architecture of each chip specifically and use what available tools Sega provided to them. The Saturn's DSP for example was notoriously challenging for some devs to master; even some of the best like the Traveller's Tales guy who runs the Gaming Hut channel on Youtube, even he's been perplexed by certain functions of Saturn's DSP until very recently.
 

IFireflyl

Member
First of all stop acting like Psx was the first console with CD Audio IT WASNT IT DIDNT INNOVATE WITH THAT STOP IT

And second. Do you know that something called COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION exists?
44mb of audio wouldnt be 44mb on a N64 cartridge.

Fuck. All the way. Off. You stupid. Clown.

You're a console warring troll, and I'm done with you.
 
For example the full Resident Evil 2 soundtrack was redone in Dolby Surround for the N64 version with no loss in quality whatsoever.
yeah, and very impressive, but sound effects and dialogue were reduced quite a bit.

If the N64 had been influential in any particular way, we'd have seen it in the PS2's design, but instead, they pushed their own innovations like pressure sensitive buttons, DVD playback, backwards compatibility, USB integration, online functionality - all of which (except for the analogue buttons) became industry standards in the years that followed.
to beat a dead horse: we saw it in ps1 design updates.
e.g., https://retrocdn.net/images/a/a6/EGM_US_090.pdf#page=20
 
I get what you're saying WRT CDi, FM Towns Marty and CD32, but the CDi wasn't originally positioned as a games console, rather a multimedia center device. They decided to pivot their marketing afterwards but another issue there is the CDi really lacked the hardware possible for even decent sprite-based 2D games, let alone 3D ones, so its "games" were usually pretty rudimentary compared to other consoles. But if we're just talking technically speaking, it would qualify as the 1st non add-on home console with CD.

As for PS1 and ease-of-use, I wasn't saying it was super-easy or anything. However, Sony did craft up a SDK package that took a lot of the growing pains normally associated with early console software development out of the picture. Devs didn't have to spend as much time with Assembly on PS1 compared to Saturn or N64 (N64's other crippling problem was poor microcode, which Nintendo enforced on almost everyone who wasn't them or Rare).

I do think Saturn's difficulty is exaggerated by some devs (I mean you have Lobotomy's quote, but then you have devs like Treasure who considered it easier to work with compared to the PS1), but it's generally known that you had to put in more effort for comparable 3D performance on Saturn versus PlayStation, that's just the way it was. Sega's initial SDK tools weren't great, but even with the SGL 2.0 that came later in '95 for the average 3D programmer, Saturn was still more "work" to do to get similar results vs PS1.

And, that mainly came down to how the systems were designed for 3D. Sony had more control over in-house chip production and integration, so that allowed them to design a more closely-knit SDK and have a lot of things automated through their APIs. Saturn's hardware wasn't as vertically integrated, so devs needed to study more of the architecture of each chip specifically and use what available tools Sega provided to them. The Saturn's DSP for example was notoriously challenging for some devs to master; even some of the best like the Traveller's Tales guy who runs the Gaming Hut channel on Youtube, even he's been perplexed by certain functions of Saturn's DSP until very recently.
Yes one of the things Sony did right with the Psx was developing a functional API much earlier than the other two.

The Nintendo microcode thing wasnt Nintendo being some morons, SGI had troubles with other companies when they delivered the faster microcodes so Nintendo decided to be conservative as usual. It was very easy to introduce bugs on N64 code that were later a pain in the ass to debug. That was why N64 games took so long to develop (amongst other things). I personally think that SGI ripped off Nintendo but thats a long story so i leave it there.

As for the Saturn and its performance the pproblem it had was that it rendered in quads and all multiplat games were developed with triangles. You could render triangles in the Saturn by fusing together two vertices from one quad but that added a performance penalty for every triangle rendered destroying framerates in the process.
 
44mb of audio wouldnt be 44mb on a N64 cartridge.
you are not being specific here, you mention "audio" and you dont mention what specs and format the "audio" have, sorry but 44mb of audio in one console will occupy the same size if using the same compression and obviously there is a loss in quality in most formats back then if compared to cd quality(for the tracks that used the cd quality), both consoles have plenty of games that use compressed formats in which case a cd allows to store lot of sound assets
 

marquimvfs

Member
Controlling innovation: N64 was, between the two, the first console to implement an analog stick, and, I should add, it was the only platform to make good use of it in that generation. So, to that list, N64 brings:
*Analog Stick

Feedback innovation: N64 was the first console to widely implement force feedback in games by the use of the rumble pack. In my opinion, the rushed Dual Analog inclusion in japan doesn't make the Playstation the first platform to really implement it, but feel free to disagree. Now, the list also haves:
*Rumble Pack

Connectivity innovation: N64 was the console that brings several conectivity options to the market in a time that standardization wasn't in the table. Today, with the widespread adoption of usb ports in every console, everithing is way easier than that time. With that said, let me list what I think are the connectivity innovations that the console brought to us:
* 4 integrted controller ports (no more multitaps!)
* Card Reader (smartmedia port in some cartridges)
* Microfone Support (with an accessory conected to controller port, the VRU)
* Video Capture (av input in some cartridges, some games allowed rudimentary video capture and edition)
* Connectivity with its portable brother (achieved through the transfer pack)
And that list only contains first party solutions. Second and third party makes some interesting use of hardware, too, like the biosensor.

Graphics inovation: N64 was the first console that had some advanced features that were available only in expensive pcs and workstations, the most important (in my opinion, and there's more than that) of those features were:
* Z buffer
* Tri-linear Mipmap interpolation
* anti aliasing
* high precision vertex coordination
* perspective correction

Audio innovations: N64 had support to
*MP3 playback.

I'm pretty much sure theres even more innovations that the platform brought and I'm not very versed into the Playstation architecture and so... And would be very interesting to see some list of innovations that it brought to the table. Can someone summarize then?

Edited to remove incorrect info that was pointed to me here...
 
Last edited:
I do think Saturn's difficulty is exaggerated by some devs (I mean you have Lobotomy's quote, but then you have devs like Treasure who considered it easier to work with compared to the PS1), but it's generally known that you had to put in more effort for comparable 3D performance on Saturn versus PlayStation, that's just the way it was. Sega's initial SDK tools weren't great, but even with the SGL 2.0 that came later in '95 for the average 3D programmer, Saturn was still more "work" to do to get similar results vs PS1.

sorry but when you see the graphic pipeline to achieve the effects of games like burning rangers compared to the simplicity and power of the GTE in PSX then its easy to understand that the difficulty of sega saturn is not exaggerated, there is lot of specific that are hard to achieve with lot of complex processes and wasted performance in the rendering

treasure is/was a very talented team, another difficult to program consoles was the PS2, yet treasure developed stretch panic a games that exhibits very nice effects very early, does that mean PS2 was in reality easy to work with? of course not, it required lot of change in how games were engineered back then
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
I've seen that weird dual-Mission-Stick stuff said for Panzer Dragoon Zwei before but nobody has said what controlling it like that does in game. Does it actually let you control the dragon detached from following the crosshair, so one stick is moving the dragon around and the other the crosshair independently, like Sin & Punishment 2, which would totally break the game? Or is it a myth and the sticks don't do anything different, just diplicate input? Or the second does something like cosmetically turn the dragon's head like the d-pad does if you play with the 3D Control Pad? So, which is it, as you cite these as facts? The main function of the Mission Stick was a single stick to attach on either side of the buttons, it was ambidextrous. I've not been able to find an emulator that allows for twin configuration to test it (the digital Twin-Stick does emulate for Virtual On, Gungriffon II etc.).

Sega's 3D Control Pad did have analog triggers before the others :)
 
Last edited:

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
While arguably the playstation had the better library, the N64 meant the birth of the modern 3D game. To me it means more.
 
Also i dont know what you mean by "simplfying development" . the Psx was not a nice nor easy to work with machine. It was a pretty crappy machine its just that compared to Saturn (which in the words of Lobotomy devs was an "abortion") and the N64 (which was a much more complex machine) it was the lesser evil.

3d graphic development is difficult specially back then, in n64 it was very complex with all the bandwidth problems and small texture cache, in saturn its said was an "abortion" in psx was very simple in comparison and very straightforward memory management in fact it was considered a very powerfull machine in the words of lobotomy, yet you say its crappy, maybe you have a wrong idea of what is an easy to develop 3d console of mid 90's
 

IFireflyl

Member
please go away and stop spreading your bs lies around

You're officially the first person I've put on Ignore on NeoGAF.

kimmy schmidt titus GIF by Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt
 
Last edited:

teezzy

Fantastik Tuna
idk if i've expressed it in this thread or not, but i regret growing up as an N64 kid

they had the Zelda games and the Rare games and that was about it

PSX had so many bangers and hidden gems; JRPG galore

if I could go back in time I'd smack myself for remaining to Nintendo as long as I did
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
While arguably the playstation had the better library, the N64 meant the birth of the modern 3D game. To me it means more.
I only played OoT in recent years and its impeccable design is crazy, it's a template for anything a modern action adventure ever needs, yet it usually does much more than that and it has so many sub systems that all function elegantly and form a cohesive whole, almost like a PC immersive sim.
 
Last edited:
idk if i've expressed it in this thread or not, but i regret growing up as an N64 kid

they had the Zelda games and the Rare games and that was about it

PSX had so many bangers and hidden gems; JRPG galore

if I could go back in time I'd smack myself for remaining to Nintendo as long as I did
 

Trimesh

Banned
1994 wasn't even close to when Sony gave up on minidisc. They were still pushing it in the early 2000s. Some Vaios had built in MD players, and MD had a spec refresh at that point ; I think it was called NetMD. I had a MD player in 03 during its last push in the American market. It was cool, but ultimately had two fatal flaws:

They were still selling MD stuff, but at that point it was clear it was always going to be a niche format - NetMD was basically just MD with better compression (it was called "NetMD" because it shared the compression with Sony's flash based Network Walkman series). They also did the seemingly impossible and managed to make software (called "Sonic Stage") to manage the music that was even shittier and more counter-intuitive than iTunes.
I actually liked MiniDisc, but it was pretty clear clear that (even in Japan, where it sold best) it was never going to hit enough market share to become a significant format.
 

nkarafo

Member
Dude, no, that thread is the worst place to get informed about the N64. Sega 16 members are absolutely biased agaist the console and will scratch the bottom of the barrel to find things to say against it.

Yet, they didn't even know Wipeout on their beloved Saturn run at 20 fps.

It was a good forum a long time ago where some knowlegable members would share technical info but they left and its been just a Sega fanboy pit for a while now.
 
Last edited:
sorry but when you see the graphic pipeline to achieve the effects of games like burning rangers compared to the simplicity and power of the GTE in PSX then its easy to understand that the difficulty of sega saturn is not exaggerated, there is lot of specific that are hard to achieve with lot of complex processes and wasted performance in the rendering

treasure is/was a very talented team, another difficult to program consoles was the PS2, yet treasure developed stretch panic a games that exhibits very nice effects very early, does that mean PS2 was in reality easy to work with? of course not, it required lot of change in how games were engineered back then

Well since you mentioned it, PS2 was a more challenging system to develop for vs. Saturn, if we're just talking in terms of architecture. And FWIW the Saturn was at least an early glimpse into the parallel programming approach that eventually became a thing with the PS360 gen (also in their "own" way with those two), conceptually speaking.

The difference between those two though is that PS2 had a very healthy platform holder with the resources and marketing budget to see their system be a massive success, which meant essentially guaranteed marketshare for 3P devs, giving them the incentive to learn the architecture no matter what. That incentive just wasn't there for the Saturn, so a lot of devs didn't bother to learn the hardware.

Burning Rangers IIRC the biggest thing it did graphics-wise was transparencies, and it's a bit exaggerated about Saturn not being able to do "true" transparencies. Harder than with PS1, yes, but not insanely harder, and games back then relied on the softening and blurring of home CRTs to "blend" the dithered meshes to look like transparencies in a way.
 
Dude, no, that thread is the worst place to get informed about the N64. Sega 16 members are absolutely biased agaist the console and will scratch the bottom of the barrel to find things to say against it.

Yet, they didn't even know Wipeout on their beloved Saturn run at 20 fps.

It was a good forum some time ago where some knowlegable members would share technical info but they left and now its just a Sega fanboy pit.

I have seen very biased people and very wrong "facts" there before just as you say but also developers that give very good information but lets not forget that some people say similar things about NeoGAF, it is not correct to label everybody there as biased and also that thread is from 2015, I think its very simple, the arguments are right or are wrong I have not checked everything on that list but there are true facts there others are debatable
 
Laugh all you want dude, but I'm picking the console with Tekken, Ape Escape, and the Squaresoft games every time.
Whatever rocks your boat. Thats totally fair. You like what you like no problem. But dont say stupid shit like "N64 only has Zelda and Rare games and thats it".
That only makes you look like an ignorant. The N64 has dozens of great games in many genres.
Out of 71 games reviewed it has 51 with above 75 score in metacritic..Thats more games that you've completed in your lifetime probably.
For comparison out of 189 games reviewed Psx has 99 games with a 75 or more in metacritic. Thats just a small sample.
The N64 had ~300 games released in the west are you going to tell me out of 300 games only a dozen or so are worthy enough of your exquisite mighty presence? PLEASE.
 
I have seen very biased people and very wrong "facts" there before just as you say but also developers that give very good information but lets not forget that some people say similar things about NeoGAF, it is not correct to label everybody there as biased and also that thread is from 2015, I think its very simple, the arguments are right or are wrong I have not checked everything on that list but there are true facts there others are debatable
So.....what is your username in Sega16?
 

nkarafo

Member
I have seen very biased people and very wrong "facts" there before just as you say but also developers that give very good information but lets not forget that some people say similar things about NeoGAF, it is not correct to label everybody there as biased and also that thread is from 2015, I think its very simple, the arguments are right or are wrong I have not checked everything on that list but there are true facts there others are debatable
Fair enough. Im saying that i know this thread very well up to a point and can say at least half of it is bullshit. Of course you can take my word with a grain of salt.

Most Developers in Sega 16 have abandoned it a long time ago, that i know because im also a member there for more than a decade. Not saying there arent any now, i kinda abandoned it as well.
 

teezzy

Fantastik Tuna
Whatever rocks your boat. Thats totally fair. You like what you like no problem. But dont say stupid shit like "N64 only has Zelda and Rare games and thats it".
That only makes you look like an ignorant. The N64 has dozens of great games in many genres.
Out of 71 games reviewed it has 51 with above 75 score in metacritic..Thats more games that you've completed in your lifetime probably.
For comparison out of 189 games reviewed Psx has 99 games with a 75 or more in metacritic. Thats just a small sample.
The N64 had ~300 games released in the west are you going to tell me out of 300 games only a dozen or so are worthy enough of your exquisite mighty presence? PLEASE.

Growing up with N64, I can confirm that most of the games did not age well imho. This includes fan favorites like Mario Kart 64 and the original Smash Bros.

I may sound ignorant to you, but I'm willing to bet more people here would agree you're coming across as a blowhard.

Including far too many numbers in your post, as if anyone gives a hoot, doesn't change that PSX dominated the 5th console generation with good reason.

Yes, in my opinion, the N64 had the Zeldas, the Rare games, and not much else (Mischief Makers? Mario Tennis? )

No nerd citing MetaCritic at 1am is going to change that for me.

Pound sand.
 
Well since you mentioned it, PS2 was a more challenging system to develop for vs. Saturn, if we're just talking in terms of architecture. And FWIW the Saturn was at least an early glimpse into the parallel programming approach that eventually became a thing with the PS360 gen (also in their "own" way with those two), conceptually speaking.

The difference between those two though is that PS2 had a very healthy platform holder with the resources and marketing budget to see their system be a massive success, which meant essentially guaranteed marketshare for 3P devs, giving them the incentive to learn the architecture no matter what. That incentive just wasn't there for the Saturn, so a lot of devs didn't bother to learn the hardware.

PS2 graphic wise succeeded partly to the support but the other and very important part was that the system had the capability for displaying those effects it was very difficult to use but the capabilities are there and developer little by little exploited most of it, is not enough to give support to a system the system requires something on it to achieve the desired effects and performance, in saturn case it was difficult to use but only to obtain a subpar result(in 3d) in most cases compared to playstation, there were interesting ideas like the infinite planes, but there were a lot of resources wasted in the way the quads get together wasting fillrate, saturn while relied on multi processing it wasnt the only console to do that, other earlier consoles also used many processors, even in playstation we saw very amazing at the time effects such as a video in the background with 3d graphics on top that requires multi processing too, ps2 was a difficult to use console because it was radically different in its way of doing 3d, but it had a clear idea of what it wanted to achieve and had paths to use it in an easy way and others more complex, in saturn it appear as a mismatch and by some interviews of the time it appear it was a lot of different engineers wanting to put something on it just for the sake of it, it has very memorable games and is a good system but oh boy it has lot of problems

Burning Rangers IIRC the biggest thing it did graphics-wise was transparencies, and it's a bit exaggerated about Saturn not being able to do "true" transparencies. Harder than with PS1, yes, but not insanely harder, and games back then relied on the softening and blurring of home CRTs to "blend" the dithered meshes to look like transparencies in a way.

do you have any idea of how the game internally work in order to do those transparencies?, they are extremely important because the game is everything about translucent fire any third party at the time in their place will simply cancel the game or move it to playstation

Ill search for a video that explains
 
Last edited:
So.....what is your username in Sega16?

I dont have an account there but visited it in the past because a very interesting and very long thread where one of the devs of burnout(who also posts on B3D) shared his experience working on different systems, of course he was attacked a lot, but curiously it was by nintendo fanboys because he criticized gamecube way of working compared with xbox and ps2 and explained why the series stopped being released in that console all of a sudden I was tempted to register just to ask him a couple things but the topic was a bit old by the time I located it he probably dont post there anymore(and for a good reason)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom