I had a Nintendo 64 growing up, so recently I've been giving this console a shot and seeing what I missed.
Granted, it does 2D/prerendered stuff all right, but what the fuck is with the 3D? Every polygon and texture just jitters all over the place. You never know where the devs intended anything to be because all it takes is a slight camera movement to knock everything out of position.
Who thought this was acceptable? Even the fucking Jaguar didn't have these issues, and that came out over a year before. There already existed 3D arcade games in the late '80s that didn't do this shit. So how did they fuck this thing up so bad?
And some people prefer the PS1's 3D over the N64's? Fucking why? PS1 is a bullshot console, plain and simple.
epic
>>3311493
Watch as the right wobbles out of existence
>>3311461
Takes some getting used to, I personally love the held with duct tape and spit look
>>3311461
I'm of two minds on this, on the one hand I grew up with a 64 myself and I remember absolutely hating the 3d on the playstation when I would play it at a friends house, but on the other hand it just had so many great games that I didn't have access to. I remember going over to one friend who had his modded on the weekend and just marathoning Monster Rancher and Jade Cocoon, as well as playing Tekken and all the other great fighting games on the system.
I think 64 games have aged better, but at the time it sucked owning one because you would get maybe 3 good releases in a year, so it was basically just a mario kart/Goldeneye machine.
>>3311502
What you call horrible rendering I call an excellent homage to Squigglevision.
>>3311493
Nice bait, that's the PC version.
>>3311461
>Who thought this was acceptable?
Anyone who isn't a graphics whore?
I had both a PS1 and an N64 growing up. While N64 textures were a lot cleaner and less grainy, I still spent more time with my PS1, if only because of the larger selection of games available.
The PSX was the fastest consumer level 3D hardware available in 1994, bar none.
But the way Sony got this speed was going with affine texture mapping instead of the more accurate perspective-correct texture mappingand dropping any form of sub-pixel correction.
Most people that prefer PSX like them for nostalgia reasons: either for nostalgia of the console itself, or the appearance of graphics in that particular 3D era.
N64 was essentially the dawn of 'modern' 3D graphics, but simply in its most primitive iteration. Since modern graphics have simply continued improvements along the N64 line of graphics, there's less nostalgia attached to it, even though it's 'better' than PSX.
>>3311547
*that prefer PSX graphics
We all know the n64 had better hardware but also went full retard and used carts which was a Hugh bottleneck. So it ended up being the original no games system, while the ps1 was getting good titles at a good rate. And the wobble wasn't that noticble on a 19 inch portable crt
Funny, how someone enjoying nintendo products bitches about graphics.
>>3311579
Name a bad looking Nintendo first party title.
>>3311584
Yoshis island
>>3311597
WAYEEH WAYEEH
>>3311461
Was harder to notice on a CRT.
>>3311584
Not that they look bad, but seems like most nintendoers doesn't care that much on graphics.
>>3311606
>ever hearing this
git gud
>>3311510
Pretty much hit the nail on the head, the PS had more variety than the 64 as well as a better controller.
I only started to work on a PS 1 library due to actually having money to buy games. But damn prices are scary for some games.
>>3311559
I guess it might have been a way to set it self apart from the competition even tho cartridges are flawed due to the constant rubbing of the connector and pins they get worn down reducing the contact needed to function properly. Sure you had to have mem card to save but with out the need to save on the disk ( rhetorical comment) you free up a lot of space right ?
I grew up with both and I always, and still do, hated that ridiculously aggressive bilinear filtering of the N64 so much. It's blurry as fuck, as if the screen's been smeared with vaseline.
>>3311461
OP is right, I had the same experience after growing up with an N64 and no PS1.
PS1 defenders have no argument, 3D on PS1 sucks. But if you're the type that can ignore that and enjoy and entertaining game with good mechanics, it can be overlooked. It gets harder and harder over the years but it is possible.
We still see this happening today to some extent. I cannot play 3DS games because they're so horribly pixelated and have that tearing that happens with diagonals and curves. Maybe I'll find a good game that will get me to ignore this but for now I can't stand to fucking look at the thing.
>>3312191
The whole inability to render anything in the distance...the whole fog effect emphasis on fog.
>>3312191
What's funny is the texture filtering on N64 could be completely disabled in software, but devs didn't because it was considered better than pixellated textures at the time.
>>3311978
>I guess it might have been a way to set it self apart from the competition even tho cartridges are flawed due to the constant rubbing of the connector and pins they get worn down reducing the contact needed to function properly.
What? You think the issue people had with cartridges was because they wear out? No, the problem was that a cartridge could only hold a tiny, tiny fraction of the space that a PS1 disk could.
>Sure you had to have mem card to save but with out the need to save on the disk ( rhetorical comment) you free up a lot of space right ?
Dude, an entire PS1 memory card only has 1 MB of memory. A PS1 disk can hold about 700 MB. If it were possible to save on the disk, it's crazy to think how much more would've been possible. You could've saved entire screenshots and shit.
How does this relate to cartridges, anyway? Do you believe N64 games save data to the ROM chip or some crazy shit?
>2016
>Nintenbabies are still mad over missing the greatest library of all time.
>>3312468
>PS1
>greatest library of all time
On a shovelware-to-games ratio it's one of the worst of all time.
>>3312473
>b-but muh shovelware
![Ten Pin Alley [U] [SLUS-00377]-front.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/9V7YXkL.jpg "Ten Pin Alley [U] [SLUS-00377]-front.jpg")
>>3312476
Your point being?
>>3311461
>Nintendo 64
Nintendo 64 didn't exist when I was a kid. Yes when I was a teenager but I was too busy playing Command & Conquer along with Rise of the Triad to notice.
You know the thing I hate the most about the PS1? The analog controller. The first one (not the dualshock, the little known dual analog) was just a regular ps1 controller with joysticks shoved into it as fast as possible, so the dualshock line of con'ttrollers weren't meant to have those and they were very uncomfortable for the thumbs. Then, with the dualshock 1, they just added rumble support. Sony completely copied Nintendo. At least with the Saturn 3-D controller it came out at the same time as the N64.
>>3312519
So in other words, everyone copied Microsoft because they had the Sidewinder before everyone else.
>>3312457
No not really I was trying to make a comparison on space between the cartridge and disk and I know that you can't save data to the disk only to the memory cards.
The cartage has to hold the game data and save data while the CD has only the game on it which would allow more content to be put on it than a cartridge.
>>3312519
Well it was better than the joy stick on the 64 controller I guess.
>>3312703
But that's wrong.
Save data is stored on the cartridge either via a RAM chip powered by a battery, or an EEPROM chip, since save data is the only part that needs to change. The game data, containing the code, graphics, music, etc. is stored on a ROM chip, which means the bits are shipped burned into pure silicon. They could get bigger chips of this type for less cost than that of RAM or EEPROM, and the ROM data cannot be changed once written.
In short, they're two different types of data. If they were all contained on one chip, you'd run the risk of the game accidentally writing unwanted values over its own code, which would render the cartridge unusable. See? They're smart. They think of these things.
>>3312353
>The whole inability to render anything in the distance...the whole fog effect emphasis on fog.
Are you talking about PS1 or N64?
>>3312819
Wait what the shit
I had the PC version of this, the PS1 version is really that bad? Good god
>>3312824
Well it's hard to imagine the PS1 doing any better. I mean, are there any PS1 games with a controllable camera in large areas where there isn't huge fog or serious distance LOD?
>>3311579
Nintendo had the best graphics for their time constantly. Sega had to release two systems in competing with NES before Nintendo decided to release the SNES.
NeoGeo had to make a super expensive console to "beat" the SNES that then Nintendo countered with FX chipped games and Mode 7 psuedo 3d maps.
Nintendo then releases the 64 that no company was close to (three times as much power as the PS1) Forcing Sega to release ANOTHER console years later that then isn't even a part of the console generation it was competing with.
Then FINALLY microshaft releases the Xbox. Something more powerful than Nintendos offering. Gamecube still far more powerful than their expected competitor, the Sony PS2.
Not talking about all the other failed consoles (3do, cdi) that were either begging for popularity or had trouble keeping up.
Not even a Nintendo fan here either.
>>3312351
Funny how this got no attention, given it sums up the PS1 perfectly. Not that I don't love the system, but the texture flicker is godawful. Then again, same for PS2.
>>3311461
>SCE: what kind of 3D do you want?
>PS1: just fuck my shit up
>>3313080
Meant to say the buildings look like they appear outta thin air when you should be able to see them in the distance. Would that kinda stuff be the lack of powerful hardware to render or just plain laziness on programmers part?
PSX
n64
>>3313085
The N64 can't do it either faggot
>>3313028
The PS2 didn't have that shit though.
>>3313080
You have absolutely no idea how technology works, do you?
>>3313085
Look up what draw distance is, and while you're at it, see if you can figure out how a light switch works.
>>3313087
wtf is wrong with his face?
>>3313087
This just looks like they fucked up the textures, N64 looks better otherwise.
>>3312457
PS1 had a 128k memory card afaik
>>3312473
Who cares about shovelware? It doesn't take away from all the good games. If you took all the good games on the ps1 you would probably have the same number of games as the entire 64 library, 294 games were released for the 64 compared to the 3292 on the playstation.
The N64 also has the option of doing it the PS1 way but no released game ever did.
>>3313375
This board is full of elitist tech heads, you just kind of have to roll with it. Don't worry though, they fail at life in most other ways.
>>3313384
Thanks, I never did much with electronics outside of the micro electronics classed back in high school used to know the logic circuits and what they meant, I could read a wiring schematic to a degree but I guess if you don't use it you lose it right.
>>3311493
>random NPC
>still has a better textured face than the main character in a PS1 game
>>3313379
Holy shit that's cool.
Did the 3DO have the same jittery polygons and textures that the Playstation and Saturn did?
>>3313547
Yes, it worked on the same principle, it just had less cpu power.
>>3313580
What about the Jaguar and Pippin?
What about the 32X, SuperFX chip, and SVP chip?
What about arcade hardware?
What about software rendered PC 3D as seen on DOS games?
What about the 3D accelerators on the PC like the Voodoo?
>>3313586
The first Voodoo 3dfx came out after the N64, in late 96, it has correct perspective like the N64.
I'm glad we can finally fix vertex jitter and affine texture mapping in PS1 games with emulation.
N64 can't do 3D right considering it has no games.
>>3314780
shut up random bitch
>>3313379
you know when I first noticed the textures wiggling I thought I was actually becoming schizophrenic, Thank you for proving I'm saner than I believed I was
>>3312858
You realize the snes didn't have better graphics because it was still running 65c for backwards compatibility they scrapped in favor of rehasing Nintendo games. The only redeeming factors were cartridges were expandable and Sony's da chip. Everybody else was using 6800 at the time
>>3311461
> bitching about graphics in a vr thread
Its nice to know /v is back
>>3312858
>NeoGeo had to make a super expensive console to "beat" the SNES
lmao, SNK didn't even think about the SNES for one moment
all they wanted to do was make a powerful arcade machine
>Nintendo countered with FX chipped games
neo geo's 68k could probably do 3D faster than the first superFX chip without any addons needed
>Gamecube still far more powerful than their expected competitor, the Sony PS2.
gamecube had better texturing and image quality than the PS2, but the PS2 had more raw power (burnout 3 wasn't developed for gamecube because it couldn't handle the physics, dynamic car damage model, etc)
pretty embarrassing considering the gamecube was almost 2 years newer
