Which console looked better, PS1 graphics when they were at their best or N64 graphics when they were at their best?

Neither. 3D was a mistake. We should have skipped the N64/PS1 era.

Attached: d2.png (558x382, 217K)

Z-buffer having a fit is soul
Muddy blurry textures is soulless

It would have only dragged the framerate even lower. All you could do with the pack was either higher res textures or higher display res doing both gives 10FPS

I feel like PS1 games tried to make textures too detailed, and as a result, they look kind of weird and blurry. N64 games did a better job of having a smoother look

>it also looked better on n64
if by "better," you mean "like smeared soulless shit," then sure.

Attached: 1373524152323.png (1282x591, 385K)

On a technical level N64 because it could do accurate perspective projection, whereas the PS1 more or less eyeballed it to save calculations and circumvent the missing Z-buffer. That's why in PS1 surfaces seem to jiggle and textures get weirdly warped at odd angles.

However I think the PS1 still had superior visual fidelity. The N64 seems to really struggle with lighting, also I perceive a lot of N64 games rather empty in level detail and on-screen objects, I'm guessing a result of the very limited cartridge storage space.

why does it look so much sharper on 64?

Both pictures are obviously taken from emulators, with the N64 emulator clearly set to render a higher resolution.

If you actually think all that jank on the left picture looks better than the right you suffer from the tism. sorry friend.

The one I had as a kid

N64 and it's not even close. Almost all PS1 games look awful and like a blurry mess. A fair amount of N64 games have a decent style and look like Paper Mario, Conker, even OoT.

sharper? Look at the floor; it's just blur

i'll take actual detail over a vaseline-smeared picture any day of the week.

looks smoother than the realy pixely look of PS1

>that awful N64 render distance
>not even masking it with fog or darkness or anything, just cutting it off at some point

n64 has texture filtering
you could argue it looks better or looks like blurry shit

>pixely look of PS1
That "pixely look" looks great on the intended screen it was meant to be displayed - a CTR.

N64 wins by default for me because of the lack of the retarded wobble. I always hated the fucking wobbling most PS1 games had but no one seemed to notice it, or they just ignored it.

PS1 manages to look 2D while being 3D

Rareware pretty mu h makes this a one sided fight.

Conker, Tooie, and Perfect Dark look better than some early 6th gen games.

FF VIII and IX lookd stupidly good for PS1 games but they were kind of outliers.

Just like your intellect.

Attached: 1430892751133.gif (1024x1024, 959K)

Firs of all you have to resize the n64 texture to be 2kb

what are you talking about? The draw distance is clearly higher on N64.

It's funny because it's true. I never preceived bad loading times on the PS1 though, it was always like five seconds at most, and in many cases it was so short they didn't even bother with a loading screen, you just had two or three seconds of black screen. Loading times really got out of hands in the sixth gen. I've dropped PS2 games because of the loading times.

Check your the corridor dosen't even render in full on the 64 retard

PS1

Attached: b30eb48d49709b804e6e0956d8b7da33.gif (500x465, 1001K)

you mean 500 bytes. n64 texture limits were small so they had to draw a lot of textures which was hard because the n64 was fillrate limited.

Is that why you can see the wall at the end on the PS1 and you can't on the N64?

Graphics aside, it fucking KILLS me every time I think about what could have been if Nintendo went with discs.

The N64 was the more powerful system, but was so hampered by the decision to go cart based. Many games that were on both systems looked worse on the N64 because of compression, not because of the hardware. The same thing happened with the gamecube and those stupid mini discs.

Attached: 1533188708823.jpg (668x651, 111K)

Are you high?

The N64 generaly had better graphics but if we're talking peaks then there's not a single game in that whole generation that looks better than Vagrant Story.

CDs were a scam

N64 has good polygons but really washed out textures.
PS1 has eh polygons but great textures.

N64 may be fast. But suffered a crutch, it's texture 4kb texture cache. It's like the PS3 of it's era. Great hardware but shitty dev tools.

PS1 was inferior to both the Saturn and the n64 but it's architecture is simple. One CPU for calculations, one CPU to handle graphics, one CPU to handle CD-rom and one for sounds unified by a single 2mb RAM plus 1MB ram for video.
N64's another crutch is it's system RAM 4mb. While technically faster than the PS1 the N64's video and sound chip need to access the CPU to access the system RAM.

tldr
PS1 crooked polygons because lel no z buffer but good shaders
N64 good polygons but lel washed out shaders so it hides them by garroud shading.

>Cheaper to produce
>Easier to manufacture
>Faster to print
>Held significantly more data than the largest cart at the time

How was this a scam?

Attached: 1559046938310.jpg (1023x682, 44K)

I thought it was 2kb for a single texture max for the n64.

lol

based &redpilled

good explanation, thx

Are you both blind? The n64 version has a higher fov and is clearly rendering more floor tiles.

>only benefit is for the wallets of the publisher
Sure sucks that I couldn't have jank ass FMV videos in my N64 games though, I'll just have to keep coping

Both had their own special aesthethic, this is the real answer. It was apples to oranges.

N64 polygons are way better
Ps1 texture and sprites are way better

Take your pick

wrong on both counts
you can't even see the wall at the end of the corridor on N64

n64, all thanks to rareware

The wall is blacked out on the ps1 version too

maybe that or my screen is fucked

I used to take the CD out after it finished loading and put a music CD and play games with my own BGM

>The N64 seems to really struggle with lighting

Attached: conk2.webm (480x360, 2.49M)

>imagine still thinking colectathons were a good genre.

Either your monitor is complete garbage and you're half blind, or you're just baiting at this point.

the ps1 violently shits on the n64 in every single aspect that isn't load times

anyone saying otherwise is blind or low functioning autistic

By contrast, none of the Spyro games have a lighting model at all.

Attached: conker10.webm (480x360, 2.85M)

silent hill exists btw

Attached: conker7.webm (480x360, 2.95M)

or games longer than 20 hours

N64 had
>no fighting games
>no shooter games
>no RPGs
>no rhythm games
>no arcade games
But hey you got bing bing wahoo, I guess.

silent hill still exists btw, you don't have to post conker3, conker4, etc

none look better

Silent Hill still exists.

Here's the inconvenient truth Sonyfriends don't want you to know.

The N64 had a 4KB texture cache.
But the PS1 had a 2KB texture cache.

Man, Rare really mastered coding for the N64 didn’t they

So why do N64 games all have blurry pea soup textures?

Attached: turok2.webm (480x360, 2.77M)

>only benefit is for the wallets of the publisher
and the consumer. cd-rom games were way cheaper at the time than nintendo's cartridges.

Attached: cartridgecosts.jpg (725x468, 69K)

a "bilinear filter" that was actually just a gausian blur applied to everything in vram. Even the frame buffer.

This looks like a PS2 game, holy shit

Objectively speaking, Conker's Bad Fur Day was the most technologically impressive game of that generation. Nothing else comes close.

Well that’s objectively false
KI and MK?
It had the only good shooters on console in that gen
Didn’t have many rpgs I’ll give ya that there is ogre battle though
Last two points again full of shit

N64, obviously, assuming we're talking purely about technical graphical fidelity (art style is another topic, and also more subjective). Not to sound rude, but why even make this thread? It's like asking if the best PS4 and Xbone games look better than the best Switch games. Obviously the system with more processing power is going to win out.

I think turok 2 looks better than any ps1 game. Tenchu has neat graphics but you can see only 5 meters far. The problem is most ps1 games are not fun.

The console didn't have a lot more RAM bandwidth than the PS1 did but processed a z-buffer which eats up RAM bandwidth. N64's RAM was also hard to use properly because it used RDRAM which doesn't behave like normal RAM. That meant that to get memory bandwidth under controls many developers would just downgrade the textures.

Developers that mastered the console got enough bandwidth out of the machine that they could do better textures than PS1. N64 supports trilinear texture filtering so if the textures are the same resolution as PS1 they will look better.

Attached: conker4.webm (480x360, 2.88M)

Your gamma's fucked, kid.

Attached: file.png (164x140, 8K)

>most ps1 games aren't fun
Neither are most N64 games, or most NES games, or most Xbox One games. You know why? Because most video games are mediocre shovelware and such crap.

Attached: ps1_tekken_3_p_btt4xz.jpg (600x600, 103K)

>a "bilinear filter" that was actually just a gausian blur
Nope, that's completely wrong. The N64 applies a conventional bilinear texture filter though it takes a triangle of samples instead of a quad (the difference isn't too big).

The main reason many N64 games are blurry is because they use sub-LD rendering resolutions is to save memory bandwidth (not all of them of course - some are near-SD like Factor 5 games). Banjo-Tooie is 304×226 while Spyro 3 on PS1 is 512x224.

The other reason is that the console does some pretty needless scaling of the output from 320x240 to 640x240 and nobody knows why. It blurs up the image though.

Yet another reason is that the console does dither filtering. Basically the PS1, Saturn and N64 render games in 16-bit color, not the 32-bit color which became standard later. The low color produces banding. N64 and PS1 do dithering to get around the banding, but the N64 takes it a step further by trying to blend the dither in order to get an even higher color count. It's not a dumb indiscriminate filter - it actually seeks out the dither patterns, but it makes the image blurrier in return for richer colors.

A Crash Team Racing?

Conker was one of the 3 largest games on the system(64MB) and still looks great. Framerate can take a significant hit though.

Late gen graphics on both consoles were nothing short of a technological marvel, it's amazing how good these games looked.

Attached: 1560162458177.jpg (800x600, 262K)

PS1.

This isn't because I'm a sony fan, but because the N64 blurred the shit out of the low-res textures. While superior technology-wise, it looked like shit. At least the PS1 had a crisp visual clarity to it, albeit pixelated.

The only truly bad part of the PS1's visuals of its era was the texture mapping and the jittery vertexes giving it the weird warping effect. Otherwise the two consoles are roughly equivalent. Muddy texture smear is indefensible. Even old PC games looked like shit for this reason, and looked better with filtering disabled, e.g. Quake and HL1.

ps1>n64

PS1 graphics be like

Attached: PS1 animations.gif (320x240, 502K)

Probably not relevant to most people in this thread but it really sucks that the N64 did not support RGB. Modding that in does a great job at improving the video output for original hardware.

>Muddy texture smear is indefensible. Even old PC games looked like shit for this reason, and looked better with filtering disabled, e.g. Quake and HL1.
Texture filtering is objectively better 99% of the time for 3D games. It's only worse when textures are composed of a lot of straight lines and uniform patterns like they are in Quake (and to a much lesser extent in Half-Life).

Given arbitrary 'natural' looking texture patterns, filtering is better. The average misinformed person thinks that bilinear filtering is just indiscriminate "smearing", but the way it actually works is that the GPU has to read the texture source four times more often than unfiltered because it's using four times the sample data. That's how texture filtering normally works as an anti-aliasing process.

Attached: 14395515919464.png (344x128, 99K)

imagine being triggered over collectathons. zoom zoom.

your mom bilinearly filters my #%*@

N64 looks like dogshite.
Fuck texture filtering.

>Fuck texture filtering.
Except the N64 textures aren't worse in Megaman 64 due to texture filtering.

They are literally 25% the size of the PS1 textures in that game. If it wasn't for the filtering they'd look even worse.

PS1 easily, N64 had that hideous filter

Objectively wrong but all nintendo kiddies are braindead to begin with.

Vagrant Story has a top tier art style.

the N64, when pushed to its limit, looks much better than any PS1 game. however, most N64 games chose to use different styles or lower graphics instead of pushing the limit, so PS1 had way more better looking games than the N64

n64, conker just blows the playstation out of the water at its best

that said the playstation had a ton of impressive games, spyro in particular was amazing considering the number of hardware limitations it circumvents. I for one consider the insomniac games of the 5th and 6th generation to be more impressive than the naughty dog ones

this is how spyro looks on a real ps1 console

Attached: spyro2.webm (640x360, 1.67M)

It's probably the best looking PS1 game overall.

Attached: 1529794955821.gif (640x480, 41K)

this is how soul reaver looks on a real ps1 console

Attached: reaver.webm (480x360, 1.88M)

Nice meme

Besides the rougher edges on models thanks to the resolution, that still looks pretty fucking good to me

>The average misinformed person thinks that bilinear filtering is just indiscriminate "smearing"

when the texture is one thats so low-res it uses pixel art principles, the smearing is bad. a higher res like 512x512 and upwards its fine.

damn n64 carts were expensive to produce

Texture filtering doesn't work differently depending on the resolution. The example texture of the lava is 64x64 and it looks better filtered.

You can't really see the rough edges on CTR tv, it's just on flat screen

Fucking what is this magic?

This is the best looking 6th gen 3D game. Bar none.

How far Tekken has fallen.

SOUL

>jumps into the fountain at the end
for what purpose

doesn't a texture at 64x64 look like shit on a large screen, but better on a small screen?

>>no fighting games
RAKUGAKIDS
>>no shooter games
Are you litterally retarded? Goldeneye/Perfect Dark
>>no RPGs
Custom Robo 1&2
>>no arcade games
Sin And Punishment

You're just wrong.

N64 probably looked better at its best. But PSX was really popular and as a result, it still had its share of black magic games. Such as Tekken 3, Soul Blade, Ridge Racer, Tenchu and Crash 3.

However, bare in mind PSX released a whole year earlier than N64. So really the gap being as small as it was showed Nintendo was lagging behind on hardware even way back then. The PSX is genius hardware design and offered great value for the money.

Attached: 1852667-tenchu.jpg (400x328, 19K)

>on a real ps1 console
>Dreamcast logo
Nice try idiot.

>However, bare in mind PSX released a whole year earlier than N64. So really the gap being as small as it was showed Nintendo was lagging behind on hardware even way back then
Well except for how Sony quietly upgraded the PS1's GPU around the time the N64 came out

Attached: ps1_dithering.jpg (602x618, 96K)

We got a funny guy over here.

I did not know this. I wonder now which one I had. Probably the latter given how I got one around '97. Still even base version looks fine.

N64
PS1 has that constant texture shearing issue because the hardware developers were retarded. N64 wasn’t as strong but we still got some good looking shit like Banjo and DK64 without any of that shit.

>Sony quietly upgraded the PS1's GPU around the time the N64 came out

didn't know that
neat

Attached: 1448831571654.jpg (447x313, 21K)

Better than it looks on those fucking emulator screencaps with the incorrect colors.

Another change that Sony made was swapping the original video memory from VRAM (which was actually a brand of RAM at that time and not just an acronym) to SGRAM which delivered higher performance. So later PS1 consoles also run at a slightly higher framerate than earlier consoles.

By contrast the N64's hardware was never improved throughout its life, just cheaper components.

Did Sony do this for PS2 aswell?

You stupid? N64 had THE shooters.

Who cares if the n64 had graphics it was a shitty mario zelda console like everything nintendo does, the ps1 was the cradle of many original franchises like resident evil, silent hill, ace combat, suikoden, etc.

I don't think so. Technically they raised the clockspeed of Emotion Engine from 294 MHz to 299 MHz on the slims but I'm fairly sure that was to compensate for the loss of the original I/O processor and it might not have actually made a performance difference. Not 100% sure though.

A reason they might have upgraded the PS1 GPU is that the original version can only blend textures at 15-bit color while the N64 can do it at 24-bit color. The newer version of the PS1 GPU can also blend at 24-bit color precision. Sony might have wanted parity in a way that didn't require messing with the hardware too much.

>KI2
>botched Mortal Kombat Trilogy port
Mortal Kombat 4 is good if you get past the jank N64 controller. Also, PS1 had Alien Trilogy, Metal of Honor, Playstation Doom, etc. Please refute his last two points if you can.

N64 for sure.

Attached: Glide64_Banjo-Kazooie_16.png (1024x768, 420K)

Attached: wdc3_n64.webm (640x360, 2.66M)

When PS1 devs knew what they were doing: youtube.com/watch?v=mB03Rp3Ykt4

so the webm could seamlessly loop

>No shooter games
Nigga, Doom 64. Doom 4 is literally a sequel to Doom 64.

By comparison, here's a PS1 game that came out over a year after BK.

Attached: Threads of Fate (USA)-181210-235542.png (1329x997, 1.1M)

>Graphics aside, it fucking KILLS me every time I think about what could have been if Nintendo went with discs.
and such a shit controller.

Attached: PD_6.webm (640x360, 3M)

do you even have to ask? some n64 games might have higher polygon count but aesthetically they are all ugly as shit.

youtube.com/watch?v=923fVDDwaHo

Stylistically, Silent Hill 1 is one of the best looking games of all time.

Hey, carts meant faster load times, which are always nice.

PS1

Anyone saying N64 is lying

Yes, and that looks better than Banjo Kazooie

Attached: perfect dark 4.webm (640x360, 2.21M)

>no texture filtering
>side warping
>blocky level layouts
Yeah, no way.

Attached: Threads of Fate (USA)-181211-001759.png (1329x997, 1.26M)

>skip the seriously janky aged like milk fifth gen era
>give 3D more time to develop slowly so devs know how shit should actually function in the first place in a 3D game
>get another glorious 2D gen

Yep we are in the worst timeline.

Not him but I guess the thing is that the top PS1 games were less technically proficient than the top N64 games but there were more PS1 games with a really good artstyle.

Like Vagrant Story isn't even close to Conker in technically prowess but it has a bloody great artstyle and that's why it looks so good. I guess that might be done to the PS1 having a lot more Japanese developers while the N64 was mostly filled with Western made games that can't into art.

>give 3D more time to develop slowly so devs know how shit should actually function in the first place in a 3D game
That's exactly what happened in the fifth gen. But in order for tech to develop products need to be made and sold. It was learning by doing. You can't lock yourself in an office for six years to develop your 3D engine. Who's gonna pay you during that time?

If I wanted texture filtering on my games, I'd cut out the hardware and just smear vaseline all over my screen.

Attached: FAN_Centr_01.gif (720x574, 3.88M)

I suggest reading how texture filtering works first

Attached: grug.jpg (640x640, 52K)

I always wondered what was at the bottom of those turbines (if there even was one)

N64's best graphics are World Driver Championship, which had the highest polygon count of any 5th gen game for any system. Only PC games from that era could beat it and even some PC games from the same year had worse graphics.

The graphical capabilities of the N64 objectively surpass the PS1.

FFS, the PS1 couldn't even display textures! How the fuck is this even a question?!

Wrong. Look up World Driver Championship.

Fuck how it works, in regards to the N64 it's as if everything's been covered in jelly.

Are you implying that Rare's games didn't have good art direction?

>I guess that might be done to the PS1 having a lot more Japanese developers while the N64 was mostly filled with Western made games that can't into art.
The PS1 had tons of western devs, too. Some of its best-selling titles are by western studios, like Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Core Design, etc.

Attached: Glide64_Banjo-Kazooie_05.png (1024x768, 324K)

Some Western devs did have good art direction. Rare and Insomniac are probably the best examples.

I'm just saying that most of them are bad at it.

N64

>I've dropped PS2 games because of the loading times.
Why not just emulate them, or buy digital copies for the PS3/PS4? Eliminating the disc altogether ought to shorten the loading times significantly.

Oh hey, I can post high res pictures from an emulator, too!

Attached: 11hg8vcyuc7y.png (2560x1440, 2.49M)

See

>Why not just emulate them, or buy digital copies for the PS3/PS4?
Because those things didn't exist at the time.

>I'm just saying that most of them are bad at it.
You could say that about most developers at the time. Japanese developers didn't have nearly the edge you think they did.

Loving the ugly-ass polygon warping and high-res filtering.

Oh, I thought you were talking about going back to them. Loading times didn't bother me back in the day, because they were the norm. It's only when I replay PS2 and GC games that I notice how bad some of them are.

And non-midi music...
And textures...

Almost every Japanese made N64 game had good art direction though.

Even if N64 has better hardware, the PS1 yields more nice-looking games. With the N64 you'd have to do a ton of digging to find a title that wasn't 1st party or Rareware that didn't look like trash.

Attached: 36714-crash_bandicoot_2_-_cortex_strikes_back_u-9.jpg (799x536, 154K)

It's all perspective. The hardware was so different between consoles back then that one console could excel in one aspect and lack in another while the other does the opposite. And that does happen between the 64 and the PS1.

Attached: Sally.png (500x739, 142K)

Not that big of a task, you can easily play the entirety of the 64 library in half a year.

Attached: 1561067890232.png (683x490, 19K)

N64
PS1 can never overcome its texture warping. The best PS1 games look shit compared to ugly N64 games

I seriously had to google for WDC. it looks really nice for its time. why did it flop?

>With the N64 you'd have to do a ton of digging to find a title that wasn't 1st party or Rareware that didn't look like trash.
You could say the same thing about PS1 except that the PS1 had a lot more games so also a lot more AAA devs.

>didn't have a lot more ram bandwidth
Lol it had way more

No that isn't what happened. The fourth gen was starting to slowly introduce it towards the end and then bam. Full blown everything HAS TO BE 3D next gen. They should have kept doing 2D for fifth gen and did their CD add on hybrids as well as doing more and more 3D slowly but surely. Instead fifth gen was basically jumping fully naked into ice cold water. This is why fifth gen gets mocked so much for having aged like milk. 2D games were allowed to flourish for awhile and get perfected but developers were too greedy and wanted their 3D right away. This is why fifth gen has aged so poorly compared to any other gen including even the Atari days despite how extremely simple those games are.

>You could say the same thing about PS1
Ahh yes. How could I forget all those amazing titles Rare put on the PS1.

Not really. The N64 only has a single memory bus. It's a fucking fast one, but it's just one.

PS1's total memory bandwidth is almost as high because it has several moderately fast memory buses.

the game sucks

To be fair Threads of Fate was a small, low-budget game.

Not what I meant. My point was that you just had more AAA devs on PS1 but just like on N64, once you are outside of the AAA dev pool the games look like shit.

You can think of Superman 64 and all the rest, but your typical PS1 shovelware looks even worse than that.

user get new glasses asap.

Attached: 1549060083747.jpg (1024x768, 381K)

And this is also why those games look so bad to this day while you don't see people mock sixth gen that harshly at all. Notice how Dreamcast doesn't get shit on like that despite being inferior to PS2? Its because fifth gen was too much 3D too soon. 3D wasn't fully ready by that gen, it needed more time to build and fine tune. Now there is an entire console generation with games that have mostly aged like shit and aren't worth playing today. Its just not the same for any other gen including what came before fifth gen.

>Doom 64
not canon and also trash game

Not entirely sure what your point is. The PS1 still had more good-looking games. And I don't go out of my way to play shovelware so I'll just take your word for it.

>buy PS2
>can play over 5200 games
>buy DS Lite
>can play over 3300 games
>buy Wii
>can play over 2100 games
Backwards compatibility is a fucking blessing, and I pity any fool that buys platforms without it.

Attached: 1339523059311.png (320x320, 14K)

Makes a lot of sense actually. Well said user.

You know, as much as I'd probably agree with people from the graphics angle, I think 4th gen 3D needed to happen from a design and mechanics standpoint. Think about it: if the industry stalled pursuing 3D development for a whole generation, that would mean it would be a generation behind in level design, camera controls, game feel and mechanics, balancing and hitboxes, etc. I don't think the 6th gen would have turned out anywhere as good as it did without all the lessons in 3D game design learned in the 5th gen.

It came out later though.

Legacy of Kain. Fucking loading screens to get into the goddamn in-game menu that you had to use quite a bit.

(You)

You might be right which is why I think to this day the sixth gen is the best gen while the fifth gen is the least best gen of gaming outside of the second gen which is the worst these days almost by default but I think a great compromise would have been if fifth gen was half 2D or majority 2D while 3D wasn't the main focal point of the gen. Everyone wanted to race fast to 3D and a lot of the cancer you see Yea Forums hate on today actually happened largely because of this gen. Developers and publishers started to take notice on how they can sell people on glorified hype rather than solid game design. FFVII is a good example of this. It isn't an awful game of course and deserves its praise mostly but it was one of the first games ever to have such a large marketing hype behind it and deceptive marketing at that. It was sold to people mainly through FMV and not as much the gameplay. This was purposefully done of course and devs all over the world got to see just how much selling people on lies rather than mechanics worked on the masses.

I actually hate the fifth gen in many ways despite it producing some of the all time classic games people love. Those games are a tiny exception to the rule though. The fifth gen was just not a great one at all.

I disagree. 5th gen was still a creative period, particularly with the various ways devs approched 3D. FFVII didn't corrupt the game industry straight away, even though it inevitably led it down the path of marketing and hype.

Also in my opinion the 3D aged better in 5th gen than 6th gen. The aesthetic of 5th gen is very interesting and stylised due to the low polygon games. I feel that 6th gen is squarely in an uncanny valley zone due to characters looking like barbie dolls. Enough detail to give a somewhat natural shape (unlike 5th gen) but not enough detail to look more than plastic.

>console wars over systems that came out before the majority of Yea Forums was even born

>worst gen
>not seventh gen
Consoles stopped having character and distinctive libraries and starting being flooded with multiplats. Online fees. Focus on online play ruining games in the first place. Console shooters everywhere. Preorder DLC. Achievements. Unreliable hardware.

The seventh gen console that got the most criticism actually turned out to be the least terrible one thanks to its backwards compatibility and piss-easy homebrew.

Attached: dims.jpg (474x358, 35K)

Probably n64.

the wii's native library was shit, I only used it for gamecube games

conker and legacy of kain looked the best at their time for the console, but by then dreamcast was already out and doing dead or alive 2 graphics at 60fps

>the wii's native library was shit
Maybe you should have played more than wii sports.

>Also in my opinion the 3D aged better in 5th gen than 6th gen. The aesthetic of 5th gen is very interesting and stylised due to the low polygon games.
I disagree. Barring maybe Mega Man Legends and that one Dr. Slump title, 5th gen 3D looks like dog shit these days. 6th gen gave us the likes of Metroid Prime, Wind Waker, Metal Gear Solid 3, Half-Life 2, Final Fantasy XII, Doom 3, and a number of other games that have aged way better than anything from the 5th gen.

Forgot the number this time kiddo.
How did you even mix up Lttp and WW anyway?

Eh, it had some good first party games. Also the couple of lightgun shooters it got were a real refreshment for me. Ghost Squad, Dead Space Extraction, the Red Steel series (not just shootan but also swordfightan) and so on. Really enjoyable experiences you couldn't get on any other platform, including the PC.

The human mind is a creature of chaos, that's how.

Fifth gen forced movies and stories on to people and people bought into it big time. It even rubbed its filthy paws into 2D game design. Megaman X5 comes to mind as being ruined by this filth and even X4 to a smaller extent. While mechanically X4 and X5 play better than most games of that era due to being stuck in 2D gameplay they did have more forced dialogue and cutscenes than what came before them and it is thanks to that era of gaming. In fact going back to fifth gen the 2D games, platformers and RPG are often ranked as among the best for that era for a good reason. Because 3D action games sure as hell didn't age too well for the most part. I'd agree with you but I think you are thinking too much of the cream of the crop from that gen like Crash, Mario, OOT, FF games etc. Those games are exceptionally good even today but that is because they were the best of their era and still regarded as good for a reason. The more middle of the road games aren't as graceful. Sixth gen however even an average game might still be pretty fun today because the mechanics were improved.

And again going back to Dreamcast, you look at Shenmue vs everything else on fifth gen and it was such a massive leap. Plus Dreamcast is arguably more like an in between 5 and 6 gen console. Like a 5.5 gen console. This may be why JRPG were arguably in their prime this era. They were the best genre to push story and FMV through and as you see today, that is what devs/pubs like to mainly push on people to this day. Cutscenes, story and graphics is how games are mostly marketed which can be easily altered during development. However selling people on gameplay, like Star Citizen which is in development hell for example, isn't so easy.

Don't agree with you on sixth gen man. Outside of the best fifth gen games nobody gives a damn about that gen for good reason. Sixth gen looks better and plays way better more importantly. Fifth gen almost entirely carried on nostalgia now.

a cathode 'tude ray

>upgraded
It's updated, you dunce.

>using emulators that improve the shitty PS1's display and correctly most of it's texture warping for examples

As bad as that stuff is it was inevitably going to happen regardless. I think Microsoft vastly sped up the process of those things by joining the console market anyways. Even if they didn't and it was still Sega, well either Sega or Sony would have eventually come around to doing that stuff soon enough. In fact I heard Dreamcast did have DLC for its online for a some games.

What I like about 6-8 and soon to be 9th gen is you can pick up and play a more middle tier type of game and pretty much expect what it will play like and its likely going to play well which is most important here. You pick up your average fifth gen shitty or average game and the clumsiness of its controls and crap graphics is guaranteed to turn most off. Even fucking tank controls improved well in sixth gen before being pretty much deleted now. Look at how Silent Hill 2 or 3 play vs the first game. First game is much more stiff as is so many tank games from the days. RE4 is praised to this day yet had tank controls and I think I know why. It was born in the right gen and came as 3D kept getting more and more refined.

PS1 and Spyro is the proof

Modern gaming apologists are not welcome on Yea Forums.

psx and ps2 have god tier libraries. no other past or future gen or console will ever surpass it. SNES comes close though.

Indeed the PSX is a work of genius. But guess who discarded it, after basically having developed it?

I'm not fully defending modern gaming. Also I see a lot of people post on /vr/ and Yea Forums now saying how sixth gen should be considered retro. The gens before and after gen 5 all have many more playable games for their respective systems.

PD is like.. Godly designwork. Godly UX. Godly gameplay. Jesus, such a fucking work of art.

PS1 by far.

N64 at its best was visually more impressive, but blurry as fuck and ran like a slideshow.

PS1 is not real 3D.
As for OP, N64 was better at the time, but PS aged better.

N64 had better specs and the pak to boot, so at its best the N64 would "look better" (have more advanced graphics) without a doubt. However, the PS1 lets game devs dump higher quality textures due to CD storage, so games will look a bit sharper (that + the filters on N64). At the end of the day it doesn't matter, art direction reigns over all.

Wrong as fuck. If a n64 game is remastered it looks great today. The banjo and perfect dark remakes on 360/xb1 prove this. But if you tried to bring back a ps1 game as is it would be a jittering ugly fucking mess. This is why crash needed an entire remake instead of a remaster. Because it would like trash

PS1 also ran like a slideshow

Attached: mdk.webm (640x360, 1.88M)

>PS1 graphics when they were at their best or N64 graphics when they were at their best?
PS1 because they actually ran at playable framerates.

Those are different scenarios than just a port, but yeah PS1 remakes are tough.

Spyro has good art style but is not that impressive. People jerk off about the LOD being so clever but the N64 has built-in LOD. It's called mipmaps, and with trilinear filtering enabled, the transitions between the detail levels are invisible. Unlike Spyro where the detail change is right in your face.

At their absolute best the PS1 could do a lot more with color variety but N64 could load in a shitload more at once and thus larger worldspaces with better looking distant horizons.

PS1 games don't need remasters because they still play fine.

It's invisible because of the fog 4 feet away from the player.

>emulators
so this whole argument right now is completely moot until somebody redoes that comparison image with real actual captured footage.

Ah yes the fog which is completely absent in all of Nintendo and Rare's games.

looks amazing

Now post the Reignited comparison

Dreamcast version looks way better than that jagged low res piece of shit in the webm

Attached: 1511981643811.jpg (1280x720, 73K)

>buy Wii
>can play over 2100 games
you're talking about gamecube?

because both were obviously taken from emulators and Project64's default resolution is 480p

pic related is a real hardware capture

Attached: 1466983418999.jpg (1968x786, 421K)

It's fully backwards compatible, even has Gamecube controller ports and memory card slots.

Attached: 20070202095329560.jpg (550x393, 29K)

Consoles with small library are comfy.

Soul Reaver vs Soulless Reaver

Because of that the Wii U can technically play GC games too. You just need homebrew to allow the hardware interfaces for controllers etc.

Shit, didn't know that, I will buy one later then

programmer claimed it had over 2x the number of polygons of the highest polygon racer on PS1

Attached: wdc2.webm (640x360, 2.46M)

>SNES 1757
>N64 389

that's embarrassing

No, in fact there are some instances of PS2 slims being worse than PS2 phats, and since then Sony has focused hardware revisions on being trimmed down and sleeker rather than improving the original's actual performance, the only two exceptions being PSP 2000 and 3000 which made the PSP phat completely obsolete due to how much of a piece of shit that thing was. PS4 Pro doesn't really count because it's treated as a premium model sold at a higher price.

you can literally see texture warping in that image you dumb nigger

yeah, it takes advantage of the shitty capacities of the psONE to turn everything ugly and disturbing, the sequels looks like chacracter are made of rubber.

The loading times are even worse today.

Back then you only needed to shuffle at most 4-8MB of data from a disc to RAM at kilobytes per second. Today you're shuffling GIGABYTES into memory from laptop HDDs, Blu-ray discs, or glorified SD cards, and you wonder why shit takes up to a minute or more to get going.

It pushes the fog forward too, so you could see the whole abyss.

>not that impressive
What the fuck ever, Spyro was a pretty impressive achievement at the time. The Playstation could render a ton of untextured polygons, and they used that to their advantage.
>3D gradient mesh skyboxes
>large scale, long distance
>beautiful texture mapping
>dynamic LOD, no distance fog or pop-up geometry
>portals
>3D HUD (in the first one, at least)
>3D lettering all over
>well rendered NPCs
>all items and characters and projectiles are 3D models, not sprites

Attached: dark_hollow_2.png (640x449, 258K)

I mean the Dreamcast is also literally a generation higher than PS1
Saturn is the Sega equivalent of the PS1

>the PS1 couldn't even display textures!
Were that true, every game would look like Bubsy 3D. Can you rephrase that?

Did you get bullied for not having a playstation or something? What are you trying to gain from shitting on some of the objectively best looking 6th gen games?

>3D gradient mesh skyboxes
While it makes for a nice artstyle, it's hard to be technically impressed with what are basically untextured gouraud shaded polygons.

>beautiful texture mapping
Yes they are pretty high resolution and cleverly shaded, but also repetitively tiled and non-multitextured.

>dynamic LOD, no distance fog or pop-up geometry
But the LOD transitions blatantly pop-up.

>well rendered NPCs
Spyro himself has a high polygon count, but every single other character in the game has an extremely low polygon count.

>all items and characters and projectiles are 3D models, not sprites
Yes, but either untextured like the diamonds or geometrically very basic.

Also Spyro doesn't have a lighting model at all.

Nintendo Bonus was at its highest during N64 and DS / (early) Wii eras

Attached: Perfect Dark.webm (1280x720, 1.08M)

It was a joke doofuses

>repetitively tiled
yawn
>But the LOD transitions blatantly pop-up.
Not really, Spyro uses pre-baked mipmaps.
>but every single other character in the game has an extremely low polygon count
not really tho?

IIRC only early Wiis have the right setup. Late models removed the GCN controller and memory ports as well as the USB ports on the back of the machine.

>webms the part of the video where Digital Foundry put on high-res mode
nice try sony cockroach

The "late models" you're talking about are another thing (Wii mini). Regular Wiis are way more common.

>Not really, Spyro uses pre-baked mipmaps.
None of the levels are blended together. That's why when even hardware mipmaps are used, trilinear filtering is required to blend the levels together.

When we're talking about a software mipmap system like the type Spyro uses, the level transitions are even more blatant.

5th gen was one of the most experimental gens, I am sorry your favorite 2D game got 2D taxed in reviews, but you can't warp history like that

>PS1 is not real 3D.
What kind of retarded bullshit is this?

And you wouldn't know if they hadn't told you.

>N64
technically far more advanced
>PS1
better games, far higher number of good games, better performance because devs actually tried to work with the limitations of the hardware

PS1 aged far better

Ah, didn't realize they had a separate model.

Right, compared to Ridge Racer 4 where the game doesn't allow you to see more than 2 opponent cars at once.

That's why when I jailbroke my PS3, I got the one with native PS2 backwards compatibility. That monster can play everything that Sony has or ever will produce that is worthwhile, and then some.

YFW this is emulator footage with overclock hack

It's a capture from s-video on real N64

>mfw this entire thread

Attached: 132DD702-75F9-40FB-9399-4DDA3D044E59.gif (323x233, 470K)

Be careful, there are "Family edition" Wiis without gamecube ports. you can easily tell if they are if the wii logo isn't vertical with the wii.

it says a lot about the N64 when its best game (OoT) averages 20 FPS

Do you speak this from knowledge or are you speculating? Looks pretty smooth for the actual game.

It says a lot about the PS1 when its best game (FF7) has character models that look like this. Over pre-rendered backgrounds.

Attached: cloud.jpg (150x260, 12K)

when you blink your pupils

Attached: 1452463741275.gif (457x321, 1.81M)

They're from a Youtuber that records real N64 footage.

yes, PS1 games also looked terrible, what's your point nintenkiddie? dreamcast was the first home console with decent 3D visuals

but between PS1 and N64, the former was easier on the eyes

Whoops wrong image and game

Attached: chrono-cross-370999.jpg (520x400, 159K)

>sharper
why is Yea Forums so technically retarded?

Chrono Cross is the only game I know that drops frames on screens with fucking pre-rendered backgrounds

Chrono Cross isn't even that good of a game in general.

the real truth is that 3D games all looked like shit in this generation, I wish we got more games like SotN

Maybe, butt you have to admit it's pretty.

the pre-rendered backgrounds helped FFVII to age better than the average full 3D console game from the same era, the backgrounds still look decent to this date

Attached: Final Fantasy VII.png (320x224, 65K)

Look it up user.
PS1 uses a faux system that just looks 3D but has all kinds of mathematical errors, which is why it jitters and skews so much.
N64 was true 3D but had to sacrifice other stuff to make room for that.

wasn't that a stylistic choice because they couldn't decide between chibi and more realistic designs

IIRC all vertices have to fall cleanly on integer pixel coordinates and there's no z-buffer or something like that. It's an issue with emulation because even rendering at 4k or something, you still are limited to 320 or 240 or however many positions from one side of the screen to another. I think it's related to polygon jittler/wobble and there's like a hack fix on pcsx-r .

at least it's not overrated trash like ocarina of time.

>HERES YOUR TRIANGLE BRO
PSfags will defend this

Attached: Untitled.jpg (801x834, 103K)

t. LCD babby

I have the actual cart. The framerate is only shit in the saving private ryan part and the zombie area.

It depends, Insomniac and naughty Dog did some crazy things with their games but Rare and Factor 5 also seemed to do well with the 64. I wonder what Rare's games would look like on a PS1.

Attached: 1561687570081.png (506x720, 230K)

like a beautiful water painting.

>looked better
Who cares? A game can look like shit as long as THE GAME IS FUCKING FUN.
This is why the N64/PS1 generation was the beginning of the end. Sony and Nintendo wanted people to think graphics (and/or story) mattered and gameplay could be a fucking pile of shit because they didn't want to waste time making games good any more.

>N64's hardware was never improved throughout its life
The expansion pak no?

PS1 had better waifus.

Attached: 1547585367567.jpg (1024x716, 97K)

And PS2 had even better waifus.

Attached: thotmine.jpg (1344x1010, 122K)

the ps1 was loaded with god-tier games.

We know that you sperglord. But there's nothing wrong with discussing graphics. Go take your meds.

Attached: hmm.png (467x556, 239K)

>The seventh gen console that got the most criticism actually turned out to be the least terrible one thanks to its backwards compatibility and piss-easy homebrew.
PS3?

sure, but the first love is something truly special. like pic related.

Attached: 1540050730384.jpg (819x1024, 296K)

There are too many arcade games on n64 to list but I’ll give ya cruise’n’usa and gauntlet, as for rhythm games I may have mistaken the game cubes dance dance revolution games for being on n64

GCN had the best waifu of all time. OF ALL TIME!

Attached: Untitled.png (2000x2000, 1.97M)

There's another model of Wii before Wii Mini that removed the gamecube ports, it looks nearly identical to the original wii except the Wii logo is horizontal like pic related so you have to be careful when shopping for one.

Attached: wii_console.jpg (960x676, 93K)

Poor Yoshi.

Agreed

Attached: Fio-MS3.jpg (600x800, 172K)

Ps1 would´ve been the best if it didnt have that god awful polygon distorting thing.
I prefer sharp unfiltered textures.

kek

unfortunately the game isnt a screenshot. as soon as it starts moving every fucking ps1 3d game wobbles around like its about to explode or it exists in non euclidean space

I fucking love the art direction namco was putting out in the late 90s.

Attached: Ace Combat 3 - Electrosphere (J) (v1.1) (Disc 1) [SLPS-02020]-190531-203111.png (1440x1080, 572K)

at least it helps with bouncing effects

youtube.com/watch?v=lWncFJh6es0

>I wonder what Rare's games would look like on a PS1.
probably like Terracon with very open areas and questionable framerate

youtube.com/watch?v=GA_e5c3XG80

(You)

underrated gem

PS1 is peak soul

Attached: KingsField05.jpg (380x285, 29K)

Looking at this and all future Square RPG that came after FFVII it really makes me wonder wtf they were thinking with those chibi paper origami models.

>Z-buffer
Even Nintendies have to admit that PS1 is peak fucking aesthetic.

>pre-rendered backgrounds
Resident Evil proved there is nothing wrong with pre-rendered backgrounds

They weren't so sure what style they wanted to go with the transition to 3D and they were overall not very proficient with 3D yet at the time 7 was being developed. Every PS1 Square game after that is a huge step up.

If you sell a Gran Turismo wannabe it sure as fuck had better be able to come at least remotely close in terms of content, which World Driver Championship didn't.

N64 games always looked better to me because the walls didn't jitter around and warp whenever you moved the camera. Even if it was a little blurrier it made me feel more like I was inhabiting an actual virtual world rather than some kind of jaggy nightmare

Attached: 1517039885915.jpg (564x1166, 152K)

>sixth gen is the best gen

4th gen was better. SNES, Genesis, TG-16, Neo Geo, and Gameboy were all good to great, and PC gaming at the time was incredible. Plus arcades were amazing as well and produced too many quality games to count.

6th gen was PS2, Dreamcast, and GBA. PC gaming was OK, but it was already going downhill compared to the late 90s (when it peaked). The rest of that generation SUCKED. Xbox was trash, Gamecube was somehow even worse, arcades were dead, and the other forgotten portables that tried to compete against Nintendo and failed were some of the worst trash ever.

PS1, crunchy textures are kino

I love how the banjos look

Attached: BMNdmnK.jpg (1280x768, 190K)

Attached: 1406529647323.png (1024x768, 1.18M)

>The N64 seems to really struggle with lighting
No it doesn't. N64 games have far, far more complex lighting than PS1 titles. Heck, remember when Turok 2 gave you a flare gun just to show off the dynamic lighting system they'd built? (Quake II RTX did the same thing, curiously.)

The N64 had an architectural problem that forced all textures to be loaded through the 4kb cache. The only workaround for this was to draw everything using the CPU. But basically nobody tried doing this because the N64 CPU wasn't very good. The 64Doom homebrew renders by blitting pixels directly to the framebuffer using the CPU, and as a consequence it doesn't have any of the limitations of N64 video hardware.

Any time the N64 and PS1 share a multiplat, the N64 always wins. I mean look at
youtube.com/watch?v=Hl9PXqG0dvg
and
youtube.com/watch?v=VVsw2Wn1ewY

PS1 also uses more dynamic resolutions, Crash and Spyro run at 512x224 (with borders), Bubsy 3D runs at 480i surprisingly enough

Banjo, Conker and I presume most of the most intensive Rare games run at 320x224 also with borders (Banjo is effectively 292x214)

N64
Conker's bad fur day

The N64 hardware had some severe issues with fill rate in part because 1/3 was being blown on the z-buffer, and another 1/3 was being blown on the hardware anti-aliasing process, and so on.

Yet PS1 devs could draw their textures from anywhere in the VRAM or the cache, allowing you to have textures up to 256x256px. On the N64 you're forced to draw everything from the 4kb cache while also sharing that with the mipmap system, effectively maxing your texture size to 32x32px.

>On the N64 you're forced to draw everything from the 4kb cache while also sharing that with the mipmap system, effectively maxing your texture size to 32x32px.
The max texture size is 64x64 with 8 bit colour, I believe. (Or 128x32 or some combination.) If you did monochrome you could squeeze even higher resolutions.

N64 textures didn't have to be mipmapped. In a game like Perfect Dark, for example, bilinear filtering and mipmapping is controlled on a per-surface basis.

I don't think the N64 hardware supported palletized textures, 24/16-bit color, 8-bit grayscale or nothing.

>1996
Nintendo fans, how does this make you feel?

Attached: visually boring.jpg (1882x846, 623K)

You're probably right. I think developers resorted to storing some textures in monochrome format to reduce storage size but they had to be converted to a specific format before passing through the N64 texture cache.

The N64's final video output is absolute dogshit. I remember that DMA Design were hugely disappointed with how fuzzy everything looked compared to the home computer hardware they were used to working with.

>meant to be displayed on a CTR

CRASH TEAM RACING OH FUCK YEAH!!!

n64 had better textures, ps1 had better models.

>ps1 had better models.
The PS1 literally couldn't display stable 3D geometry.

No contest. N64. Are you retarded?

PS1, both in art and audio. Fuck cartridges.

Its the fucking opposite

I unironically think Vagrant Story is one of the top three greatest games ever made, at least

It makes me seeth.