|
Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
#329284 - 08/05/14 08:22 AM
|
|
|
Considering when it came out, shouldn't of the games been comparable to early Sega Model 3 games! I noticed when working on a Texture Pack, how small the textures are, was that the max size files that it could process! I think it could of produced games of the same quality as 1996 Model 3 hardware maybe or 3dfx but lacked something so they couldn't get close to the best out of the machine or video chip. Model 3 could process more polygons than the 64 but the 64 could process more bits but had less ram, its main CPU was faster than Model 3's, it had some things over Model 3 and Model 3 had some things over it but why the texture quality looked so poor in the Nintendo 64 games is beyond me, i am limited in my understanding of these things.
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329285 - 08/05/14 08:24 AM
|
|
|
> Considering when it came out, shouldn't of the games been comparable to early Sega
> Model 3 games! I noticed when working on a Texture Pack, how small the textures are,
> was that the max size files that it could process! I think it could of been good but
> lacked something so they couldn't get close to the best out of the machine or video
> chip.
The plastic analog stick.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329287 - 08/05/14 08:44 AM
|
|
|
It wasn't that much of a failure and nobody I knew at the time compared it to Model 3 or knew what Model 3 was. You might as well include Gamecube, WiiU, everything by Sega but Genesis, TG-16, Atari Lynx, Atari 5200 Coleco Apple Lisa CD-i Atari Jaguar, why did they all fail on some level... If you actually compiled real data for them all and wrote a book on why they all didn't meet their potential, that would be interesting. But as for 50 threads of opinions... Well it seems spammy to me but I guess we don't have anything better going on so, proceed?
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6819
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Heihachi_73]
#329288 - 08/05/14 08:49 AM
|
|
|
> > Considering when it came out, shouldn't of the games been comparable to early Sega
> > Model 3 games! I noticed when working on a Texture Pack, how small the textures
> are,
> > was that the max size files that it could process! I think it could of been good
> but
> > lacked something so they couldn't get close to the best out of the machine or video
> > chip.
>
> The plastic analog stick.
I say the D-Pad. I had to mod it to play decently on KI-Gold. And by "Mod it" I mean I dremeled out a round piece of plastic, hot glued that onto the + cross shaped D-Pad -just so I could hit the diagonal directions better.
eta: You know? We were promised Killer Instinct, but never got it ("Coming to your home in 1995!").
And KI-Gold, being somewhat of a port of KI2.... I noticed (I believe) the reflections (on some smooth floors) of the characters in the Arcade game looked different than the reflections of the characters on the N64 version. The Arcade version... look at Fulgore's level. Then look at the same stage on the N64. It's more like a Sprite flip.
Edited by Tomu Breidah (08/05/14 09:36 AM)
|
LEVEL-4
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329289 - 08/05/14 08:55 AM
|
|
|
> It wasn't that much of a failure and nobody I knew at the time compared it to Model 3
> or knew what Model 3 was. You might as well include Gamecube, WiiU, everything by
> Sega but Genesis, TG-16, Atari Lynx, Atari 5200 Coleco Apple Lisa CD-i Atari Jaguar,
> why did they all fail on some level... If you actually compiled real data for them
> all and wrote a book on why they all didn't meet their potential, that would be
> interesting. But as for 50 threads of opinions... Well it seems spammy to me but I
> guess we don't have anything better going on so, proceed?
PSX could process better textures, it was a piece of crap as far texture quality goes, creating a texture pack for the games is a nightmare cause so many ugly texture and you get to see just how bad they were after you dump them, but you can't complain for 400 which is cheap for a newly released console and the games were very enjoyable to play.
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329291 - 08/05/14 09:02 AM
|
|
|
I really enjoyed both the PSX and the N64 and the games that first come to mind are console exclusives like Mario 64 and Mario Kart 64 and Banjo Kazooie and Twisted Metal so guess what hardware texture potentials meant to me at the time? Jack fuckall shit.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329292 - 08/05/14 09:04 AM
|
|
|
> I really enjoyed both the PSX and the N64 and the games that first come to mind are
> console exclusives like Mario 64 and Mario Kart 64 and Banjo Kazooie and Twisted
> Metal so guess what hardware texture potentials meant to me at the time? Jack fuckall
> shit.
I was hoping they would be of the same quality as Model 2 games at least, but yeah same with me the more i played Mario the less concerned i was with the animation.
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329293 - 08/05/14 09:04 AM
|
|
|
> Considering when it came out, shouldn't of the games been comparable to early Sega
> Model 3 games! I noticed when working on a Texture Pack, how small the textures are,
> was that the max size files that it could process! I think it could of produced games
> of the same quality as 1996 Model 3 hardware maybe or 3dfx but lacked something so
> they couldn't get close to the best out of the machine or video chip. Model 3 could
> process more polygons than the 64 but the 64 could process more bits but had less
> ram, its main CPU was faster than Model 3's, it had some things over Model 3 and
> Model 3 had some things over it but why the texture quality looked so poor in the
> Nintendo 64 games is beyond me, i am limited in my understanding of these things.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329294 - 08/05/14 09:13 AM
|
|
|
I didn't know very many arcade hardwares at the time. I played them but didn't know what systems I was playing. I didn't learn about them until mame (2000+). Around the time N64 came out it seemed really close to me to top end arcade hardware.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329295 - 08/05/14 09:19 AM
|
|
|
> I didn't know very many arcade hardwares at the time. I played them but didn't know
> what systems I was playing. I didn't learn about them until mame (2000+). Around the
> time N64 came out it seemed really close to me to top end arcade hardware.
You can't be serious!
Nintendo 64
Arcade
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329296 - 08/05/14 09:22 AM
|
|
|
Surely you aren't stupid enough to think those are accurate full res frame grabs of the systems.
Edit: oh wait now you're editing your posts. Get a grip.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329297 - 08/05/14 09:25 AM
|
|
|
> Surely you aren't stupid enough to think those are accurate full res frame grabs of
> the systems.
>
> Edit: oh wait now you're editing your posts. Get a grip.
Frames from Arcade and Nintendo 64 below, i got them off google so the quality is not my doing, we all know Scud Race looks clearer so that will do, and that is about right with the Nintendo image.
Nintendo 64
Arcade
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329298 - 08/05/14 09:29 AM
|
|
|
And now reversing it. Dude if you see a world of difference there to enjoy then enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329299 - 08/05/14 09:34 AM
|
|
|
> And now reversing it. Dude if you see a world of difference there to enjoy then enjoy
> it.
We all know what it looks like so no point posting a perfect image of it, SuperModel a great and popular emulator. I do very much enjoy it, even occasionally these day i play it, Scud Race a great game.
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329300 - 08/05/14 09:35 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
Surely you aren't stupid enough to think those are accurate full res frame grabs of the systems.
Surely you aren't stupid enough to believe a home system costing $250 in 1996 could hope to match a then state of the art arcade system, costing multiple thousands of dollars?
Seriously people, the N64 could never hope to match Model 3.
It's failure was nothing to do with the systems capabilities.
It failed because of it launching 2yrs after the PSX and the decision to stick to the ROM cart format which was too expensive for 3rd parties to risk developing for, which meant a very poor software selection and more expensive releases.
Edited by Ziggy100 (08/05/14 02:40 PM)
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Ziggy100]
#329301 - 08/05/14 09:40 AM
|
|
|
I did see hardware differences between top end arcade hardware and N64 in 96-97, just not a huge leap. It was all coming out of low res monitors, really baby step shit.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329303 - 08/05/14 10:03 AM
|
|
|
Sorry, but the difference was night and day...
15 to 20,000 polygons per frame at 60fps compared to 3 or 4,000 per frame at only 20-30fps at nearly half the resolution.
Just in notional terms, that's something like a x16 rendering deficit.
Factor in the the virtually unlimited texture RAM and ROM sizes, and your looking at a HUGE gap.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Ziggy100]
#329305 - 08/05/14 10:16 AM
|
|
|
I really didn't have any of these games side by side at the time. I would occasionally go to the arcade and when I played games on my N64 they would seem a tad inferior hardware wise overall to the top of the line (1-2 in an arcade) but also different games (Mario Kart 64 and Diddy Kong for racers which weren't in arcades). I really didn't feel like I missed something in the hardware gaps of this period at all and the high end Sega games yall purr over didn't define the arcade experience to me at the time at all (and still don't), but to each his own. Hell I couldn't even get any of my friends to go to the arcade with me past 95/PSX release. They would rather play their PSX.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Ziggy100]
#329306 - 08/05/14 10:46 AM
|
|
|
> Sorry, but the difference was night and day...
>
> 15 to 20,000 polygons per frame at 60fps compared to 3 or 4,000 per frame at only
> 20-30fps at nearly half the resolution.
>
> Just in notional terms, that's something like a x16 rendering deficit.
>
> Factor in the the virtually unlimited texture RAM and ROM sizes, and your looking at
> a HUGE gap.
And also the fact that the game developers have to make them look more attractive than home crop so people will put coins into them, as with console games they come in a case and you don't get to see them until after you pay 100 and take them home and put them in the machine and if they are sh.t then that is bad luck lol, these days people don't have to worry about that cause most look good and they can check them out on youtube before they buy them. Even on Dreamcast most the games the art was no where near to the extent they went with the art in Scud Race, Shenmue 2 was about the only one i think.
|
I am the original retro game dork.
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329307 - 08/05/14 11:11 AM
|
|
|
> I did see hardware differences between top end arcade hardware and N64 in 96-97, just
> not a huge leap. It was all coming out of low res monitors, really baby step shit.
You can really see it in emulation.
Been the nerd that i am, lol, on the original hardware i looked for and could see a difference between the Model 2 Daytona and the Saturn version, one of the most disappointing times was when i sold my SNES and games just to buy Daytona after seeing the back of the cover, it looked as good if not better than the coin-op version on the back of the cover the Australian version, and then after running it i was very disappointed, the animation was important to me, the Arcade version looked a treat back then and until the late 90's pretty much.
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6819
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
use the word "Graphics" instead of "Art" -plz. [nt]
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329319 - 08/05/14 03:23 PM
|
|
|
thx 
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329323 - 08/05/14 05:14 PM
|
|
|
> I noticed when working on a Texture Pack, how small the textures are,
> was that the max size files that it could process!
Asked and answered: textures really were that small in the hardware.
I would dispute that the N64 "went wrong"; it was #2 in a 3-console generation and home to half a dozen of the most beloved games of all time.
It was quite pleasant to work on for the most part, too. CD emulators were a gigantic unreliable pain in the ass at that time; cartdevs were well-refined technology from the 16-bit era and Just Worked. And the bliss of having fast DMA access to all of your data at any time instead of having to deal with the at-the-time 2X speed CD-ROMs could not be overestimated.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329324 - 08/05/14 05:16 PM
|
|
|
Yes, and in 1997 we didn't fucking have $5000 Scud Race machines parked next to our TVs to A/B. N64 was close enough to what arcades were doing, and the games themselves were frequently better.
I'll take a "16x rendering deficit" for a 16x price deficit.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#329325 - 08/05/14 05:19 PM
|
|
|
> And KI-Gold, being somewhat of a port of KI2.... I noticed (I believe) the
> reflections (on some smooth floors) of the characters in the Arcade game looked
> different than the reflections of the characters on the N64 version. The Arcade
> version... look at Fulgore's level. Then look at the same stage on the N64. It's more
> like a Sprite flip.
The arcade was pure software, no GPU, and it could stream textures off the HDD. There are obviously going to be differences porting that to any system prior to the PS3/X360 generation.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: R. Belmont]
#329337 - 08/05/14 07:18 PM
|
|
|
> I would dispute that the N64 "went wrong"
These guys agree
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: R. Belmont]
#329342 - 08/05/14 07:39 PM
|
|
|
> Yes, and in 1997 we didn't fucking have $5000 Scud Race machines parked next to our
> TVs to A/B. N64 was close enough to what arcades were doing, and the games themselves
> were frequently better.
>
> I'll take a "16x rendering deficit" for a 16x price deficit.
Fucking truth right here.
Discuss!
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#329352 - 08/05/14 08:52 PM
|
|
|
I like the 'smoothed' N64 graphics better. It has its own reality, rather than trying to imitate one.
|
|
|
|
I love how popcul has 'appropriated' the word nerd.....
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#329353 - 08/05/14 08:56 PM
|
|
|
It used to mean you actually knew something......
|
|
|
|
HAHN....if I drank coffee, I might've spewed it..... CLASS (nt)
[Re: MooglyGuy]
#329354 - 08/05/14 08:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: R. Belmont]
#329362 - 08/05/14 11:45 PM
|
|
|
> Yes, and in 1997 we didn't fucking have $5000 Scud Race machines parked next to our
> TVs to A/B. N64 was close enough to what arcades were doing, and the games themselves
> were frequently better.
>
> I'll take a "16x rendering deficit" for a 16x price deficit.
I would take photo realistic Model 3 textures any day over blurry cartoon N64 textures.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: R. Belmont]
#329367 - 08/06/14 12:42 AM
|
|
|
> > And KI-Gold, being somewhat of a port of KI2.... I noticed (I believe) the
> > reflections (on some smooth floors) of the characters in the Arcade game looked
> > different than the reflections of the characters on the N64 version. The Arcade
> > version... look at Fulgore's level. Then look at the same stage on the N64. It's
> more
> > like a Sprite flip.
>
> The arcade was pure software, no GPU, and it could stream textures off the HDD. There
> are obviously going to be differences porting that to any system prior to the
> PS3/X360 generation.
There is really no comparison, Model 3 was way ahead visually, Dreamcast was the 1st console to be able to do art like it as we seen in Shenmue 2.
N64's finest visually, Ridge Racer 64, it looked ok this one.
Sega Model 3
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329376 - 08/06/14 03:14 AM
|
|
|
Its animation was a little similar to Sega Model 2's and that is been generous to the 64.
Model 2
Model 2
Model 2
Nintendo 64
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329377 - 08/06/14 03:34 AM
|
|
|
You do realize that emu N64 pic has no basis in reality, right? If you want to show what it looked like then plug in a system and get a capture at its native resolution with a card (because I'm not sure if there is an accurate emulator though I haven't checked in years). What I think you've done there is taken snaps of Sega hardware from probably an accurate emu source and then your N64 nightmare, dude that is just plugin cluelessness. I'm not saying N64 was superior but with that pic there, you might as well of thrown in scaling effects and photoshopped the shits.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329380 - 08/06/14 04:05 AM
|
|
|
> You do realize that emu N64 pic has no basis in reality, right? If you want to show
> what it looked like then plug in a system and get a capture at its native resolution
> with a card (because I'm not sure if there is an accurate emulator though I haven't
> checked in years). What I think you've done there is taken snaps of Sega hardware
> from probably an accurate emu source and then your N64 nightmare, dude that is just
> plugin cluelessness. I'm not saying N64 was superior but with that pic there, you
> might as well of thrown in scaling effects and photoshopped the shits.
It wasn't that bad in the 90's that you couldn't see what the textures looked like. You can even in this average quality video of Daytona https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a101qgl8Ncs
I did actually, i increased the lighting cause it was dark, and captured the picture from the project 64 emulator. Here is what it normally looks like
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329381 - 08/06/14 04:09 AM
|
|
|
That looks more like it though I'm hesitant to trust an N64 snap from a website called romsworld considering how inaccurate the emulation was last time I checked.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329393 - 08/06/14 06:11 AM
|
|
|
Also both did similar road textures. As far as software goes, overall Model 2 kicked N64 a.. IMAO
Model 2
Nintendo 64
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329394 - 08/06/14 06:37 AM
|
|
|
I sometimes have people post here who are so fucking stupid that I feel like I can't ban them for something their parents forced on them because what's fair about that? But if you post one more N64 emu shot from some horseshit plugin using inaccurate bullshit I will ban you period.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329395 - 08/06/14 07:32 AM
|
|
|
> I sometimes have people post here who are so fucking stupid that I feel like I can't
> ban them for something their parents forced on them because what's fair about that?
> But if you post one more N64 emu shot from some horseshit plugin using inaccurate
> bullshit I will ban you period.
Take a picture of it in full screen with your keyboard print key in the same position in project 64 and then adjust the brightness in photoshop and you will get the exact same picture, if the textures look different than the ones in my picture which they won't, if they some how do then accuse me of been stupid.
I used the Project 64 default Plugin, the games look same as i remember them except a little clearer that is about it, i remember what Mario 64 looked like clearly, there is no enhancements with the default plugin at all in the textures, they still look like garbage.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329396 - 08/06/14 07:43 AM
|
|
|
I don't need to accuse anything. Think whatev4 ufeelike.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Smitdogg]
#329399 - 08/06/14 08:23 AM
|
|
|
> I don't need to accuse anything. Think whatev4 ufeelike.
A raw picture of it, no brightness adjustment, it does have some nice textures in it but is one of the very few games on N64 that did, it got great ratings by gaming sites and magazines.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329403 - 08/06/14 12:10 PM
|
|
|
> Its animation was a little similar to Sega Model 2's and that is been generous to the
> 64.
Do you even know what the word "animation" means? Hint: still pictures cannot show it.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329404 - 08/06/14 12:18 PM
|
|
|
You aren't understanding. There is no plugin-based N64 emulator that generates the same frame buffer pixels as hardware. Exactly zero of them run the original RSP code and generate the actual hardware's rasterization data. Exactly zero of them draw the triangles the way the RDP did (which is not at all like the way modern GPUs work). MESS starts to be in the right neighborhood, but nobody else even tries.
Also, you're missing the filtering effects of CRTs in both the Model 2 and N64 cases, and NTSC artifacts in the N64 case.
Hence, emulator shots are completely bogus vs. the actual experience we had playing those games back in the 90s before you were born.
Also, most of the Model 2 games were garbage. The only one people will go out of their way to play today is Daytona. There's nothing of the stature of Mario 64 or Ocarina of Time or pretty much Rare's entire output for the system.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: R. Belmont]
#329409 - 08/06/14 03:27 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Also, most of the Model 2 games were garbage. The only one people will go out of their way to play today is Daytona. There's nothing of the stature of Mario 64 or Ocarina of Time or pretty much Rare's entire output for the system.
What's this got to do with the question being asked?
No one denies Nintendo, along with Rare produced a handful of masterpieces for the N64, but that's all it was, a handful.
The rest was just as bad as the shovelware crap that infested the PS1, just less of it.
If your 3rd parties don't bring anything to the table, your hardware will be a (relative) failure, which the N64 was.
..also, thank fuck emulated screenshots don't look as bad as a proper N64, because the image quality output of the N64 was a piece of shit, it didn't even have an RGB option which was the standard in Europe, Composite and SVHS are an abomination in comparison.
..even Super Mario 64 with it's bold,colourful cartoon visuals was blur 'o' vision on European TV screens compared to the technically inferior polygons of the RGB SCART output of the PS1.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: Ziggy100]
#329411 - 08/06/14 03:58 PM
|
|
|
> What's this got to do with the question being asked?
His point of contention was that the N64 sucked because it wasn't Model 2; note the repeated screenshot galleries of Model 2 games offered as proof. My counteroffer is that he's being a graphics whore and that if you focus on actual games, N64 has multiple masterpieces and Model 2 has 1 genuine masterpiece (Daytona) and 1 near-miss (Sega Rally). Model 3 has zero masterpieces and 1 near-miss (Scud Race, which in a just world would've had a kickass Dreamcast port).
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64! *DELETED*
[Re: Ziggy100]
#329412 - 08/06/14 04:10 PM
|
|
|
Post deleted by RetroFan4554
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329413 - 08/06/14 04:20 PM
|
|
|
> > The rest was just as bad as the shovelware crap that infested the PS1, just less of
> > it.
As far as animation goes, most Model 2 games looked very good in their day, some even better than Daytona and Sega Rally, OverRev, Motoraid, Sega Touring car, to name a few. The Model 2 rom software was much higher quality, the hardware may be better in N64 but most the game developers for it either had no desire for graphic art, only for money, or they were not given enough time in their contracts.
|
|
|
| CTOJAH |
|
MAME Addict
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 07/13/10
|
|
Posts: 980
|
|
Loc: Macedonia,Veles
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329418 - 08/06/14 05:36 PM
|
|
|
May I ask You, why You keep comparing N64 with Model 2 ???
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329427 - 08/06/14 07:30 PM
|
|
|
> > I'll take a "16x rendering deficit" for a 16x price deficit.
>
> I would take photo realistic Model 3 textures any day over blurry cartoon N64
> textures.
Yes, and in 1997 you would have paid ~$5000 for a Model 3 cabinet which can play a single game to achieve that.
You seem to think there was some sort of magic Nintendo could have pulled to achieve what at the time were high-end military simulator visuals for a $300 price point. Sega notably didn't even try; Saturn was a System 32 evolution and Dreamcast/Naomi was largely a clean-sheet design based on consumer PC hardware (with a few minor nods to Saturn here and there).
|
|
|
| B2K24 |
|
MAME @ 15 kHz Sony Trinitron CRT user
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 10/25/10
|
|
Posts: 2663
|
|
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: RetroFan4554]
#329450 - 08/07/14 05:07 AM
|
|
|
I don't consider the N64 a failure at all.
My Roommate and I were living "the Dream" in 97 with our own Apartment and the living room was a mess of consoles and games right when you walked in the door :P
There was so many games we wanted to buy at that time, we actually picked up more hours at work and spent less time in arcades only to arrive home from work and be gaming all night long with hardly any sleep.
As far as the N64 is concerned, aside from all the legendary games people automatically name when referencing the system, I still remember how much fun we had playing the original Turok. MK4 also seemed to be very well done from what I Still remember.
Damn those were fun times.
|
|
|
|
Re: Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
[Re: CTOJAH]
#329456 - 08/07/14 06:45 AM
|
|
|
> May I ask You, why You keep comparing N64 with Model 2 ???
Stupidity. The comparison makes no sense at all. The whole point of high-cost arcade systems like Model 2 is to provide an experience you can't afford to have at home. That can be done with superior graphics, unique control setups, immersive cabinets, etc. It becomes a decent value proposition because the high initial cost is amortised over a large number of gamers.
The N64 was a living room console built to a living room price. That places constraints on it straight away. At the time, even things like high-performance RAM were very expensive. Console games themselves also have to be affordable as you need to sell lots of them. On a ROM-based console this puts a limit on the data size you can work with, as fast ROM is not cheap.
There are different limitations in the kind of content you can sell in arcade games vs home console games. An arcade game needs immediate pulling power, to get the person walking past to put a coin in. It also has to be over relatively quickly - even a relatively long game like a beat-em-up or run-and-gun can still usually be finished in under an hour. Since an arcade is often a social experience with a mixture of friends and strangers, having good competitive or cooperative multiplayer can make for more lasting appeal.
On the other hand, people spend more time with a console game. For a game a good value proposition, it either needs to have a decent amount of content so it'll take a while to complete, or be a game that you'll want to play more than once. That's why you get RPGs with longer stories, multiple outcomes etc. Also things like driving games that let you track your performance as you improve over an extended period.
It's pointless to compare the two, and I'm pretty sure he wasn't around to experience either in its original form, so he has no point of reference.
|
|
|
Index 
Threaded 
Where did Nintendo go wrong with the Nintendo 64!
Reply
[Re: 
