Quantcast

Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 381

Thread: Amount of consoles sold worldwide

  1. #136
    I DON'T LIKE POKEMON Hero of Algol j_factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    9,204
    Rep Power
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barone View Post
    OK, ABF. You were right all the time. I'm sorry for having said that you were wrong.
    The N64 fog is actually a hardware feature and the other consoles of that generation, including the 3DO, couldn't do volumetric fog; here's an article explaining the whole thing:
    www.ign.com/articles/1999/06/03/n64-fog-how-it-works-2
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Barone again.


    You just can't handle my jawusumness responces.

  2. #137
    Hero of Algol TrekkiesUnite118's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Age
    30
    Posts
    7,971
    Rep Power
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post

    Actually ingame? I thought most Saturn games that have high res just use the higher res in menus, which really is kind of irrelevant (gameplay is what matters).
    Yes, those games actually run in High Res mode in game. Others include Last Bronx, Virtua Fighter Remix, Digital Dance Mix, Anarchy in the Nippon, Decathlete, Winter Heat, All Star Japan Wrestling, all the Digital Pinball games, and Saturn Bomberman. Toshinden Ura, D'Xhird, Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix use High res backgrounds and low res models if I remember correctly.

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Eh, I think that eventually the PS1 got pretty close to no-RAM-expansion Saturn 2d... I mean, like how Darkstalkers 3 for PS1 looks just as good as Night Warriors for Saturn, which was a huge improvement over the first PS1 Darkstalkers game. But yeah, I do agree that the PS1, and the N64 as well, are quite capable 2d systems. All three of those systems can do 2d games quite well, when developers tried and knew the systems.
    Yet Vampire Savior on the Saturn blows Darkstalkers 3 out of the water, go figure.

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    It sure looks like it's changing. Look at how at first they're just grey outlines in the background, but once you get close they're detailed buildings... is that really just all just a flat front texture? If so, then they're changing that as you get closer. Nice effect.
    That's not model detail. That's texture detail. There's a very big difference. And if you ask me they are probably just doing a VDP2 blending effect similar to what Sonic R does as that would be easier and more uniform than changing each texture per polygon per frame. The point is, it gives the same effect as N64 fog for all intents and purposes.

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Hi-Octane looks like popup through and through to me. As for the others though, can anyone actually PROVE this one way or the other, and not just say opinion stuff?
    The polygon drawing is happening very close to the fog border, that's why. But the fog is still over top the polygons as you can see it's having a visual effect on them.

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Most 3d PC games had skyboxes by the later '90s, I think... but yeah, I guess console games didn't yet. Skyboxes or background textures, then. Same difference, the two things serve the same purpose.
    I believe you will find Quake 2 was one of the first games to use a Skybox. And no console port of that game uses a skybox to my knowledge.

  3. #138
    Hero of Algol
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,544
    Rep Power
    166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118 View Post
    Yet Vampire Savior on the Saturn blows Darkstalkers 3 out of the water, go figure.
    TBH, I think the first PS1 port (by Psygnosis), Vampire: The Night Warriors, is very good for the time and hardware (compare it to all 2D ports released during those days for the PS1 and you'll see that it's the best or easily Top 3 in terms of accuracy) but it pays the price for having carried the many gameplay flaws the original arcade game had.
    Compared to the arcade game, it doesn't have many more cuts than Darkstalkers 3 had; also, it has an improved color palette and some transparencies which were not present in the arcade.
    It's when you compare it to the Saturn's port of Vampire Hunter: Darkstalkers' Revenge (which on the arcades already was a heavily improved game when compared to Vampire: The Night Warriors) that it really pales.

  4. #139
    Raging in the Streets A Black Falcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,238
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barone View Post
    OK, ABF. You were right all the time. I'm sorry for having said that you were wrong.
    The N64 fog is actually a hardware feature and the other consoles of that generation, including the 3DO, couldn't do volumetric fog; here's an article explaining the whole thing:
    www.ign.com/articles/1999/06/03/n64-fog-how-it-works-2
    Childish idiocy instead of actually trying to figure out if you're right or not? Typical Barone, sadly.

  5. #140
    Hero of Algol
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,544
    Rep Power
    166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Childish idiocy instead of actually trying to figure out if you're right or not? Typical Barone, sadly.
    Utter hypocritical post after having ignored several members' comments, videos, tons of info and examples which proved you're completely wrong once again. Typical ABF, sadly.

    And that image is nothing but a visual summarization of your attitude in this entire thread (as in many other occasions). However, I would understand if someone had criticized me saying that I should have used a big N64 wall image instead.

  6. #141
    Raging in the Streets A Black Falcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,238
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barone View Post
    Utter hypocritical post after having ignored several members' comments, videos, tons of info and examples which proved you're completely wrong once again. Typical ABF, sadly.
    I ignored nothing. I just think you're wrong. Don't misunderstand me though, I'm sure some PS1 games do use fog too... my point was that I think that specific fog effect is easier to do on N64. I imagine some PS1 games do do something similar in software. I think that stuff like that purple fog in Extreme-G, though... the PS1 cannot do that in hardware, while the N64 can.

    And that image is nothing but a visual summarization of your attitude in this entire thread (as in many other occasions). However, I would understand if someone had criticized me saying that I should have used a big N64 wall image instead.
    That image is nothing other than a visualization of how childish your "argument" style is and how useless it is to actually attempt to hold a debate with you.


    Edit: And there we go, some evidence to back up that the PS1 cannot do colored fog in hardware. The N64 can, obviously. But the PS1? Takes programming tricks to pull off, and very few games do. From http://www.playstationmuseum.com/Games/SCUS94555/
    On the alien planet level, we had green-colored fog. Nowadays, colored-fog is trivial, but the PlayStation was limited in such a way that you had to be kind of tricky to do it. Even doing a billboard tree that faded into colored fog as we had on the volcano level had required a few graphical tricks that would be nothing on modern hardware. I hadn't seen it in any PlayStation game before ours, so I was hoping that I would have broken new ground there. Then Spyro shipped before we could and rained colored fog on my parade.
    On the N64, of course, fog like that was easy. So, we're both partially right; I guess the PS1 can do fog, but it has a hard time doing fog like the colored fog I pointed out from Extreme-G as being an example of something the N64 could do in hardware that the other systems of the generation couldn't. The N64 clearly improved fog effects versus previous consoles, so I was partially right, but yes, I guess they could do basic black-and-grey "fog" effects without much trouble... but it's not on the same level as N64 fog is.
    Last edited by A Black Falcon; 09-25-2013 at 04:18 AM.

  7. #142
    Hero of Algol kool kitty89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,724
    Rep Power
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118 View Post
    The Sonic R effect is very similar visually . The big difference though is that background layer is what's being used to cause the fade in effect. Basically the background image is laid over top and as you get closer to new geometry it is blended in using VDP2 transparency if I remember correclty. If you replaced that background image with a gradient or someting less detailed you'd have a very similar looking effect to the N64's fog. That actually might be an interesting thing for someone to try with hacking.

    The fog in courier crisis is rather similar too, it's just not as thick or intense.
    The Sonic R effect is neat, but more typical "fade to white" distance shading is more like "real" Z-fogging as the N64 typically does, and plenty of Saturn and PSX games do that.

    As for Sonic R, I'm pretty sure they way it's done is using normal 15-bit RGB mode on VDP1 with 1-bit priority, along with a translucent VDP1 background plane. VDP1 objects use normal fade to white shading/fogging, while also dropping to low priority for the farthest back stuff which thus ends up being placed behind the VDP2 layer and blended into it. (radient emerald uses a similar effect to make the entire stage seem translucent)

    For a while I was baffled at why it seemed like VDP1 objects smoothly blended into the BG at a gradient (gradually fading into transparency), but then I realized they were actually just being shaded/fogged on the VDP1 end as well as the simple on/off priority effect sorting the blended ones. (so all objects really are blended at the same level of transparency, but they fade out due to shading)

    Actually, the Saturn's "limited" shading/lighting mechanism faclitates that . . . if the Saturn only had multiplicative style lighting and no additive shading like that, you'd have to fade towards black (like Tomb Raider), but the way Sega "faked" their lighting allows fading towards white or black. (granted, adding full additive colored lighting/shading would have done that and allowed red/green/blue/yellow/cyan/magenta lighting/shading, as the PSX does . . . along with multiplicative shading )


    Quote Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118 View Post
    The fog IS the draw distance in most N64 games that use it. So by looking at fog you are looking at a draw distance.
    Yeah, that's the point of distance fogging, it smoothly fades out and masks the sharp/obvious draw distance limit and "pop in" and even relatively old/simple games tend to do some sort of shaded fading to assist pop-in problems to some extent.

    Granted, there's some cases where it's excessive or where it's just a bandaid for a horribly short draw-distance limit, like in Turok.

    I mean look at Turok on PC (very similar crappy draw distance) with some old video cards not using fog:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2CXlvWRzF4

    (actually, I think the draw distance might be a bit better too, though still crap)

    Heh, the Matrox Mystique is a pretty interesting GPU to compare in the whole features/performnace thing. It was pretty fast for what it was, and it did do perspective correct texture correction (and seems complete, not the slightly off/incomplete perspective seen on some Rage cards, Lagoona, 3D, and some others), and it's got smooth shading and multiplicativel lighting, but apparently lacks any form of additive shading/blending, which means no colored lighting, no fade to white fogging effects, and no alpha blending of any kind (even per-vertex or per-texture -ie no alpha channel, but just opacity control on a per polygon or per texture basis). So you get nice perspective correct texture mapped and smoothly lit 3D, but stupid dither patterns for translucency effects and no additive shading or colored lighting. (and even worse, many games don't just limit it to simple checkerboard dither but use super nasty looking ordered dithering to attempt -and fail- to mimic translucency beyong 50/50 blending)
    It's really, really strange, since the logic required for additive blending is much simpler than multiplicative lighting or gouraud shading, and it's totally ridiculous not to have in that context.

    That, and compared to several other lower-end cards of the time that gained a lot of speed by doing unfiltered texture rendering (like Rage and ViRGE), it's actually not that much faster. (it's somewhat faster than a ViRGE 325, but less so compared to ViRGE DX or Rage II . . . and much slower than Rage Pro -and all of those have additive lighting/blending, even alpha channel support too . . . though the ViRGE has a separate problem of never getting really good DirectX driver support -or any OpenGL- but Mystique had a lot of problems there anyway )

    Heh, in that respect the Saturn (and 3DO) is actually better off than the Mystique, at least it can blend translucent sprites and do limited additive shading. (though it can't do multiplicative shading . . . but at least that makes sense from an engineering standpoint) Though the Mystique is way faster than the Saturn, or PSX, or N64 for that matter. (well, probably not an N64 with the speed-robbing features disabled . . . and N64 would still have a visual quality edge with nice blending/shading/alpha effects even with unfiltered textures)

    Quote Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118 View Post
    Yes, those games actually run in High Res mode in game. Others include Last Bronx, Virtua Fighter Remix, Digital Dance Mix, Anarchy in the Nippon, Decathlete, Winter Heat, All Star Japan Wrestling, all the Digital Pinball games, and Saturn Bomberman. Toshinden Ura, D'Xhird, Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix use High res backgrounds and low res models if I remember correctly.
    Do also remember that high-res games (beyond 512 pixels wide) are using 8-bit 256 color paletted color rendering on VDP1, and thus no lighting, shading, or blending effects of any kind (aside from dithered transparency and VDP2 blending). That goes for games using 640/704x240p or 480i (the latter is just single buffered using each framebuffer as a field).

    Though you could do 320/352x480i in 15-bit color, or do 512x240/480 at high res with the trade-off of having an empty horizontal boarder area. (framebuffers are limited to 1024 bytes by 256 lines each)

    I'm not sure whether VDP1's fillrate improves in 8-bit color or not (if it did have support for that, it coudl be 2x the pixel rate of 16-bit color), and if not that means that much less on-screen compared to low res stuff. (that and you'll get tearing if you can't keep up with 30/25 Hz in interlaced modes)







    Quote Originally Posted by j_factor View Post
    Only in the context of SNES does anyone ever argue that color palette has anything to do with how powerful a system is.

    "Power" means computational power. The CPU and (when present) GPU and FPU are what comprise a system's power. Things like color and resolution -- display -- fall into a separate category. So does audio. "Wins" isn't the same thing as "more powerful". You can argue that the SNES "wins" -- or that it's superior. But it's not more powerful.

    Similarly, an Amiga is not more powerful than an Atari ST. It's better hardware overall, because of aspects other than power. But it isn't more powerful. Atari ST's marketing slogan was "all the power without the price" -- which they were able to do because they skimped on other features.
    In actual tech discussions, yeah, but, in general, "power" and "capabilities" are often blurred together. That, and the Amiga's added logic resources in hardware is closer to actual "power" than color palette issues.

    Oh, and if you REALLY want to get down to it, the SNES DOES have advantages in logical and computational power given the CPU's external mult/div coprocessor, the added computational logic in the VDPs -particularly that related to Mode 7, part of which can also be slaved to math coprocessing when Mode 7 is not in use), and then there's the logical/computational resources of the SPC700 MPU and DSP. (vs the Z80 and 68000 being the vast majority of "power" in that context)
    The difference is that the vast majority of that "power" can't be harnessed for general purpose use.

    That, and "CPU power" is only one fascet of where the MD kicks the SNES's ass. (as I already detailed above in posts 101 and 102)

    And ST's "power without the price" wasn't due to "using weaker hardware." and it wasn't aimed at the Amiga either, but at high-end competitors like the Mac and IBM PC . . . which it totally wiped the floor with by 1985 standards at a fraction of the price. (which the Amiga also beat the crap out of price wise, let alone hardware -well, except the PC/AT had a HDD as a standard feature)
    The issue was an elegant and efficient (if minimalistic) design philosophy that resulted in a simple and clean, but very powerful general purpose home/business computer for the time, that and an emphasis on standardized low-cost mass production and far more aggressive margins than the likes of Apple or IBM. (the closest thing to that in the IBM-compatible world of the time was the Tandy-1000 line . . . which was still a good deal less capable than the ST)

    And here you've got it backwards. The N64 was definitely more powerful than PSX or Saturn, but whether it was the "best hardware" is debatable. After all, it has a cartridge port instead of a CD-ROM drive.
    And beyond the media used, there's all the artificial limiations Nintendo/SGI imposed on the programming end of things. (again see post 101/102)

    While it consumes power to implement those features, in and of themselves they do not equate to a more powerful system. The PS2 lacks many of those features, but obviously is more powerful than N64.
    Are you sure about that? Have you seen a detailed explanation of the N64's RDP features and functionality as well as the PS2 GPU? There's a lot of "features" on the N64 that aren't implemented purely in hardware, but need CPU/RCP assistance for the "full" effect (which isn't so different from some PC GPUs of the era too), and the same is true to some extent of the PS2. (except the PS2 doesn't have a dedicated MCU managing the GPU -which is the stock configuration on the N64, though you can program the RDP via the CPU directly- and the PS2 also has that pair of very powerful vector coprocessors while the N64's vector unit is a more "normal" and limited one more like 3DNow!/SSE/SH4 VU, etc)

    The main difference in this context (aside from actual raw hardware functionality) is that the N64 was more like the 3DO (or perhaps early gen PSX -since I don't think CPU libraries were fixed as on 3DO) where no low-level documentation or tools were provided for customized graphics programming (either direct programming or developing custom libraries), while the PS2 provided tons of low level docs and tools, but no fully-featured set of libraries to work with out of the box. Really, you want both, and the further back you go, the more important low-level documentation and optimization is, which is why the 3DO was crippled and why it was important that Sony expanded the PSX documentation too. (granted, in the PSX's case, the GPU is fairly streamlined and straightforward and Sony's initial libraries weren't THAT limiting, but opening the doors to cutom GPU programming did help a lot in general and worked around flaws/limitations that the early libraries didn't . . . that and Sony never forced library level CPU coding so even early games could have assembly based CPU code, not so on the 3DO -which was a much bigger problem than lack of custom GPU programming)

    Actually, if you flipped the N64 and PS2 programming support situations, both would probably have been better off for the time, given the N64 was in a position on the market where low-level optimization and proprietary/custom APIs were more common (and necessary), while the PS2 arrived when the market was in pretty heavy transition to standardizing on high-level programming (and to some extent even making proprietary APIs less attractive -which was also one of the problems with the PS3 being "difficult" later on).

    I'm pretty sure you can do fog on PSX or Saturn, it just wasn't done. The fog doesn't really cover the popup. Fog is a bit of a space saver. Where a Playstation game would have a bitmap in the background, you can avoid having to do that by just putting up fog. That may not sound like much, but over the course of a game those bitmaps can add up. And many N64 games were very very tight on space.
    You can do some form of distance foging on pretty much any of the 3D capable platforms, includign 256 color PC and 32x games, and to some extent even on very old hardware doing 3D/pseudo 3D stuff. (I'm pretty sure there's some examples on Atari 8-bit stuff, in the demoscene at least -though I think one of the Fractal based games used it . . . granted the A8 was probably the best example of an 8-bit computer for that sort of effect given the palette and colorspace modes avaialble)

    It's just a matter of shading to "fade out" in the distance, the typical gray/white fading is one method, though some games used fade to black, especially those on platforms (or software renderers) with multiplicative lighting as the primary shading method. (Tomb Raider hides pop-in using black, and that's the easiest way to do it on the Jaguar too in CRY color -otherwise you have to alpha blend white in or software LUT effects)
    In the Saturn's case, its shaded lighting effect works great for fading to black or white (that's all it can do), and is actually BETTER for that sort of affect than normal "lighting" since it's an additive effect rather than multiplicative.
    PSX just uses additive shading for fade to white.

    That's all done using software assisted routines of course, and some GPUs have hardware support for Z-fogging as such . . . but some GPUs have hardware transform and lighting too. (and it's effectively the same effect in any case)

    If you want to make far-off objects also turn transluscent rather than just desaturating/blending towards white or black (or any color on PSX -or any platform with colored lighting), you need to use alpha blending of some sort, and even if that works it often means a hit to rendering performance (as alpha blending in general means more bandwidth for rendering). Albeit on the Saturn, you can exploit VDP2 backgrounds to do some blendign effects too, which is how Sonic R does it. (seems to do typical "fade to white" fogging, but then also uses VDP1 priority to place the far-off objects behind a transluscent 2D BG layer -blending those VDP1 object pixels with the VDP2 layer without affecting VDP1 rendering speed)

    Though, that said, the 3DO/PSX/Saturn (and most software renderers) can't use per-pixel Z-buffer data for fogging/shading effects since they don't Z-buffer, thus the fog/fade effects will be associated with the software z-sorting methods used (ie painters algorithm), and that also means per-vertex or per-polygon shading rather than per-pixel. (though if it's gouraud shading it's still going to be a smooth gradient, just using linear inerpolation rather than per-pixel Z-specific shading)
    Technically the Jaguar COULD use true Z-fogging, though again limited to fade to black or more limited LUT or additive blending effects. (unless you did 32-bit color, and then you could have 24-bit RGB quality additive lighting/shading . . . but no multiplicative lighting -since the latter is dependent on CRY)





    Quote Originally Posted by Da_Shocker View Post
    Well the N64 did have that ram expansion pack that helped it boost the graphics up quiet a bit from the Saturn and PSX.
    More so game complexity as well as graphics than raw graphics . . . though also remember that ROM sizes used for games with Expansion Pak support were also among the largest on the system. (many in the 32-64 MB range, and the smallest ones being 16 MB like Rogue Squadron)

    And the majority of games that had optional support just used the Expansion Pak to allow for larger and/or higher color depth framebuffers for higher res and/or color depth. (Rogue Squadron, BFN, and Episode 1 Racer all did that) You also tend to take performance hits at higher res and color depth (more so for resolution).




    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Is the medium an element of hardware power? I guess that's a fair question, yes. But FMV and the like aside, I do not think the medium choice held back the N64 much at all. And games don't need FMV.
    The media had a huge impact on game quality . . . FMV aside, games still took up dozens to hundreds of megabytes in that generation due to model data, texture data, level data, game complexity (physics, mechanics, AI) etc, etc. I doubt there's a single N64 game what wasn't limited by its ROM size in some way.
    And then you could pretty well include music/SFX/dialog and other in-game audio content too for a good chunk more data space. (even excluding streaming audio . . . except even there you've got several N64 games using low bitrate streaming audio for the soundtrack too -which certainly would have been CD-DA if on disc in those cases -not to mention the further potential for streaming compressed audio with CD-ROM capacity)

    Hell, even 4th gen consle/computer games had a lot of added potential with mass storage beyond FMV, and a large chunk of games of that time show that off. (and same for contemporary PC stuff)
    Floppy disk based games would fall into a similar vein for examples. (more so for PC games requiring HDD install, making games with several -often heavily compressed- disks relatively fast/convenient to play once installed -which would be painful to do directly off floppy)

    Not to mention the actual cost effectiveness advantages for CD-ROM manufacturing vs ROM carts. (so much so that Nintendo easily should have made up the losses quickly even if keeping the console price point the same, especially if they'd kept those same high game prices and high licensing fees -except now with much higher margins )
    The only (arguably) logical explanation for Nintendo using carts was to maintain their own stubborn, limiting, anticompetitive, overcontrolling, proprietary, "greedy" software manufacturing model (and to lesser extent anti-piracy). Except even then it shouldn't have been a factor since CD technology using a proprietary data format would have been just about as foolproof in those areas (like GD-ROM would have been had Sega used it as the only media for the DC . . . or like the GC's DVD based format). And the whole ZIP-disk-like DD format was just stupid for those same reasons and even more. (much less cost effective than CD-ROM -drives or media- lower capacity on top of that, and then delayed and too late to market to be worth it anyway -even if Nintendo had though ROM was still better for a system with a 1995 launch target -as the N64 had- they should have realized all the practical advantages of optical media as well as the rapidly falling mass market pricing of the related hardware, and at worst, they should have had time to quickly develop a reasonably low cost CD based add-on for ~1997 -maybe '98 in the US- with a satisfactor proprietary data format)
    Last edited by kool kitty89; 09-25-2013 at 03:20 AM.
    6 days older than SEGA Genesis
    -------------
    Quote Originally Posted by evilevoix View Post
    Dude it’s the bios that marries the 16 bit and the 8 bit that makes it 24 bit. If SNK released their double speed bios revision SNK would have had the world’s first 48 bit machine, IDK how you keep ignoring this.
    Quote Originally Posted by evilevoix View Post
    the PCE, that system has no extra silicone for music, how many resources are used to make music and it has less sprites than the MD on screen at once but a larger sprite area?

  8. #143
    Hero of Algol kool kitty89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,724
    Rep Power
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spiffyone View Post
    Apparently they didn't avoid that situation until quite a deal later in the life cycle of PS2. There's an internal SCEA doc floating around that shows that even in '03 there were issues with devs getting the most out of the system, or really even scratching the surface. Seems that devs were using just one one of the vector units, and in the doc it reads as though SCEA is begging the devs to use the other one. Also a bunch of shortcuts/cheats to get more out of the system (using a lower resolution, etc.).
    I was just saying that the N64's problem was the opposite of the PS2 in terms of the programming environment. (fixed/limited API support without open low-level access and doccumentation)

    Even from a lamen's perspective I can tell that hardware wasn't as well designed as the others of its gen.
    I used to think that too . . . but it's arguable. Actual technical discussions I've seen on that topic from programmers and/or engineers PoV vary a lot more, in several cases refering to the PS2 as powerful and elegant. (actually Crazyace and Chilly Willy were discussing the merits of the PS2 a few times, but I forget the full details)

    In any case, Sony not including powerful and capable, well optimized libraries for the PS2 was a major problem. Had they done that and continually improved that throughout the generation (in addition to providing documentation to allow 3rd party customization), the situation would have been rather different.
    Albeit, with the way the PS2 is designed, it still wouldn't cater to "normal" API feature sets in the vein of DirectX or OpenGL style stuff, so it would still be "different" and more complex for porting compared to DC/GC/Xbox. (and taking the "lazy" route and using a limited port of one of those common APIs -or conceptually similar one- would be like DirectX stuff on the DC compared to native PowerVR optimized stuff . . . except probably a good deal worse )

    True enough, but there was a reason for that: the different manufacturers used slightly different hardware. The spec was the same, they used the same 3DO designed chips and processors, etc., but there were small incompatibilities here and there. And, of course, the idea was that the OS could run on new hardware, and still play the old software.
    Yes, I understand that (in fact there were still OS compatibility issues among some hardware variants as it was), and that's one of the notable flaws in the 3DO's market distribution model (along with the horrible inflation of the retail price compared to a normal console market model -minimize cost, standardize manufacturing, and sell at as low a margin as feasible).

    In terms of backwards compatibility, providing low-level compatibility can still be relatively cost effective, at least in a large number of cases, and systems with a large amount of standardized high-level programming still need a considerable amount of low-level compatibility too, or at least relatively low-level in terms of far functionality and features and direct driver-level compatibility, and probably a good deal of binrary level compatibility. (like had MS made the 360 natively compatible with the Xbox, they'd have needed a CPU compatible with the full PIII/Celeron instruction set -ie IA-32, MMX, SSE- and a GPU natively compatible with all the API/driver revisions used -and still migth have a few problems with a few games that "broke the rules" of standard programming . . . but there's a ton of "off the shelf" options that could have complied there, even with a switch to AMD+ATi -which, in hindsight, would have been an especially nice choice )

    More of an issue with the business strategy than the hardware itself, or not allowing things to be used for completely baffling reasons (there was really no good reason for Nintendo not allowing the Turbo microcode on N64, IMO).
    There also wasn't a good reason for Nintendo/SGI not providing detailed documentation and programming tools for the RCP and RDP. The RCP is just a 32-bit MIPS based MCU with DSP extensions, so customizing code for that would have been pretty straightforward. The RDP is pretty complex for GPU standards of the time (even compared to the new 3D GPUs on PCs arriving in 1996) and would have been a real pain to program directly . . . but the point wouldn't be to program it by hand for an entire game, but to allow for customized APIs with features optimized to the developers needs. (and providing the documentationa and tools necessary for that -something Sony initially omitted with the PSX, but later added and several developers made quite good use of, including some who ported over existing APIs -like Argonaut's BRENDER for Croc)

    Pretty sure if 3DO had gone with a less-"platform of the future" strategy and just gone with the normal game console strategy, writing "to the metal" would've been allowed from the get-go.
    Yep, though having those nice libraries avilable in addition to proper documentation would have covered there bases pretty nicely.

    Heh, there's a good chance the 3DO would have been pretty decent mass-market success had it been sold as a "normal" console . . . much lower initial price point and further drops beyond that, potential for more optimized games, marketing more aggressively targeted at the mainstream console market, etc. (and parneting with a single Japanese partner for manufacturing/distribution . . . launching first in Japan and then North America might have been smarter too -93 in Japan and '94 in the US at closer to $400 would have made a ton of sense . . . and then undercutting the PSX/Saturn price in 1995 -by which point they also could have had some consolidation and die shrinking done to the custom chips on top of the more general component cost trends and economies of scale)

    With XBox, there was a price disadvantage, yes, but that console had the advantage of being a "PC in a box". PC-centric devs, some of which never really ventured into the home console market, all of a sudden did, and that was something new for both the "core" console gamer looking for new experiences and those "core" PC gamers who were a bit more price sensitive than others (really, when one looks at it, XBox was a pretty damned good PC rig for the time, at a lower price than it would've been as either a ready-built PC or a self-build). Being so close to PCs helped XBox gain acceptance from both devs and consumers, and so the XBox built a good library of exclusives (console exclusives many, industry exclusives some) alongside having the best versions of home console ports, many of which GC never even got at all.
    Yeah, and Nintendo still had some of the stigma (and real problems creating that stigma) that turned developers off from publishing there . . . even compared to some of the trade-offs of working with Sony or MS.

    Though, to be fair, the Dreamcast also pulled a pretty hefty chunk of PC developer support for a console at the time, especially considering Sega's shaky position. (then again, the DC was fairly PC-like in architecture and lazier developers could opt for Direct3D usage too, at much reduced performance) Having the likes of id and Epic onboard was pretty significant, then you've got a bunch of others too.

    And yeah, the Xbox was a pretty decent piece of hardware by 2001 PC gaming standards too, plus with the "closed box" hardware meaning developers could target explicit hardware specs without concerns for major variables. (at hardware or driver/OS level)

    It didn't help that GC had no "killer app" at launch, and games, as haunted Nintendo for quite some time, were slow to release. Killer apps are critical to consoles. DC's launch in the US wouldn't have gone as well as it did without NFL2K, Sonic, and Soul Calibur (the latter of which, IMO, is the only one that really holds up to this day). PS2 didn't really have any must haves that first year, and seems to have sold on a combination of being a cheap DVD player and hype alone, but when '01 rolled around it had plenty of must have games (some of those I listed earlier). XBox had, of course, Halo. What did GC have? The closest thing to a "must have" at launch was Star Wars, which didn't have nearly the selling power it once did. I loved Super Monkey Ball as much as the next guy, especially Sega's brilliant marketing campaign for the game, but it wasn't a "system seller" either.
    The PS2 also had a pretty strong composite lineup for 2000. Maybe no one game that was a "univeral" killer app, but enough "must have" games that carted to a decent segment of consumer tastes to cover the majority of the market. (from mainstream sports games, to fighting games, to FPS titles like Unreal Tuournament, and Timesliptters)

    Kind of a shame they ported the unreal engine over for just UT . . . having the awesome original Unreal and RTN (almost certainly bundled like Unreal Gold ).
    A real shame that no consoles got the original Unreal (albeit DC and PS2 were the only really suitable ones before it got "old"), awesome game. Makes me wonder if Unreal 2 would have been done justice had the original game penetrated the console market. (ie an actual sequel rather than a half-assed spinoff and generic Half Life/Halo wannabe)

    Sega had input into the design of the SH-4 CPU, specifically (from what I've read elsewhere) the vector co-processor. The PowerVR2DC GPU was a custom design based on Imagination's Series 2 design, but not the same as the design as intended (and released) for the PC market (Sega requested a few changes, etc.). So, based on that, Sega had just as much input on the designs of most of the DC processors as Nintendo did the GC's. Don't know about the audio parts, though. Regardless, whether or not the contracts themselves (with NEC, Hitachi, and Imagination) reflected that, however, is the question.
    From an engineering and manufacturing standpoint, MS probably should have done that sort of thing with the Xbox too. (potentially even more customized optimization, and more potential negotiation/investment for flexible licensing and manufacturing contracts facilitating consistent successive cost reduction of the chipset . . . that and they didn't have to go x86 either)
    Well . . . OK, the Xbox GPU is already a semi-custom derivative of the Geforce3 series (and the in-development Geforce4), but the whole manufacturing situation thing still applies.
    6 days older than SEGA Genesis
    -------------
    Quote Originally Posted by evilevoix View Post
    Dude it’s the bios that marries the 16 bit and the 8 bit that makes it 24 bit. If SNK released their double speed bios revision SNK would have had the world’s first 48 bit machine, IDK how you keep ignoring this.
    Quote Originally Posted by evilevoix View Post
    the PCE, that system has no extra silicone for music, how many resources are used to make music and it has less sprites than the MD on screen at once but a larger sprite area?

  9. #144
    I DON'T LIKE POKEMON Hero of Algol j_factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    9,204
    Rep Power
    121

    Default

    kool kitty = Tolstoy


    You just can't handle my jawusumness responces.

  10. #145
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    3,203
    Rep Power
    51

    Default

    Yea Kool Kitty mammoth posts, I always come back to them, when I actually have enough time to read them.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  11. #146
    Hero of Algol
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,544
    Rep Power
    166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    I ignored nothing. I just think you're wrong.
    I really wish it was true. But it's not.
    You often completely ignore videos, articles and any sort of sources people provide to you in order to show how lunatic some of your claims are. sheath had already warned about that... He pointed me some posts where he intentionally had inserted some off/absurd links and videos to see if you're actually reading anything prior to reply to him, and you never did anything beyond your usual pass-trough "reading"/no! no!!! no!!! approach. It's laughable and sad at the same time.


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Don't misunderstand me though, I'm sure some PS1 games do use fog too... my point was that I think that specific fog effect is easier to do on N64. I imagine some PS1 games do do something similar in software.
    That's another prominent characteristic of yours: you lie and backpedal. A LOT.
    Let's see which were your original "points":
    #1
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    The N64 had the best hardware, period. It was far more powerful than the other systems, and that shows in the games. Th Playstation and Saturn can't come even close to the N64;
    Fanboysm.

    #2
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    I'm pretty sure that the PS1 and Saturn can't do N64-style volumetric fog. It's a hardware effect in the system I believe, and was something new.
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    The "N64 fog" problem only exists because the N64 CAN do that fog effect; on PS1 or Saturn you can't do that fog effect, so you get massive amounts of popup, instead of fog that covers the popup.
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    So, we're both partially right; I guess the PS1 can do fog,
    Wrong. It also showed how ignorant about PS1's and Saturn's libraries your actually are 'cause there are dozens of examples to prove you wrong. And even the 3DO had games using distance fog instead of "raw" popup.


    #3
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Also, the N64's bottlenecks are overstated by its critics...
    hummm...
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    neither one has perspective correction, triple buffering, anti-aliasing, Z-buffering, or any of that stuff! The result is that horrible jaggy look and the constant perspective issues you see in both systems, Playstation especially
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Once again, the hardware perspective correction ALONE puts the N64 far ahead without the slightest shadow of a doubt. The rest of the system's advantages are just a bonus.
    Thank you for not being biased neither hypocritical.
    I like Urban Dictionary's definition for "jaggy" though: "A term used by elitist pricks in the videogame industry to describe a non-anti-aliased image with sharp edges.".


    #4
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    The other systems cannot compete -- you can't do perspective correction in software on the PS1 or Saturn, or at least, if you could, no one ever tried.
    That's off. It's not like NO/Zero/Zip perspective correction. You always exaggerate about this.


    #5
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Second, N64 draw distances are pretty much the same as PS1 or Saturn draw distances.
    IF true, it only matched the most impressive PS1 draw distances in very few games and almost always using the expansion pak. Without the add-on it was usually closer and thus why the fog was so common in N64 games. The same for frame rate, screen resolution and texture quality.


    #6
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    That is to say, objectively, N64 graphics are better, regardless of your opinion of the results. They are technically superior.
    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    If you're implying that the N64 has worse graphics than the PS1, then no, you're wrong, and it kind of hurts the rest of your point above...
    Too bad your biased factual opinions ignore things like frame rate, texture quality and screen resolution when talking "objectively" about graphics.
    N64 has nothing like PS1's Fighter's Impact running at solid 60 fps with real-time lighting (shadow casting as well) and animated 3D backgrounds and nothing as detailed as DOA on the Saturn running at 60 fps. With or without expansion pack.


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    The only fanboys are the ones in denial of reality.
    Oh, really???


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Bashing N64 fog while not bashing the just as close or even closer draw distances on most any PS1 or Saturn FPS released around that same time is hypocritical.
    Bashing games running in older hardware for having popup while praising N64's releases with very close distance fog is even more hypocritical.




    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    Edit: And there we go, some evidence to back up that the PS1 cannot do colored fog in hardware. The N64 can, obviously. But the PS1? Takes programming tricks to pull off, and very few games do. From http://www.playstationmuseum.com/Games/SCUS94555/
    "On the alien planet level, we had green-colored fog. Nowadays, colored-fog is trivial, but the PlayStation was limited in such a way that you had to be kind of tricky to do it. Even doing a billboard tree that faded into colored fog as we had on the volcano level had required a few graphical tricks that would be nothing on modern hardware. I hadn't seen it in any PlayStation game before ours, so I was hoping that I would have broken new ground there. Then Spyro shipped before we could and rained colored fog on my parade."
    First, the point of this discussion was never colored fog.
    Second, that guy surely didn't know the PS1's library well as much as you keep ignoring that I've already pointed Disruptor, which has green-fog like 5 seconds after you start the gameplay and it's a 1996 release. That game, alone, makes that "I hadn't seen it in any PlayStation game before ours, so I was hoping that I would have broken new ground there." claim pretty pointless and kinda funny.
    Motorhead also had colored-fog prior to Jet Moto 3 (if you're pretending to backpedal one more time and restrict that to racing games or any sort of stupid excuse to try to sustain such a poor claim).
    Also, Jet Moto 3 has some of the worst texture warping issues I've seen in PS1 games, especially a late release like that. So I'd take his words with a grain of salt.


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    I guess the PS1 can do fog, but it has a hard time doing fog like the colored fog I pointed out from Extreme-G as being an example of something the N64 could do in hardware that the other systems of the generation couldn't.
    It was so hard to do on the PS1 that it had it prior to the N64. Go figure.


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    The N64 clearly improved fog effects versus previous consoles, so I was partially right, but yes,
    Another blatantly false claim.
    Turok's fog (1997), for an example, looks pretty much like fog effect used in a Immercenary, a 1995 game.
    Disruptor had already colored-fog back in November 1996...
    So, yeah, N64 improved nothing noticeable in terms of fog effects versus previous consoles.


    Quote Originally Posted by A Black Falcon View Post
    I guess they could do basic black-and-grey "fog" effects without much trouble... but it's not on the same level as N64 fog is.
    I guess you're blind... fanboy.



    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    The Sonic R effect is neat, but more typical "fade to white" distance shading is more like "real" Z-fogging as the N64 typically does, and plenty of Saturn and PSX games do that.
    Yep.



    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    Do also remember that high-res games (beyond 512 pixels wide) are using 8-bit 256 color paletted color rendering on VDP1, and thus no lighting, shading, or blending effects of any kind (aside from dithered transparency and VDP2 blending).
    That's a shame and major advantage of PS1's hardware IMO. I don't like lighting-fest games but some lighting is really nice.
    Still, 704 (Saturn's hi-res mode) vs 512 (PS1's most common and nearest equivalent hi-res mode) wide is a good advantage is terms of graphical details.


    DOA is damn good looking and especially sweet to see it running at 60 fps (not on YT though). The only 60 fps fighting game on the N64 is MK4 AFAIK and it doesn't come close to those graphics IMO and it's running at 320x240.



    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    There's a lot of "features" on the N64 that aren't implemented purely in hardware, but need CPU/RCP assistance for the "full" effect (which isn't so different from some PC GPUs of the era too), and the same is true to some extent of the PS2. (except the PS2 doesn't have a dedicated MCU managing the GPU -which is the stock configuration on the N64, though you can program the RDP via the CPU directly- and the PS2 also has that pair of very powerful vector coprocessors while the N64's vector unit is a more "normal" and limited one more like 3DNow!/SSE/SH4 VU, etc)
    Yep but a lot of people nowadays think that "hardware support" means "no CPU assistance".


    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    You can do some form of distance foging on pretty much any of the 3D capable platforms, includign 256 color PC and 32x games, and to some extent even on very old hardware doing 3D/pseudo 3D stuff. (I'm pretty sure there's some examples on Atari 8-bit stuff, in the demoscene at least -though I think one of the Fractal based games used it . . . granted the A8 was probably the best example of an 8-bit computer for that sort of effect given the palette and colorspace modes avaialble)
    No. No. No! No!! NO!!! NO!!!
    The revolutionary N64 invented the distance fogging almost certainly for sure, yes.


    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    Though, that said, the 3DO/PSX/Saturn (and most software renderers) can't use per-pixel Z-buffer data for fogging/shading effects since they don't Z-buffer, thus the fog/fade effects will be associated with the software z-sorting methods used (ie painters algorithm), and that also means per-vertex or per-polygon shading rather than per-pixel. (though if it's gouraud shading it's still going to be a smooth gradient, just using linear inerpolation rather than per-pixel Z-specific shading)
    Yep, Robinson's Requiem on the 3DO uses fog with gouraud shading and it looks good.



    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    And the majority of games that had optional support just used the Expansion Pak to allow for larger and/or higher color depth framebuffers for higher res and/or color depth. (Rogue Squadron, BFN, and Episode 1 Racer all did that) You also tend to take performance hits at higher res and color depth (more so for resolution).
    I think Road Rash 64 is the only game which used the expansion pack to boost the frame rate only, thus allowing for 60 fps gameplay.
    Also, several of those games using the hi-res mode aren't fullscreen on the N64, they're letterboxed for the most part.



    Quote Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
    Heh, there's a good chance the 3DO would have been pretty decent mass-market success had it been sold as a "normal" console . . . much lower initial price point and further drops beyond that, potential for more optimized games, marketing more aggressively targeted at the mainstream console market, etc. (and parneting with a single Japanese partner for manufacturing/distribution . . . launching first in Japan and then North America might have been smarter too -93 in Japan and '94 in the US at closer to $400 would have made a ton of sense . . . and then undercutting the PSX/Saturn price in 1995 -by which point they also could have had some consolidation and die shrinking done to the custom chips on top of the more general component cost trends and economies of scale)
    The sources talking about the Japanese release date retail prices and sales number actually sustain your point.
    Last edited by Barone; 09-26-2013 at 12:04 PM.

  12. #147
    Raging in the Streets A Black Falcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,238
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    There's no point in even talking to you as long as you delusionally try to claim that perspective correction, Z-buffering, and anti-aliasing aren't incredibly important things, more important than almost anything else when it comes to 3d graphics.

    I understand that many PS1 and Saturn fans have managed to get used to texture warping, jaggies, and the like, but that's irrelevant on an objective basis. What matters is that the other systems can't do those things, while the N64 can. It was the first console that could do good 3d. And there's absolutely no fanboyism going into that fact. You are absolutely, totally wrong if you continue to try to claim that. Texture warping and jaggies are serious problems in early 3d graphics, and they're problems which the N64 fixes. That came at a cost of blurry textures, but one drawback, versus a whole pile of major advances? It's very easy to see which is better.

    Too bad your biased factual opinions ignore things like frame rate, texture quality and screen resolution when talking "objectively" about graphics.
    Getting rid of perspective issues and jaggies are far more important than any of that stuff, though. I mean, as long as the framerates are good enough, which they are on N64. And the resolutions are very close as well, not a huge difference there. And anyway, the N64 has more games with high-resolution support than the N64, on the high end.

    But accurate polygons? That's a HUGE difference! And it's much harder to do technically, too. I mean, the N64 could have done 500,000-600,000 flat-shaded polygons (versus ~100,000 with all features on), had Nintendo allowed people to turn off the anti-aliasing, perspective correction, and such -- that is, the hardware features that the N64 can do but previous consoles cannot -- but because Nintendo correctly thought that those were extremely important things which differentiated the N64 from its competitors, they did not allow it.

    In comparison, the PS1 claims a theoretical (never seen in reality) max of 360,000 polygons, or a "realistic" max of 180,000, though I doubt many PS1 games actually have that many polygons...

    On that note, Nintendo was always cautious in their polygon-count estimates, pretty much the opposite of Sony, so Nintendo numbers are numbers the system really can do for sure, and probably can exceed, while Sony numbers were generally unrealistically high estimates made to make their system look better. You can particularly see this when comparing Gamecube to PS2 tech specs, but I imagine it's likely it applies to some degree to the PS1/N64 too. That is to say, I have serious doubts that real games could ever have done that "360,000" number on the PS1, while I'm certain that N64 games could have had over 500,000 polygons had Nintendo allowed people to turn off the perspective correction, anti-aliasing, and the like. But even if both of those numbers are correct, it should show the large gap between the systems, and also just how much processing power had to be dedicated to making polygons actually appear accurate -- it was hard, and required a lot of power!

    N64 has nothing like PS1's Fighter's Impact running at solid 60 fps with real-time lighting (shadow casting as well) and animated 3D backgrounds and nothing as detailed as DOA on the Saturn running at 60 fps. With or without expansion pack.
    As I always say when you critics talk about fighting games, I don't think it's entirely fair because the N64 only had one major fighting-game developer developing for it, and that was Midway. None of the top Japanese fighting game companies supported the platform with fighting games, not SNK, Namco, Sega (of course), or Capcom. All they had for Japanese fighting game was second and third-tier stuff from companies like Konami and Hudson. If you compare Konami and Hudson's PS1 and N64 efforts, the N64 games hold up quite well... but comparing Capcom's PS1 or Saturn games to Hudson's N64 ones? Of course that's going to be somewhat unfair, Capcom was a far better developer in the genre.

    That is, the biggest problem N64 fighting games have is that really the only prominent fighting games on the N64 are some Midway games from '96-'98 (because Midway didn't do anything of note fighting-game-wise between '99 and '01; a Dreamcast port of MK4 [MK Gold] was pretty much it during that time period from them.) and Super Smash Bros., which of course is a great game. But that's purely a problem of developer support, not hardware ability. I am quite certain the N64 could have done better had better teams developed fighting games for the platform. Choosing to focus on fighting games focuses on one of the N64's weaker genres, against two systems which were pretty strong in the genre. Of course there'll be an unbalanced result.

    What are the better polygonal N64 fighting games? I'd say Fighter's Destiny, Fighter Destiny 2, Mace: The Dark Age, Mortal Kombat 4, Super Smash Bros., Flying Dragon, SD Hiryu no Ken... and that's about it. Maybe also Dual Heroes, Bio F.R.E.A.K.S., and Clayfighter 63 1/3, in the 'mediocre but amusing anyway' category? And SSB aside, none of those games are quite as good as the top PS1 or Saturn polygonal fighting games on a quality level. I don't know what resolutions or framerates any of those games run in, though. As I said, I can't really tell framerates once they reach a decent level.

    And finally, there are no N64 fighting games that support the Expansion Pak. Who knows what could have been done with it.

    Fanboysm.
    No, saying that the most powerful console was the most powerful console and that many games prove that fact is most definitely not "fanboyism". It's reality. I guess you're not a fan of reality.

    I really wish it was true. But it's not.
    You often completely ignore videos, articles and any sort of sources people provide to you in order to show how lunatic some of your claims are. sheath had already warned about that... He pointed me some posts where he intentionally had inserted some off/absurd links and videos to see if you're actually reading anything prior to reply to him, and you never did anything beyond your usual pass-trough "reading"/no! no!!! no!!! approach. It's laughable and sad at the same time.
    You are the only one who acts badly in arguments. Not me.

    I think Road Rash 64 is the only game which used the expansion pack to boost the frame rate only, thus allowing for 60 fps gameplay.
    Also, several of those games using the hi-res mode aren't fullscreen on the N64, they're letterboxed for the most part.
    A couple of games have letterboxed hi-res modes, but not most of them. Excitebike 64 is the only game I can think of offhand that has letterboxed-only hi-res mode.

    You are right that games didn't usually use it for framerate, though. The N64 was mostly fillrate-limited, not RAM-limited, so just adding more RAM didn't make it easy to increase the framerate...

    First, the point of this discussion was never colored fog.
    Second, that guy surely didn't know the PS1's library well as much as you keep ignoring that I've already pointed Disruptor, which has green-fog like 5 seconds after you start the gameplay and it's a 1996 release. That game, alone, makes that "I hadn't seen it in any PlayStation game before ours, so I was hoping that I would have broken new ground there." claim pretty pointless and kinda funny.
    Motorhead also had colored-fog prior to Jet Moto 3 (if you're pretending to backpedal one more time and restrict that to racing games or any sort of stupid excuse to try to sustain such a poor claim).
    Also, Jet Moto 3 has some of the worst texture warping issues I've seen in PS1 games, especially a late release like that. So I'd take his words with a grain of salt.

    It was so hard to do on the PS1 that it had it prior to the N64. Go figure.

    Another blatantly false claim.
    Turok's fog (1997), for an example, looks pretty much like fog effect used in a Immercenary, a 1995 game.
    Disruptor had already colored-fog back in November 1996...
    So, yeah, N64 improved nothing noticeable in terms of fog effects versus previous consoles.
    I said that the N64 made it easier to do, not that the PS1 couldn't do it. And that quote backs up my point. If you think otherwise, find some actual evidence to support your position.
    Last edited by A Black Falcon; 09-26-2013 at 04:15 PM.

  13. #148
    Raging in the Streets Yharnamresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    3,203
    Rep Power
    51

    Default

    Maybe a tiny bit of fanboyism is evident. Like the N64 is the most powerful hardware, but its not a night and day difference. Its probably the same as Genesis and SNES, with its transparency, mode 7, 15-bit palette, and a more reasonable amount of sub palettes.
    Certified F-Zero GX fanboy

  14. #149
    Death Bringer Raging in the Streets Black_Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,234
    Rep Power
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azonicrider View Post
    Maybe a tiny bit of fanboyism is evident. Like the N64 is the most powerful hardware, but its not a night and day difference. Its probably the same as Genesis and SNES, with its transparency, mode 7, 15-bit palette, and a more reasonable amount of sub palettes.
    ...vs higher resolution, fm + psg sound, much greater sprite ability, much greater processing power, faster memory, realtime polygons, column scrolling, etc.

    That's the whole point, no console dominates another across the board. But Black Falcon is arguing that the actual artwork in game visuals is of little value and that all that matters is smearing of non-art.

  15. #150
    Master of Shinobi Bottino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    1,705
    Rep Power
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Black_Tiger View Post
    ...vs higher resolution, fm + psg sound, much greater sprite ability, much greater processing power, faster memory, realtime polygons, column scrolling, etc.

    That's the whole point, no console dominates another across the board. But Black Falcon is arguing that the actual artwork in game visuals is of little value and that all that matters is smearing of non-art.
    Can you provide some pratical examples about realtime polygons and column scrolling on the Mega Drive/Genesis?
    I'm curious about that now.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •