Why did the N64 have terrible graphics compared to the PS1?
i dont have enough bait picture
>there still aren't any games that take direct inspiration from this music video, visually
>even cartoony games seem to strive for realism when it comes to perspective and proportion
>the time of serious art experimentation is basically over, big budget and indie games only use a handful of styles each
Everything is shit.
N64 was objectively a more powerful system than PS1, supporting higher resolution realtime graphics and much more accurate texture scaling. However, the system was poorly documented and as a result many third party development studios floundered with it and released subpar product
Cartridges are faster at memory recall than discs, but at the price of storage space and costly media. Back then it was a big deal to be able to support music files on disc so marketing pushed the CDs vs. outdated cartridges angle hard, but in reality both have significant trade-offs.
But this was always a troll thread, wasn't it?
Both PS1 and the 64 supported 640x480 screen resolutions, so you can't say one had "higher resolution" over the other in that respect. However, the PS1 allowed for greater sized and more numerous textures thanks to its greater available memory, so the PS1 is objectively superior from that perspective. I'm sorry you only have a baseline understanding of hardware, anon.
THAT LITTLE INDIE WITH THE PIXELS AND THE MAY MAYS
YEAH BUDDY, THAT'S SO ELUSIVE
THAT LITTLE INDIE TOPS THE METASCORE LISTS
THAT LITTLE INDIE IS THEIR OWN EXCLUSIVE
MY FACE WHEN BLOODBORNE, RED DEAD REDEMPTION,
KINGDOM HEARTS, FINAL FANTASY,
METAL GEAR SOLID HD COLLECTION
WILL NEVER, EVER, COME TO PC
The turtle is nature's suction cup
Yeah, me and my brother still reference this movie all the time. I watched the commentary track on the dvd, and they say that Raul died in an accident before the movie came out. His parts were so good.
you faggots are so annoying
correct answer is they both did different things well. ps1 fans are generally more obnoxious about it being "superior" to the n64, but you could all stop this argument by just reading the specs
n64: 64-bit 93.75 MHz CPU GPU performance: 500 MIPS and 100 MFLOPS.
PS1: 32-bit 33.8688 MHz CPU 66 MIPS
n64: 4 MB RDRAM (Rambus DRAM) on a 9-bit 562.5 MB/s bus, upgradable to 8 MB with Expansion Pak
ps1: 2 MB main DRAM 1 MB VRAM
n64: supports 240p (320×240), 288p (384×288), 480i (640×480), 576i (720×576)
ps1: supports Progressive: 256×224 to 640×240 pixels Interlaced: 256×448 to 640×480 pixels
both have 24-bit color
>With a clock rate of 93.75 MHz, the N64's VR4300 is said to be the most powerful console CPU of the fifth generation of video game consoles.
I don't have a gif, but I'll tell you one case where I remember the difference
>Bro next door has n64 and I had ps1
>We both rent the James Bond game (it starts with a snow level, I forget the name but it was a multiplat)
>We play both versions at eachothers houses
We observed that while the ps1 version had actual movie footage, the character models lacked a lot of details. The n64 version showed the character models mouths moving during conversation, where the ps1 was static
I have no idea, I only played the ps1 version
Whoever captured the footage for your video might not have done an accurate job. I guess you could emulate both.
>do the floating point numbers
the lack of.
Vertices are being forced to clamp to whole number locations so you get a shimmering effect as they jump from one spot on the "grid" to the next.
I think we can all agree that the ps1 had the worst graphics of any console ever
>Silent Hill 2
Leave it to namefags to spout dumb shit
Neither of which were launch titles, retard. The PS2 came out in 2000, not 2001.
The 2001 lineup was fantastic, but the actual launch lineup was pathetic, it was a pure case of quantity over quality.
I SHOULD'VE BOUGHT, A PLAYSTATION 4
I SHOULD'VE BOUGHT, AN XBOX ONE
LOOK AT THAT FRAMERATE, IT'S CHUGGING, SILKY SMOOTH 30 FPS
MAN, WE COULD RUN IT BETTER
SONY'S UP THERE, WHAT ARE THOSE
WE START UP THOSE PETITIONS BEGGING FOR CONSOLE PORTS
OH THAT AIN'T WORKIN'
THAT'S THE WAY WE DO IT
IF WE DON'T GET THE GAME, WE WILL CALL IT SHIT
The arcade version is literally running on a Windows system, as well. Not a specially designed system, but a machine with a Core i5 and a 6 series GPU. Tekken is just in bed with Sony, that's why Takeda did that incredibly professional rant of his on Twitter.
Most arcade boards ARE. It's seldom a board tries to be closer to a console than a PC itself. Lindbergh was meant to be as close to the PS3 as it could, as opposed to being it's own thing. Made porting games easy though.
VF5 came out what... a year after the arcade game?
When you think about it...
>Sonybros are taunting PC gamers for not getting Tekken 7
>when Tekken 7 is already technically a PC game
>Sonybros taunt PC gamers for getting ports of console games
>when Tekken 7 is a port of an arcade game
>which is literally a PC
>>when Tekken 7 is already technically a PC game
then why ain't it on the PC
I doubt it, I don't think the programmers would develop some form of hardware DRM to make it work only on that system.
But it is? It's not for sale ON PC, but the arcade version IS a PC. Sony just has their hands down Namco's pants, since Tekken has consistently shown up on Sony platforms, with only a handful of non-Sony installments.
Is it weird that I actually kind of like this weird glitchy effect? The PS1 was the first console I owned, so I guess I have some nostalgia attached to textures spazzing out like they are in that gif.
The VGA card in the N64 is actually pretty powerful for the time, though the Voodoo (3?) came out right after, but for its release N64 had some impressive power.
It however lacked a few things. One being memory, but one of the major parts was a texture buffer that wasn't entirely laughable.
4kb...Yes 4kb was the pinhole through which all texturing had to be squeezed. Meaning every texture you were seeing combined had to be that small or take fucking forever to load and pray not to overload its low memory amount.
This is why N64 games are colorful, as they are just simply plain colors not textures, but all kinda look the same, because the motherfucker couldn't load a picture. A shader makes it a little more distinct so the games don't look totally flat, but basically Nintendo put a V8 in a Pinto. Its fucking stupid design.
PS1 looked grainy because the resolutions on many of the textures it had were fairly low resolution compared to the size of screen they were going on, but it did have them in good quantity. And PS1 had way more options to falling back on 2D techniques both for sprite use, and for simply using static image backgrounds with collision maps and other tricks to make an interesting look. The hardware was simply more flexible and well rounded.
There are exceptions of course and good looking-ish N64 games exist, and plenty of PS1 games that didn't take its limits into account that look like ass as well, but in general that is why N64 games typically look rather eh.
Hope that helps, didn't see anyone really explaining it much detail.