Was the N64 actually weaker than the PS1?
Was the N64 actually weaker than the PS1?
In some ways, yes
In others, no
N64 carts generally allowed for games to have much better load times but graphics took a hit without the power of a CD
Show me a single ps1 game that can even come close to conkers bad fur day
vagrant story, spyro 3, why does conker run like such shit?
>have Tony hawk for ps1
>neighbors get it for n64
>song loops early as fuck
>mfw
You can't do comparisons with a shitty port. The ports are from games built to the other system's strengths rather than its own. I'm sure if you ported SM64 or OoT to the PlayStation, it would look like fucking shit in comparison.
nintendo always produces fisher price tier game consoles.
I have no idea and I never really cared.
Pretty sure that's just because of the disk.
youtube.com
youtube.com
how did n64 bros put up with this?
PS1 had smaller but more detailed levels
N64 had larger but less detailed levels
Also PS1 didnt have a Z-buffer and N64 slapped AA on everything which makes things better or worse depending on your opinion
N64 version isn't too awful there. V8 Second offense is like downright offensive. Still mad people say they prefer the N64 version.
youtube.com
youtube.com
Yes and no.
N64 had killer load times and tended to focus on larger-scale level geometry while PS1 had better storage and tended to focus on getting more detail into less physical space.
>the power of a CD
Compact Disc is a data storage medium.
because it was designed to run on the n64, and n64 emulation is garbage. Anyone who plays knows their games will always have one issue or another when running.
maybe not make it un playable but something
talking about real hardware here, game rarely hits 30fps
Was the GameCube really stronger than the PS2?
Pokemon stadium 2 still looks great
All 3 Spyro games
damb..
that's like asking was the xbox weaker than the ps2
want to explain how any of that shit is better than 60 fps? because it's not, it's just window dressing.
>more AI
i distinctly remember playing 007 nightfire on xbox, ps2 and gamecube and for some reason ps2 let you add the least computer opponents in multiplayer
They were better at different things. Megaman Legends on N64 is a garbage port that's both lazily done and the result of a game that's actually extremely optimised for the PS1 hardware and has a ton of LoD to make it run incredibly smoothly on the PS1 with one of the largest draw distances on the system, on top of the fact that all of the textures in the N64 version have half of the resolution of the original.
playing RE2 on the 64 was a technological marvel
Vagrant Story looks amazing but it's less of a feat of hardware magic and more of a feat of artistic ability. It was made by the FFT team who had never made a 3D game before and was extremely optimised, saving on CPU by not using samples for its audio, tons of vertex-based lighting for the environments rather than something like Conker's much more complex lighting system, and all of the environments are mostly grid based and all hard right angles. Vagrant Story is like an art design and direction showcase while Conker is the culmination of Rare's magic with the N64 hardware and it's why the former holds up better.
reading comprehension
>PlayStation Portable
Meanwhile Tales of Symophonia PS2 version is to blame for all future ports being at a shit 30FPS.
A bigger storage medium allows for more textures and models available.
The first generation of 3D consoles was truly the wild west since there was no standard way of rendering polygons.
Sony, Sega, and Nintendo all went different way and it meant cross porting games was nearly impossible regardless of power.
That's not that bad, imagine just having this.
youtube.com
Admittedly, this was the final N64 game so I doubt anyone had to actually deal with this.