did you read my post?Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades
Printable View
did you read my post?Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades
Not at all. EA put out some great stuff in the 90s, they were much better than they were in the 2000s. Same goes for LucasArts, Interplay, Sierra, 3DO, Midway... even Acclaim.Quote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Again with the twisting. Those are not PS4 games and both games didn't run at native 1080p on a base XBox. So even today games have issues running at 60 fps, or at the systems high res mode, multiplatform or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Please, When I added a 3FDX III card to my Pentium II I saw increases to both my frame rates and screen res and all I did was add Hardware. When I played F1 GP II on my Pentium MX to playing it on the old 486 I saw an increase in the frame rate. Better the hardware and more powerful the CPU the better chance of games running faster.Quote:
Disagree about the hardware being at fault for high res or 60fps
You made a big deal over 2D sprites used in Saturn 3D, In the N64 track and field game the cameramen are 2D sprites, the stadium spectators are completely flat. We take issues with Decathlete for doing just that, but have no issues when the N64 does it and you complain about being not being consistent with regards to fogging:roll:Quote:
The other games don't have as many sacrifices it terms of detail but they are lower res and frame rate.
Dug a hole and in trying to get out if it has made a laughable statement not just because its not true, but in this thread he even brings up the likes of Boss Studios, who last time I checked were USA, same goes for Turok 1 and II developers. Looking over that, its not like many Japanese N64 developers made many 60 fps N64 games, much less run games in its Highest Res mode. Clearly, it was easier for Saturn and PS developers to push the screen res and the frame rate. So glad SEGA Japan said no to SCI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades
I said generally so there were definitely some exceptions (road rash for instance). However many of EA games (internal studios) were produced in Europe. Same with Sierra, Interplay and LucasArts. Midway, 3DO and Acclaim were mostly shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
In the 16 bit era Western developers pushed the Mega Drive to isnae levels, EA was one the system best developers, the likes of Aladin one of the best looking Mega Drive games. Lobotomy pushed the Saturn to insane levels, Clockwork Tortoise pushing both the Mega Drive and Mega CD to insane levels, STI worked wonders on the Mega Drive, Tiburon also did wonders on the Saturn, never mind the gfx Visual concepts were getting from the both the Saturn and then Dreamcast with its NBA and NFL games all games made in the USA, Crystal Dynamics pushing the 3DO and leading the 32 Bit chargeQuote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Can't agree with you on that one sorry mate
yeah games like aladdin were made by europeans. read what I write I specifically said Europe also made good games for the same reasons japan did. they had much more experience making serious games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
Most of EA games were made in the USA or Canada and if you want to talk 3DO then it was EA and the likes of Crystal Dynamics that really pushed that sytem with the likes of Madden, Road Rash, Need for Speed. I know it cool to dislike EA or some American studios but they've always had great studios and made good looking and sounding gamesQuote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
In America and with American staff helping out . id have always tried to attract the best staff from around the world. I still class the likes of id and Doom as a USA, even if its been in part the new Doom was developed by ex Crytek staff. Sorry, Visuals concepts NFL 2k made my jaw hit the floor in 1999, Lobotomy Exhumed made my jaw hit the floor in 95 and then I needed a chnage of pants with their Duke and Quake ports in 96, the wonderful visuals from STI in Comic Zone or the stuff Blue Sky did with Vectorman & Vectorman II.Quote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
I'm not denying ea weren't great in the 80s and 90s. far from it they were really great, but a lot of their games were made in europe or for european market by canadian studios that was essentially europe minded in everything, also platforms and games. same for australia and new zealand btw. it was all amiga, armstrad etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
about crystal dynamics. it took them a number of years before they really became good imo. star control (2) was a real exception though.
also about visual concepts and many american developed games, the turn of the century was a turning point. visual concepts made amazing dreamcast games but their saturn efforts were a bit hit or miss imo.
You bring up PCs, that means you don't know what you are talking about. Consoles can't be upgraded, they are fixed hardware which means developers have full control on how you play the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
You still don't get it. I showed you how double standards go both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
We were talking about arcade ports. Namco and Sega were at the top of their game. Name me one big Japanese developer who could compete in order to bring a good arcade fighter to the N64. There were only US arcade ports and these were "janky".Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
I tell you Japan had better arcades than the US to port and you guys answer me with completely unrelated stuff. I guess it's my fault and i can't keep up with the discussion and constant change of topics. I have a hard time trying to express myself as it is, editing my posts over and over correcting myself.
Stop being insulting and accept the fact that just by adding a new piece of hardware to my old PC, I saw gains in both Frame rates and screen Res. So having more powerful hardware does help and if you want to talk consoles if one overclocks their MD they'll see gains as do people playing their old XBox One games on the One X. So spare me on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
No try, you take issues with people not pointing out fogging in Saturn or PS games, but you don't point out that N64 games used 2D sprites and also have not 3D polygons used for spectators in the stands in N64 sports games, lets just call Saturn sports games out for it.. Talk about double standards.Quote:
You still don't get
Konami, Temco, Tatio, Takara . You didn't have to be Namco or SEGA or even a Coin up the developer to bring 60 fps and high res quality 3D fighters to one's system. Saturn had likes of Anarchy In The Nippon, Zero Divide , Savaki all 60 fps and all at 704x480 and all made by small developers like Kiss, Zoom or CynusQuote:
Name me one big Japanese developer who could compete in order to bring a good arcade fighter to the N64.
Please don't make out their were big developers or Big Arcade developers like SEGA or Namco
Lots were made in the USA, the Big difference was back then you had PC and consoles and Western developers were divided between the two, now their pipleines are unified for the consoles and PC. In the 90's most Japanese studios were just 100% on the consoles and nothing else, but now their pipelines are split between the handhelds/mobiles and the consoles and its being reflected in the outputQuote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Yes, this is what i am trying to show you. That it works both ways. I KNOW it's a double standard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
One can show you non Arcade developers and not the biggest Japanese developers getting Saturn games running at 60 fps and at 704X480 one can also show N64 sports games using 2D assets and with flat stadiums (so lets cut the bull that only Saturn games used it ). Like I said, for screen Res, for sound and for fps the N64 wasn't a step forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
That's why I was glad SOJ turned it down.