The Nintendo 64 Classic Edition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Team Andromeda

So lame and pathetic.

---

Right, i'm done with this discussion. Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Black_Tiger

Quake 64 does indeed have an option to disable the ("AA") filter and I confirmed by playing the hacked "no filter" version that it is the same problem filter that ruins most games.

---

Yes. I don't think the custom microcode is responsible for this in Factor 5 games. AFAIK, the custom microcode helped push more polygons. And later on, with the second Star Wars game, they pushed even more and increased the draw distance. BOSS also used custom microcodes for a similar effect in their later games. They also disabled Z-buffering with this but i'm 100% not sure, that's just info i read online.

The filter seems to be a separate thing that could be disabled by anyone, without microcodes. I think some other later games may have it disabled. Dunno why most devs decided to use it, maybe it has something with stubborn Nintendo giving hard time to them if not using it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

This video showed up in my Youtube suggested videos. There are a couple of interesting titles in this video.

---

Thanks for this.

I remember waiting for Rev Limit to get released... The tech demo looks good.

F-Zero X runs at 60 fps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

But Ridge Racer games also run at 30fps on the PS1, except for the "remastered" 60fps version of a Ridge Racer 1 track in the bonus disc of Type4. And that was more like a demo of how the PS1 could handle an older engine with improved code. Kinda like how RARE mentioned that the Perfect Dark engine improvements could run Goldeneye faster.

---

True, but there's other 60fps modes in a few racers on the PS1 too like Colin McRae Rally and Gran Turismo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rdAxewJ6fw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

And is there any proper 3D 60fps racer on the Saturn?

---

Do Outrun and Street Racer count?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Racing games are harder to do at 60fps because you need a big environment to drive, there's constant motion, many camera angles, physics, etc.

---

Funny, because these days you hear people saying Racing games are the easiest games to do pretty graphics for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Fighting games look like it's easier to make because all you really need is two 3D models on a flat surface and a 2D backdrop. There's nothing unexpected happening, it's almost too scripted. And if the PS1/SAT could do it i don't know why it's so hard for the N64 to do it too. But there wasn't a Tekken/VF game on the N64 and i wouldn't expect someone like Midway attempting something like this.

---

Yet some of those games also have some 3D objects going on as well. Plus they're running in High Resolution modes and doing it. If it's so easy to do, then why do so few N64 Fighting games do it? The only ones I know of are Dark Rift and Mortal Kombat 4. Killer Instinct also does it, but I wouldn't really consider that a true 3D fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

This too. If Factor 5 could do it, more devs could if the N64 was a bigger player, especially in Japan. Pretty much nobody cared for it there.

Edit: Wasn't there an option in Quake that turned this filter off? I don't think they had to write a custom code for this.

---

How late in the game was that though?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

True, but there's other 60fps modes in a few racers on the PS1 too like Colin McRae Rally and Gran Turismo:

---

You asked about Ridge Racer on the N64. Can't comment on the other games because none of these devs ever made anything on the N64. And i never said anything about the PS1 not being able to do 60fps so i don't know why you respond to me with these videos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Do Outrun and Street Racer count?

---

Proper 3D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Funny, because these days you hear people saying Racing games are the easiest games to do pretty graphics for.

---

These days, yes. But i'm talking about the days of old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

If it's so easy to do, then why do so few N64 Fighting games do it? The only ones I know of are Dark Rift and Mortal Kombat 4. Killer Instinct also does it, but I wouldn't really consider that a true 3D fighter.

---

I have answered this before. I blame the lack of support from big Japanese devs that are experienced with arcade games. And the overall low interest on developing for the machine compared to the PS1 and even the Saturn. I would like to see a serious effort by, say Namco, in porting a Tekken game. But being serious about it. Not like Mickey Tetris Capcom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

How late in the game was that though?

---

What do you mean? You could turn that off in the options menu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Edit: Wasn't there an option in Quake that turned this filter off? I don't think they had to write a custom code for this.

---

Quake does have a "filter" on/off option. It definitely looks sharper, and the Game Shark/Action Replay codes for other games has this same effect. But it's not a "complete" disabling of the filter; apparently it's actually a two-stage thing, with the latter stage (an overall blur applied to the entire image) being the part that gets disabled. This post explains it.

The results are kind of mixed tbh. I mean, I definitely prefer the look of the filter turned off, but it also exposes some flaws, which is the reason for the filter in the first place.

I've always thought the Gamecube used the same filter, because it's output is also blurrier than normal through standard AV.

Quote:

---

Dither filter - in the VI, basically smears the entire output to hide dithering. Similar performance hit. Easy to disable, but some games look downright terrible without it (Starfox)

---

There's another blur filter on the N64?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

Quake does have a "filter" on/off option. It definitely looks sharper, and the Game Shark/Action Replay codes for other games has this same effect. But it's not a "complete" disabling of the filter; apparently it's actually a two-stage thing, with the latter stage (an overall blur applied to the entire image) being the part that gets disabled. This post explains it.

The results are kind of mixed tbh. I mean, I definitely prefer the look of the filter turned off, but it also exposes some flaws, which is the reason for the filter in the first place.

---

If that's the case then i don't see a reason to disable the whole lot. Partially disabling it like in Quake should have been enough for most games to at least improve the output. Something is better than nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blades

I've always thought the Gamecube used the same filter, because it's output is also blurrier than normal through standard AV.



There's another blur filter on the N64?!

---

everything is blurry through standard av.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blades

I've always thought the Gamecube used the same filter, because it's output is also blurrier than normal through standard AV.



There's another blur filter on the N64?!

---

That would be the PS2. The GC has nice clean graphics, but I've always ran it with S-Video and component.

Quote:

---

That would be the PS2. The GC has nice clean graphics, but I've always ran it with S-Video and component.

---

The PS2 isn't that great either, now that you mention it. The GC is fantastic through component, but mediocre with composite. The DC, PSX, and Saturn all produce very nice composite outputs. Composite can look good with a high quality TV and s-video can look terrible on a bad TV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bultje112

everything is blurry through standard av.

---

Quote:

---

I've always thought the Gamecube used the same filter, because it's output is also blurrier than normal through standard AV.

---

Can you read?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Proper 3D.

---

Hard Driving;), which also runs in Saturn High Res mode . Though to be fair it really was Street Racer on the Saturn that was the only 60 fps on the system

Quote:

---

These days, yes. But i'm talking about the days of old.

---

Its not easy now and it was terrible back in the early and mid 90's there weren't many PC racers than run at 60 fps. Only with Powerful late 90's PC with 3D cards and consoles like the DC did that start to change

Quote:

---

I have answered this before. I blame the lack of support from big Japanese devs that are experienced with arcade games

---

And that's your typical twisting and ignoring what people say and post. Please tell me what Arcade experience the developers of these High Res Saturn games had, much less try and make out that they were BIG Japanese developers

CYNUS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F02qbn3Zm4Q&list=PL279CF49D06E01994&index= 10&t=6s

KAZE


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1Tq9CJk50A

KSS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KypUPQsG7g4


All 60 fps and all in Saturns High Res mode of 704x480

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

If that's the case then i don't see a reason to disable the whole lot. Partially disabling it like in Quake should have been enough for most games to at least improve the output. Something is better than nothing.

---

What I don't get is, if Quake could simply put it in the options menu, why didn't any other games do this? Or simply have it disabled? A game without the filter, designed from the beginning to have it disabled, could have maximized the benefit. And Quake wasn't from a "dream team" developer with favored status, which is generally the excuse for why only a limited number of games were "allowed" to use custom microcode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Team Andromeda

All 60 fps and all in Saturns High Res mode of 704x480

---

Necronomicon is a bit silly to use as an example -- did the N64 even have a single pinball game? Granted, I'm not aware of any high-res 2D games on the N64, but I think that's more because the system suffered from an overall lack of 2D games. I don't know of any hardware flaw that would prevent the N64 from being able to run at high-res and 60 fps. Fitting those assets all on a cartridge would be the only issue, especially considering a game the likes of Necronomicon wouldn't justify the expense of an extra high capacity cart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

What I don't get is, if Quake could simply put it in the options menu, why didn't any other games do this? Or simply have it disabled? A game without the filter, designed from the beginning to have it disabled, could have maximized the benefit. And Quake wasn't from a "dream team" developer with favored status, which is generally the excuse for why only a limited number of games were "allowed" to use custom microcode.

---

Probably because the smearing was seen as a feature. Quake shipped a subpar product, so they tried to cover their tracks by offering an optional mode that offered a slight increase in performance but at the cost of filtering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

Necronomicon is a bit silly to use as an example -- did the N64 even have a single pinball game? Granted, I'm not aware of any high-res 2D games on the N64, but I think that's more because the system suffered from an overall lack of 2D games. I don't know of any hardware flaw that would prevent the N64 from being able to run at high-res and 60 fps. Fitting those assets all on a cartridge would be the only issue, especially considering a game the likes of Necronomicon wouldn't justify the expense of an extra high capacity cart.

---

What it is, was an example of a small Japanese developer making a High Res game where team making it had nothing to do with the Arcades , that was the point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

You asked about Ridge Racer on the N64. Can't comment on the other games because none of these devs ever made anything on the N64. And i never said anything about the PS1 not being able to do 60fps so i don't know why you respond to me with these videos.

---

Because you were implying that it wasn't that big of a deal with Ridge Racer Turbo on the PS1 since it was just the first game. So I gave some more examples.

I brought up Ridge Racer 64 because you flat out said "I bet if Namco made a game on the N64 they'd get better performance!" Well, Ridge Racer 64 is an example of that not being the case. It performs on par at best, and doesn't really look as nice as Ridge Racer R4 that came out 2 years earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Proper 3D

---

Define proper. Yeah Outrun is all spirtes, but Street Racer is using polygons for the scenery and tracks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

These days, yes. But i'm talking about the days of old.

---

I don't see why it would be harder to draw polygons in a racer in 1998 vs in 2016. The same limitations to what's visible and actually needs drawn still apply. In fact we still see a lot of tricks that were used on the Saturn and PS1 like flat trees and people watching in newer racers on the PS3 and even PS4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

I have answered this before. I blame the lack of support from big Japanese devs that are experienced with arcade games. And the overall low interest on developing for the machine compared to the PS1 and even the Saturn. I would like to see a serious effort by, say Namco, in porting a Tekken game. But being serious about it. Not like Mickey Tetris Capcom.

---

Capcom gave you a port of Megaman Legends. And that has a lower draw distance and worse textures last I checked. And Namco gave you a port of Ridge Racer in 2000 that they worked together with Nintendo to produce. So you had a serious effort with Nintendo working with them to get the best out of the hardware late in the generation after a lot had been figured out with the hardware. So in theory that should have the best effort from developers possible. It still isn't as nice as R4 that came out 2 years earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

What do you mean? You could turn that off in the options menu.

---

It's a figure of speech. Late in the game as in late in the generation. I was referring specifically to Factor 5 writing custom microcode to turn shit off so they could run at 640x480. That was late in the generation around 1999/2000 when they did that, after the Dreamcast and PS2 were out.

And while we're on this topic of N64 Resolution, here's an interesting topic I found where a person was looking at what the game is actually coded to run at by doing frame buffer dumps and also using an emulator plugin that doesn't upscale from the native resolution. The results are pretty interesting:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comme...n64_games_ran/

Turns out Factor 5's games are not running at 640x480, they are instead running at 400x440.

Wow, I wonder what resolution Shadowman 64 runs at. The main improvement is the texture upgrade.

Yes, interesting reddit post.

I'm not really surprised. The same is basically true of the Playstation and Saturn, if not a little worse. Even without specifying 640x480, most of the games that had a higher resolution than normal both vertically and horizontally were 2D, or 3D fighters with 2D backgrounds. WipEout 3 ran at something like 512x240. High resolution on one axis. So for a fully 3D game like Rogue Squadron to run at 400x440 is still exceeding what was seen on Playstation and Saturn, even if it's a bit less impressive than initially reported.

I have heard that Internal Section runs at 640x480, but its graphics are basically "Tempest 2000 meets Silpheed".

Doesn't Winter Heat have one high and one low resolution value? Like 708 x 240 or something?

I've heard people say that All Star Japan Wrestling runs in high res, but given that it features two shaded fighters in a 3D ring, I'm guessing that at best only one side is a high value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Namco gave you a port of Ridge Racer in 2000 that they worked together with Nintendo to produce. So you had a serious effort with Nintendo working with them to get the best out of the hardware late in the generation after a lot had been figured out with the hardware. So in theory that should have the best effort from developers possible. It still isn't as nice as R4 that came out 2 years earlier.

---

Ridge Racer 64 was not made by Namco, it was made by Nintendo. Namco had more of a support role. It wasn't a major project for them like RRT4, not at all. And Nintendo themselves never pushed the hardware as much as other devs, they always made games "by the book".

Also, before Type 4 Namco made a ton of games on PS1. They knew the system inside out. They even made that 60fps RR1 demo to show how better they can take advantage of the system compared to when they started. They basically went "Hey, remember that game we made 4 years ago? We can make it run twice the speed now". So even if they did make the 64 port themselves, as their major project (which was not) you really expected a state of the art game (technically) with their first game on the system? It took them years to master the PS1 and you want them to master the N64 (a more complicated system even) at day one? Talk about unrealistic expectations.

And no RR game is 60fps on the PS1 anyway (apart from the bonus disc demonstration) so to expect RR64 being a 60fps title is another unrealistic expectation.

Now lets pretend the PS1 didn't exist and the N64 was the major player in the generation. If Namco had to make a Tekken game on the system, as their major project, and put a 100% effort like they did for the PS1, do you think that it would be impossible for it to run at 60fps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

It's a figure of speech. Late in the game as in late in the generation. I was referring specifically to Factor 5 writing custom microcode to turn shit off so they could run at 640x480. That was late in the generation around 1999/2000 when they did that, after the Dreamcast and PS2 were out.

---

Quake 64 was released in 1998.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

And while we're on this topic of N64 Resolution, here's an interesting topic I found where a person was looking at what the game is actually coded to run at by doing frame buffer dumps and also using an emulator plugin that doesn't upscale from the native resolution. The results are pretty interesting:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comme...n64_games_ran/

Turns out Factor 5's games are not running at 640x480, they are instead running at 400x440.

---

I wasn't aware Factor 5's game were supposed to be high res...

NFL Quarterback Club games were though. Some other games are also hi-res but i don't remember them atm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

It's a figure of speech. Late in the game as in late in the generation. I was referring specifically to Factor 5 writing custom microcode to turn shit off so they could run at 640x480. That was late in the generation around 1999/2000 when they did that, after the Dreamcast and PS2 were out.

And while we're on this topic of N64 Resolution, here's an interesting topic I found where a person was looking at what the game is actually coded to run at by doing frame buffer dumps and also using an emulator plugin that doesn't upscale from the native resolution. The results are pretty interesting:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comme...n64_games_ran/

Turns out Factor 5's games are not running at 640x480, they are instead running at 400x440.

---

Rogue Squadron came out way before the Dreamcast. I was playing the game long before the DC launched in North America.

My capture device won't capture anything under 640x480. I'll have to hook it up to see if that's really true.


Hybrid Heaven is definitely 640x480.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Ridge Racer 64 was not made by Namco, it was made by Nintendo. Namco had more of a support role.

---

Nintendo the makers of the system and who would have full access to the system, all the low level coding open to them and all the very latest tools and support b. It’s just an endless list of lame excuses with you . How much know how did Namco have with the PSX when they did the RR port, or made Tekken their 1st system 11 game for the system? . Namco 1st game SC for the Dreamcast was utterly amazing too, same for RR on the PSP

So let’s drop not having much experience on the system and as we saw on both the Saturn and PSX. Small developers or even 1st time developers were able to run games at 60 FPS or run at high res. Not such the case for the N64 developer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

My capture device won't capture anything under 640x480. I'll have to hook it up to see if that's really true.

Hybrid Heaven is definitely 640x480.

---

The resolution that the system outputs, and the resolution that the game is actually running at, aren't necessarily the same. The N64 only outputs either 240p or 480i (excluding PAL). All that your capture device is demonstrating is that Hybrid Heaven uses the N64's interlaced mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

The resolution that the system outputs, and the resolution that the game is actually running at, aren't necessarily the same. The N64 only outputs either 240p or 480i (excluding PAL). All that your capture device is demonstrating is that Hybrid Heaven uses the N64's interlaced mode.

---

I wasn't suggesting that it was outputting 480p. The Dreamcast games that work with VGA will work fine with my capture device, while a game that doesn't support VGA's 640x480 won't work with my capture device.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Ridge Racer 64 was not made by Namco, it was made by Nintendo. Namco had more of a support role. It wasn't a major project for them like RRT4, not at all. And Nintendo themselves never pushed the hardware as much as other devs, they always made games "by the book".

Also, before Type 4 Namco made a ton of games on PS1. They knew the system inside out. They even made that 60fps RR1 demo to show how better they can take advantage of the system compared to when they started. They basically went "Hey, remember that game we made 4 years ago? We can make it run twice the speed now". So even if they did make the 64 port themselves, as their major project (which was not) you really expected a state of the art game (technically) with their first game on the system? It took them years to master the PS1 and you want them to master the N64 (a more complicated system even) at day one? Talk about unrealistic expectations.

---

Your argument was literally if Japanese Arcade devs put an effort into the N64 it would show that the system was more powerful than the PS1. Ridge Racer 64 is that serious effort. It's a joint development between Nintendo and Namco to bring a high profile racer to the platform that was big on it's competitor. It came out 2 years after Ridge Racer Type 4 which was the high point of the series on the PS1. If the system was so much more powerful than the PS1 clearly this project would have shown it as you have both the original developer involved and you have Nintendo working on it who would most likely want to show off what their system could do better. Clearly they should know the system inside and out just like how Namco knew the PS1 inside and out by 1998. But we don't see that superiority in Ridge Racer 64. If anything it looks worse than Type 4 which came out 2 years earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

And no RR game is 60fps on the PS1 anyway (apart from the bonus disc demonstration) so to expect RR64 being a 60fps title is another unrealistic expectation.

---

Maybe, but I'm not the one arguing that the N64 was so much more powerful that just having a developer do a serious attempt at a port would show it. And I'm not even talking about frame rate here. When looking at Ridge Racer 64 geometric detail, texture quality, track scenery, lighting, etc. are all lacking when compared to Ridge Racer Type 4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Now lets pretend the PS1 didn't exist and the N64 was the major player in the generation. If Namco had to make a Tekken game on the system, as their major project, and put a 100% effort like they did for the PS1, do you think that it would be impossible for it to run at 60fps?

---

Who knows? What we do know is that even B and C tier developers were pulling off 60fps fighters on the Saturn and PS1. Just because Namco and Sega's were the best ones doesn't mean they were the only ones pulling off higher resolutions and high frame rate 3D Fighters on the systems. Just look at Dead or Alive. That was Tecmo's first foray into 3D Fighters on the Saturn and they still pulled off a High Resolution 60fps port of the game. Or look at the examples from TA earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Quake 64 was released in 1998.

---

I wasn't talking about Quake, I was talking about Factor 5's games and writing custom microcode. Yeah Quake can turn off part of the AA in the options, it's not using custom Microcode last I checked to try and run in a higher resolution. And even then that's pretty late in the generation. Summer of 1998 was only a few months before the Dreamcast hit in Japan after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

I wasn't aware Factor 5's game were supposed to be high res...

---

It was mentioned in the post you quoted:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Factor 5 had to write their own custom code to turn all of the AA garbage off, so they could run Rogue Squadron at 640 x 480. The game probably would have been the hot mess that Perfect Dark is, if they didn't turn that crap off.

---

This too. If Factor 5 could do it, more devs could if the N64 was a bigger player, especially in Japan. Pretty much nobody cared for it there.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

NFL Quarterback Club games were though.

---

At the cost of frame rate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

Some other games are also hi-res but i don't remember them atm.

---

I'd be careful, as the thread I linked to suggests they're not as high of a resolution as previously thought. Many don't seem to be anywhere near what high resolution Saturn and PS1 games were doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Rogue Squadron came out way before the Dreamcast. I was playing the game long before the DC launched in North America.

---

Maybe, but in Japan it came out after the Dreamcast launched. And I was referring more to Battle for Naboo with that comment which came out in 2000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

My capture device won't capture anything under 640x480. I'll have to hook it up to see if that's really true.

---

That would be about as useful as hooking your console up to your HDTV and accepting what it says the resolution is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Hybrid Heaven is definitely 640x480.

---

Yes, which is mentioned as one of the few that's actually at that resolution in that thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comme...s_ran/d5ya2es/

Unfortunately the framerate sucks in that mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

That would be about as useful as hooking your console up to your HDTV and accepting what it says the resolution is.

---

No, because it won't accept a signal that is below 640X480. I can plug in the NES to my 1080p television, and it will display it on the screen, while I'll get nothing but a green screen if the input from the system doesn't meet the requirements of my capture device. Like I'd said, I'll have to plug in my N64 to my capture device to see if Rogue Squadron actually meets those requirements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Your argument was literally if Japanese Arcade devs put an effort into the N64 it would show that the system was more powerful than the PS1.

---

My argument was literally that the N64 could do 60fps just like the PS1 or Saturn could, if the developer was willing to give frame rate the priority and then use all the tricks to minimize the cost of that decision. Just like any other console basically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Ridge Racer 64 is that serious effort. It's a joint development between Nintendo and Namco to bring a high profile racer to the platform that was big on it's competitor. It came out 2 years after Ridge Racer Type 4 which was the high point of the series on the PS1. If the system was so much more powerful than the PS1 clearly this project would have shown it as you have both the original developer involved and you have Nintendo working on it who would most likely want to show off what their system could do better. Clearly they should know the system inside and out just like how Namco knew the PS1 inside and out by 1998. But we don't see that superiority in Ridge Racer 64. If anything it looks worse than Type 4 which came out 2 years earlier.

---

Like i said (and both you and TA ignored) Nintendo never pushed the system as others like BOSS or Factor-5 or even RARE. Ridge Racer 64 still uses all the filters and Z-Buffering as all standard games do so you don't get the extra juice available to make it push the system into producing more geometry (like how WDC doesn't use Z-Buffering) or the same with better frame rate or whatever. Still, even though it uses the standard features, the game looks better than most N64 racers, runs smooth and has nearly unlimited draw distance (not even tricks to hide it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Maybe, but I'm not the one arguing that the N64 was so much more powerful that just having a developer do a serious attempt at a port would show it.

---

Neither i. While i do believe the N64 is more powerful overall than the Saturn/PS1, in this particular argument about 3D fighters i'm merely arguing that the N64 isn't weaker than the Saturn or PS1. TA suggests the Saturn is a more powerful machine and i disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Who knows? What we do know is that even B and C tier developers were pulling off 60fps fighters on the Saturn and PS1. Just because Namco and Sega's were the best ones doesn't mean they were the only ones pulling off higher resolutions and high frame rate 3D Fighters on the systems. Just look at Dead or Alive. That was Tecmo's first foray into 3D Fighters on the Saturn and they still pulled off a High Resolution 60fps port of the game. Or look at the examples from TA earlier.

---

We also know the N64 had at least a little more juice than it's competition when used microcodes or skipped certain filters and features that the other systems didn't have to use and waste processing power. You also never answered me my question. Do you really believe these developers you mention wouldn't be able to make something similar on the N64 if they made the same effort and using all the tricks available?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

At the cost of frame rate.

---

What if most players in the field were 2D sprites like in Decathlon? And there were no weather effects either?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Maybe, but in Japan it came out after the Dreamcast launched. And I was referring more to Battle for Naboo with that comment which came out in 2000.

---

Why are you so obsessed with how late games were on the N64? Battle for Nabbo was released 4 years after the console's launch. It's the same as Ridge Racer Type 4 on the PS1. You also complain that Quake was "released late" and that was just 2 years after the console launch. It takes some time and experience for developers to push the systems (if they are willing). Life in the universe doesn't start with the launch of the PS1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Team Andromeda

It’s just an endless list of lame excuses with you

---

No. I think my arguments are solid. There are a few games (like very few) that visibly push the system beyond the competition so that means the power is there. It's just that very few were willing to go through the hoops and tap it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

My argument was literally that the N64 could do 60fps just like the PS1 or Saturn could, if the developer was willing to give frame rate the priority and then use all the tricks to minimize the cost of that decision. Just like any other console basically.

---

I really doubt the 3DO could handle a 3D polygon fighter at 60 fps myself.

Quote:

---

While i do believe the N64 is more powerful overall than the Saturn/PS1, in this particular argument about 3D fighters i'm merely arguing that the N64 isn't weaker than the Saturn or PS1. TA suggests the Saturn is a more powerful machine and i disagree

---

Love the way you twist and igore what people say or said. I don't think or say the Saturn is better at 3D than the PS, never mind the N64. What I said is I#m glad SEGA turned down the N64 chipset as it wasn't a leap over the PS or Saturn and where we saw fewer games running in High res or at 60 fps, add in no sound hardware and the blury display of the N64.
Which are simply the facts of the matter.

Quote:

---

What if most players in the field were 2D sprites like in Decathlon

---

Lame and pretty wrong too. Baseball uses the Saturn High Res mode, with full Polygon players and unlike most N64 High Res titles not at the cost of the frame rate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ffNHZajB9o&list=PL279CF49D06E01994&index= 24

or you Have Winter Heat which again runs inthe Saturn High Res mode (granted not the full 704X480) and again not at the cost of the Frame rate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zu26xPv_pI&t=472s&list=PL279CF49D06E01994 &index=18

Quote:

---

No. I think my arguments are solid.

---

No they are just excuses. Nintendo not able to use their own system to the fullest, or that you have to be Arcade developer like SEGA, Namco or a huge Japanese corp to make 60 fps games.

I'm sorry but that baseball game looks atrocious, i don't care how good resolution it runs at. You can literally count the polygons on the players. N64 baseball games look much better than that. This one runs at high res too, without the expansion pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3UBqz4PndU


As for Winter sports, 1080 does more in terms of graphics.

Isn't the horse dead by now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

I'm sorry but that baseball game looks atrocious, i don't care how good resolution it runs at. You can literally count the polygons on the players. N64 baseball games look much better than that. This one runs at high res too, without the expansion pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3UBqz4PndU


As for Winter sports, 1080 does more in terms of graphics.

---

I think that the problem is that people here have radically different, yet unblanced values in what looks good in early 3D games.

So much of the animation in All Star Baseball 99 N64 looks so broken that I honestly can't believe it shipped like that, independent of the sparse and lower than low res textures in a "high-res" game.

The models in both those baseball games are angular, but having such a strong reaction to the detailed and well animated Saturn game to call it "atrocious", while posting ASB'99 makes it clear that your tastes are reversed engineered around the N64. So there's no point in people posting anymore videos, if people are looking for radically different things, even when replying about a specific element.

1080 isn't a winter sports game, it's a snowboarding game, which is closer to an arcade racer. Nagano '98 is the closest thing to Winter Heat that I can think of for N64.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

There are a few games (like very few) that visibly push the system beyond the competition so that means the power is there. It's just that very few were willing to go through the hoops and tap it.

---

That's because of the cartridge format. Developers were already going through hoops just to get their games to fit. That's already a challenge, so to try to exploit the hardware in an impressive way is a lot on top of that. It also takes more data to make graphics better in many ways. Which can mean less game. Plus with the additional expense of cartridges... Nobody wants a $70 tech demo.

Think of something like Omega Boost, which, as it was, was praised for its graphics but criticized for being too short. Now imagine trying to fit that game on a cartridge. You'd probably have to either make it even shorter, or reduce the textures, or cut some assets and reuse the remaining ones. Or some combination of the three. Plus, keep in mind that it's just some shooting game without a big name attached that would generate a lot of hype (like a Star Wars game or a Rare platformer), so they probably won't feel that the game justifies the expense of the largest available cart size. So basically it either looks worse or is over in like 45 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Black_Tiger

I think that the problem is that people here have radically different, yet unblanced values in what looks good in early 3D games.

So much of the animation in All Star Baseball 99 N64 looks so broken that I honestly can't believe it shipped like that, independent of the sparse and lower than low res textures in a "high-res" game.

The models in both those baseball games are angular, but having such a strong reaction to the detailed and well animated Saturn game to call it "atrocious", while posting ASB'99 makes it clear that your tastes are reversed engineered around the N64. So there's no point in people posting anymore videos, if people are looking for radically different things, even when replying about a specific element.

---

Don't get me wrong, i don't like the way this game looks either. And i see that the animation isn't great (90's US developers at it again). But we are talking about how games push the systems technically not aesthetically. He asked for a high-res baseball game, i showed him one that has (technically) more complex graphics even though it's ugly aesthetically. It's the US "janky" look games had in the late 90's that i was talking about earlier. Another very obvious example is Rush 2049. The game does a lot technically, having very busy backgrounds and unlimited draw distance but at the same time it looks ugly as sin.

We are talking about hardware capabilities here. The systems only care about polygons, amount of pixels, amount of colors, etc. They can't tell how these things are put together to make a pleasant image. That's the artist's job.

And come on, "detailed Saturn game"? Those models look like they jumped out of a 32X game and then dressed with textures, it's obvious they re made by a very low amount of polygons, even by 5th gen standards. And before you bring up my tastes, i don't play baseball games but if i had to i would play the Saturn one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

That's because of the cartridge format. Developers were already going through hoops just to get their games to fit. That's already a challenge, so to try to exploit the hardware in an impressive way is a lot on top of that. It also takes more data to make graphics better in many ways. Which can mean less game. Plus with the additional expense of cartridges... Nobody wants a $70 tech demo.

---

Yes. That makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulis

I'm sorry but that baseball game looks atrocious, i don't care how good resolution it runs at. You can literally count the polygons on the players. N64 baseball games look much better than that. This one runs at high res too, without the expansion pack.
.

---

This is what I mean by your double standards, Does the N64 Baseball you just showed game use 3D polygons for the crowd, no it doesn't and nothing from you. But when a Saturn game does it, let's highlight it. The point of that vid was to also to show a Saturn High Res game running at 60 fps all with full polygon 3D characters but thanks for also looking over that too 3D Baseball is the best looking Baseball game on all formats, but that runs a lower screen res and frame rate. And finally to compare 1080 to Winter Heat is simply laughable. You should be comparing it too Steep Sloop Sliders, and again thats a game running at a higher res and better frame rate and thats from a tiny company more use to making shooters than sports games compared to an elite In-House team, don't tell me Cave are a Arcade corp and so doesn't count

You talk of hate and being not being conistant. but its quite clear you hate on the Saturn and have complete double standards for 2D assets being used in games or when it comes to High Res and 60 fps

Arguments about graphics are dumb. Is the gameplay good? That's all that matters. WSB '98 is one of the best baseball games I've ever played. Not complex like modern MLB: The Show entries, but with a realistic enough batting system, yet still fun to play. Didn't know the Saturn one had a NiGHTS team.