Wii U is the weakest console so it is going to fail.

#81DTY3Posted 2/26/2013 10:07:09 AM
Enclave posted...
Even the character models look better than Conker in that image.

I'm sorry but while the N64 could push polygons it was complete garbage when it came to texture quality.

How good graphics are isn't purely about how many polygons are on screen.


Likewise, how good graphics are isnt purely about texture quality.

Come back when FF9 actually looks good while rendering an actual 3D environment.

Hell come back when the character models have fingers or lips.
---
Metroid Zero Mission and Super Metroid are some of the finest 2D games ever made and are the best in the series.
Metroid Fusion is pretty cool I guess.
#82guinness4lifePosted 2/26/2013 10:23:05 AM
fhsfootball74 posted...
Just like NES, SNES, PSone, DS, Wii and 3DS wait did I do that wrong? Remember power doesn't mean anything. It can fail for other reasons but it won't be because of its power just look at history.


NES > Atari
SNES > Genesis

PS1 was inferior to DC and several competitors, but its game library was astounding. NIntendo's libraries have been lackluster post-N64.

Wii was marketed to casuals, who don't upgrade consoles or need fancy graphics. The wii u has improved its graphics, which none of the people who bought wii's care about. Hardcores gave up on nintendo years ago.

This wii u has successfully managed to appeal to no one.
---
i5 3570|MSI Twin Frozr III 7950|24gb RAM|Intel 335 240gb SSD|Hitachi 1 TB HDD|Rosewill Capstone 750w|Cougar Challenger Case
#83EnclavePosted 2/26/2013 10:38:46 AM
DTY3 posted...
Enclave posted...
Even the character models look better than Conker in that image.

I'm sorry but while the N64 could push polygons it was complete garbage when it came to texture quality.

How good graphics are isn't purely about how many polygons are on screen.


Likewise, how good graphics are isnt purely about texture quality.

Come back when FF9 actually looks good while rendering an actual 3D environment.

Hell come back when the character models have fingers or lips.


You know, you're just coming off as somebody who's trying to find some way to bolster up the N64. Accept it, the PSX had better looking games than the N64 did and the reason is a combination of having more space to play with thanks to using CDs instead of carts and having superior ability to render in 2D. This is a fact, it's not debatable.

While what the N64 did required more raw power than what the PSX did that doesn't mean it was better looking.

Look, I'm not ragging on the N64, it was a fun system, but come on it had it's flaws and some pretty big ones at that.
---
The commercial says that Church isn't for perfect people, I guess that's why I'm an Atheist.
#84DTY3Posted 2/26/2013 10:51:08 AM
Im not trying to "bolster" anything. It's common knowledge the 64 looked better. Compare multiplats.

Ans N64 could do boring prerendered backgrounds andFMVs as well.
---
Metroid Zero Mission and Super Metroid are some of the finest 2D games ever made and are the best in the series.
Metroid Fusion is pretty cool I guess.
#85EnclavePosted 2/26/2013 10:56:47 AM
DTY3 posted...
Im not trying to "bolster" anything. It's common knowledge the 64 looked better. Compare multiplats.

Ans N64 could do boring prerendered backgrounds andFMVs as well.


Of course multiplats looked better, the only multiplats that could exist between the two were full 3D games which the N64 excelled at. The reason there weren't more multiplats was because the N64 couldn't do 2D.

Also, you bring up prerendered backgrounds as though they're a bad thing. They look better than flat monocoloured polygons. Why bust your ass to make a system render a boring and blocky background when you can use a beautiful pre-rendered background? This is game development 101, if you don't need to render something in-engine then don't. It's all about giving the user the best experience possible.

Also, why even bring up FMVs? I haven't even once.

You really come off like you're just trying to defend the N64 or you just have a hate on for the PSX for being able to do various things better than the N64 could which includes having better looking games.

If you're trying to defend the N64 then you'd be better off focusing on it's gameplay over it's graphical capabilities. The best N64 games are some of the best games ever made and it's not because they looked good but rather played well.
---
The commercial says that Church isn't for perfect people, I guess that's why I'm an Atheist.
#86DTY3Posted 2/26/2013 10:58:20 AM
I dont hate on PS1. Im just giving credit where it isdue.
I think prerendered backgrounds look awful and lazy. They make the world look artificial as all hell.

Problem is, when the PS1 didnt use them....well yeah. yikes.
---
Metroid Zero Mission and Super Metroid are some of the finest 2D games ever made and are the best in the series.
Metroid Fusion is pretty cool I guess.
#87DTY3Posted 2/26/2013 10:59:57 AM
also lmao at saying the N64 "couldnt do 2D".

There were a few. Not many because N64 had one of the worst overall libraries of all time, but there were a few.
---
Metroid Zero Mission and Super Metroid are some of the finest 2D games ever made and are the best in the series.
Metroid Fusion is pretty cool I guess.
#88EnclavePosted 2/26/2013 11:30:05 AM(edited)
DTY3 posted...
I dont hate on PS1. Im just giving credit where it isdue.
I think prerendered backgrounds look awful and lazy. They make the world look artificial as all hell.


And blocky backgrounds that are mono coloured are more realistic? Please. The pre-rendered backgrounds look a hell of a lot more realistic than blocky mono coloured backgrounds of the N64

Problem is, when the PS1 didnt use them....well yeah. yikes.


Which is why the PSX usually used them, because it could and it looked better than anything their competition were doing.

edit:

When I say the N64 couldn't do 2D I mean it couldn't do it as well as the PSX. The N64 was built for pushing polygons. It really wasn't great at rendering 2D images. Obviously it could render them, just not very well compared to the PSX.
---
The commercial says that Church isn't for perfect people, I guess that's why I'm an Atheist.
#89SuigintouEVPosted 2/26/2013 3:16:11 PM(edited)
MasterMoron posted...
Some people seriously think the N64 had better graphics than the PS1? Seriously? Talk about fanboys.


Nothing fanboyish about it. Look at the real-time visuals and polygon counts in late N64 games like Banjo Tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, or Majora's Mask.

Nothing on the PS1 can technically come close..

Where the PS1 made up any ground technically was 100% in its far superior media, where you could come out with multi-disc games with tons of prerendered FMV and relatively uncompressed textures and audio (which btw look poor next to N64 in real time) like FFVIII and Metal Gear Solid.

Megaman 64 vs Legends pretty much speaks for itself.

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/173/9/b/PSX_VS_N64___megaman_legends___by_Elias1986.png

The textures look blurry on the N64 not because of the hardware limitations but because of the media limitations where they are compressed.

MasterMoron posted...
I don't care whether PS1 or N64 had more power. All you have to do to say which has the better graphics is look at the games. Look at something like Final Fantasy VIII and then look at Zelda: Ocarina of Time. There's no comparison. Nintendo 64's graphics were just blocky and ugly. Granted, some earlier PS1 games looked pretty bad as well, but later PS1 games were huge improvements, whereas N64 was never able to get out of it's blocky phase.


Huh?

First of all FFVIII was 90% pre-rendered and jagged as hell. Prerendered, FYI, means it was 2D static images!

Seriously this is FFVIII:

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110918175828/finalfantasy/images/5/59/Odin_FFVIII.png

This is Conker's Bad Fur Day:

http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/255061-conker-s-bad-fur-day-nintendo-64-screenshot-birdy-explains.jpg
---
Hissatsu!!! Burst Spinning Giga Plasma Marble Screw Drill Maximum Tempest Break Punch - Pretty Arcshin Gurren Robo II
#90EnclavePosted 2/26/2013 3:18:10 PM
SuigintouEV posted...
MasterMoron posted...
Some people seriously think the N64 had better graphics than the PS1? Seriously? Talk about fanboys.


Nothing fanboyish about it. Look at the real-time visuals and polygon counts in late N64 games like Banjo Tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, or Majora's Mask.

Nothing on the PS1 can technically come close..

Where the PS1 made up any ground technically was 100% in its far superior media, where you could come out with multi-disc games with tons of prerendered FMV and relatively uncompressed textures and audio (which btw look poor next to N64 in real time) like FFVIII and Metal Gear Solid.

Megaman 64 vs Legends pretty much speaks for itself.


But that's just it, the only time N64 comes out ahead is when you compare it via pure poly count or full 3D game vs full 3D game.

If you however look at the whole package, at what's more visually pleasing to the eye? The Playstation often comes out on top thanks to pre-rendered backgrounds and far superior textures.

These things are far more important than pure poly count. Look at say Morrowind and Oblivion. Morrowind as I recall had much higher poly counts on it's in-game objects than Oblivion did but Oblivion looked better. The reason? Oblivion had much better textures and in-game effects.

People always go on about the N64s ability to push out more polygons but I think I've done a good job in this thread pointing out that it didn't actually translate into better graphics.

I think a lot of you really are ignoring just how important high quality textures are when it comes to a games graphics.
---
The commercial says that Church isn't for perfect people, I guess that's why I'm an Atheist.