Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Reserved for classic gaming discussions.
a1
Posts: 3032
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby a1 » March 25th, 2011, 10:15 pm

[QUOTE=nesfan]

Why did you choose the overworld for Final Fantasy VII? That's kind of unfair to compare that to OOT because in just about every Final Fantasy game, the world map isn't as detailed as the actual towns themselves. Zelda doesn't do it that way. It features the same look no matter where you go.

[/QUOTE]

Well, I mainly wanted to compare the character models. Link looks like a 3d character and Cloud seems like he would fit nicely in a 2600 game. Also, Final Fantasy 7 uses prerendered images for cities, so to me that gives a pretty false idea of the actual graphical capabilities of the PSX. It was a good workaround, and the cities do look nice, just don't trick yourself into thinking that the PSX's graphics were capable of them (obviously neither console was). Here's a city picture, anyhow:

Burk1
Posts: 389
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Burk1 » March 26th, 2011, 1:50 am

[QUOTE]By the way, what's with the complaints about the PS1 library?  There are 2,418 games.  Have you played them all? [/QUOTE]

 Actually ,that stat is a little skewed..That number represents many duplicate games given different titles,depending on region.The number of US releases is about half that.Still a butt load of games.I am trying to amass the entire US PS1 library.Only about 900 to go.

Guy

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Guy » March 26th, 2011, 3:24 am

I have both!
They both have good and bad games. Some games on both systems have aged poorly!


JesusSaves

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby JesusSaves » March 26th, 2011, 8:39 am

Just to set the record straight, I never said that you could determine the framerate of OOT by looking at the screenshot. I said that OOT had a low framerate.

Logan Ruckman

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Logan Ruckman » March 26th, 2011, 11:45 am

Pac-Man World looks great, but I don't think I'd ever call it better than OOT.

nesfan1
Posts: 995
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby nesfan1 » March 29th, 2011, 5:06 pm

a, I understand what your saying about the prerendered graphics. But wouldn't you say that graphics, prerendered or otherwise, are all about looks? If Final Fantasy VII used prerendered graphics for the cities, wouldn't they still be considered a part of the graphics? With that in mind, what the system is capable of producing seems irrelevant. I mean, who cares what the system is capable of when the graphics are clearly right there on the screen? If the graphics are there, why shouldn't they be a part of the comparison?


a1
Posts: 3032
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby a1 » March 30th, 2011, 1:19 am

[QUOTE=nesfan]

a, I understand what your saying about the prerendered graphics. But wouldn't you say that graphics, prerendered or otherwise, are all about looks? If Final Fantasy VII used prerendered graphics for the cities, wouldn't they still be considered a part of the graphics? With that in mind, what the system is capable of producing seems irrelevant. I mean, who cares what the system is capable of when the graphics are clearly right there on the screen? If the graphics are there, why shouldn't they be a part of the comparison?

[/QUOTE]

I understand what you're saying, and the prerendered graphics in FF7 do work well, and look good. However, it's a trick that only that game (or maybe other rpgs) could use.  A platformer or shooter couldn't use pre-rendered graphics because you can't really move on those surfaces, they're just decoration. In FF7 they work because you really don't interact with the environment.

So in general, a PSX game can't rely on that trick, so they have to use the actual graphical abilities of the system. Thus, I only cared to compare what the actual polygons looked like compared to each other, as that's what most PSX games rely on.

On another note, I think with or without pre-rendered graphics, Zelda is a better looking game because the polygons in FF7 are just so horrendous. Although the cutscenes in FF7 usually look very good. Perhaps, though, it was unfair to put FF7 up against Zelda, because really, FF7 characters are much uglier than characters in other PSX games. I just picked it because they seem to be two games people like to compare when they argue the consoles.

I guess comparing the graphics is pointless, because it's simply a matter of taste too. I've never really noticed the low frame rate in 64 games, but I believe it's there. I mean, look at the different experiences people are having with the 3DS; clearly we all see a bit differently. At any rate, I feel like I've put too much of my time into this particular discussion, so I'm gonna cut myself out of it now.

Jake

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Jake » March 30th, 2011, 11:33 am

Burk brought up some good points...

PS1, does have a huge library of games, so even if there's mediocre games,
you could find some goodies in there, and stick to those.

N64, like SNES is kinda hard to find games for. Not too difficult but, tends to be more expensive or rare compared with PS1.

I don't have either console "anymore", but from what I played I liked N64 better...
even if I played less total games for it.




Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Jon1 » March 30th, 2011, 12:50 pm

This is a no brainer. N64 crushes Playstation because when you compare the great games on each system the N64 comes out on top. Also, as the last cartridge based system it pushes the limit of what they could do with that format. There is absolutely no denying that PS1 has aged terribly, and while I know they had some great games, they have few timeless classics. And c'mon, the load times are still annoying. There are some N64 games that you just can't live without like Goldeneye. Living in 2011 we all have time to look back and figure out which one was better. I have to admit that the N64 had some bad years where nothing good was released but, like I said, in 2011 you can go through the whole library and look back and analyze everything. In a wierd way I compare N64 to the Jaguar. When you look back on it, you can get the 10-20 best games and stay away from the bad ones and they blow away the Playstation.


Oltobaz1
Posts: 1605
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Playstation Vs. Nintendo 64

Postby Oltobaz1 » March 30th, 2011, 2:38 pm

You're entitled to your opinion. Hey, I like the Jaguar! But, did you just say it
crushed the Playstation?


Return to “Classic Gaming”