Every person with taste did.
N64 graphics still look gorgeous almost 30 years later
- Thread starter RetroGamingUK
- Start date
Team Andromeda
Member
People can move the goal when it suits. People compared the PC Engine to the Mega Drive, never mind it's only a 8 bit system and came out 2 years before the MD
Great channel
You could've fooled most of the forum with Last Bronx though, the synchronisation between the camera and the parallax layers is almost perfect, it's a great illusion.
Well you made
Great channel
You could've fooled most of the forum with Last Bronx though, the synchronisation between the camera and the parallax layers is almost perfect, it's a great illusion.
Thanks and you asked for polygon backgrounds. For what it's worth ai think Soul Edge destroys anything on the N64 or Saturn, for 3D backgrounds in a 3D fighter.
But since you like asking, how many N64 fighters run in high res at 30fps and how many PS1 or N64 racers run in full scree at 30fps with 40 cars on a single track....
Last edited:
cireza
Member
Sure, but it helps with the variety of content in the game, which I think is pretty obvious when you compare the libraries of the consoles and how RPGs, games that require a ton of content, are just absent from N64.
MrCunningham
Member
I got an N64 as a Christmas present back in 1997 or so, and Rouge Squadron was like the first game I played for the System, and I remember that it literally overheated my N64 an hour after playing it, and I had to return my system back to the department store and get a replacement unit.
roosnam1980
Member
good compilation
Sportler
Member
I had a lot of fun with Street Fighter EX plus Alpha. With EX2, less so. EX1 also got great reviews back then.
Max was surprised by the third game, which I didn't play:
Last edited:
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Thanks for another example of a straw-man argument, I never equated Saturn with N64. Pretty much nobody has done that in order to make this the defence whenever the thread turns to bashing others instead of praising the N64, bu bu but people say Saturn is as/more powerful. They don't
Oh well, you'll probably ignore reality again and go on another tirade as I'm just rewording what I said in my last post you quoted and still apparently ignored to defend the N64's honour that was not attacked, at least not by me, just as when you claimed I said N64 games perform horribly. I didn't.
Last edited:
RetroGamingUK
Member
Soul Blade was one of the first games I bought on PlayStation, frame rate and resolution aren't the best, but these features are more than worth it…
- character models on par with Virtua Fighter 2
- character lighting
- polygonal baclgrounds
- transparencies on backgrounds, characters and weapon effects
More than made up for the technically disappointing Tekken 2
Last edited:
NeverYouMind
Member
X-Men vs Street Fighter did the flashy tag mechanics with these characters better four years prior.
Last edited:
Team Andromeda
Member
Soul Blade was one of the first games I bought on PlayStation, frame rate and resolution aren't the best, but these features are more than worth it…
- character models on par with Virtua Fighter 2
- character lighting
- polygonal baclgrounds
- transparencies on backgrounds, characters and weapon effects
More than made up for the technically disappointing Tekken 2
Soul Edge was incredible for its FMV intro and 3D backgrounds.
I still say Lost Bronx was the most impressive Vs 3D fighter on the consoles IMO
RetroGamingUK
Member
That subway stage looked incredible, the VDP2 background layer warping is carried off masterfully, it's also scaling when the camera zooms and just lines up with the vertical walls (a flat image) perfectly.
Makes me wonder if Virtua Fighter 2's backgrounds could've been better implemented.
Saturn was the best console for fighters during its lifespan
Last edited:
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
That's probably arcade shot, Saturn Last Bronx has ugly giant circle shadows as its only blemish (well everything else was downgraded too, but that sticks out). They could have done something more elegant for sure. Probably better than going for low res a la Fighting Vipers though. Still liked both.
The blob shadows in All Japan Pro Wrestling: Featuring Virtua are much nicer (as are the 3D ring ropes compared to those seen in Fighting Vipers Jane's stage), too bad they didn't share know how or art or whatever between games (seemingly). Or at least not to they degree they could or should...
The blob shadows in All Japan Pro Wrestling: Featuring Virtua are much nicer (as are the 3D ring ropes compared to those seen in Fighting Vipers Jane's stage), too bad they didn't share know how or art or whatever between games (seemingly). Or at least not to they degree they could or should...
Last edited:
RetroGamingUK
Member
Fixed
Yes Last Bronx was a bit flickery, especially shadows.
I wouldn't go the Megamix route though, visually it was such a drop compared to Virtua Fighter 2.
Last edited:
Team Andromeda
Member
I'm sure AM#2 would have used the trick if they had gone back to VF2.That subway stage looked incredible, the VDP2 background layer warping is carried off masterfully, it's also scaling when the camera zooms and just lines up with the vertical walls (a flat image) perfectly.
Makes me wonder if Virtua Fighter 2's backgrounds could've been better implemented.
Saturn was the best console for fighters during its lifespan
I also think for overall top level 3D graphics Vagrant Story is the best example of PS1 polygons .
Grandia, Last Brox, Panzer Zwei, Vagrant, Story, Die Hard Arcade, Decathlete , MGS and RSG are my fav examples of 3D on 32-bit systems
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
FV/FM were fine still, they could have played more with the lighting they sacrificed the resolution for, with more stages like Jane's. I'd have preferred a more polished VF2.5, maybe with character endings etc. a la Tekken instead, I didn't care for most bonus characters and Vipers' style clashed VF's. Though personally I think the lack of lighting in Virtua Fighter 2 helped make the fighters look way smoother than they were, than the arcade, hiding the limb seams and stuff better, and still didn't look bad, they could have worked on baked lighting on the levels and fighter textures (iterate Remix).
Same for Sega Rally 1.5, adding extra tracks and a 10 year championship and shit like Sega Rally 2 on DC instead of constantly trying and failing to redo Daytona. Just use the engine for what it was made for, rallying, and give us more of that, trying to shoehorn Daytona on it didn't work out great.
Arcades were out, longform games were in and they didn't try to compete with that with their flagship arcade titles (but at least gave us various RPGs or other longer games, it's just a shame they didn't take a page out of Namco's book for the ports, going for authenticity instead of extra content).
Also who the heck needed VF Kids as a separate game, Fighting Vipers' big head mode cheat thing was basically the same thing, lol. Okay not as expansive, Kids' changed all the backgrounds and stuff to more cartoony and other small touches but, Idk what they were thinking with some releases.
Same for Sega Rally 1.5, adding extra tracks and a 10 year championship and shit like Sega Rally 2 on DC instead of constantly trying and failing to redo Daytona. Just use the engine for what it was made for, rallying, and give us more of that, trying to shoehorn Daytona on it didn't work out great.
Arcades were out, longform games were in and they didn't try to compete with that with their flagship arcade titles (but at least gave us various RPGs or other longer games, it's just a shame they didn't take a page out of Namco's book for the ports, going for authenticity instead of extra content).
Also who the heck needed VF Kids as a separate game, Fighting Vipers' big head mode cheat thing was basically the same thing, lol. Okay not as expansive, Kids' changed all the backgrounds and stuff to more cartoony and other small touches but, Idk what they were thinking with some releases.
Last edited:
Team Andromeda
Member
Fighting Megamix looks ace and for me how the planned VF3 and Sonic Fighters ports would have looked.
Dark Saviour doesn't get enough credit for how good is looks, same for Die Hard Arcade.
I'm sure in a interview with Saturn mag in Japan, Climax said Dark Saviour was pushing over 100,000 polygons.
Dark Saviour doesn't get enough credit for how good is looks, same for Die Hard Arcade.
I'm sure in a interview with Saturn mag in Japan, Climax said Dark Saviour was pushing over 100,000 polygons.
CuteFaceJay
Member
these screenshots look more like Nintendank64
Last edited:
Midway-AGNC-
Member
Yes, you did say that Tomb Raider on Saturn had performance comparable to Nintendo 64 titles like Super Mario 64 and Banjo, in a discussion with another user about 3D games. If you don't remember, let me help refresh your memory.Thanks for another example of a straw-man argument, I never equated Saturn with N64. Pretty much nobody has done that in order to make this the defence whenever the thread turns to bashing others instead of praising the N64, bu bu but people say Saturn is as/more powerful. They don't
Oh well, you'll probably ignore reality again and go on another tirade as I'm just rewording what I said in my last post you quoted and still apparently ignored to defend the N64's honour that was not attacked, at least not by me, just as when you claimed I said N64 games perform horribly. I didn't.
I already explained why that kind of comparison is flawed — it's contortionism, plain and simple. I'm not going to run in circles repeating the same explanation. What I'd like to know is what exactly was your goal with that statement? What were you trying to prove by saying Tomb Raider on Saturn, a 3D game on hardware that was clearly weak for that type of design, had comparable performance to N64 games? That doesn't change the fact that the Nintendo 64 was technically far superior for 3D games, and using framerate as a "gotcha" point in this context is just silly.
And just to make it clear: I'm a big fan of the Saturn, and of the PS1 as well — I've probably played more games on both systems than you have.
But honestly? Out of everyone I've debated with here, your reaction has been the most childish and crybaby-like. Not even the most obvious trolls reacted as aggressively as you just did.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Um, when did I say I didn't? I said I didn't equate Saturn to N64. Which is a wholly different thing. Learn how to fucking read, stop with the strawman arguments. So no, pointing out Tomb Raider's "terrible" performance is like some other praised (3D action) games' performance isn't equating anything else, but speaks about what was criticised there, as it was criticised on its own, without any qualifications like its terribleness being not because of the performance but because of other factors outside the performance that was criticised itself, or equating it to anything else about other games or hw. You're the only one who thinks saying game x has framerate y and game z has framerate y means the games are equal on every other front and the hardware they're on is also equal in every single way, which was never said, implied, hinted, or anything else. That's just you reaching.
I did not say that though, Mario 64 runs way better generally, drops in some levels. The first Banjo's probably similar, I think Tooie can have more drops but anyway, I don't care. Great games. Like Tomb Raider on any platform it was on (sadly not N64 but hey the GBA kinda got it). Toodles.
Last edited:
Midway-AGNC-
Member
I did read what you wrote, very carefully. The thing is, that exact line of reasoning has been used repeatedly in this thread and in plenty of other discussions — often as a fallacy or distortion to try and downplay the N64. And honestly, the way you phrased your argument here comes across very similar to those same fallacious comments. I've had this same back-and-forth with other users, even with obvious trolls, where they lean on the framerate comparison as if it proves something it doesn't. Given the trend of this thread, it came across as the same tactic.
That said, fair enough — maybe I misread your exact intent. I just think you need to be clearer about what point you're actually making, and also tone down the hostility a bit. It's possible to disagree without jumping straight to "you can't read" or the aggressive tone.
nkarafo
Member
I think the sum of the comparisons look like this (graphically):
3D Platforms - N64 wins (Banjo-Kazooie is the best looking game of that generation IMO)
First Person Shooters - N64 wins (Lots to choose from)
3D Adventures - N64 wins (The two Zelda games and Shadowman)
Racing games - N64 = PS1 (World Driver Championship and Ridge Racer Type 4)
Role Playing Games - PS1 = Saturn? (I'm not sure, i never played much of those games)
3D VS Fighting - PS1 wins (Soul Edge beats everything overall IMO)
2D VS Fighting - Saturn wins (the RAM cart ports have no competition)
2D games - Draw (The best looking game from each console looks pretty comparable)
Side scrolling Shmups - Pretty sure Saturn wins (i have little experience with PS1 here)
3D shmups - N64 wins? (I don't think there's anything better than Starfox or Rogue Squadron)
Sports games - N64 wins (NBA Courtside 2 and NFL QBC98)
Feel free to change/add stuff.
3D Platforms - N64 wins (Banjo-Kazooie is the best looking game of that generation IMO)
First Person Shooters - N64 wins (Lots to choose from)
3D Adventures - N64 wins (The two Zelda games and Shadowman)
Racing games - N64 = PS1 (World Driver Championship and Ridge Racer Type 4)
Role Playing Games - PS1 = Saturn? (I'm not sure, i never played much of those games)
3D VS Fighting - PS1 wins (Soul Edge beats everything overall IMO)
2D VS Fighting - Saturn wins (the RAM cart ports have no competition)
2D games - Draw (The best looking game from each console looks pretty comparable)
Side scrolling Shmups - Pretty sure Saturn wins (i have little experience with PS1 here)
3D shmups - N64 wins? (I don't think there's anything better than Starfox or Rogue Squadron)
Sports games - N64 wins (NBA Courtside 2 and NFL QBC98)
Feel free to change/add stuff.
Seider
Member
N64 has 5 games running at 60 fps.
Saturn has a lot of them. And Playstation has even more.
Having only 5 60 fps games in N64 is disappointing.
And base resolution should have been something in between 320x240 and 640x480. Because it was launched between Psx (320x240) and Dreamcast (640x480). Should have used 400x300 or 512x384.
Another disappointing thing was it didnt have a sound chip like Snes did.
"Let's face it. The Super NES has a soundchip, the N64 doesn't have a soundchip. That's how it is. The N64 shares its workload with the co-processor -- actually, let me rephrase that: The whole machine does it, because you can also make music with the CPU. It just seems that at the moment most people are preoccupied with pumping out cool graphics -- and that's also what most gamers want. And the more graphics you do on the N64, the less performance you have left over for sound. With the Super NES, you knew that you could do all this and then you still had a sound chip to handle the music. On the N64, sound eats up performance."
"On the N64, sound EATS UP perfomance." xD
www.ign.com
For me, N64 was a failure. And i didnt say anything yet about cartridge vs CD. It should have launched with a 4x CD Drive.
Saturn has a lot of them. And Playstation has even more.
Having only 5 60 fps games in N64 is disappointing.
And base resolution should have been something in between 320x240 and 640x480. Because it was launched between Psx (320x240) and Dreamcast (640x480). Should have used 400x300 or 512x384.
Another disappointing thing was it didnt have a sound chip like Snes did.
"Let's face it. The Super NES has a soundchip, the N64 doesn't have a soundchip. That's how it is. The N64 shares its workload with the co-processor -- actually, let me rephrase that: The whole machine does it, because you can also make music with the CPU. It just seems that at the moment most people are preoccupied with pumping out cool graphics -- and that's also what most gamers want. And the more graphics you do on the N64, the less performance you have left over for sound. With the Super NES, you knew that you could do all this and then you still had a sound chip to handle the music. On the N64, sound eats up performance."
"On the N64, sound EATS UP perfomance." xD
What's Wrong With Music On the N64? - IGN
When we visited Factor 5's offices in San Rafael, the N64 newcomer…
For me, N64 was a failure. And i didnt say anything yet about cartridge vs CD. It should have launched with a 4x CD Drive.
Last edited:
nkarafo
Member
There are more than 5. But still not much.
But it's only natural the Saturn has more since it has more games. That means it has more of everything.
The PS1 has a bigger library than both. So it has more 60fps games than both.
Math and statistics check out.
Seider
Member
Then you are sayting Psx and Saturn were better options than Nintendo 64.
And Psx had more than 500 JRPG while N64 only had 4 o 5. A total mess in this genre.
And in shootem ups there are a lot of games running at 60 fps in Playstation. None in N64. All shootemups in N64 run at 30 fps.
N64 should have been better than Psx in all aspects. But thats not what we received from Nintendo. N64 was a total failure IMHO.
Midway-AGNC-
Member
N64 has 5 games running at 60 fps.
Saturn has a lot of them. And Playstation has even more.
Having only 5 60 fps games in N64 is disappointing.
And base resolution should have been something in between 320x240 and 640x480. Because it was launched between Psx (320x240) and Dreamcast (640x480). Should have used 400x300 or 512x384.
Another disappointing thing was it didnt have a sound chip like Snes did.
"Let's face it. The Super NES has a soundchip, the N64 doesn't have a soundchip. That's how it is. The N64 shares its workload with the co-processor -- actually, let me rephrase that: The whole machine does it, because you can also make music with the CPU. It just seems that at the moment most people are preoccupied with pumping out cool graphics -- and that's also what most gamers want. And the more graphics you do on the N64, the less performance you have left over for sound. With the Super NES, you knew that you could do all this and then you still had a sound chip to handle the music. On the N64, sound eats up performance."
"On the N64, sound EATS UP perfomance." xD
What's Wrong With Music On the N64? - IGN
When we visited Factor 5's offices in San Rafael, the N64 newcomer…
For me, N64 was a failure. And i didnt say anything yet about cartridge vs CD. It should have launched with a 4x CD Drive.
You're leaning way too hard on framerate as if it were some universal measure of hardware superiority, but that's pure contortionism. In that generation, hitting 60fps almost always came with big sacrifices.
Take F-Zero X on N64: yes, it ran at a rock-solid 60fps, but the backgrounds were stripped away, leaving mostly a flat void behind the tracks. That was the trade-off. The same thing applies to plenty of 60fps PS1 and Saturn games — fighters with tiny arenas, racers with minimal detail, or games with stripped-down geometry. None of that proves the hardware was "better," it just shows different design priorities and compromises.
Comparing that to today's standards is intellectually dishonest. Modern hardware can push high-end graphics and 60fps because the tech allows it. Back then, you couldn't have both — developers had to choose. That's why even on PS2, a much more powerful console, you had huge games like GTA III or San Andreas with wildly inconsistent framerates. Nobody at the time was docking them points because the artistic and technical ambition mattered more than a perfect 60fps counter.
So when you say "N64 only had 5 games at 60fps," you're trying to spin a development reality of the 90s into some kind of failure metric, when in fact all consoles of that era lived with the same trade-offs. Basing your entire argument on that one number isn't serious analysis — it's fanboy narrative dressed up as fact.
nkarafo
Member
I never said the N64 is the better console. Just the more powerful one of the three.
I highly doubt the PSX has 500 RPG games but it does have a lot, yes.
It's more powerful but also much harder to program for. The PS1 was the easiest to develop for of the three consoles. Despite that, the N64 did come out on top in some genres (graphically speaking).
Seider
Member
I enjoyed games in Playstation like Thunderforce V, Phlosoma, Rtype Delta, Einhander... all of them running at 60 fps.
Where are the 60 fps shootem ups games in N64 like these games? Ill tell you. Nowhere. There arent shootemups running at 60 fps in N64.
That is not acceptable in a system released 2 years after the Playstation.
Seider
Member
The exact number is 421 games... meanwhile, the N64 had 5 or 6 JRPGs.
And i was only talking about JRPGs. Im sure there are a lot of RPGs in Playstation developed outside Japan.
Last edited:
Midway-AGNC-
Member
Okay, that's your opinion, doesn't mean it's an universal truth for everyone else.
nkarafo
Member
Okay...
So now the thread is not about graphics anymore but which console has the better library?
No i don't think so, it's just you being a little off topic here my mate.
Last edited:
Seider
Member
The absence of shootem ups in n64 running at 60 fps is not an opinion. Its a fact.
nkarafo
Member
Well, it's a good thing i don't like shootem ups, otherwise i would hate my N64.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
But that's the same argument we had before "60fps target." Back in those days, 60fps games basically meant you had harder dips. There's no way to prove those games were actually 60fps like today. Today, we will give a game a pass if its 60fps with a few dips, but back then that's not what we got. So yeah, choosing locked 30fps or closer to lock 30fps might have been the better choice in many of those games.
Seider
Member
What are you talking about? I enjoyed 60 fps games even in a Commodore 64. There were 30 and 60 fps in Arcade games too. And of course there were 30 and 60 fps games in P.laystation, Saturn and Nintendo 64.
Thunderforce V, Einhander, Philosoma, Rtype Delta, etc ran all of them at 60 perfect fps. And just because i was used to that i got disappointed by N64 games. Only 5 60 fps games in its complete library of games. What the f--c was that?
Later arrived Dreamcast with almost all of its games running at 60 fps. And it was awesome.
Saturn, Playstation and Dreamcast had a ton of 60 fps games. N64 didnt and i wanted even more 60 fps games than on Playstation.
nkarafo
Member
Romulus
Member
I don't care what you enjoyed. I'm talking about actual facts in the 5th generation. Saying something is 60fps back then is not that same as it being actual 60fps.
nkarafo
Member
Not sure what you mean by that, there are plenty of actual 60fps games during every generation. Older generations like the NES, SNES, Genesis, etc, had 60fps as the standard.
Seider
Member
60 fps games were 60 fps games in 1985, in 1995, in 2005 and in 2025. I dont understand what are you talking about. Games showing 60 images every frame.
There were a lot of these in Playstation, Tekken 3, Dead or Alive, Einhander, Tobal N1&2, Ergheiz. And same in Saturn... Radiant Silvergun, Last Bronx, Fighters Megamix, Virtua Fighter 2, etc
But there were ONLY 5 3D games at 60 fps in N64. As you can see in this video...
Fzero X, Smash Bros, Mortal Kombat 4, Dark Rift and Killer Instinct. Thats all.
Seider
Member
No. There were 30 and 60 fps games in Snes, Megadrive, Nes, etc. Same as in Psx, Saturn, N64, Dreamcast, Ps2, Xbox, Xbox 360 ,etc
Metal Slug is a 30 fps game and its a Neo Geo 2D game. And there were a lot of games running at 30 fps in Snes and Megadrive
Romulus
Member
I explained it above in the first post. Games back then that targeted any framerate dropped harder and less consistent in general, especially that first 3d era. The higher the target, the more they generally dropped. We've seen DF and others test many of these older games and seen that they targeted 60fps, but that was it. Target.
Its just not worth getting into a fps debate unless we have the metrics because "slowdown" as we all called it was a big thing. Some guy showing a few minutes of footage means nothing or saying the words 60fps.
Last edited:
calistan
Member
This quarter-century-old console war thread is spectacular!
Living in PAL-land, we didn't have ANY 60 fps games back then. It was 50 fps for us, and that usually meant games running 20% slower. Lap times for Mario Kart and Wave Race were seconds faster for NTSC gamers, while we were playing in slow motion.
Anyway, as you were, battle on.
Seider
Member
There are a lot of games running at 60 perfect fps in Playstation, Saturn and Dreamcast.
Even in N64 you have 60 fps perfect games like Fzero X.
I dont get your point or what are you talking about. Daytonsa USA in arcade vas running at 60 perfect fps. No framerate drops. Never.
Romulus
Member
What does alot mean? 20%? How do you know how many are perfect?
We don't. Its just people say words when we all know slowdown was way more prevalent in those days.
Dreamcast is not a 5th gen console and I'm not discussing arcades either.
nkarafo
Member
I didn't say otherwise. I said 60fps was the standard, meaning the vast majority of games run at 60fps then.
I'm still waiting for that N64 60fps list by you.
Here's mine:
Dark Rift
F-Zero X
Yoshi's Story
Mischief Makers
Killer Instinct Gold
Mortal Kombat 4
Mortal Kombat Trilogy
Smash Bros
Rakuga Kids
Pokémon Puzzle League
NBA Hangtime
And some Japanese or other 2D games i don't remember/know about. So not only 5 games. Stop getting your information from Games Sack.
Last edited:
cireza
Member
To be frank, I think his statement is simple, factual and can be easily observed. And the spin would rather be your entire post, trying to paint in a good light the fact that N64 had a handful of 60fps games only.
Seider
Member
Games running 99.9% time at 60 fps are 60 fps games.
Games like Tekken 1,2,,3 Dead or Alive, Thunderforce V, Einhander, Philosoma, Rtype Delta, Last Bronx, Bloody Roar, Radiant Silvergun, Virtua Fighter 2, etc ,etc ,etc are 60 fps games. In 1998 and today.
Last edited:
Seider
Member
Mischief Makers - Wikipedia
"It is the first 2D side-scrolling game for the Nintendo 64"
Yoshi's Story - Wikipedia
"the game features vivid pre-rendered 3D graphics"
Mortal Kombat Trilogy is a 2D game
NBA Hangtime uses Sprites as its a 2D game
And so on...
There are only 5 3D 60 fps games on Nintendo 64.
There are others games running at 60 fps like The New Tetris. But its a 2D game.
Romulus
Member
These are mostly simpler, safer bets, but yeah you don't know that, not in the 90s lol. Of course some were, but the vast majority would not be considered a consistent 60fps. Slowdown was prevalent and a buzzword in those days for a damn good reason. Effects were heavy, and they had no one to call them out on it like today. I don't call them 60fps unless I know they are, they targeted 60fps.
Last edited: