Support NeoGAF

[Variahunter]

The music in this game… it's lovely!

And the animation is too, of course.
Anyone here played it? I remember reading reviews of it at the time, but it was Japanese only and clearly not aimed at the western market, so it scored pretty poorly. Being 2D didn't do it any favors too, of course,

I didn't play it so I wouldn't know, plus honestly it's not my cup of tea as a genre. Though I loved PAC MAN 2 on SNES.

 

[Generic]

PS1/N64/Saturn 3D graphics all looked painful.

Good thing nowadays we have emulators to smooth them.

 

[Midway-AGNC-]

The same thing could be said about Shadow of the Colussus. That game did crazy stuff on the PS2, and during some battles the frame rate dropped to what felt like (and possibly was) single digits at times.
Yet that game rarely receives the same amount of criticism for that… I can't quite put my finger on what the reason could be, though

I completely agree — your Shadow of the Colossus example is spot on. It really shows how pointless and inconsistent it is to dismiss a game based purely on framerate issues. When a title is pushing the limits of its hardware to deliver something ambitious and technically groundbreaking, some performance trade-offs are inevitable. That's not a flaw — it's a sign of innovation.

GTA III is another perfect case: widely regarded as one of the most influential games ever made, yet it constantly dropped frames, especially during heavy action or driving sequences. Still, no one seriously claims it's a bad game because of that. It's the same story — people selectively criticize framerate when it suits their biases. In the end, that kind of argument says more about fanboyism and insecurity than about the actual quality or importance of the game.

Why make a game that can't even theoretically run smoothly?
To show off your fake ambitions?

First and foremost, a good game should play well.

As for Perfect Dark itself - gameplay-wise it's a piece of shit even at 1080@60. It's much worse than Medal of Honor or Syphon Filter on the PSX.

That argument really oversimplifies how game development — especially in the late '90s and early 2000s — actually worked. Practically every ambitious title that tried to push hardware boundaries faced performance trade-offs. On the PS1, for example, Metal Gear Solid, Tomb Raider III, and Syphon Filter all had noticeable framerate dips. The N64 wasn't any different — GoldenEye 007, Banjo-Tooie, and even The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask ran at very unstable frame rates when things got intense. And let's not even start with the Saturn, where games like Panzer Dragoon Saga and Virtua Fighter 2 pushed the console far beyond what it was comfortable handling.

When you move to the next generation, that didn't suddenly change. On the PS2, Shadow of the Colossus, Gran Turismo 4, and Silent Hill 3 all had performance dips. On the original Xbox, Knights of the Old Republic and Morrowind often struggled with framerate stability. Even the GameCube, famous for its optimization, saw drops in games like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime 2. And looking further ahead, titles like The Last Guardian, Elden Ring, Cyberpunk 2077, and Tears of the Kingdom all have performance fluctuations despite being visually stunning.

That's because developers pushing for technical or artistic breakthroughs are always testing the hardware's absolute limits — and when you do that, the framerate will inevitably take a hit. But that doesn't make the graphics bad; quite the opposite, it usually means the game is doing something visually ambitious for its time.

So I challenge you: go into any thread discussing "best graphics on PS2" and say Shadow of the Colossus has bad graphics because of its framerate drops — and see how quickly everyone laughs you out of the room.

Indeed. A shame about the missing music, but an otherwise awesome port. Nightmare mode was great, and a good challenge after playing countless times beforehand on PS1.

N64 version looks like shit, imo. I have the PS1, DC, GC, and N64 ports and they're regularly connected to my JVC broadcast monitor. Even on a CRT, the background reduction on N64 is massively noticeable. Worst version by a long shot. The Dolby Pro Logic sound is also bollocks. It's still compressed and sounds worse. The again, the only port that had comparable sound to the PS1 original was GC. Dreamcast was only slightly more compressed. Nowhere near as bad as N64 sound.

That said. Still impressive that they got the game onto a cartridge. The blame is Nintendo for not adopting CDs. N64 would have probably had Final Fantasy ports if it weren't for that stupid design decision. Anything that had pre-rendered backgrounds, the machine was fucked and would have to compromise.

That argument completely misses the point. Resident Evil 2 was a PS1 game at its core — pre-rendered visuals, CD audio, FMVs — and the N64 port wasn't a simple copy-paste job; it was a re-engineering miracle. Fitting two full discs of content with all voice acting and cinematics into a 64MB cartridge was one of the most technically impressive feats of that generation.

And if we look at other multiplatform titles, the idea that the N64 "couldn't handle" games well is just nonsense. Rayman 2: The Great Escape on PS1, entire levels were removed, visuals were stripped down, and many 3D details were lost. The N64 version, by contrast, offered the full experience with smoother gameplay, richer lighting, and higher-quality models. It's night and day when you compare the two side by side. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater trilogy also perform far better on N64, with sharper textures, faster loading, and more stable frame rates than the PS1 ports.

Then there are games originally built for N64 hardware that suffered heavily when ported to the PS1 — Mission: Impossible is the perfect case. Developed first for N64, its PlayStation version is a mess: reduced draw distance, downgraded effects, worse controls, and lower frame rates. Another example is Shadow Man. The PS1 version was heavily downgraded — lower-resolution textures, constant loading screens, poor draw distance, and framerates that often dropped into single digits. Meanwhile, the N64 version kept most of the map intact, offered far better performance, and even maintained the same cutscenes and overall atmosphere. It's a great example of how the PlayStation simply couldn't keep up with a game originally built around more advanced or flexible hardware like the N64.

So yeah, dismissing Resident Evil 2 on N64 because it doesn't look identical to the PS1 version is kind of hilarious. That's like saying Shadow of the Colossus has "bad graphics" because the framerate dips — you're completely missing the point (and the genius) behind it. It's the same as claiming the Street Fighter II versions on Super Nintendo are "bad" just because they had to make cuts to fit properly on a cartridge. Resident Evil 2 N64 isn't some "worst version" — it's a technical miracle, a jaw-dropping piece of engineering that managed to cram two full CD-ROMs of data onto a single cartridge. Honestly, calling that a downgrade is like watching someone climb Everest without oxygen and complaining they didn't do it fast enough.

Wasn't there recently a similar thread about N64 visuals.

N64 graphics still look gorgeous almost 30 years later

Why have another thread about the exact same discussion, a few weeks later...?

Don't participate then, nobody's twisting your arm to be here. If you're that bothered, just scroll past instead of whining — better than flooding the thread with your backseat, self-righteous hot takes.

 

[Romulus]

Shadow of the Colossus is hilariously basic and mundane. Ride a horse and run around in the middle of barren nowhere to spot a docile colossus, climb it, poke it in its marked weak point until it goes down, and proceed to do it again. Meanwhile, in God of War II you could have an epic battle with the Colossus of Rhodes.

And you wonder why you get laughed out of these threads by people who aren't even nintendo fanboys. This point is silly.

 

[Romulus]

You think the 2D visuals (not gameplay) in Yoshi's Story are trash?

Dunno man... I don't think this game looks any worse than any of the Saturn's "high level" ( ) 2D graphics games.

I mean, the lighting and reflections in some instances look even better?

Don't remember this but I'm actually surprised by it. N64 was a good 2d machine it seems. This thread is a learning experience.

 

[lestar]

Neon Genesis Evangelion, the 3D models are early DC quality