Why you should buy a N64, and ignore everything else
Johnson
I have a N64 and a PSX, and that Jesus H Christ guy was a loser from hell,
but I have to agree with one thing he said. With Intel's MMX technology
and the upcoming Pentium II, the PC's have equaled if not surpassed the
gaming abilities of the PSX and Saturn, but the N64 remains the most
advanced gaming machine on earth. I just got a Dell Dimension with the 200
Pentim MMX processor, and the games on that blow away the same games on my
PSX.
SR Dominguez
Johnson (nos...@aol.com) wrote:
: I have a N64 and a PSX, and that Jesus H Christ guy was a loser from hell,
That doesn't change the fact that they haven't done anything impressive with
it yet! I have all three systems, and I have only Mario64 for the Nintendo,
and yes it is great and I love it, but the 3D is so sparse! It's the same
with Saddoes of the Empire - the only reason the N64's graphics get credit
is because of the custom chip that smooths the polygons off. When the gap
between 64 bit and 32 bit becomes as appreciable as the gap between 16 and
32 bit is now, THAT'S when I'll start taking ownership of my N64 seriously.
If I haven't already spend my money on Sega arcade games that is.
"I tower in the dark for your love." -Paul Crosby, c1995
GoD LtD
In article <01bc600a$aee03540$1f9b45cf@default>, Johnson
<nos...@aol.com> writes
>I have a N64 and a PSX, and that Jesus H Christ guy was a loser from hell,
>but I have to agree with one thing he said. With Intel's MMX technology
>and the upcoming Pentium II, the PC's have equaled if not surpassed the
>gaming abilities of the PSX and Saturn, but the N64 remains the most
>advanced gaming machine on earth. I just got a Dell Dimension with the 200
>Pentim MMX processor, and the games on that blow away the same games on my
>PSX.
>
Hmm A Dell Dimension, and where did you buy that from then eh & cost ?
--
GoD LtD - Let there be light, NO No no not a solar powered Torch!!!!
Andrew Donovan
In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.97051...@theflame.hilltop.com>,
Marc Morrisette <dra...@theflame.hilltop.com> wrote:
> Actually, the PC's have always been way ahead of the consoles. Don't get
> me wrong, I love my Saturn, but I haven't seen a console yet that can do
> Doom as well as my old 486 DX4-100 (Intel) could... The main difference
> is in the type of games that are available. The console games tend to be
> more "arcade-ized" than the PC games. Mechwarrior II is a decent game on
> the Saturn, but it doesn't even compare to the PC version. You have to
> realize that one of the main differences is mass storage and memory. PC's
> usually have mass storage (hard drives), tons of RAM (usually at least
> 16MB now compared to the Saturn's 2MB), much better video (2MB at the bare
> minimum compared to 1.5MB for the Saturn). There's just no way a console
> could possibly keep up with this and still be even remotely affordable.
> Still, I doubt we'll ever see RPG's like Lunar or shooters like Panzer
> Dragoon II on the PC. It's not that the PC couldn't do it, there just
> isn't very much demand for games like that on PC's...
I too felt that PCs offered highter quality gaming until I got a Nintendo
64. Doom64 is faster, smoother, higher detail than I have ever seen on a
computer. I'm sure computers will catch up, but right now, in my opinion,
the N64 is the most powerful gaming platform. Now if they can just make
some games for it, I'll be set.
Andrwe
Marc Morrisette
On Thu, 15 May 1997, GoD LtD wrote:
> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 00:17:46 +0100
> From: GoD LtD <GoD...@mcp1.demon.co.uk>
> Newsgroups: alt.games.video.nintendo-64, alt.games.video.sega-saturn,
> alt.games.video.sony-playstation, rec.games.video.nintendo,
> rec.games.video.sega, rec.games.video.sony
> Subject: Re: Why you should buy a N64, and ignore everything else
Ed Giangrande
>I too felt that PCs offered highter quality gaming until I got a
Nintendo
>64. Doom64 is faster, smoother, higher detail than I have ever seen on
a
>computer. I'm sure computers will catch up, but right now, in my
opinion,
>the N64 is the most powerful gaming platform. Now if they can just
make
>some games for it, I'll be set.
>
Granted.. but think of when Doom 2 came out? When did Doom 64 come out?
If ID were to make Doom again on the PC, using one of the new engines
that exist today... Quake, Unreal, etc... are all much better
comparisons... have you seen Quake on a 3DFX? granted the 3dfx alone
costs what, almost double what a N64 costs, but as far as i know, it is
better... Heck Quake on my PC looks great, and i highly doubt I'll see
a reasonable version of Red Alert, Warcraft, CIV, Diablo, Tie V X...
etc on any system... mainly due to the multiplayer stuff though.. I'd
kinda like to see N64 do Diablo... but will it need a 64DD??? is taht
really worth it either?There are still some thinsg a PC offers that
consoles don't... both graphically and network wise.....
>Andrwe
Rick Florey
tig...@ix.netcom.com(Ed Giangrande) wrote:
Wellll, it's not multiplayer, but Saturn Command & Conquer is a
reasonable port of one of my fave PC games. As I'm sure you know,
Saturn will be getting multiplayer games via its Netlink, and while
I'm certain it won't match the PC experience, it's still a progressive
step forward.
Just my .02
Rick Florey
>>Andrwe
Ed Giangrande
In <5ll7aq$o...@service-2.agate.net> over...@overkill.sdi.agate.net
oh yeah, i'm sure... I just remember that if You bought a saturn in May
1995 or even Sept 1995 and then bought a second controller and a
Netlink, etc.. you have really had your investment drop in value by
over $250... If you bought a certian type of Pentium 100 computer (I
figure that is still a decent enough PC to play just about any current
game) in May 1995, obviously the drop off in price would be much
higher... I mean at least I get to play C&C/ Red alert with 8 people on
a much MUCH faster IPX network.. sure, The biggest problem with the PC
is price... But even Netlink is only a small taste of a much bigger
picture....
both PC and consoles have their advantages and disadvantages.. PC's
have the ever presenmt problem with price.. who knows... Maybe PCs will
one day drop in price low enough so that one may only need to pay $800
for a PC that plays all of the current top games (which I would wager
is about true for today since I'd bet a Pentium 166 built yourself may
only cost that now or possible even much less if you kept an existing
monitor, etc..) maybe soon that will drop to $700 or even $600.. Of
course consoles i bet will always hover around that $99-$199 price
range, but the closer they get, I guess the more likely it is that I'll
stick to PCs more often than not...
>
>
>
Fre@k!
In article <andrew-1605...@news.sover.net>, and...@vermontel.com
0+> In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.97051...@theflame.hilltop.com>,
0+> Marc Morrisette <dra...@theflame.hilltop.com> wrote:
0+> PC's
0+> > usually have mass storage (hard drives), tons of RAM (usually at least
0+> > 16MB now compared to the Saturn's 2MB), much better video (2MB at the bare
0+> > minimum compared to 1.5MB for the Saturn). There's just no way a console
0+> > could possibly keep up with this and still be even remotely affordable.
^^^^^^^^^^
Key word: AFFORDABLE
Now do people get it? -- i.e. More fun for your $$$$.
Fre@k!
Phil Donate
Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with the
power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
now...
Ed Giangrande <tig...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5li4ae$g...@sjx-ixn9.ix.netcom.com>...
>
> >I too felt that PCs offered highter quality gaming until I got a
> Nintendo
> >64. Doom64 is faster, smoother, higher detail than I have ever seen on
> a
> >computer. I'm sure computers will catch up, but right now, in my
> opinion,
> >the N64 is the most powerful gaming platform. Now if they can just
> make
> >some games for it, I'll be set.
> >
>
> Granted.. but think of when Doom 2 came out? When did Doom 64 come out?
> If ID were to make Doom again on the PC, using one of the new engines
> that exist today... Quake, Unreal, etc... are all much better
> comparisons... have you seen Quake on a 3DFX? granted the 3dfx alone
> costs what, almost double what a N64 costs, but as far as i know, it is
> better... Heck Quake on my PC looks great, and i highly doubt I'll see
> a reasonable version of Red Alert, Warcraft, CIV, Diablo, Tie V X...
> etc on any system... mainly due to the multiplayer stuff though.. I'd
> kinda like to see N64 do Diablo... but will it need a 64DD??? is taht
> really worth it either?There are still some thinsg a PC offers that
> consoles don't... both graphically and network wise.....
>
> >Andrwe
>
>
Joe Ottoson
In article <01bc67a6$3f0a4140$5f67adce@phillipd>, "Phil Donate"
<don...@mdn.net> wrote:
> Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with the
> power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
> now...
>
You're right. MDK, Enhanced Tomb Raider show nothing the N64 can't do.
That is, if the N64 was faster and had more storage... ;-)
Always remember,
Real faith is objective
Sony Rules
AIR_TIME wrote:
>
> Dude are you on crack?
> Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
>
> Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster 3d.......You
> can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is not
> even 1/3 that much power.. ...
This guy's a moron.
Ed Giangrande
In <01bc67a6$3f0a4140$5f67adce@phillipd> "Phil Donate" <don...@mdn.net>
writes:
>Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with
the
>power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but
for
>now...
That isn't to say it isn't possible on a computer right now... and
actually a game like Tomb Raider/Quake on a 3DFX card does look
substancially better than without one... almost to the point where I'd
say the two are very close (N64 and PC)... However, looking at a game
like X-wing V Tie and the graphics of the ships and I see a lot of
detail comparitivly to Shadows of the empire (obviously X V T doesn't
need to do anything else besides flight sim)... however, still many
felt Xv T didn't do enough graphically and could have been much
better..
I personally think that there are a lot of PC games that on the right
machine would be on the same level as a N64 game (with usage of some of
the top graphics cards).. however that same machine as a computer will
also run you well into the $1000 range...
AIR_TIME
Dude are you on crack?
Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster 3d.......You
can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is not
even 1/3 that much power.. ...
Phil Donate <don...@mdn.net> wrote in article
<01bc67a6$3f0a4140$5f67adce@phillipd>...
> Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with
the
> power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
> now...
>
AIR_TIME
You're the moron....
Tell me how a N64 is more powerfull than a Pentium II MMX.
Whats the N64 have? 2mb ram?.....wooo.....processor?...ain't shit.....to a
pentium II.
3d?.....no way it can beat POD, or Quake on a MMX computer with A Monster
3d card.
Sony Rules <P...@rules.com> wrote in article <33861B...@rules.com>...
> AIR_TIME wrote:
> >
> > Dude are you on crack?
> > Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
> >
> > Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
> > Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster
3d.......You
> > can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is
not
> > even 1/3 that much power.. ...
>
Ed Giangrande
In <33861B...@rules.com> Sony Rules <P...@rules.com> writes:
>
>AIR_TIME wrote:
>>
>> Dude are you on crack?
>> Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
>>
>> Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
>> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster
3d.......You
>> can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is
not
>> even 1/3 that much power.. ...
>
>This guy's a moron.
even if it isn't more powerful.. it is a heck of a lot less money... To
get a graphics card alone that matches the N64 would cost at least $200
if not $300.. N64 is $149, and hopefully it will drop to $99... though
unlikely...
Ed Giangrande
In <01bc67d9$67df8fc0$4c295dcf@jackallt> "AIR_TIME"
<AIR_...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
>You're the moron....
>
>Tell me how a N64 is more powerfull than a Pentium II MMX.
>Whats the N64 have? 2mb ram?.....wooo.....processor?...ain't
shit.....to a
>pentium II.
>3d?.....no way it can beat POD, or Quake on a MMX computer with A
Monster
>3d card.
well it I think all comes down to price IMOP.. i love my PC, but for
$149, the N64 is still a great deal less money (except you pay $70 for
games.. and there are very few out there)... A good Pentium 2 PC with
MMX will still run you $1500+ even if you put it together yourself.. I
saw a 300MHz PII for $3700... is that more powerful, yes. but you could
also buy a N64 and every game and still not be within $2700 of getting
to the cost of that PC... Sure, the N64 ain't cheap either.. and That's
why i don't have one.. and a PC can be used for much more than games..
But I don't know many people who buy PCs JUST for gaming.. it just
isn't practical... unless of course you are on an IPX network or
something similar and are able to play 4, 8, and 16 player multiplayer
games like Diablo, Atomic Bomberman, Red alert, Tie v X-Wing, and
Quake, just to name a few... If that is the case, get a PC... you'll
play your Pc so much your eyes will turn red.. :) or at least mine
did.. Multi-player and speed in multiplayer games with IPX etc, are one
big BIG advantage PCs have in gaming... Multi-player is always the way
to go... since CPU opponents are no match most of the time for real
HUMAN interaction, skills, and sometimes the occational 'what the hell
is he trying to do?'..
Mark Rathwell
Distribution:
: Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
Eh ... my 386DX40 can't keep up with my Jaguar, let alone an N64.
If you're referring to newer PCs like the Pentium 166 and up, I should
hope they clobber the N64 'cause they cost a fortune.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Rathwell
E_Mail: mrat...@uoguelph.ca
Web Page: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~mrathwel
Now approaching 5000 visitors: The Incredible Hulk Television Series Page!
AIR_TIME
Yes I'm referring to a Pentium 166mhz and above...
Not to say that my Pentium 100 is not pretty damn powerfull...for some
games its better than the playstation...
But I'm getting a Pentium II 266mhz here pretty soon...
Mark Rathwell <mrat...@uoguelph.ca> wrote in article
<5m5s2u$d...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>...
D. B. Brown
Phil Donate wrote:
>
> Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with the
> power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
> now...
Not to flame... but seriously, seriously man... have you played
GLQuake? I mean, 640x480, 30+ fps, real-time lightsourcing,
full texture maps, up to 32 players simultaneously over the
net, CD sound (by Trent Reznor)...
I mean, on my monitor it looks less pixelated than N64 games on a
TV...
Seriously, have you played GLQuake on a decent system?
--
+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
|Do you ever get the feeling that the story's|D.B. Brown |
|too damned real and in the present tense? |da...@bme1.image.uky.edu|
| -Ian Anderson | "..." |
+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
Nicholas Eales
> > Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with
the
> > power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
> > now...
> Not to flame... but seriously, seriously man... have you played
> GLQuake? I mean, 640x480, 30+ fps, real-time lightsourcing,
> full texture maps, up to 32 players simultaneously over the
> net, CD sound (by Trent Reznor)...
I've got a p166 mmx with Monster3d and 32mb ram .. And i'm absolutely
hooked on GLquake .. but to be fair the N64 does look a lot better than
GLquake, the problem with GLquake is that it's just a beta and has got MANY
bugs .. And i HATE the loading times, i'm waiting for ever for the game to
render in the whole level .. And you try playing 32 players at once with a
28k8 over the net, it looks like you've got a PSX framerate ..
> I mean, on my monitor it looks less pixelated than N64 games on a
> TV...
Windows looks less pixelated on a monitor than a N64, the problem is that a
TV is always going to be crap compared to a monitor ..
> Seriously, have you played GLQuake on a decent system?
I repeat : YES !
Signed,
--=[ Kiwi ]=--
Jimmie Jehl
Sony Rules <P...@rules.com> wrote:
>AIR_TIME wrote:
>>
>> Dude are you on crack?
>> Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
>>
>> Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
>> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster 3d.......You
>> can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is not
>> even 1/3 that much power.. ...
>
>This guy's a moron.
You're the moron. I don't care what kind of computer you have, but if
you stick in a monster 3d card in it, it beats the hell out of a N64.
Both 3d cards and N64's cost the same, but when you add in the price
of the games on top of the graphical power of a 3d card, the n64 can't
compare.
Jimmie
Joseph Smith
The n64 *can* compare to computers that are up to 200mhz. With a computer
the memory and power is rationed out between dozens of continually running
applications. Even though the n64 runs at 94 mhz and 4 megabytes of ram it
can compare to a pentium 200mhz 64megabytes of ram! See, with the n64
everything is straight from the cartridge to your screen. -=Joe=-
Jimmie Jehl wrote in article <3388a839...@news.primenet.com>...
VooDoo
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6C97.32C40560
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ed Giangrande <tig...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5m5hpm$i...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>...
> In <33861B...@rules.com> Sony Rules <P...@rules.com> writes:
> >
> >AIR_TIME wrote:
> >>
> >> Dude are you on crack?
> >> Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
> >>
> >> Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
> >> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster
> 3d.......You
> >> can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is
> not
> >> even 1/3 that much power.. ...
> >
> >This guy's a moron.
>
>
> even if it isn't more powerful.. it is a heck of a lot less money... To
> get a graphics card alone that matches the N64 would cost at least $200
> if not $300.. N64 is $149, and hopefully it will drop to $99... though
> unlikely...
>
true!
but in australia it is $399
and anyway
why keep buying new Consoles when YOU can just upgrade :o)
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6C97.32C40560
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial"><br><br><br><br>Ed Giangrande <<font =
color=3D"#0000EE"><u>tig...@ix.netcom.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">> wrote in article <<font =
color=3D"#0000EE"><u>5m5hpm$i...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> In <<font =
color=3D"#0000EE"><u>33861B...@rules.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">> Sony Rules <<font =
color=3D"#0000EE"><u>P...@rules.com</u><font color=3D"#000000">> =
writes: <br>> ><br>> >AIR_TIME wrote:<br>> >> =
<br>> >> Dude are you on crack?<br>> >> Almost every =
PC whoops a N64's ass.<br>> >> <br>> >> Im getting a =
new computer here pretty soon.<br>> >> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb =
Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster<br>> 3d.......You<br>> >> =
can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 =
is<br>> not<br>> >> even 1/3 that much power.. ...<br>> =
><br>> >This guy's a moron.<br>> <br>> <br>> even if =
it isn't more powerful.. it is a heck of a lot less money... To<br>> =
get a graphics card alone that matches the N64 would cost at least =
$200<br>> if not $300.. N64 is $149, and hopefully it will drop to =
$99... though<br>> unlikely...<br>> <br>true!<br>but in australia =
it is $399<br>and anyway<br>why keep buying new Consoles when YOU can =
just upgrade :o)</p>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></body></h=
tml>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6C97.32C40560--
bem
Ed Giangrande <tig...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5m5hpm$i...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>...
> In <33861B...@rules.com> Sony Rules <P...@rules.com> writes:
> >
> >AIR_TIME wrote:
> >>
> >> Dude are you on crack?
> >> Almost every PC whoops a N64's ass.
> >>
> >> Im getting a new computer here pretty soon.
> >> Pentium II 266mhz,, 64mb Ram, Matrox Millenium 4mb, Monster
> 3d.......You
> >> can't tell me that the N64 is more powerfull than that....the N64 is
> not
> >> even 1/3 that much power.. ...
> >
> >This guy's a moron.
but in australia it is $399
and anyway
why keep buying new Consoles when YOU can just upgrade :o)
Have You really Used a computer or are you caught up in the hipe of Intels
New PentiumII 266.First of all there is no way that you can say that a
nintendo 64 is only 1/3rd the power of any computer since pentiums are not
true 64 bit machines and neither are pentiumII's, Have you ever wondered
why intel are already designing their merc processor where it will be a
true 64 bit processor. Secondly Have you seen any speed specs of the N64 to
compare it to a PC? I don't think so! And thirdly show me a game on the pc
that can even come close to the graphics detail of a game such as Turok. I
have been in the computer scene for a long time and there is no game that
even comes close to it. So the only way that you can compair the power Of
the N64 to a PC is by the way that Each system runs its programs and in
this respect that the N64 wins hands down every time.
ps Do u own a N64 system or even played with one :).
----------
Joe Ottoson
In article <01bc6f08$65d1c8c0$50610ccb@vortex>, "bem" <b...@zip.com.au> wrote:
>Secondly Have you seen any speed specs of the N64 to
> compare it to a PC?
If you compare 3Dfx Tomb Raider against M64, M64 suffers from a much lower
res, a 10fps lower frame rate, and it has to rely on less complex
texturemapping and polygon construction.
For a system that's supposed to blow away the competition on all fronts,
the N64 falls flat against a PC (anyone who says otherwise is simply
deluding themselves.)
I don't think so! And thirdly show me a game on the pc
> that can even come close to the graphics detail of a game such as Turok.
How about Turok 2? Quake? MDK? I could shame you with a new title every
day for the rest of the month if you really cared.
Michael Montague
>power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
>now...
>
You obviously don't have a very good computer.
- Mike
--
Michael Montague (mi...@nugent.net)
IRC: Tarix (#amnin, Efnet)
--
Mark D. Ormond
On Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:48:44 GMT, deh...@worldonline.nl (Michel de
Heer) wrote:
>On Sat, 24 May 1997 14:58:14 -0400, "D. B. Brown"
><da...@bme1.image.uky.edu> wrote:
>
>>Phil Donate wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, you won't find any computer game today that can compare with the
>>> power of the N64. Of course, this will change within the year, but for
>>> now...
>>
>>Not to flame... but seriously, seriously man... have you played
>>GLQuake? I mean, 640x480, 30+ fps, real-time lightsourcing,
>>full texture maps, up to 32 players simultaneously over the
>>net, CD sound (by Trent Reznor)...
>>
>>I mean, on my monitor it looks less pixelated than N64 games on a
>>TV...
>>
>>Seriously, have you played GLQuake on a decent system?
>>
>>--
>
>Just wait for Quake on the N64. It will look better then the GL
>version. Besides that, to play the GL version you'll need a videocard
>which is more expensive than a N64.
>
>Regards,
>Michel.
>
It can't look better, TV's don't have the resolution that monitors do.
(BTW GLQuake is INCREDIBLE on a 200MMX, 64Meg Ram, Monster 3d Video
Card.)
Later,
dabone
Jesse Dorland
>It can't look better, TV's don't have the resolution that monitors do.
>(BTW GLQuake is INCREDIBLE on a 200MMX, 64Meg Ram, Monster 3d Video
>Card.)
No, it couldn't go any higher than 640x480 on the N64. But if Midway managed
to tweak the game enough to get it running in high res, the myriad graphical
features of the Nintendo 64 could take over and create a game that looks just
as impressive as GLQuake running at 640x480.
It has long been my opinion that sitting back in a comfy chair and playing a
game on a 27-inch television set with SRS is a superior experience to being
hunched over a desk, playing a game on a 15-inch screen with a tinny speaker
at either side (that is not to say that better PC sound systems and larger
monitors do not exist; they're just a wee bit out of my price range). I can
live with interlacing and a resolution limit if it means that I get to play
games on a large screen with sound that fills the room. But that's just my
opinion; there are a lot people who prefer the sharper image of PC monitors.
-Jesse
>
>
>Later,
>dabone
>
=========================================================
There are two major products that come out of Berkeley:
LSD & UNIX. We do not believe this to be a coincidence.
=========================================================
Michel de Heer
Delmoi
Actualy the n64 is 99Mhz, but that's not the point. the kind of video
performance
that you get with the n64 is far beond anything that PC can do now, but
I'm not
shure that will be true for much longer, the PC was much more powerfull
than the
NES when the SNES came out, and it was much more powerfull than the
16-bit
systems when the Psx and Saturn came out. Even if you compare the non
exselerated
version of Tomb Rader on the PSX to the PC, the PC kicks it's ass! I
think that
the PC will be more powerfull interms of graphics most of the time, with
a short
amount of time with each new generation of Vidgame Systems where it
lags.
TRANTER JOHN H wrote:
> The below is absolutely correct. The reason is dedicated hardware
> onboard
> the N64 (and other video game systems). Computers have always lagged
> behind
> the game systems in response and gameplay interface, and always will.
> The
> PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video platform
> (ProjectX?)
> will be the new gaming standard. 64MHz N64 versus a 233MHz PC is a
> misleading
> comparison--the PC needs to use all of the horsepower to translate all
> the
> toolbox routines _via_software(ouch)_ before you see them on your
> screen.
>
> John Tranter
> Univ. of Kansas
> jtra...@falcon.cc.ukans.edu
>
> : >
> : >--
Charles Miller Jr.
> The below is absolutely correct.
Are you nuts?
> The reason is dedicated hardware onboard
> the N64 (and other video game systems). Computers have always lagged
behind
> the game systems in response and gameplay interface, and always will.
Not really. In fact a GL Board can toast an N64 in so many ways. The
"interface" is BS. A digital interface, like a keyboard, has a MUCH FASTER
response time than the N64. If you soly mean the "game interface" that is
the game, not the computer.
> The
> PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video platform
(ProjectX?)
> will be the new gaming standard.
There will never be a "gaming standard."
> 64MHz N64 versus a 233MHz PC is a misleading
> comparison--the PC needs to use all of the horsepower to translate all
the
> toolbox routines _via_software(ouch)_ before you see them on your screen.
Not really. In fact the PC with a GL board is not that much different. It
has seperate dedicated processors for graphics and sound, just as the N64.
The main processors do much of the same things as far as bus and mem
control, when needed, and game control. In fact, memory latency is better
on the PC. With dedicated sound and graphics the cpu is NOT using all of
the horsepower to translate all the toolbox routines via software. Do you
even know what he ment by GL Quake?
Fact is if the N64 version of Quake is better then it is because they have
worked on it and done many new things, in software, or utilized more
features than they did in the GL Quake version. This is in no way a
testiment to the N64 hardware being better than a GL PC with a Sound
card... of which the GL Board costs much more than the N64 and the Sound
card too. The N64 is nowhere as good as a PC with a bad ass GL board and
Sound card. In fact, the N64 will run Quake in close to 320X240. This is
hardly impressive compared to the GL Quake in 1200X1024 and the such.
Jesse Dorland
Delmoi <del...@ames.net> wrote:
>Actualy the n64 is 99Mhz, but that's not the point. the kind of video
<nitpick> Actually, the N64 is 94MHz :-) </nitpick>
-Jesse
ttammi
deh...@worldonline.nl (Michel de Heer) wrote:
>Just wait for Quake on the N64. It will look better then the GL
>version.
But when Quake64 is out, PC probably already has Hexen2, Quake 2 and
Unreal out, which look even better. Plus, Quake64 won't run in as high
resolutions as glQuake does (640x480, 800x600), and it will probably
still be somewhat slower.
>Besides that, to play the GL version you'll need a videocard
>which is more expensive than a N64.
N64 costs $149. Flash3D with the 3Dfx chipset costs $149.
Is $149 "more expensive" than $149?
ttammi
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>No, it couldn't go any higher than 640x480 on the N64. But if Midway
>managed to tweak the game enough to get it running in high res, the
>myriad graphical features of the Nintendo 64
>could take over and create a game that looks just as impressive as
>GLQuake running at 640x480.
But it would probably run considerably slower.
>It has long been my opinion that sitting back in a comfy chair and
>playing a game on a 27-inch television set with SRS is a superior
>experience to being hunched over a desk, playing a game on a 15-inch
Not for a game like Quake, which you really want to play with a
mouse+keyboard combination. You need a desk for that. A couch is more
suited for Mario etc., which only need one tiny game pad for good
control.
>I can live with interlacing and a resolution limit if it means that I
>get to play games on a large screen with sound that fills the room.
>But that's just my opinion; there are a lot people who prefer the
>sharper image of PC monitors.
Not only that, but nowadays you can connect PCs to TV systems as well.
They are not restricted to hires monitors only.
Daniel Nelson
N64 wont be able to have all the Quake levels or the online aspect which
made Quake so popular. For that reason consoles suck! I love Quake for
the simple fact i can get online and blow the hell out of people I dont
even know and listen to them bitch! N64 will have two maybe three levels
due to the cart system ( which sucks) So to hell with you N64
worshipers! GLQuake will still rule over N64 any day you whimp!
Dan
Wee Jeffrey
On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:06:08 +0300, ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote:
>Not for a game like Quake, which you really want to play with a
>mouse+keyboard combination. You need a desk for that. A couch is more
>suited for Mario etc., which only need one tiny game pad for good
>control.
I dunno about this. The control system for Turok is pretty good. I
can't wait for all the N64 style joypads to make it to the PC. A
similar setup to Turok would rock for Quake.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wee Jeffrey
weeje...@enterprise.net
http://homepages.enterprise.net/weejeffrey/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Dorland
Vince Chan <tro...@netcom.ca> wrote:
>Jesse Dorland wrote:
>>
>> Delmoi <del...@ames.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Actualy the n64 is 99Mhz, but that's not the point. the kind of video
>>
>> <nitpick> Actually, the N64 is 94MHz :-) </nitpick>
>
>_Actually_, it's 93.75 MHz. (How's that for nit picking? =)
Urgghhh.... you win. :-)
Emerson Mounger
> deh...@worldonline.nl (Michel de Heer) wrote:
>
> >Just wait for Quake on the N64. It will look better then the GL
> >version.
>
> But when Quake64 is out, PC probably already has Hexen2, Quake 2 and
> Unreal out, which look even better. Plus, Quake64 won't run in as high
> resolutions as glQuake does (640x480, 800x600), and it will probably
> still be somewhat slower.
>
> >Besides that, to play the GL version you'll need a videocard
> >which is more expensive than a N64.
>
> N64 costs $149. Flash3D with the 3Dfx chipset costs $149.
> Is $149 "more expensive" than $149?
It is when you have already forked over $2000 for a computer.
nir...@cybcon.com
Vince Chan wrote:
>
> Jesse Dorland wrote:
> >
> > Delmoi <del...@ames.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Actualy the n64 is 99Mhz, but that's not the point. the kind of video
> >
> > <nitpick> Actually, the N64 is 94MHz :-) </nitpick>
>
> _Actually_, it's 93.75 MHz. (How's that for nit picking? =)
*ACTUALLY* it's 93.7514239 MHz.
HAC
> The PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video platform
(ProjectX?)
> will be the new gaming standard.
Actually, a PC with a 3dfx Voodoo-based chipset will blow an N64 away
graphically.
HAC
> Fact is if the N64 version of Quake is better then it is because they
have
> worked on it and done many new things, in software, or utilized more
> features than they did in the GL Quake version.
Carmack et al. said that the N64 platform is the one gaming system that
will be able to do a DECENT job of QuakeGL.
I highly doubt the N64 version of Quake will look anywhere near as good as
QuakeGL on a P2 with a 3dfx board.
G.T. Hamilton
ttammi wrote:
> jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>
> >No, it couldn't go any higher than 640x480 on the N64. But if Midway
>
> >managed to tweak the game enough to get it running in high res, the
> >myriad graphical features of the Nintendo 64
> >could take over and create a game that looks just as impressive as
> >GLQuake running at 640x480.
>
> But it would probably run considerably slower.
>
Uh no. Every interface on the mainboard is running at 200mhz. HI rez
would do nothing but give---a few milli seconds of load time.--
__________________________________________
|"Music is the sound track of our lives."|
| Dick Clark/on American Bandstand |
|________________________________________|
|http://www.abraxis.com/ryougaecho/ranma |
|________________________________________|
| Colliding SYmphonies \ Space |
| Productions | for |
|______________________________/__Rent___|
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> Actually, a PC with a 3dfx Voodoo-based chipset will blow an N64 away
> graphically.
>
>
yeah, but a loaded comp with an accelerator is gonna be $2500+ and the N64
is $149...hmmm...
Nikolai Erochenkov
Delmoi wrote :
> Actualy the n64 is 99Mhz, but that's not the point. the kind of video
> performance that you get with the n64 is far beond anything that PC can
> do now,
??? ... Examples please. Video performance in Mario64/WaveRacer is worse
than that in Quake on a P5-166/16 system. How can you even compare those
huge blury textures on N64 with crystal-clear ones in PC's Quake in SVGA
mode ? OK, speed is approximately the same though ;-)
Probably those games mentioned above are a little bit outdated now and
there exist more superior ones. I do not know.
> I'm not shure that will be true for much longer, the PC was much more
> powerfull than the NES when the SNES came out, and it was much more
> powerfull than the 16-bit systems when the Psx and Saturn came out.
> Even if you compare the non exselerated version of Tomb Rader on the
> PSX to the PC, the PC kicks it's ass!
So what ? May be they wrote a 3d engine for a PC version in C ;-) Who
cares about bad programmers. Now there are tons of 3d games on PC of
a similar level :-(
> TRANTER JOHN H wrote :
> > The below is absolutely correct. The reason is dedicated hardware
> > onboard the N64 (and other video game systems). Computers have always
> > lagged behind the game systems in response and gameplay interface, and
> > always will. The PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video
> > platform (ProjectX?) will be the new gaming standard. 64MHz N64 versus
> > a 233MHz PC is a misleading comparison--the PC needs to use all of the
> > horsepower to translate all the toolbox routines _via_software(ouch)_
> > before you see them on your screen.
Who cares still this software translation works faster than hardware
one ? (hardware ... interesting word ;-) do you know what a microcode
is? have you programmed a CISC or any high level, say graphic, chip?)
Why to compare to P5-II/233 ??? Open your eyes and try simple P5-166
w/ 16 MB RAM. It is becoming as funny as stating that all TVs have 21
bits of colour depth ;-) Probably I will not write on this topic for
the same reason anymore :-)
WBR, Nikolai
Charles Miller Jr.
> It has long been my opinion that sitting back in a comfy chair and
playing a
> game on a 27-inch television set with SRS is a superior experience to
being
speaker
> at either side (that is not to say that better PC sound systems and
larger
can
> live with interlacing and a resolution limit if it means that I get to
play
> games on a large screen with sound that fills the room. But that's just
my
> opinion; there are a lot people who prefer the sharper image of PC
monitors.
Or scan convertors to play the games on a 50 inch screen with the sound
card, which in most current systems toasts the N64's, hooked into the
stereo... now, that is the way to go....
umli...@cc.umanitoba.ca
llipd> <33873A...@bme1.image.uky.edu> <5ncdnn$7qt$1...@neptune.worldonline.nl> <5nhpt2$d...@raven.cc.ukans.edu> <01bc756d$41cd7440$0264...@granite.mtco.com>
In <01bc756d$41cd7440$0264...@granite.mtco.com> "Charles Miller Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> writes:
>Not really. In fact a GL Board can toast an N64 in so many ways. The
>"interface" is BS. A digital interface, like a keyboard, has a MUCH FASTER
>response time than the N64. If you soly mean the "game interface" that is
>the game, not the computer.
Agree, the point is that N64 is a game machine while a PC is abstract
processing machine. Without any special help from dedicate 3D
accelerator and game input devices, PC will never match the performance
of a N64. MMX may change the story in the future but this will remain
truth for the next year or two. BTW, a GL Fire 3D accelerator may not
necessary "toasted" the N64 because N64 is power by a specially designed
MIPS workstation class CPU. The systme is tuned for 3D game playing!
Also for the price of a GL Fire, you can buy a half dozen of N64 consoles :)
For PC gaming purpose, 3Dfx is a much wiser and cheaper choice!
aC
>> The
>> PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video platform
>(ProjectX?)
>> will be the new gaming standard.
>There will never be a "gaming standard."
>> 64MHz N64 versus a 233MHz PC is a misleading
>> comparison--the PC needs to use all of the horsepower to translate all
>the
>> toolbox routines _via_software(ouch)_ before you see them on your screen.
>Not really. In fact the PC with a GL board is not that much different. It
>has seperate dedicated processors for graphics and sound, just as the N64.
>The main processors do much of the same things as far as bus and mem
>control, when needed, and game control. In fact, memory latency is better
>on the PC. With dedicated sound and graphics the cpu is NOT using all of
>the horsepower to translate all the toolbox routines via software. Do you
>even know what he ment by GL Quake?
>Fact is if the N64 version of Quake is better then it is because they have
>worked on it and done many new things, in software, or utilized more
>features than they did in the GL Quake version. This is in no way a
>testiment to the N64 hardware being better than a GL PC with a Sound
>card... of which the GL Board costs much more than the N64 and the Sound
>card too. The N64 is nowhere as good as a PC with a bad ass GL board and
>Sound card. In fact, the N64 will run Quake in close to 320X240. This is
>hardly impressive compared to the GL Quake in 1200X1024 and the such.
--
ttammi
weeje...@enterprise.net (Wee Jeffrey) wrote:
>>Not for a game like Quake, which you really want to play with a
>>mouse+keyboard combination. You need a desk for that. A couch is more
>I dunno about this. The control system for Turok is pretty good. I
>can't wait for all the N64 style joypads to make it to the PC. A
>similar setup to Turok would rock for Quake.
PCs already have digital gamepads and analog sticks, nothing new there.
As for using a gamepad/joystick for Quake, I recall id guys already
said that they added joystick support for Quake only to show that you
really want to play the game with a mouse+keyboard combination. ;-)
Analog stick and/or a digital pad simply cannot match the speed and
precision of the mouse/keyboard setup for a game like Quake.
K...@ja.co
I reckon it's the PC (with a 3D accelrator, check GlQuake), then the
N64, then Playstation and finally the Sturn. Anyone read about the
Saturn 2? it's going to use a PC 3D accelerator chip! the PowerVR
chip, or more likely the 3DFX chip! consoles can't take the pain.
Kw@ja
K...@ja.com
SOS everyone, really sos, don't get too worked up. Anyway, I might as
well say that the N64 is an excellent machine, but a PC with a Monster
3D or Apocalypse 3Dx is better. Firstly, with a 3Dx, you can go up to
1024x768 in 24 bit colour, instead of snidey 640x480 on N64. Try
GlQuake witha 3Dx when the drivers come out, cos the speed and detail
will twat the N64. The N64 has that tri-linear texture mapping
bollocks, it looks good, but still only just better than bi-linear. OH
NO!, the N64 in 64-bit, wow. Well all PC gaming/graphics cards are 64
bit too, and a few are 128 bit, ha. The good thing about an N64 is the
games, luckily they are about 6 megs. big and can be copied to a PC,
and played using an emulator, or soon a D3D N64 emulator (of someone
makes it). The only problem is the the N64 costs just a bit more than
a 3D accelerator, so it's about £1500 cheaper, but still, not as good.
Anyone seen that top 3DFX only game that's being made, the one in
space? it's top and twat's any N64 game, except Killer Instict Gold,
which is top. I reckon that it's the game that make a certain piece of
hardware good, depends what you like.
On Mon, 26 May 1997 07:52:42 -0500, "Joseph Smith"
<jo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>The n64 *can* compare to computers that are up to 200mhz. With a computer
>the memory and power is rationed out between dozens of continually running
>applications. ..............bollocks....crap...,shite
Kw@ja
Kw@ja
It does you know, SEGA want it to be top this time round, what about
Sony though? Microsoft are thought to provide the software, PC stuff
all round here, and maybe a PowerPC chips will be used, but more
likely the one they used before
Kw@ja
umli...@cc.umanitoba.ca
In <339F18...@bath.ac.uk> Nikolai Erochenkov <ma...@bath.ac.uk> writes:
>Who cares still this software translation works faster than hardware
>one ? (hardware ... interesting word ;-) do you know what a microcode
>is? have you programmed a CISC or any high level, say graphic, chip?)
What's your purpose to bring up the term "microcode" and "CISC". I am
not sure if "he" understand what are they but I do. N64 is based on RISC
machine so do many new CPU like K6, M1/M2 even Pentium II in some way
looks more like a RISC then CISC, in CS we called it CRISC. Afterall, I
don't think a P166 with 16megs (why, memory are so cheap now!) can beat a
N64 in terms of 3d Graphic rendering. My Pentium Pro 200Mhz with a so-so
3D card (3D Xpression+ PC2TV with 4Meg SDRAM) can barely play Screamer2
in SVGA mode with detail set to highest. BTW, the 3D Xpression+ alone
cost almost the same as the N64 console and the PPro 200Mhz CPU alone can
buy 4 N64 consoles!!!
aC
>Why to compare to P5-II/233 ??? Open your eyes and try simple P5-166
>w/ 16 MB RAM. It is becoming as funny as stating that all TVs have 21
>bits of colour depth ;-) Probably I will not write on this topic for
>the same reason anymore :-)
--
Mike Kamoudis
HAC wrote:
>
> > The PCs are quickly catching up to the N64, but a new video platform
> (ProjectX?)
> > will be the new gaming standard.
>
> graphically.
It depends on the PC...But a P2-266 surely does what you say....
leo
ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote in article
<VA.0000011...@me.netlife.fi>...
You silly Pc Nerds with your precious keyboard & mouse really make me
laugh. I have been playing Quake ever since it came out (mostly on the
internet), control was fine but I have been playing Turok for the last
month and have found i very difficult to go back to Quakes restrictive
digital control, speed & precision my butt if Quake had the same controls
as Turok, Id love to see you play against everyone on the internet with
your keyboard/mouse setup, Circle strafe around you with the axe and you
would be toast. Wake up & grow up Keyboards were designed for typing
(Micro$oft Werd), Mice were designed for pointing at Microsoft Windoze 95,
Im sure you can figure out the rest.
ttammi
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>>Actually, a PC with a 3dfx Voodoo-based chipset will blow an N64 away
>>graphically.
>yeah, but a loaded comp with an accelerator is gonna be $2500+ and the
>N64 is $149...hmmm...
First of all, your prices are way off. Does, say, a P133 machine with a
$149 3Dfx Voodoo card really cost $2500?
Second, the price was not the issue. Someone suggested that N64 is more
powerful than a PC with a 3Dfx card. It simply isn't so. Yes, N64
without a hires monitor, 2GB hard drive etc. etc. etc. etc. is much
cheaper, but that wasn't the issue here.
So, write this down for later reference:
a) N64 is much cheaper than a P166 with a 3Dfx card.
b) P166 with a 3Dfx card is much more versatile and powerful than a
N64.
As simple as that. End of discussion.
ttammi
"G.T. Hamilton" <ryoug...@abraxis.com> wrote:
>Uh no. Every interface on the mainboard is running at 200mhz. HI rez
>would do nothing but give---a few milli seconds of load time.--
200 millihertz? Wow, I'm most impressed. ;^)
Then again, I must admit I cannot understand what the heck you are
talking about. "Using hires would give a few milliseconds of load
time"??? What is that supposed to mean? What "load time"?
Poom Nukulkij
In article <339DAF...@ix.netcom.com>
Daniel Nelson <dani...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>N64 wont be able to have all the Quake levels or the online aspect which
>made Quake so popular. For that reason consoles suck! I love Quake for
>the simple fact i can get online and blow the hell out of people I dont
>even know and listen to them bitch! N64 will have two maybe three levels
>due to the cart system ( which sucks) So to hell with you N64
>worshipers! GLQuake will still rule over N64 any day you whimp!
newsgroups.
Poom!
umli...@cc.umanitoba.ca
Finally, a fair comment from kw@ja :)
PC + 3Dfx will probably do as good or even better than N64, no arguement
on that but the point is that 3Dfx alone cost as much as a N64. Also you
have to pay additional cost for a good joystick which is also included with
N64. But wait, PC can do many other stuffs which N64 can't. So my point
is that comparing the 2 is nonsense. They are designed for different
purpose. In terms of gaming purpose, N64 is a superior design in
engineering point of view. To make a PC as effective as N64, one must
spend extra $$ on a wavetable soundcard, 3D accelerator in addition to
the cost of a PC. Also play game on a 17" screen may not be as fun as on
a 29" TV. PC2TV may allow you to accomplish that but it will cost you
another $150 for a PC2TV card like ATI and the quality of TV output
still can't compare to a N64 (oops, that's the cost of another N64
console). People has argued that PC has higher resolution, true but can
your S-VHS TV support more than 800x600??? Look, I have a EIZO Nanao
TX-C7S monitor which cost more than a 32" TV but I will enjoy watching
movie with a 29" Sony more than on my 17" EIZO. TV is not designed for
CAD or DTP purpose but your PC may.
Oh one last comment. 128 bit grapic card is generally refer to the
memory path between CPU to memory but the underlying CPU core are mostly 32
and 64 bits.
aC
>SOS everyone, really sos, don't get too worked up. Anyway, I might as
>well say that the N64 is an excellent machine, but a PC with a Monster
>3D or Apocalypse 3Dx is better. Firstly, with a 3Dx, you can go up to
>1024x768 in 24 bit colour, instead of snidey 640x480 on N64. Try
>GlQuake witha 3Dx when the drivers come out, cos the speed and detail
>will twat the N64. The N64 has that tri-linear texture mapping
>bollocks, it looks good, but still only just better than bi-linear. OH
>NO!, the N64 in 64-bit, wow. Well all PC gaming/graphics cards are 64
>bit too, and a few are 128 bit, ha. The good thing about an N64 is the
>games, luckily they are about 6 megs. big and can be copied to a PC,
>and played using an emulator, or soon a D3D N64 emulator (of someone
>makes it). The only problem is the the N64 costs just a bit more than
>a 3D accelerator, so it's about #1500 cheaper, but still, not as good.
>Anyone seen that top 3DFX only game that's being made, the one in
--
The casual gamer
In article <17B8EDB03S...@UConnVM.UConn.Edu>,
PON9...@UConnVM.UConn.Edu (Poom Nukulkij) wrote:
> In article <339DAF...@ix.netcom.com>
> Daniel Nelson <dani...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >N64 wont be able to have all the Quake levels or the online aspect which
> >made Quake so popular. For that reason consoles suck! I love Quake for
> >the simple fact i can get online and blow the hell out of people I dont
> >even know and listen to them bitch! N64 will have two maybe three levels
> >due to the cart system ( which sucks) So to hell with you N64
> >worshipers! GLQuake will still rule over N64 any day you whimp!
Oh yeah, 3 levels. You idiot. Ever heard of 4 players? And maybe (i
said maybe) Quake will come out for the DD64 and be networkable, if the
DD64 has a modem.
leo
ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote in article
<VA.0000012...@me.netlife.fi>...
If price isnt an issue lets all buy Onyx2 RealityMonsters. In fact I have
one in my back yard, too bad I cant get Mario64 for it.. Oh well back to
the lounge to play on my N64.
Sean
Whats wrong with the Saturn sheesh!!
It has the best racer, beat em up, and oh shit gota go
Scott
In article <01bc756d$41cd7440$0264...@granite.mtco.com>, "Charles Miller
Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>There will never be a "gaming standard."
>
Lets hope not. Especially since Micro$oft wants to make a video game
standard. Look at the July issue of EGm and read the specs for Sega's new
machine. An M$ gaming API. Yuck!
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Maxwell - scottm (at) nic (dot) com
Founder of CRSGN "Committe for the Restoration of SPAM's Good Name"
Remember when SPAM was the world's favorite mystery meat?
We're out to bring back SPAM's good name
Scott
You forgot to add in the cost for the Wintel machine. You certainly can't
play a game on a video card alone.
Scott
>So, write this down for later reference:
>
>a) N64 is much cheaper than a P166 with a 3Dfx card.
>
True.
>b) P166 with a 3Dfx card is much more versatile and powerful than a
>N64.
>
But how many games can you run if you don't run Win95 or NT? I agree Linux
is much more versatile than an N64.
>As simple as that. End of discussion.
>
True.
Wee Jeffrey
On Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:20:36 +0300, ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote:
>
>weeje...@enterprise.net (Wee Jeffrey) wrote:
>
>>I dunno about this. The control system for Turok is pretty good. I
>>can't wait for all the N64 style joypads to make it to the PC. A
>>similar setup to Turok would rock for Quake.
>
>PCs already have digital gamepads and analog sticks, nothing new there.
>
>As for using a gamepad/joystick for Quake, I recall id guys already
>said that they added joystick support for Quake only to show that you
>really want to play the game with a mouse+keyboard combination. ;-)
>Analog stick and/or a digital pad simply cannot match the speed and
>precision of the mouse/keyboard setup for a game like Quake.
I dunno, have you actually played Turok. I have a PC and Quake and I
would love to be able to use the control pad with Quake. I know there
are analogue joysticks already out on the pc but they are all big
clunky numbers. I mean the actual design of the N64 pad is excellent.
In many ways it is similar to the average pc's mouse and keyboard
setup only replacing the mouse with a small efficient control stick.
Thomas Volpe
Barker wrote:
>
> Pkg Includes
>
> Sega Nomad ( Mint Condition )
> Nomad AC Adaptor
>
> FS or Trade for N64, PSX, or Saturn titles or....?
>
> Best Offer.
AHHHHHHHH. There we go again! At least put a suggested price up there! I
hate when people do that!
Aun Lim
K...@ja.co wrote:
: I reckon it's the PC (with a 3D accelrator, check GlQuake), then the
hmm. and all this time i thought an SGI workstation was the best games
machine. silly me..
[flaky]
alex
I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next gen
console and alsoe to benefit their in-roads into PC games.
Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt look
for something more powerful.
Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
Kw@ja. wrote in article <33a2d72f...@news.mcc.ac.uk>...
Joey
K...@ja.co wrote:
>
> I reckon it's the PC (with a 3D accelrator, check GlQuake), then the
> N64, then Playstation and finally the Sturn. Anyone read about the
> Saturn 2? it's going to use a PC 3D accelerator chip! the PowerVR
> chip, or more likely the 3DFX chip! consoles can't take the pain.
> Kw@ja
If you factor in the price, I think all 3 next-gen consoles are
much better game machines.
joey
ttammi
Mike Kamoudis <mi...@ath.forthnet.gr> wrote:
>>Actually, a PC with a 3dfx Voodoo-based chipset will blow an N64 away
>>graphically.
>It depends on the PC...But a P2-266 surely does what you say....
Even a 133MHz Pentium with a 3Dfx card does.
ttammi
"leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>You silly Pc Nerds with your precious keyboard & mouse really make me
>laugh. I have been playing Quake ever since it came out (mostly on the
>internet), control was fine but I have been playing Turok for the last
>month and have found i very difficult to go back to Quakes restrictive
>digital control, speed & precision my butt if Quake had the same
Apparently you didn't know a mouse is an _analog_ input device.
>controls as Turok, Id love to see you play against everyone on the
>internet with your keyboard/mouse setup, Circle strafe around you with
>the axe and you would be toast. Wake up & grow up Keyboards were
Practically all net-Quakers are using the keyboard+mouse setup, so what
the hell are you talking about? Doing circle-strafe with the
mouse+keyboard setup is very easy.
>designed for typing (Micro$oft Werd), Mice were designed for pointing
>at Microsoft Windoze 95, Im sure you can figure out the rest.
Like that you could be my son for your age?
ttammi
weeje...@enterprise.net (Wee Jeffrey) wrote:
>>Analog stick and/or a digital pad simply cannot match the speed and
>>precision of the mouse/keyboard setup for a game like Quake.
>I dunno, have you actually played Turok. I have a PC and Quake and I
>would love to be able to use the control pad with Quake. I know there
>are analogue joysticks already out on the pc but they are all big
>clunky numbers. I mean the actual design of the N64 pad is excellent.
>In many ways it is similar to the average pc's mouse and keyboard
>setup only replacing the mouse with a small efficient control stick.
But it isn't as precise. Remember, Turok and glQuake are not the same
game. In Turok, there is fog everywhere, so you cannot see that far
(so the monsters etc. are always rather big already when you try to
take aim at them), while in glQuake the viewing distance is not
restricted in any way, so sometimes you really need "sub-pixel"
accuracy for aiming, when you are trying to shoot someone very far
from you, maybe only some pixels tall (and this is 640x480 pixels of
glQuake, not 320x240 of Turok).
Also, IMO using the mouse in glQuake is also faster than the analog
thumb stick in Turok (when you e.g. want to shoot someone who is behind
your back and above you, so you have to turn very fast and be
accurate at the same time).
Joe Ottoson
In article <866655537.29981....@news.demon.co.uk>, "alex"
<alex@> wrote:
> I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next gen
> console and alsoe to benefit their in-roads into PC games.
>
> Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt look
> for something more powerful.
>
The only other option is a Sh-4. PPC CPU's are hardly slouches in any case.
> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>
So you don't want the PC inroads? Besides, that's only the top level
programming environment. Sega has already announced a that lower level
coding system will also be provided.
To reply, remove the *NS* in my email address
Scott
>Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt look
>for something more powerful.
>
Such as? By then the G3 version of the PowerPC will have been out for a
while. The PPC chip is quite powerful.
>Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>
Amen to that.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Maxwell - scottm (at) nic (dot) com
Remember when SPAM was the world's favorite mystery meat?
Surfing is fast. The Internet is not. Therefore I "Sloth The Net"
Scott
In article <ajkko*NS*-18069716...@news.dimensional.com>,
ajkko*NS*@dimensional.com (Joe Ottoson) wrote:
>> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>>
>So you don't want the PC inroads?
>
No, I woudln't want an M$ anything near something that relies on speed and
tight code. Glide will help with porting.
>Besides, that's only the top level programming environment. Sega has
already >announced a that lower level coding system will also be provided.
>
Sounds like Windows running on DOS.
Scott
>Apparently you didn't know a mouse is an _analog_ input device.
>
Not all the time. The 1530 mouse for the Commodore 8 bits was digital. The
1531 was analog but you could switch it to digital mode.
Dr. Sega
alex wrote:
>
> I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next gen
The 3Dfx IPO statement recently says the Sega can now buy as much or as
little stock. So far Sega hasn't bought into 3Dfx. Rumors still stands
that SoA is making a 3Dfx machine while SoJ is building a LMC machine.
Who ever creates the best machine for the best bucks, wins.
> Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt look
> for something more powerful.
Can you please tell me what you mean by PowerPC. Are you referring to
the
CPU that Sega will use? If so, Microforums has already reported that
Hitachi said Sega will use the SH-4 in their next system. Hitachi said
that the SH-4 was specifically designed with a geometry engine by Sega's
request.
>
> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
Me too. I have a feeling that Sega will use whatever Microsoft
provides, but that doesn't mean Sega won't turn around and develope
something else later on. =)
Barker
Amy Young-Leith
As someone who just bought an N64 I'll jump into this fray.
I'm not a game freak. I admit I haven't ever played Doom on any platform
(despite being a computing support professional).
I had thought Super Mario 64 was cute. But not cute enough to spend the
dough on. Then recently I played Mario Cart 64 and saw the price drop to
$150 for machines... the two things together drew the money out of my
pocket.
Looking around it is disappointing how many more games there are for
Playstation and others. Then again I look at the games... do I want them?
No. I don't like most pointless race games (like Cruisin' USA... anyone
want to buy this cheap?), I don't like most shoot 'em up gore games, etc.
When I bought the station I got three extra controllers and Wave Race,
Mario Cart, Cruisin' USA, Super Mario. (Why buy the machine with nothing
else to allow you to do anything with it? =-) ) I'm happy. But only
when a bunch of friends are on my couch screaming and yelling because
someone just shot a red turtle up their ass. It's rather boring sitting
and playing by yourself (to me anyway).
Now anyone have any neat secrets to Mario Cart?
amy
--
amy young-leith http://ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu/~alyoung
aly...@pobox.com *Speaking only for myself*
Computer Geek, Department of Psychology 855.5542
Andrew Ariens
On 15 Jun 1997 00:59:37 GMT, "leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>You silly Pc Nerds with your precious keyboard & mouse really make me
>laugh.
Uh oh. Quake/Doom newbie about to insult the keyboard and mouse.
You're treading on sacred ground here pal.
>I have been playing Quake ever since it came out (mostly on the
>internet), control was fine but I have been playing Turok for the last
>month and have found i very difficult to go back to Quakes restrictive
>digital control,
The mouse is analog.
>speed & precision my butt if Quake had the same controls
>as Turok,
If Quake had the same control as Turok, everyobody would still be
using a keyboard/mouse.
>Id love to see you play against everyone on the internet with
>your keyboard/mouse setup,
Oh, you mean against all the other people with a keyboard/mouse setup?
After all, the VAST majority of the Quake players on the internet use
the mouse and keyboard. Hey, go into #quake on IRC, and talk to them
about how an analog joystick is so much better than the
keyboard/mouse. See how long it takes you to get laughed out of the
channel.
>Circle strafe around you with the axe and you
>would be toast.
Um, circle-strafing is the easiest trick to do with a keyboard/mouse.
And since the mouse is so much more precise, you can easily do
different radiuses with your circle-strafe. (Actually, I prefer the
old term, "circle of death")
>Wake up & grow up Keyboards were designed for typing
And 1st person shooters.
>(Micro$oft Werd), Mice were designed for pointing at Microsoft Windoze 95,
And 1st person shooters.
The mouse/keyboard has always been the best control for this genre of
game. I've used it ever since Doom (some people I know have even used
it for Wolfenstein), and I wouldn't trade it for a shitty analog
joystick any day. The ONLY controller (IMHO) that even comes close to
matching the speed and accuracy of the keyboard/mouse is the SpaceOrb
360.
--
Andrew R. Ariens
**Switch the "aiinc" and the "ariens" in my address around to reply**
"To alcohol, the cause of...and solution to all of life's problems."
-- Homer Simpson
mhen...@cell2000.net
In article <5oa1bs$7op$1...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
aly...@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Amy Young-Leith) wrote:
> Looking around it is disappointing how many more games there are for
> Playstation and others. Then again I look at the games... do I want them?
Well, for one thing, the PSX had a 1 year jump on the N64 in terms of a
release date. Second, you complain about how many games are out for the
N64...yes, there's only a handful, but who expected (and in this case
afford) 100 games out in a couple months time?? Third, Nintendo got many
development systems out late to third party developers...
Now on the good side: Hearing everything Nintendo has said (price drop
in games, 64DD modem, etc..) and showed off (Banjo-Kazooie, Conker's
Quest, Zelda anyone?) today (6/18) at the E3 should definitely reaffirm
consumer faith in the N64...
> No. I don't like most pointless race games (like Cruisin' USA... anyone
> want to buy this cheap?), I don't like most shoot 'em up gore games, etc.
To each his own.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
leo
ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote in article
<VA.0000015...@me.netlife.fi>...
> "leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >You silly Pc Nerds with your precious keyboard & mouse really make me
> >laugh. I have been playing Quake ever since it came out (mostly on the
> >internet), control was fine but I have been playing Turok for the last
> >month and have found i very difficult to go back to Quakes restrictive
> >digital control, speed & precision my butt if Quake had the same
>
> Apparently you didn't know a mouse is an _analog_ input device.
>
> >controls as Turok, Id love to see you play against everyone on the
> >internet with your keyboard/mouse setup, Circle strafe around you with
> >the axe and you would be toast. Wake up & grow up Keyboards were
>
> Practically all net-Quakers are using the keyboard+mouse setup, so what
> the hell are you talking about? Doing circle-strafe with the
> mouse+keyboard setup is very easy.
>
> >designed for typing (Micro$oft Werd), Mice were designed for pointing
> >at Microsoft Windoze 95, Im sure you can figure out the rest.
>
> Like that you could be my son for your age?
>
>
>
For a start I never said a mouse was not analog, but a key board is. You
are right it is easy, but its even easier with a N64 pad, just accept it.
Like I said you make me laugh.
Ryan Conner
Tell me who has been more faithful to the consumer?
Tell me who refuses to persistently update theur products just to suck
the consumers money out of their wallets?
Tell me who has the best company produced games around?
Tell me who's system is based on a Silicon Graphics Onyx Supercomputer?
N64
You know it.
PFC Ryan Daniel Conner (Tom...@webtv.net)
Andrew Ariens
On 19 Jun 1997 07:42:33 GMT, "leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> For a start I never said a mouse was not analog, but a key board is. You
>are right it is easy, but its even easier with a N64 pad, just accept it.
No it's not. I've played Doom64 and Turock, and the keyboard/mouse
beats it hands down. Sure the keyboard is digital, but most of the
people only use it for strafing, opening doors, walking backwards,
etc. The mouse is for turning, aiming up and down, walking forward
(Using a mouse button, not "pushing it forward, moving it back,
pushing it forward again, etc.), and shooting. (3rd mouse button add
even more versatility). If someone is shooting you in your back, with
the mouse you can turn around INSTANTLY with a flick of the wrist.
Walking through mazes is better with a mouse because you can make
quick 90 degree turns, so you don't have to take your finger off the
walk/run button, and you wont' run into the walls.
Andy Schmidgall
Andrew Ariens wrote:
>
> No it's not. I've played Doom64 and Turock, and the keyboard/mouse
> beats it hands down. Sure the keyboard is digital, but most of the
> people only use it for strafing, opening doors, walking backwards,
> etc. The mouse is for turning, aiming up and down, walking forward
> (Using a mouse button, not "pushing it forward, moving it back,
> pushing it forward again, etc.), and shooting. (3rd mouse button add
> even more versatility). If someone is shooting you in your back, with
> the mouse you can turn around INSTANTLY with a flick of the wrist.
> Walking through mazes is better with a mouse because you can make
> quick 90 degree turns, so you don't have to take your finger off the
> walk/run button, and you wont' run into the walls.
I totally agree! Using a mouse makes games like that _so_ much easier.
One thing about the controls that makes me like Turok more than Doom is
that the Turok controls feel more like a mouse (with the stick you can
look up, down, around) and in Doom, the stick moves you forward
(Ugg...). The fact that in Doom you can't even look up or down also
contributes...
--
*****************************************************************
* -Andy Schmidgall
*
* Your Local Metroid 2 Expert! *
* (http://homepage.dave-world.net/~rogers/metroid/metroid.html) *
* abs...@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu *
* rog...@dave-world.net *
*****************************************************************
John Campbell
leo wrote:
> For a start I never said a mouse was not analog, but a key board is. You
> are right it is easy, but its even easier with a N64 pad, just accept it.
>
I see that you are not very difficult to humor.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
John P. Campbell-
Popular Game Cheats - http://www.pe.net/~button95
Dragonball Z Links - http://www.pe.net/~button95/dbz/dbz.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Johnson
Forget the mouse and keyboard (which I have nothing against), use a
joystick for games. The N64 controller is nice, but it doesn't have 104
keys, auto fire, precision, macro ability, etc. I'll stick with my PC if
given the choice.
--
Too many idiots, too few comets.
|
|
Apologies to the person who came up with that.
Apologies for the cross-post.
Ed Giangrande
In <33A8A2...@sometime.com> "Dr. Sega" <some...@sometime.com>
writes:
>alex wrote:
>>
>> I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next
gen
>> console and also to benefit their in-roads into PC games.
>
>The 3Dfx IPO statement recently says the Sega can now buy as much or
as
>little stock. So far Sega hasn't bought into 3Dfx. Rumors still
stands
>that SoA is making a 3Dfx machine while SoJ is building a LMC machine.
>Who ever creates the best machine for the best bucks, wins.
However, has't it also been reported that EA has bought (or is buying)
a good portion of stock in teh 3DFX too... wouldn't that be a nice turn
of events if for some new reason EA games could once again start
landing at a regular pace on a new Sega system...
>> Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt
look
>> for something more powerful.
>
>Can you please tell me what you mean by PowerPC. Are you referring to
>the
>CPU that Sega will use? If so, Microforums has already reported that
>Hitachi said Sega will use the SH-4 in their next system. Hitachi
said
>that the SH-4 was specifically designed with a geometry engine by
Sega's
>request.
>
>>
>> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>
>Me too. I have a feeling that Sega will use whatever Microsoft
>provides, but that doesn't mean Sega won't turn around and develope
>something else later on. =)
hey, way I look at it, it never is all that bad to have very powerful
friends... heck sega ads on microsoft.com, maybe having some form of
Sega PC games on new microsoft products (like demos or even how VFR
comes packaged with the Sidewinder pads)
*maSApo*
On 16 Jun 1997 08:39:42 GMT, "leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>If price isnt an issue lets all buy Onyx2 RealityMonsters. In fact I have
>one in my back yard, too bad I cant get Mario64 for it.. Oh well back to
>the lounge to play on my N64.
>
you dont have an onyx!!!!!!
no way
alex
My last reference to MS was regarding its use in a console . Sega would
like to have an inroad into the PC market via the likes of 3DFX. A console
has no need for MS involvement, any interest in using the likes of 3DFX
will enable easier porting of games, which will require re-compliation for
the CPU's benefit rather than the graphics engine.
Alex
Joe Ottoson wrote in article ...
>In article <866655537.29981....@news.demon.co.uk>, "alex"
><alex@> wrote:
>
>> I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next gen
>> console and alsoe to benefit their in-roads into PC games.
>>
>> Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt
look
>> for something more powerful.
>>
>The only other option is a Sh-4. PPC CPU's are hardly slouches in any
case.
>
>> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>>
>So you don't want the PC inroads? Besides, that's only the top level
>programming environment. Sega has already announced a that lower level
>coding system will also be provided.
>
>
>
alex
Scott wrote in article ...
>In article <ajkko*NS*-18069716...@news.dimensional.com>,
>ajkko*NS*@dimensional.com (Joe Ottoson) wrote:
nced a that lower level coding system will also be provided.
>>
>Sounds like Windows running on DOS.
too true....anyway think of the resources you need to run a MS front end.
Console with 16Meg , just to please a MS !!!
alex
>> I know SEGA have bought a 29% stake in 3DFX , partly for their next gen
>
>The 3Dfx IPO statement recently says the Sega can now buy as much or as
>little stock. So far Sega hasn't bought into 3Dfx. Rumors still stands
>that SoA is making a 3Dfx machine while SoJ is building a LMC machine.
>Who ever creates the best machine for the best bucks, wins.
.....still say 29% of 3DFX is in Sega hands !!
>
>> Power-PC chipset ?? Possible but by the end of 1998 they'll no doubt
look
>> for something more powerful.
>
>Can you please tell me what you mean by PowerPC. Are you referring to
>the
>CPU that Sega will use? If so, Microforums has already reported that
>Hitachi said Sega will use the SH-4 in their next system. Hitachi said
>that the SH-4 was specifically designed with a geometry engine by Sega's
>request.
>
I refered to PowerPC chipset in my reply to a previous message...but as you
say SH-4 is a strong contender.
>>
>> Just hope the Microsoft bit doesn't come through........
>
Gary Bradley
leo wrote:
>
> ttammi <tta...@netlife.fi> wrote in article
> <VA.0000015...@me.netlife.fi>...
> > "leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > >You silly Pc Nerds with your precious keyboard & mouse really make me
> > >laugh. I have been playing Quake ever since it came out (mostly on the
> > >internet), control was fine but I have been playing Turok for the last
> > >month and have found i very difficult to go back to Quakes restrictive
> > >digital control, speed & precision my butt if Quake had the same
> >
> > Apparently you didn't know a mouse is an _analog_ input device.
> >
> > >controls as Turok, Id love to see you play against everyone on the
> > >internet with your keyboard/mouse setup, Circle strafe around you with
> > >the axe and you would be toast. Wake up & grow up Keyboards were
> >
> > Practically all net-Quakers are using the keyboard+mouse setup, so what
> > the hell are you talking about? Doing circle-strafe with the
> > mouse+keyboard setup is very easy.
> >
> > >designed for typing (Micro$oft Werd), Mice were designed for pointing
> > >at Microsoft Windoze 95, Im sure you can figure out the rest.
> >
> > Like that you could be my son for your age?
> >
> >
> >
>
> are right it is easy, but its even easier with a N64 pad, just accept it.
>
> Like I said you make me laugh.
Well I must agree with the original post. The control in Turok with the
N64 pad is ace, but Quake with a mouse is much much more ace.
Scott
In article <866821111.9934.1...@news.demon.co.uk>, "alex"
<alex@> wrote:
>>Sounds like Windows running on DOS.
>
>too true....anyway think of the resources you need to run a MS front end.
>
>Console with 16Meg , just to please a MS !!!
>
Hmmm...Office 98 for Saturn?
ttammi
"leo" <l...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>For a start I never said a mouse was not analog, but a key board is.
You said "Quake's digital control". So the analog mouse is not part of
"Quake's control" then?
The crosspad and the buttons on N64 controller are digital as well, the
thumb stick is the only analog part of the controller. So, what was
your point? Are you using only the thumb stick for controlling Turok?
I didn't think so.
>You are right it is easy, but its even easier with a N64 pad, just
>accept it.
It works in Turok because that game doesn't need the same precision as
glQuake running at 640x480 or 800x600, mainly because of the lower
resolution and the fact you cannot see monsters/enemies from far away,
because of the fog that is covering the pop-up effect.
This whole argument of the N64 controller being the "ultimate controller
for Quake type of games" sounds the same as some other console owners
claiming the digital gamepad is the best controller for about any
type of game, including racing games, flying games, strategy games etc.
>Like I said you make me laugh.
Nervous laugh. Figures.
Zsolt Szabo
In article <33af4bff...@news.dacom.co.kr>,
You have doubt? It is quite obvious that he was kidding. I don't know
many people who can afford a $50,000 workstation the size of a small
fridge--personally, that is.
Btw. has anybody played the two games by paradigm that ship with most
Indigo^2 xxx Impact Systems? One is a WWI fighter and the other one is a
game involving mecha. Both have superb graphics, including all effects
and run at 1280x1024/24 bit. Well, does anybody know the point of the
Mech game? I keep running around aimlessly and while the graphics are very
impressive, I don't quite see what I'm supposed to do. I wonder when
these games will be released for O2 systems. They should be able to
handle the graphics easily.
To those who haven't seen these games and think their Voodoos are best
for 3D games--you ain't seen nothing yet. You can get an O2 system for as
little as $5000. This system will run Quake at 1280x1024 resolution, with
texture filtering enabled. Oh, and at the same time the O2 runs an
operating system which doesn't decrease your intelligence quotient with
every session the way Win 95 does.
--
__ // MSDOS--Maybe Some Day an Operating System
-/_)_ ( _ __) __)___ // http://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~robodude
_/ \(_)_)_)_/(_/_/(-__/(___________________________________________________
ttammi
"alex" <alex@> wrote:
>Console with 16Meg , just to please a MS !!!
I guess there could be quite a few other reasons, like that to get
life like textured polygon models, you need lots of texture RAM
(besides high polygon count).
To give an easy example, "Techlandsoft" is making a PC game that will
use six megabytes of RAM for textures only, at any given time. Meaning,
you cannot load the textures dynamically from a
CD-ROM/harddrive/cartridge. Think about it, that six megabytes reserved
for texture RAM alone is more than any console has _total_ RAM. ;-)
Also, I think the coin ops (Atari's 3Dfx/MIPS based, Sega Model3,
Konami Cobra) use at least four megabytes of RAM for textures, probably
much more (the latter two at least).
ttammi
aly...@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Amy Young-Leith) wrote:
>else to allow you to do anything with it? =-) ) I'm happy. But
>only when a bunch of friends are on my couch screaming and yelling
>because someone just shot a red turtle up their ass. It's rather
>boring sitting and playing by yourself (to me anyway).
But the other people don't have to be in the same room. glQuakeWorld on
the Internet against 4-32 other people you don't necessarily even know
is marvellous, especially in team modes (like Capture The Flag and
Team Fortress). Could you have 16 team players in the same room around
one screen? I don't think so.
So you don't actually see the other players screaming at your face,
big deal. It is enough you KNOW they must be screaming because
you got that missile launcher just before their eyes and shot them
all to pieces with a couple of shots, or how you made them
all crash in POD just before the finish line. ;-)
What's more, the problem with "playing with your friends on the couch"
is that it means you have to find friends who are interested in playing
video games in the first place. All my friends are so "adult" that they
simply don't care about video games. And even if they did, they
probably wouldn't want to play against someone who knows the game like
his own pockets. I mean, if I win them everytime, what incentive do
they have to play against me?
But when I log on an Internet server running Quakeworld, Tanarus,
Diablo, Outlaws, Interstate'76 etc., I'm always sure to find people
who are ready and willing to play the game when _I_ want and have time.
Plus, I can be certain that at least most of them are experts in the
games, so it's not "Ho hum, I killed you again" all the time, like with
casual house guests who don't normally play video games at all.
No calling around all your friends "Uh, I was just thinking, now that I
got my daughter to sleep at last, would you want to come over to play
Mario Kart against me? Oh, you were sleeping already, sorry.".
We usually have far more "active" activities with my friends than
just playing video games together.
That is not to say that you cannot play multiplayer computer games on
the same machine. I have played e.g. Speedball 2 and POD against my
wife and couple of friends lots of times. In front of my 17" monitor,
there's just as much room for 2-4 players as, say, in front of a
coin op, which usually are multiplayer games as well.
What is more, if you _really_ want, nothing prevents you from
connecting the PC to a TV as well, and sitting on the couch.
I personally just happen to find the couch more suitable for
"inactivity", like lie on the sofa, watching some stupid movie
and falling to sleep watching it.
Mr. Gamer
Well, with the DD64, you would have 8 megs of RAM total
Jesse Dorland
In a secluded warehouse,
on a pier somewhere in Maine,
gagged and at gunpoint,
tu...@webtv.net (Rob Stepp) frantically made this plea for help:
>Actually N64 games are not 6 megs, most are 64 megs and a couple (like
>StarFox 64) are 96 megs, and they cannot be copied to a computer.
The amount of space on ROM carts, which is measured in mega*bits*, should not
be confused with mega*bytes*. One byte is the equivalent of 8 bits, so a 64
"meg" cart actually holds only 8 megabytes. Likewise, a 96 meg cart actually
stores 12 megabytes.
-Jesse
=========================================================
There are two major products that come out of Berkeley:
LSD & UNIX. We do not believe this to be a coincidence.
=========================================================