N64 ony 30,000 polygon per sec.
guest
In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
N64, @PS quality.
sol...@vnet.net
On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
wrote:
>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>N64, @PS quality.
No, try 100,000 polygons per second.
David Chea
Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
Can anyone confirm this for me? Email me if you know the answer.
Thanks in advance.
David
d...@bridge.net (Vampire Marius) wrote:
>In article <32A34D...@student.csi.cuny.edu>, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu> wrote:
>>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>>N64, @PS quality.
>Actually it can do 160,000 w/all features on.
>Which is still pathetic IMO for a 64bit system.
>
> ú ú
> ù Danny[VampireMarius] ù
> . 'Drink From Me And Live Forever' .
> | :d...@bridge.net: |
> | |
> ø ø
erik landerholm
On Mon, 2 Dec 1996 sol...@vnet.net wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
> >N64, @PS quality.
> No, try 100,000 polygons per second.
>
>
no try 600,000 to 1,000,000 with all special effects turned off. with all
special effects turned on the max is 100,000 to 300,000. sony psx does
300,000/sec with no special effects. it doesn't even have the most
difficult special effects in the hardware (anti-aliasing, z-buffer,
tri-linear mip map interpolation, etc) it is no contest in terms of
graphics horsepower. The N64 has a chip that is still used in high end
SGI computers, there is no reason to think a machine that is over a year
older could compete graphically.
Charles Miller
Yep. Also, remember it isn't how big it is but how you use it. Look at
VF2 for sat if you are ify. (^_^)
sol...@vnet.net wrote in article <32a368fb...@news.vnet.net>...
Vampire Marius
In article <32A34D...@student.csi.cuny.edu>, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu> wrote:
>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>N64, @PS quality.
Siegfried
No, the PSX is inferior to the N64 as far as polygons are concerned.
160,000 w/ ALL features on is actually very impressive when you consider
the fact that the N64 has a whole lot of features. Using them all at once
would be, I assume, rather taxing on the CPU. It would be possible for a
machine to have so many features that the polygon count with every single
feature on would be 1 polygon per scond or less, even if it was a very
sophisticated machine -- maybe the features aren't meant to all be on at
once. It seems as if using "polys/sec, w/all features on" does a
disservice to more advance machines because the more features they have,
the lower their poly count would be.
-Siegfried
dc...@pipeline.com (David Chea) wrote:
>Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
>I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
>
>Can anyone confirm this for me? Email me if you know the answer.
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>David
>
>
>d...@bridge.net (Vampire Marius) wrote:
>
Phat Hong Tran
In article <580b7h$8...@skyway.bridge.net>,
Vampire Marius <d...@bridge.net> wrote:
>In article <32A34D...@student.csi.cuny.edu>, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu> wrote:
>>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>>N64, @PS quality.
>Actually it can do 160,000 w/all features on.
>Which is still pathetic IMO for a 64bit system.
Not so if you consider how compute-intensive the effects are. Probably
between 10 to 20 times more operations per pixel than the effects on the
PSX require.
Phat.
Gumby
erik landerholm <land...@ece.orst.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Dec 1996 sol...@vnet.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>> >N64, @PS quality.
>> No, try 100,000 polygons per second.
>>
>>
>no try 600,000 to 1,000,000 with all special effects turned off. with all
>special effects turned on the max is 100,000 to 300,000. sony psx does
>300,000/sec with no special effects. it doesn't even have the most
>difficult special effects in the hardware (anti-aliasing, z-buffer,
>tri-linear mip map interpolation, etc) it is no contest in terms of
>graphics horsepower. The N64 has a chip that is still used in high end
>SGI computers, there is no reason to think a machine that is over a year
>older could compete graphically.
actually, the chip is not used in high end SGI machines, it was
specially designed for the N64...i believe the newest SGI 'reality
monster' can push 80,000,000 (yes, 80 million) polys/sec.
nevertheless, i believe your 1,000,000 polys/sec with no effects is
correct, but i think with all the effects turned on, it can push
around 500,000 polys/sec. either way, it has a sufficent graphics
power lead over other home systems.
--gumby
Willie Abrams
>Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
>I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
From a spec perspective, the PSX can pump more polygons per second.
However, the N64 hardware creates better looking, but fewer polygons
through the use of anti-aliasing, and a variety of texture mapping
techniques.
So, it is a wash. Each one has differing capabilities - which result in
different gaming experiences.
For example, in Mario 64, the distinct polygons are hard to see since the
antialiasing helps the image quality so much, and you don't notice how
many - or - how few ploygons are on the screen.
On the other hand, if you were to look at a game like Wipeout XL or Forumla
1, you would see a sheer amount of polygons blasted to the screen, albeit
with visible shapes and lesser texture quality.
I think if you were to see either one on the other hardware, you might be
disappointed in the experience.
Both are excellent pieces of hardware. Both have their strengths. Polys per
second is just a part of the equation.
Get both. :-)
(And as for the Saturn, its biggest strength is that it has Sega writing
games for it...but that is something altogether different...)
Willie
----
Willie Abrams
pixel dealer, packet pusher * http://pobox.com/~willie/
"Yeah, yeah, genius. Let's burn things. That'd be cool!" - Bobby Thomale
Breeze
This is a load of crock - if u're going to give information please state
your sources. Overall, the Nintendo 64 is capable of rendering about
160,000 polygons with all hardware features enabled. (quote from nintendo).
Although polygon count is great - realism and gameplay do highly rely on
the amount of things that can be done to the polygon. texture mapped,
gouraud shaded polygons are a lot harder to do than just drawing a simple
polygon.
--
Best Regards
Jessie Anderson,
___ ___
| \ \ / | \
| ) \ / | )
|___/ V |___/
Digital Video Direct
"Your Direct Source For Digital Video"
Sales: 1-800-322-1261
Int'l Sales: 1-217-355-2785
Fax: 1-217-356-4312
WWW.dvideo.com
*Send Your Address for a Catalog*
guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu> wrote in article
<32A34D...@student.csi.cuny.edu>...
Alex Tomic
>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>N64, @PS quality.
Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
Pacarana
WA> From a spec perspective, the PSX can pump more polygons per second.
WA> However, the N64 hardware creates better looking, but fewer polygons
WA> through the use of anti-aliasing, and a variety of texture mapping
WA> techniques.
WA> So, it is a wash. Each one has differing capabilities - which result in
WA> different gaming experiences.
Yeah but what if you turn off all of the effects that the N64 has above and beyond
the PSX then its poly per second count suddenly shoots above the PSX's.
WA> On the other hand, if you were to look at a game like Wipeout XL or
WA> Forumla
WA> 1, you would see a sheer amount of polygons blasted to the screen, albeit
WA> with visible shapes and lesser texture quality.
WA> I think if you were to see either one on the other hardware, you might be
WA> disappointed in the experience.
Perhaps, but I believe you could turn off many of the spfx and reduce things to
PSX quality and have the N64 push out even more polys than are in F1.
Pacarana
VM> In article <32A34D...@student.csi.cuny.edu>, guest
VM> <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu> wrote:
>>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>>N64, @PS quality.
VM> Which is still pathetic IMO for a 64bit system.
But doesn't that also include environment mapping AND hardare specularity
(which I don't think the M2 has [actually I'm not 100% sure the N64 does but it looks
it judging by one article and some game footage I've seen] which probably takes up
a lot of time, if it does have it I'd imagine you could get a could 2x and maybe
3x performance boost with that effect off).
Hanson
"Breeze" <bb...@scn.org> wrote:
>This is a load of crock - if u're going to give information please state
>your sources. Overall, the Nintendo 64 is capable of rendering about
>160,000 polygons with all hardware features enabled. (quote from nintendo).
> Although polygon count is great - realism and gameplay do highly rely on
>the amount of things that can be done to the polygon. texture mapped,
>gouraud shaded polygons are a lot harder to do than just drawing a simple
>polygon.
I don't know what the signifigance is, but the new specs for the N64
at Cap Scott's site do not have any polys per second figures.
The other thing is that polys with all hardware effects on is
extremely memory intensive, so the 160,000 figure is deceptively low.
And the N64 renders rectangular polygons -- instead of two triangles
requiring 6 vertices (like the PSX's Geometry Engine), the N64
produces a rectangular polygon with 4 vertices and bends it in to two
triangles. On top of that, the N64's hardware features can render a
3-D object that looks better with less polygons.
Also consider that the MIPS rating for the PSX Geometry Engine is 66
while the N64's Realty Co-processor performs over 500 million vector
operations per second. Obviously, the N64 hardware is much more
powerful than the PSX guts.
Hanson
"My neck feels like one gargantuan monkey fist!"
- J. Peterman
Vampire Marius
In article <580eh4$a...@camel0.mindspring.com>, dc...@pipeline.com wrote:
>Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
>I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
>
>
I think it's true. The lack of polygons are evident in the games. Geez don't
they all look alike? I believe if it could've done more Nintendo would've
hyped it up. Why does Cruisin look inferior? With lack of polygons? 1million
haha! yea right.
Zsolt Szabo
In article <32a4b25b...@news2.idirect.com>,
Alex Tomic <ste...@idirect.com> wrote:
>Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
>really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
>Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
It can't play CD games 10x better--maybe 10x worse ;-)
I do agree with the first statement, though. I doubt the PSX can render
more tmeshs per frame than the N64.
--
__ //sys 64738-code must always be as tight as possible!
-/_)_ ( _ __) __)___ //URL=HTTP://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~robodude __ One man's
_/ \(_)_)_)_/(_/_/(-__//junk is another man's protoculture-Gen. Rolf Emmerson
Obi
Willie Abrams wrote:
>
> In article <580eh4$a...@camel0.mindspring.com>, dc...@pipeline.com wrote:
>
> >Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
> >I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
>
From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
all features turned on. It has been quoted that if the psx used
anti-aliasing, the count would drop down to 90,000. This is far too
little for games. Not to talk about the other effects present in the
N64.
> However, the N64 hardware creates better looking, but fewer polygons
> through the use of anti-aliasing, and a variety of texture mapping
> techniques.
>
> So, it is a wash. Each one has differing capabilities - which result in
> different gaming experiences.
>
> For example, in Mario 64, the distinct polygons are hard to see since the
> antialiasing helps the image quality so much, and you don't notice how
> many - or - how few ploygons are on the screen.
>
> On the other hand, if you were to look at a game like Wipeout XL or Forumla
> 1, you would see a sheer amount of polygons blasted to the screen, albeit
> with visible shapes and lesser texture quality.
>
> I think if you were to see either one on the other hardware, you might be
Zsolt Szabo
In article <32A54B...@popd.ix.netcom.com>,
Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
>pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
>all features turned on. It has been quoted that if the psx used
>anti-aliasing, the count would drop down to 90,000. This is far too
>little for games. Not to talk about the other effects present in the
>N64.
Right. Tell that to Ian Bell and David Braben, the two creators of the
best game ever made.
Jason Martin
In article <581lbu$d...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, gu...@toy.land
says...
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform
in
>>> >N64, @PS quality.
>>>
>>>
>>no try 600,000 to 1,000,000 with all special effects turned off. with
all
>>special effects turned on the max is 100,000 to 300,000. sony psx does
>>300,000/sec with no special effects. it doesn't even have the most
>>difficult special effects in the hardware (anti-aliasing, z-buffer,
>>tri-linear mip map interpolation, etc) it is no contest in terms of
>>graphics horsepower. The N64 has a chip that is still used in high end
>>SGI computers, there is no reason to think a machine that is over a
year
>>older could compete graphically.
>
>actually, the chip is not used in high end SGI machines, it was
>specially designed for the N64...i believe the newest SGI 'reality
>monster' can push 80,000,000 (yes, 80 million) polys/sec.
>nevertheless, i believe your 1,000,000 polys/sec with no effects is
>correct, but i think with all the effects turned on, it can push
>around 500,000 polys/sec. either way, it has a sufficent graphics
>power lead over other home systems.
>
>
>--gumby
>
thought I read somewhere that the N64 uses Rectangular instead of
triangular polys. IF so wouldn't that mean it would take two triangles
to make a rectangular. Does anyone know what each machine uses for the
polys? I can't remember! =( Working graveyard is killing me when I'm
used to working days.
Truly,
Jason Martin
Power attracts the corruptible
Ben Gesserit
Galina Bokser
Chad Ray McDaniel
(followups to rec.games.video.advocacy)
mau...@mail.prostar.com (Jason Martin) writes:
> Are we talking Rectangular polygons or are we talking triangular? I
> thought I read somewhere that the N64 uses Rectangular instead of
> triangular polys. IF so wouldn't that mean it would take two triangles
> to make a rectangular. Does anyone know what each machine uses for the
> polys? I can't remember! =( Working graveyard is killing me when I'm
> used to working days.
The N64 uses triangles when rendering 3D polygon graphics. It does
support rectangles, but for 2D games.
--
-chad
David Nagy
Pacarana (lar...@gramercy.ios.com) wrote:
: But doesn't that also include environment mapping AND hardare
specularity : (which I don't think the M2 has [actually I'm not 100% sure
the N64 does but it looks : it judging by one article and some game
footage I've seen] which probably takes up : a lot of time, if it does
have it I'd imagine you could get a could 2x and maybe : 3x performance
boost with that effect off).
I'd imagine that the M2 can do enviroment mapping, but you are correct
that it's likely to exact some sort of performance hit. I've seen
no evidence that either system does any sort of specularity effects in
hardware, although one could fake such an effect by using the afore
mentioned reflection-mapping trick.
Question: Would enviroment-mapping be any harder on the hardware than
ordinary texture mapping? I wouldn't think so. Doing both at the same
time might be a chore though...
From what I've read, it appears that the N64's main advantage over the M2
may be in edge-antialiasing. Whether or not this advantage is 'balanced'
by the M2's ability to display similar poly-counts at ~5 times the resolution
is debatable. It'll be interesting to compare the subjective 'quality'
of the two systems since they seem to embody somewhat different design
philosophies.
Dave Nagy
Mark Tseytlin
What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
MISHA
Phil Rutschman
> No, the PSX is inferior to the N64 as far as polygons are concerned.
> 160,000 w/ ALL features on is actually very impressive when you consider
> the fact that the N64 has a whole lot of features. Using them all at once
> would be, I assume, rather taxing on the CPU. It would be possible for a
> machine to have so many features that the polygon count with every single
> feature on would be 1 polygon per scond or less, even if it was a very
> sophisticated machine -- maybe the features aren't meant to all be on at
> once. It seems as if using "polys/sec, w/all features on" does a
> disservice to more advance machines because the more features they have,
> the lower their poly count would be.
160,000 is less impressive when you take into account the low output
resolution of the N64. Antialiasing helps this, as does the fact that it's
generally outputted to crappy NTSC video, but the other half of polys per
second is how large those polygons are. And if your display is one quarter
of the size of other systems' (in terms of area) then that's gonna help
significantly.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Curt Warner
rating?Beyond me), just to let you know. They could at least have
hidden it better. Chris Slate for example, in his SM64 review just
slapped on a 100% because it was fun and had good graphics. His review
was full of shit. SM64 is one of my all time favs, but he ignored the
categories. A 10 in sound effects? Not when Mario sounds like a girl
hell no! Next Gen is biased against the Saturn. I will not even
attempt to go into those specifics. I think both mags, all though have
good news and extras, but they are both overly biased. EGM is probably
the least biased. Although their gossip is right only 10% of the time
(Tekken 3 an N64 exclusive?).
--
-Curt Warner
//////// ////// // \\treme
// /// // // \\treme
// /// //// // \\treme
///// // \\//treme
// ////// \\ //treme
// \\ \\treme
//
________________________________________________________
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/2320
E-mail cur...@internetmci.com
To join PSXtreme E-mail psxt...@hotmail.com
"Pay now,flame later!"
Jeffrey John Hemenway
Chad Ray McDaniel wrote:
>
> The N64 uses triangles when rendering 3D polygon graphics. It does
> support rectangles, but for 2D games.
>
> --
> -chad
I don't think I buy that... I think the N64 uses whatever polygons are
suitable for the 3D object they're building. For example, they'd use
triangles to make a pyramid, and rectangles to make a cube. For 2D
games, polygons aren't used (sprites are), so they'd have no need for
rectangles.
Jeff
Glen Avery
??? I thought that sprites were used in 2D. Not polygons. Also I
thought that the nintendo 64 used tetragons (i.e. polygons defined
by four points)
Chad Ray McDaniel wrote:
>
> (followups to rec.games.video.advocacy)
>
> mau...@mail.prostar.com (Jason Martin) writes:
> > Are we talking Rectangular polygons or are we talking triangular? I
> > thought I read somewhere that the N64 uses Rectangular instead of
> > triangular polys. IF so wouldn't that mean it would take two triangles
> > to make a rectangular. Does anyone know what each machine uses for the
> > polys? I can't remember! =( Working graveyard is killing me when I'm
> > used to working days.
>
> The N64 uses triangles when rendering 3D polygon graphics. It does
> support rectangles, but for 2D games.
>
> --
> -chad
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glen Avery (08) 40 47037 Glen....@hfera.ericsson.se
MASHOOD KHAN
On 4 Dec 1996, Zsolt Szabo wrote:
> In article <32A54B...@popd.ix.netcom.com>,
> Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
> >pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
> >all features turned on. It has been quoted that if the psx used
> >anti-aliasing, the count would drop down to 90,000. This is far too
> >little for games. Not to talk about the other effects present in the
> >N64.
>
>
> Right. Tell that to Ian Bell and David Braben, the two creators of the
> best game ever made.
>
> --
> __ //sys 64738-code must always be as tight as possible!
> -/_)_ ( _ __) __)___ //URL=HTTP://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~robodude __ One man's
> _/ \(_)_)_)_/(_/_/(-__//junk is another man's protoculture-Gen. Rolf Emmerson
>
>And while your at it, Give Dave a big pat on the pack for creating the
most "bugged" game in history.
Mash
nigel....@iee.org
On 4 Dec 1996, Zsolt Szabo wrote:
> In article <32A54B...@popd.ix.netcom.com>,
> Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
> >pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
200,000 is well above the spec of an average PSX game. I would say that
the norm would be around 100,000 while better games might sqeeze an extra
30% or so out of the hardware.
Wolfson Court, Clarkson Road, CAMBRIDGE, Cambs, CB3 0EH Tel: 01223 338892
(messages only)
Douglas Barkes
Curt Warner <cur...@internetMCI.com> wrote:
>Mark Tseytlin wrote:
>>
>> What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
>> been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
>> best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
>> the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
>> they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
>> MISHA
>Ultra GP is biased towards N64 greatly(why they gave it a low
>rating?Beyond me), just to let you know. They could at least have
>hidden it better. Chris Slate for example, in his SM64 review just
>slapped on a 100% because it was fun and had good graphics. His review
>was full of shit. SM64 is one of my all time favs, but he ignored the
>categories. A 10 in sound effects? Not when Mario sounds like a girl
>hell no! Next Gen is biased against the Saturn. I will not even
>attempt to go into those specifics. I think both mags, all though have
>good news and extras, but they are both overly biased. EGM is probably
>the least biased.
EGM the least biased? ;P
Please! At least Next Gen gives the Saturn credit where credit is due. As
far as EGM goes, they don't seem to like to give Saturn much of anything.
I'm glad I quit reading all the mags. I get my info off the net now
(though I'm debating what's worse: all these system advocates or the mags
;)
Doug
--
Doug Barkes | dba...@concentric.net | doug....@kgb.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Ottoson
In article <Pine.HPP.3.91.96120...@club.eng.cam.ac.uk>,
nigel....@iee.org wrote:
> On 4 Dec 1996, Zsolt Szabo wrote:
>
> > In article <32A54B...@popd.ix.netcom.com>,
> > Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > >From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
> > >pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
>
> 200,000 is well above the spec of an average PSX game. I would say that
> the norm would be around 100,000 while better games might sqeeze an extra
> 30% or so out of the hardware.
Actually, you're severly undercutting the PSx's actual ability. Games like
Sony's Basketball game and Iron and Blood both are pushing over 200k (I&B
almost reached 300k in fact)
Always remember,
Real faith is objective
Chad Ray McDaniel
Jeffrey John Hemenway <jjhe...@engr.ucdavis.edu> writes:
> Chad Ray McDaniel wrote:
> >
> > The N64 uses triangles when rendering 3D polygon graphics. It does
> > support rectangles, but for 2D games.
> >
> > --
> > -chad
>
> I don't think I buy that... I think the N64 uses whatever polygons are
> suitable for the 3D object they're building. For example, they'd use
> triangles to make a pyramid, and rectangles to make a cube. For 2D
> games, polygons aren't used (sprites are), so they'd have no need for
> rectangles.
>
Although it may not be obvious, all of the 3D images generated by the
N64 are composed of triangles. When you see a box on the screen each
of it's sides is two triangles or more.
Yes, the N64 supports sprite-like objects, but it also supports
triangles and rectangles that are aligned with the screen.
(I do not speak for SGI)
--
-chad
Pacarana
DN> that it's likely to exact some sort of performance hit. I've seen
DN> no evidence that either system does any sort of specularity effects in
DN> hardware, although one could fake such an effect by using the afore
DN> mentioned reflection-mapping trick.
What about all of the glints on Mario's head when he pops up on the title screen
(or wherever that actually occurs- I've only seen some taped footage)? They look like specular
highlights to me. The waves in WaveRacer also seem to get bright white glints at the
proper angles (perhaps here they have figured out some faking method) and the metallic
texture on the dump truck in some destruction game also seemed to act like specular
reflection.
David Nagy
Pacarana (lar...@gramercy.ios.com) wrote:
: DN> that it's likely to exact some sort of performance hit. I've seen
: DN> hardware, although one could fake such an effect by using the afore
: DN> mentioned reflection-mapping trick.
: What about all of the glints on Mario's head when he pops up on the
title screen : (or wherever that actually occurs- I've only seen some
taped footage)? They look like specular : highlights to me.
I don't remember that part well enough to really say, but as I said
before, they could just be mucking around with a reflection map that
consists only of a white blotch or two floating in on a transparent
background. Or, the model of his head could be detailed enough so that
the Gouroud shaded highlights are small enough to give that 'specular
look'.
:The waves in
WaveRacer also seem to get bright white glints at the : proper angles
(perhaps here they have figured out some faking method) and the metallic :
texture on the dump truck in some destruction game also seemed to act like
specular : reflection.
Interesting. Your guess is as good as mine. (Better, since I've never
even seen that dump truck game.) :)
Dave Nagy
Patrick Deupree
: What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
: been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
: best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
: the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
: they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
: MISHA
Looking at the bottom line numbers doesn't sum up the situation, however.
While I wish I could disagree with their numbers, I understand why UltraGP
gave their ratings, sort of (I think the N64 might have deserved a 6.0
also, but that's just based on the limited games and 3rd party support).
They bit that puts it all in perspective is when the UltraGP folks said
that the Saturn was having some trouble with 3rd party support, and that
the strong games for it are the Sega and Capcom ports, which is basically
fight and racing games.
I especially appreciated that they said, while they gave the others a
higher rating, when you ask anyone in the office which system they play
the most, it's the Saturn.
Phil Rutschman
In article <Pine.HPP.3.95.961202...@holmes.ece.orst.edu>,
erik landerholm <land...@ece.orst.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Dec 1996 sol...@vnet.net wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
> > >N64, @PS quality.
> > No, try 100,000 polygons per second.
> >
> >
> no try 600,000 to 1,000,000 with all special effects turned off. with all
> special effects turned on the max is 100,000 to 300,000. sony psx does
> 300,000/sec with no special effects. it doesn't even have the most
> difficult special effects in the hardware (anti-aliasing, z-buffer,
> tri-linear mip map interpolation, etc) it is no contest in terms of
> graphics horsepower. The N64 has a chip that is still used in high end
> SGI computers, there is no reason to think a machine that is over a year
> older could compete graphically.
Quick, erik, define "tri-linear mip map interpolation"
Didn't think you could.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Phil Rutschman
In article <willie-ya0233800...@news.uoknor.edu>,
wil...@pobox.com (Willie Abrams) wrote:
> In article <580eh4$a...@camel0.mindspring.com>, dc...@pipeline.com wrote:
>
> >Does this mean the PSX can push more polygons than the N64?
> >I do not know the specs of either machine in detail.
>
> From a spec perspective, the PSX can pump more polygons per second.
>
> However, the N64 hardware creates better looking, but fewer polygons
> through the use of anti-aliasing, and a variety of texture mapping
> techniques.
>
> So, it is a wash. Each one has differing capabilities - which result in
> different gaming experiences.
>
> For example, in Mario 64, the distinct polygons are hard to see since the
> antialiasing helps the image quality so much, and you don't notice how
> many - or - how few ploygons are on the screen.
It's pretty good for the Mario object, yes, but the landscape is just
horrid. If you've got a halfway decent eye you also see that edge
antialiasing helps, but doesn't fix, the low res.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Orion
In article <32a4b25b...@news2.idirect.com>, ste...@idirect.com (Alex
Tomic) wrote:
> Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
Well, if the N64 had a CD-ROM drive, this would be undecidedly true (though
10 times is vastly overstating things). However, the N64 is crippled with
that cartridge port, so there are many things that the Saturn, PSX, or even
3DO can do that the N64 simply does not have the capability to do, and
never will.
Damned shame, too.
-Orion
Inconnu
->>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
->>N64, @PS quality.
->
->Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
->really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
->Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
What a load!
Tell me: Why is Final Fantasy 7 going to be relased on two full CDs, if
the Nintendo64 can do "everything" the PSX can do 10 times better.
--
Craig Kelley
i...@inconnu.isu.edu (http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai)
Yoonjoon Lee
> Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
>pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
> 200,000 is well above the spec of an average PSX game. I would say that
> the norm would be around 100,000 while better games might sqeeze an extra
> 30% or so out of the hardware.
Number of polygons doesn't mean much because N64 is doing other SFX like
anti-aliasing and mip-mapping. And, they usually use 1 pixel polygon
(what you're gonna do with 1 pixel polygon in an actual game?) to
measure the polygons per second performance. So, the numbers are
almost meanningless. We better measure their performance with actual
games not their numbers.
Yoonjoon
Anthony Kanner
On 4 Dec 1996 23:01:28 GMT, m...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Tseytlin) wrote:
>What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
>been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
>best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
>the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
>they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
>MISHA
Neither.
Ultra GP thinks the saturn has the best games and that you will play
it the most and gives the saturn the worst ...... and Next Gen .. well
I don't know whats up with them ...
They both suck.
I think the playstation, nintendo 64, and saturn are all close. They
all have good titles. If you want the best for your money saturn is
the way to go .. 3 free games when you buy it by dec 30th plus tons of
great games for $199 .. also saturn has some internal memory.
Playstation is $199 + memory card $25 + game = yikes
nintendo 64 is $199 + game = yikes
Anthony
-----------------------------------
Anthony Kanner
kan...@pacificnet.net
http://www.pacificnet.net/~kanner/
-----------------------------------
nigel....@iee.org
On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Joe Ottoson wrote:
> In article <Pine.HPP.3.91.96120...@club.eng.cam.ac.uk>,
> nigel....@iee.org wrote:
>
> > On 4 Dec 1996, Zsolt Szabo wrote:
> >
> > > In article <32A54B...@popd.ix.netcom.com>,
> > > Obi <obi...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >From a spec perpesptive, the psx can push fewer polygons per second. It
> > > >pushes 200,000 with texture mapping while the N64 pushes 160,000 with
> >
> > 200,000 is well above the spec of an average PSX game. I would say that
> > the norm would be around 100,000 while better games might sqeeze an extra
> > 30% or so out of the hardware.
>
> Actually, you're severly undercutting the PSx's actual ability. Games like
> Sony's Basketball game and Iron and Blood both are pushing over 200k (I&B
> almost reached 300k in fact)
I do love stirring up trouble ;-)
We all know that polycounts are the wildest and most unpredictable
benchmark ever conceived. Resolution, colour depth, hardware effects,
polygon size and shape are usually pushed to one side!
Inconnu
Mark Tseytlin wrote:
-> What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
-> been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
-> best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
-> the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
-> they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
Point of clarification: ng gave the PSX and the N64 four stars, they
basically tied.
Michael Van
Mark Tseytlin (m...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: What do you think of two major sister mags, Next-gen(from what i have
: been told) and UltraGP(I read it) say two different things about the
: best choice for a system. Next-gen said n64 then PSX then Saturn(of
: the consoles) and UltraGP(I though they were nintendo kiss ups but..)
: they said PSX-8.0 N64 7.0 and Saturn 6.0, who do think it right, why?
: MISHA
Next-Gen didn't say the N64 was the best choice overall. They said it's the
best choice if you can wait a long time for a new game to be released and
don't expect a price drop in their games.
Personally, I thought they rated it PS, N64, then Saturn. They said the PS
is still a powerul game console, has lots of games (not all are great
though) both present and future, and can drop their software price faster
than Nintendo since they're on CDs.
Stephan A. Manchir
kann...@ix.netcom.com (Anthony Kanner) wrote, well, typed, actually
(unless they have a newton or other pen based computer, but that's not
important right now, oh, or voice recognition):
>I think the playstation, nintendo 64, and saturn are all close. They
>all have good titles. If you want the best for your money saturn is
>the way to go .. 3 free games when you buy it by dec 30th plus tons of
>great games for $199 .. also saturn has some internal memory.
>Playstation is $199 + memory card $25 + game = yikes
>nintendo 64 is $199 + game = yikes
Of course, if you're like me (and I know I am!) and don't have much
cash, and don't mind missing out on all the new sequels to games
already out that are sure to be coming soon, you can do what I did:
3do is $80 + extra controller $10 + 11 games @$10 each = hey!
of course, you're "throwing money away" on a dead system, but any
system you buy now is dead in a few years anyway, so this just cuts
out the middleman. (not to mention that the 3do has StarControl 2,
imho one of the best games ever made by anyone for anything)
Do not forget to *enjoy the sauce!*
"There is an art, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies
in learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss"
- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
sa...@po.cwru.edu http://k2.scl.cwru.edu/~sam14
Ken
In article <orion-ya02348000...@news.nas.com>, or...@memes.com
(Orion) wrote:
> In article <32a4b25b...@news2.idirect.com>, ste...@idirect.com (Alex
> Tomic) wrote:
>
> > Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> > really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> > Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
>
> Well, if the N64 had a CD-ROM drive, this would be undecidedly true (though
> 10 times is vastly overstating things). However, the N64 is crippled with
> that cartridge port, so there are many things that the Saturn, PSX, or even
> 3DO can do that the N64 simply does not have the capability to do, and
> never will.
>
> Damned shame, too.
>
> -Orion
Nintendo is rumoured to be working on a cdrom attachment for the 64.
Ken
Almo!
It's all academic. N's Game design is still bad. I played Mario 64.
it was Boring. I agree it is beautiful. Mario is cute, and nicely
animated. But nothing happens. You run around to the back of the
creature, grab his tail, and the computer does the rest. Boring.
Almo!
Phil Rutschman
> In article <32a4b25b...@news2.idirect.com>,
> Alex Tomic <ste...@idirect.com> wrote:
>
> ->>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
> ->>N64, @PS quality.
> ->
> ->Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> ->really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> ->Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
>
> What a load!
>
> Tell me: Why is Final Fantasy 7 going to be relased on two full CDs, if
> the Nintendo64 can do "everything" the PSX can do 10 times better.
Maybe they'll release it for N64, on 109 cartriges :)
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Khalid Shaikh
I just have a few words to say.
Here is a little about myself:
I owned a PSX, rented an N64. Sold my PSX, am going to buy an N64. If
Nintendo comes out with good games, I will keep my N64, else I will switch
back to PSX in march. (YES--> I know I'm wishy washy, but that's how I
work.)
> > ->>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform
in
> > ->>N64, @PS quality.
I believe that the N64 will be able to do Tekken II. Maybe with a few less
polygon's, but the advanced texture mapping other related features will
make the game look far better on N64.
> > ->Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> > ->really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> > ->Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
I am all for N64 being better overall, but the PSX has superior sound &
more space for RPGs. N64 will not be able to beat PSX in those areas. You
may think that Final Fantasy X on SNES (don't know the #) was amazingly
complex in cartridge format, but if space was not a requirement, then
Square would not create its first off-Nintendo platform game of PSX.
> > Tell me: Why is Final Fantasy 7 going to be relased on two full CDs,
if
> > the Nintendo64 can do "everything" the PSX can do 10 times better.
> Maybe they'll release it for N64, on 109 cartriges :)
Good one.
bri...@aol.com
Who the hell cares?
You can sit and count polygons all day. If that's all you care about when
you play then I pity you. This whole thing started because somebody took
a NG tech spec and extrapolated on it without understanding the
implications of what he read.
Polygons don't mean much. I have no idea how many polygons are used in
Waverace but from the racers do appear to have a lower polygon count then
the racers in Jet Moto. So what? Waverace looks and plays about 100
percent better. Its in the programing folks. Its in the game design.
DarkStar
Khalid Shaikh wrote:
>
> I just have a few words to say.
>
> Here is a little about myself:
> I owned a PSX, rented an N64. Sold my PSX, am going to buy an N64. If
> Nintendo comes out with good games, I will keep my N64, else I will switch
> back to PSX in march. (YES--> I know I'm wishy washy, but that's how I
> work.)
>
> > > ->>In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform
> in
> > > ->>N64, @PS quality.
>
> I believe that the N64 will be able to do Tekken II. Maybe with a few less
> polygon's, but the advanced texture mapping other related features will
> make the game look far better on N64.
>
> > > ->Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> > > ->really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> > > ->Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
>
> I am all for N64 being better overall, but the PSX has superior sound &
> more space for RPGs. N64 will not be able to beat PSX in those areas. You
> may think that Final Fantasy X on SNES (don't know the #) was amazingly
> complex in cartridge format, but if space was not a requirement, then
> Square would not create its first off-Nintendo platform game of PSX.
>
(Stuff hucked out the 497,000th story window)
Huh? Not good sound? Hmmm... I think anyone who's played Killer
Instinct Gold or Shadows of the Empire would argue. How they got that
stuff onto a cartridge, I'll never know. They did, though, and I am
grateful. It's almost as if the mystic Nintendo gnomes live inside each
and every cartridge, and when they play the music on their little
instruments, they get a fat bonus on their paychecks. I won't even try
to explain it. I'll just say N64 can do anything Playstation can do
except for FMV and pixellization, either of which can be taken either
way. But I still can't find Legacy of Kain!
DarkStar- I need you to be cool. Are you cool?
I Am Cool. -Resivoir Dogs
P.S. Something around 900,000 polygons/sec. actually.
Orion
In article <kstevens-ya023180...@news.scescape.net>,
kste...@scescape.net (Ken) wrote:
> Nintendo is rumoured to be working on a cdrom attachment for the 64.
I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
CD-ROM)
-Orion
Chris
I love the sega but get real try wave race 64 and say that's boring.
Mario is Mario. Same cutesz stuff all over again but in 64 bit form.
Matthew Baldo
Orion (or...@memes.com) wrote:
: I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
: know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
: CD-ROM)
:
: -Orion
about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
world from a CD. FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
Playstation is getting
BWA
Actually, the 64DD's speed would be about that of a 4X or 5X CD Rom...
(the numbers are 790K/sec for the 64DD, while the PSX and Saturn are at
300K/sec... the PSX and Saturn are both 2X CDs...)
More programmers should take a hint from Square and figure out how to
[almost] get rid of these nasty load times...
--BWA--
Matthew Baldo wrote:
>
> One thing you forgot to mention was the fact that the 64DD is
> about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
> want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
> to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
> SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
> worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
> world from a CD. FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
> Playstation is getting
--
"Rien ne vous rend si grands qu'une grande douleur."
--A. de Musset--
"Zero point six-eight seconds..."
Inconnu
In article <32ACFB...@intellink.net>,
DarkStar <dark...@intellink.net> wrote:
->Huh? Not good sound? Hmmm... I think anyone who's played Killer
->Instinct Gold or Shadows of the Empire would argue. How they got that
->stuff onto a cartridge, I'll never know. They did, though, and I am
->grateful. It's almost as if the mystic Nintendo gnomes live inside each
->and every cartridge, and when they play the music on their little
->instruments, they get a fat bonus on their paychecks. I won't even try
->to explain it. I'll just say N64 can do anything Playstation can do
->except for FMV and pixellization, either of which can be taken either
->way. But I still can't find Legacy of Kain!
You're right, synthesized music can be done well; but sounds which do not
lend themselves to repetition will not fare well on the N64. Speech,
guitars, adn digitized sounds (ohhh, that's right we don't need that fluff)
all take up space.
If the N64 can do anything the PSX can do, then why isn't Square making
FF7 for it? How come FF7 is being released on two disks? How come great
games (Wipeout, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider) have files in excess of 400
megs and/or redbook audio from real bands?
Che Lailc
Orion wrote:
>
> In article <kstevens-ya023180...@news.scescape.net>,
> kste...@scescape.net (Ken) wrote:
>
> > Nintendo is rumoured to be working on a cdrom attachment for the 64.
>
> know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
> CD-ROM)
>
> -Orion
Saturn has that option . I know .. but it is not more than a couple of
Kb!
Chris Curry
In article <58kf7r$2...@alpha.psd.k12.co.us>, mba...@psd.k12.co.us (Matthew Baldo) wrote:
>Orion (or...@memes.com) wrote:
>: I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
>: know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
>: CD-ROM)
>:
>: -Orion
>about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
>want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
>to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
>SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
>worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
>world from a CD. FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
>Playstation is getting
Several minutes???
Where are you getting that from, we're talking about a few seconds here.
And if they used a Quad speed drive (which are cheaper than dirt these
days) you're cutting that time in half.
Chris C
------------------------------------------------
It Is Now Safe To Proceed
to the Next Article
------------------------------------------------
Orion
> Orion (or...@memes.com) wrote:
> : I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
> : know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
> : CD-ROM)
> One thing you forgot to mention was the fact that the 64DD is
> about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom.
Which would you rather have, a storage medium with 64MB of space that
transfers at 1500K/sec (or so) or a medium with 650MB of space that
transfers at 1200K/sec (M2, or what Nintendo could have done because 8X's
are cheap as hell)? Don't tell me you would prefer the former...
> I really don't know what we would want a CD rom for.
Try, "for a system that isn't crippled with unneccessary storage constraints."
> Really people if your system is taking several minutes to load it may be next
> gen but it still acts like last gen.
If your system is taking several minutes to load, then you aren't running
any CD based system that I've ever seen. I have never had load times
measured in "minutes" on any CD-ROM system I've used, except perhaps old 1X
PCs.
> SLOW SLOW
> SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
> worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
> world from a CD.
Ahh.. I see, you've been reading Nintendo Power, haven't you. You can't
believe everything Nintendo forces down your throat you know. I think if
you actually knew what the hell you were talking about, you would know that
very few CD games have "prerendered slow loading worlds." The vast
majority of them have "large realtime generated worlds" that are pre-loaded
from the CD in a matter of seconds.
> FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
> Playstation is getting
Well, I'm rather jealous of this, too, as a Saturn user, but I am jealous
of exactly nothing I've seen coming down the pipeline for the N64.
I mean, the N64's effects are nice and all, but they don't make up for the
pitiful lack of graphics detail in N64 games. Better to have fewer
effects, but more textures IMHO. But if you want textures and decent sound
you're going to have to go with the PSX or the Saturn.
-Orion
Charles Flowers
Chris ("crod...@total.net"@total.net) wrote:
OooOOooh! Show me one thing that differentiates WR64 from any other
racing game.--
Charles Flowers
cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
Charles Flowers
Alex Tomic (ste...@idirect.com) wrote:
: On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
: wrote:
: >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
: >N64, @PS quality.
: Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
: really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
: Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
Is this some kind of a joke? Wondering why you haven't seen any
cutscenes or decent audio in an N64 game yet?--
Charles Flowers
cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
Nasty the villian
Charles Flowers <cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us> wrote in article
<58nnua$n...@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us>...
> Alex Tomic (ste...@idirect.com) wrote:
> : Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
> : really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> : Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
>
> Is this some kind of a joke? Wondering why you haven't seen any
> cutscenes or decent audio in an N64 game yet?--
I have heard better than decent audio on the N64, and since when can't the
N64 do cutscenes? What fantasy world do you live in where video game
systems can't display images? The reason that N64 games don't over use FMV
and cutscenes is because of the space limitations of carts, not because it
can't do it. Also, the N64 does 30,000 polygons per seconds with all of its
effects on. Without the effects the N64 pushes twice as many polys as the
PSX with no effects.
Hanson
cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Charles Flowers) wrote:
It's called water. Not a big blue bitmap with white foam bitmaps, but
realistic looking and moving water. No two races are the same.
Hanson
"My neck feels like one gargantuan monkey fist!"
- J. Peterman
Phil Rutschman
> Orion (or...@memes.com) wrote:
> : I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
> : know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
> : CD-ROM)
> :
> : -Orion
> One thing you forgot to mention was the fact that the 64DD is
> about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
> want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
> to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
> SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
> worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
> world from a CD. FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
> Playstation is getting
By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into consoles.
The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
that cannot be described as "several minutes" by any stretch of the
imagination. Nintendo figures wrong when it figures I'm willing to trade
four seconds of my life for a factor of 50 decrease in storage capacity.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Mauro Vito Fiore
Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.video.nintendo: 13-Dec-96 Re: N64 ony
30,000 polygon .. by Phil Rutschman@nwhouse.c
> The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
> takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
you have to be kidding me.....
12x..in a console?
Let's see, the M2 is coming out around the time of the 64DD, if not
later, and it has a 4x...
and you think it's feasible for a 12x....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------"
Mikolaj...we all know pain."
"Yes, but I wanted less of it." - White
"Feel like your life is going nowhere" - Front 242
Chris Curry
In article <YmgXyDS00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, Mauro Vito Fiore <fio...@andrew.cmu.edu>
<machack-ya0231800...@news.nas.com> wrote:
>Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.video.nintendo: 13-Dec-96 Re: N64 ony
>30,000 polygon .. by Phil Rutschman@nwhouse.c
>> By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into consoles.
>> The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
>> takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
>
> you have to be kidding me.....
> 12x..in a console?
Why not?
> Let's see, the M2 is coming out around the time of the 64DD, if not
>later, and it has a 4x...
> and you think it's feasible for a 12x....
I'd say its feasible (as in not adding that much more cost to the console) for
about an 8x. The only problem is foresight. No one could actually predict
that that CD-rom prices would drop as fast as they have and would be a certain
price at the time of a consoles release. Not to mention predicting that the
console's release would be delayed and CD-rom prices would be much lower at
the time of release. And when you have to figure out manufacturing costs and
so forth, you basically have to work within a certain amount of parameters of
what you percieve as feasible at the time.
However when it becomes more apparent that a higher speed CD-rom may have been
feasible, you have a bunch of developers that have been working on games for a
4x drive or the 64DD, or you've already started to manufacture the consoles so
there no turning back or time to redesign.
DarkStar
Phil Rutschman wrote:
>
> In article <58kf7r$2...@alpha.psd.k12.co.us>, mba...@psd.k12.co.us (Matthew
> Baldo) wrote:
>
> > Orion (or...@memes.com) wrote:
> > : I've never heard this rumor.. perhaps you are talking about the 64DD? (You
> > : know, the device that only has less than 10% the storage capacity of a
> > : CD-ROM)
> > :
> > : -Orion
> > One thing you forgot to mention was the fact that the 64DD is
> > about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
> > want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
> > to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
> > SLOW. Nintendo figures that we would rather have large realtime generated
> > worlds that move at a decent speed instead of a prerendered slow loading
> > world from a CD. FF7 is the only game that I am really jealous that
> > Playstation is getting
>
> The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
> takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
> imagination. Nintendo figures wrong when it figures I'm willing to trade
> four seconds of my life for a factor of 50 decrease in storage capacity.
>
> --
> Phil Rutschman
> mac...@nwhouse.com
Then you got a LOT of time on your hands. Some games I've played on
PSX, like Magic Carpet, allow me to take a whiz, get a snack, balance my
checkbook, etc.
12X? My 8X is too fast! You should see Wing Commander II run on
this! It's WEAK! Of course, so is WC2, but...
And a 12X would require a new system, which I don't have the funds to
purchase right now. So I'll leave you in your mystic world of load
times, waiting for something to load, while I finish Mario 64 straight
through and then get a little from my woman. Who had nothing to do
while her Playstation was loading either.
DarkStar- Comedic genius in his own right, but then again, I have no
right to comedy.
Sorry.
Siegfried
Who the hell ever said an N64 can do everything a PSX can do? They are
fundamentally different machines. Obviously, the N64 can't use CD's.
What did you expect? But the N64 is unquestionably more powerful
hardware-wise by a leap. The fact that it can't play CD music is a
deficiency. But I'd say it has a lot more exciting things going for it,
and most people who have played Super Mario 64 or WaveRace64 agree
(though some wouldn't like to admit it). The X can't do everything Y can
argument is utterly worthless. An M2 can't do everything a NES can,
either.
-Siegfried
Rick Worley
> > One thing you forgot to mention was the fact that the 64DD is
> > about the equivalent of a 10x CD rom. I really don't know what we would
> > want a CD rom for. Really people if your system is taking several minutes
> > to load it may be next gen but it still acts like last gen. SLOW SLOW
> > SLOW.
It looks like it will be between $100 and $150 for only 64 MB of storage
and about as fast as a 5x CD-ROM drive. A 6x or 8x CD-ROM would load
levels faster than 64DD, would have 10x storage, and the cost to press a CD
is only ~$1 in volume. 100 MB ZIP media is ~$12, if 64DD media is over $5
than Nintendo is making a big mistake.
Shoshinkai: Nintendo Unveils Incomplete 64DD
Nintendo has unveiled its as yet unfinished 64DD disk drive, but has still
not announced a time of release or price.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The drive is expected to be released in the
summer of next year at a price of between $100
and $150, though the company has not specified
any exact details. At Shoshinkai, Nintendo was
at pains to talk about the machine's function,
and its advantages over other media.
The arguments Nintendo puts toward concerning
its machine concerns some (though not many) new
details about the peripheral.
[Image]
* As much as 32Mb of the 64Mb machine will be
rewritable, though game designers can use
as much of the memory for game code as they
please.
* Loading speed has been marked at 790K per
second. This compares to about 300K per
second for a double speed CD-ROM as used in
the Saturn or PlayStation. A cartridge can
manage upwards of 5000K per second.
* Nintendo has pointed out the major
differences between this, and the old
Famicom disk system. It states that 64DD
attaches to the expansion connector and not
the cartridge slot allowing for game
publishers to release titles as a
disk/cartridge combination.
* As expected, RAM expandability is possible
though Nintendo is not disclosing exact
details. It's expected to be in the form of
a 2Mb RAM booster pack.
* Examples of game 'types' were presented
though no firm details of exactly what
games would be released. These included
extensive RPGs, sports games with
stat-disks and Sim City style data
cultivation genres.
Rick
Rick Worley wrote:
> It looks like it will be between $100 and $150 for only 64 MB of storage
> and about as fast as a 5x CD-ROM drive. A 6x or 8x CD-ROM would load
> levels faster than 64DD, would have 10x storage, and the cost to press a CD
> is only ~$1 in volume. 100 MB ZIP media is ~$12, if 64DD media is over $5
> than Nintendo is making a big mistake.
Nope, the latest word by N64.com and other magazines is that the 64DD is
going to be around $99...and it's at Least as fast as a 5x CD-ROM. If
you're expecting a 6x or higher CD-ROM to come out anytime soon you'll
be very disappointed. The M2 is due out in a couple of years and it's
only going to have a 4x CD-ROM.
Marcin Szymanski
Phil Rutschman wrote:
>
> By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into
> consoles.
What you have to understand is that Nintendo can't just up and decide to
stick a 12x CD-ROM out onto the market. I mean, how would they do it?
Without any games? Without the proper R&D? Pretty much impossible. By
the time you saw a 12x, 20x's would be out and people would be calling
the "N64CD" obsolete.
> The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
> takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and
> even that cannot be described as "several minutes" by any stretch of
> the imagination. Nintendo figures wrong when it figures I'm willing to
> trade four seconds of my life for a factor of 50 decrease in storage
> capacity.
Everybody has their own reaction to load times. Nintendo did surveys, I
presume, to determine the overall consensus regarding this. I suppose
they found that many people (including me) detest load times. After
playing the N64, it was difficult for me to sit down and play Twisted
Metal 2 without grinding my teeth at the load times. Four seconds? If
that's all it was, I would prefer the PSX. It's the culminative effect
of load time, after load time, after load time that really annoys me and
many others. I mean, every time I want to change vehicles in TM2, or
quit and change characters in Tekken 2, or walk into a house in Legacy
of Kain, I have to endure this loading time bullshit. I don't like that.
As always, everything my opinion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcin Szymanski University of Wisconsin-Madison
mszy...@students.wisc.edu 502 N. Frances St. Box 501E
(608) 286-0534 Madison, WI 53703
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benedikt Laube
On 12 Dec 1996 01:42:34 GMT, cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
(Charles Flowers) wrote:
>Alex Tomic (ste...@idirect.com) wrote:
>: On Mon, 02 Dec 1996 13:42:46 -0800, guest <gu...@student.csi.cuny.edu>
>: wrote:
>
>: >In this aspect, Sony Lead the Battle. Tekken can never be perform in
>: >N64, @PS quality.
>
>: Uh, whoever posted this doesn't know a damn thing about anything
>: really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
>: Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
>
> Is this some kind of a joke? Wondering why you haven't seen any
>cutscenes or decent audio in an N64 game yet?--
I guess by cutscenes you mean 'boring, badly done movies between two
levels which you stop running the second time you are playing anyway'.
Let me tell you, I am so glad that the N64 can't do these. They are
redundant.
Did you know that 99 % of all the PSX games are smaller than 50
Megabytes ? The rest is 'decent audio and cutscenes'. ;-)
Oh, by the way, I have both systems, but I haven't been playing a lot
on the PSX sice I have a choice.
Even my Pentium Pro with Voodoo makes the PSX look _old_.
Anyone want to buy a PSX ? Big liquidation, really cheap, must go,
must liquidate !
bye
Orion
> Then you got a LOT of time on your hands. Some games I've played on
> PSX, like Magic Carpet, allow me to take a whiz, get a snack, balance my
> checkbook, etc.
Well, the PSX is notorious for slow loading times, although I have never
used one at length myself. Try a Saturn sometime. The loading times are
only a few seconds long in all the games I've played on it -- except Magic
Carpet.
-Orion
Orion
> Let's see, the M2 is coming out around the time of the 64DD, if not
> later, and it has a 4x...
M2 has an 8X.
> and you think it's feasible for a 12x....
I agree that a 12X would be a little high for a system that will be out in
a year, but I can't see any reason that you couldn't put a 12X in a system
that won't be out until 2 or 3 years down the road...
-Orion
Orion
In article <01bbe7dc$5232c160$b3892299@default>, "Nasty the villian"
<na...@earthlink.com> wrote:
> I have heard better than decent audio on the N64, and since when can't the
> N64 do cutscenes? What fantasy world do you live in where video game
> systems can't display images? The reason that N64 games don't over use FMV
> and cutscenes is because of the space limitations of carts, not because it
> can't do it.
But you see, the exclusion of a CD-ROM was a design flaw of the N64. You
can't just separate the different parts of a system like that. It would be
like me saying that "the reason that Saturn games don't use mip mapping is
because of the rendering limitations of the 3D hardware, not because it
can't do it." Sounds absurd? So does what you just said.
> Also, the N64 does 30,000 polygons per seconds with all of its
> effects on. Without the effects the N64 pushes twice as many polys as the
> PSX with no effects.
Hate the break this to you, but 30,000 polygons is a pathetic number, even
with "all of its effects on."
-Orion
Andrew Ariens
On Tue, 10 Dec 1996 13:04:45 +0100, Che Lailc <C...@funcom.com> wrote:
>Well it can save stuff on the ZIP disk! can you do that on a cd
>Saturn has that option . I know .. but it is not more than a couple of
>Kb!
Yeah, and we all know how HUGE those savegame files are. (sarcasm)
--
Andrew Ariens
ari...@aiinc.com
http://www.trailerpark.com/phase1/ariens/index.html
"There's a lot of love in this room and I don't like it!"
-- James Hetfield
Phil Rutschman
> Phil Rutschman wrote:
> >
> > In article <58kf7r$2...@alpha.psd.k12.co.us>, mba...@psd.k12.co.us (Matthew
> > Baldo) wrote:
> >
> > By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into consoles.
> > The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
> > takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
> > that cannot be described as "several minutes" by any stretch of the
> > imagination. Nintendo figures wrong when it figures I'm willing to trade
> > four seconds of my life for a factor of 50 decrease in storage capacity.
> >
> > --
> > Phil Rutschman
> > mac...@nwhouse.com
>
> Then you got a LOT of time on your hands. Some games I've played on
> PSX, like Magic Carpet, allow me to take a whiz, get a snack, balance my
> checkbook, etc.
> 12X? My 8X is too fast! You should see Wing Commander II run on
> this! It's WEAK! Of course, so is WC2, but...
> And a 12X would require a new system, which I don't have the funds to
> purchase right now. So I'll leave you in your mystic world of load
> times, waiting for something to load, while I finish Mario 64 straight
> through and then get a little from my woman. Who had nothing to do
> while her Playstation was loading either.
Let me get this straight... in the 30 seconds it takes magic carpet to load
(compared to the 30-90 minutes you play) you have time to have sex...
Have you considered a desensitizing cream? I mean really, load time isn't
even enough to start kissing..
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Phil Rutschman
> Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.video.nintendo: 13-Dec-96 Re: N64 ony
> 30,000 polygon .. by Phil Rutschman@nwhouse.c
> > By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into consoles.
> > The longest load time on any of my games (read: the only game where it
> > takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
>
> you have to be kidding me.....
> 12x..in a console?
>
> Let's see, the M2 is coming out around the time of the 64DD, if not
> later, and it has a 4x...
> and you think it's feasible for a 12x....
Just because something is feasable doesn't mean it will be done. If load
time were as big a problem as everyone seems to think it is, then they
could put 12x's in consoles. or even 6x or 8x's. The fact that they don't
only underscores what a crock the load-time argument really is.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Phil Rutschman
> Charles Flowers <cfc...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us> wrote in article
> <58nnua$n...@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us>...
> > Alex Tomic (ste...@idirect.com) wrote:
> > : really. The N64 can do ANYTHING the PSX can, and ten times better.
> > : Whether the N64 has any games is another story :)
> >
> > Is this some kind of a joke? Wondering why you haven't seen any
> > cutscenes or decent audio in an N64 game yet?--
>
> N64 do cutscenes? What fantasy world do you live in where video game
> systems can't display images? The reason that N64 games don't over use FMV
> and cutscenes is because of the space limitations of carts, not because it
> effects on. Without the effects the N64 pushes twice as many polys as the
> PSX with no effects.
No effects=no lighting=pointless to compare cuz it'll look like crap.
Like it or not, btw, the cart limitation is part of the N64, so at least
until the 64DD comes out, the N64 doesn't do FMV because it can't do it.
The reason it can't has to do with the cart limitation, but that doesn't
change the fact that it can't.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Phil Rutschman
In article <32B4E8...@students.wisc.edu>, Marcin Szymanski
<mszy...@students.wisc.edu> wrote:
> Phil Rutschman wrote:
> >
> > By the time the 64DD is out, 12x's would be feasable to put into
> > consoles.
>
> What you have to understand is that Nintendo can't just up and decide to
> stick a 12x CD-ROM out onto the market. I mean, how would they do it?
> Without any games? Without the proper R&D? Pretty much impossible. By
> the time you saw a 12x, 20x's would be out and people would be calling
> the "N64CD" obsolete.
However it is feasable for them to start over and create a completely new
optical format, a completely new drive, etc etc etc....
> Everybody has their own reaction to load times. Nintendo did surveys, I
> presume, to determine the overall consensus regarding this. I suppose
> they found that many people (including me) detest load times. After
> playing the N64, it was difficult for me to sit down and play Twisted
> Metal 2 without grinding my teeth at the load times. Four seconds? If
Or maybe nintendo decided that by making a new format instead of using a
standard, they could ream developers on licensing fees.
--
Phil Rutschman
mac...@nwhouse.com
Da pimp
Orion wrote:
>
> In article <01bbe7dc$5232c160$b3892299@default>, "Nasty the villian"
> <na...@earthlink.com> wrote:
>
> > N64 do cutscenes? What fantasy world do you live in where video game
> > systems can't display images? The reason that N64 games don't over use FMV
> > and cutscenes is because of the space limitations of carts, not because it
> > can't do it.
>
> can't just separate the different parts of a system like that. It would be
> like me saying that "the reason that Saturn games don't use mip mapping is
> because of the rendering limitations of the 3D hardware, not because it
> can't do it." Sounds absurd? So does what you just said.
>
> > effects on. Without the effects the N64 pushes twice as many polys as the
> > PSX with no effects.
>
>
Pathetic number yes, but the least you could do was correct him. The
real number is 160,000 with all the effects on, not 30,000. And while
you are busy kissing up to your cd-rom, it does have its flaws. Most of
the games you have seen to this date have taken advantage of the cd-rom
format. You haven't seen a game that has taken advantage of the 64dd's
capabilities. Wait, and then judge. You may find out that it's your
cd-rom which is very flawed.
Robert Frye
>>Pathetic number yes, but the least you could do was correct him. The
real number is 160,000 with all the effects on, not 30,000. And while
you are busy kissing up to your cd-rom, it does have its flaws. Most of
the games you have seen to this date have taken advantage of the cd-rom
format. You haven't seen a game that has taken advantage of the 64dd's
capabilities. Wait, and then judge. You may find out that it's your
cd-rom which is very flawed.
The only thing 64DD takes advantage of is your wallet. I'll be enjoying
four more playstation games while you buy your beloved periferal.
Hanson
mac...@nwhouse.com (Phil Rutschman) wrote:
>Just because something is feasable doesn't mean it will be done. If load
>time were as big a problem as everyone seems to think it is, then they
>could put 12x's in consoles. or even 6x or 8x's. The fact that they don't
>only underscores what a crock the load-time argument really is.
It's not a crock -- it's a valid issue. Look at KI Gold's team
matches -- you can pick to eleven different fighters per player and
each gets one fall. The last one standing wins. After you knock down
one fighter, another drops down for almost seamless action. Now this
isn't the main thrust of the game, but it is a very fun extra. And
impossible to do on a CD system without having to pause between
rounds. But hey, it's one game. But let's say there are games built
around this priciple. Let's say that this idea is expanded further.
You like your CD system and that's great. But what kind of idiot is
going to try a game like this on a CD system? None? Exactly. You
get the games that are tailor made to the strengths and try to
minimize the weaknesses of the CD format, just as cart games take the
strengths and minimize the weaknesses of the cart format. It doesn't
cut across the board like you believe.
Hanson
"Laugh-a while you can monkey boy!"
- Dr. Emile Lizardo/John Whorfin
Phil Rutschman
> Pathetic number yes, but the least you could do was correct him. The
> real number is 160,000 with all the effects on, not 30,000. And while
> you are busy kissing up to your cd-rom, it does have its flaws. Most of
> the games you have seen to this date have taken advantage of the cd-rom
> format. You haven't seen a game that has taken advantage of the 64dd's
> capabilities. Wait, and then judge. You may find out that it's your
> cd-rom which is very flawed.
CD-ROMs are slow, compared to silicon ROM. They are also read-only, as
opposed to magnito-optical. OTOH, CD-ROMs are cheaper (per capacity) than
either. I don't call that a flaw, I call it a design trade-off.
That said, I trust the established CD-ROM technology more than I trust some
propriatary format developed by a company with a history of price fixing,
cripling royalty structures, and draconian control over content.
--
----/-----------------------------------------/-------------------------\
---/ Phil Rutschman, Macintosh Consultant / Kill Spam Dead! \
--/ mailto:mac...@nwhouse.com / \
-{ { End Corporate Abuse }
-| CompSci Major, Western WA Univ | http://www.vix.com/spam/ |
-+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
Probably the earliest fly swatters were nothing more than some sort of
striking surface attached to the end of a long stick.
Phil Rutschman
In article <32baabc7...@news.ntr.net>, han...@ntr.net wrote:
> mac...@nwhouse.com (Phil Rutschman) wrote:
>
> >only underscores what a crock the load-time argument really is.
>
> It's not a crock -- it's a valid issue. Look at KI Gold's team
> matches -- you can pick to eleven different fighters per player and
> each gets one fall. The last one standing wins. After you knock down
> one fighter, another drops down for almost seamless action. Now this
> isn't the main thrust of the game, but it is a very fun extra. And
> impossible to do on a CD system without having to pause between
> rounds. But hey, it's one game. But let's say there are games built
Or, if they wanted to, they could put more RAM in CD based systems, and
stream data for the next segment off the CD into RAM during the previous
match.
Rob Alexander
Phil Rutschman wrote:
> Just because something is feasable doesn't mean it will be done. If load
> time were as big a problem as everyone seems to think it is, then they
> could put 12x's in consoles. or even 6x or 8x's. The fact that they don't
Wow, someone with a greater attention span than a puppy or a small
child. Maybe there is hope for people :-)
Rob Alexander
Orion wrote:
> I agree that a 12X would be a little high for a system that will be out in
> a year, but I can't see any reason that you couldn't put a 12X in a system
> that won't be out until 2 or 3 years down the road...
Or MEI could just throw in the 12X since the software already written
for the 4 or 8X would still work and the 2nd generation games could
really take advantage of it.
Rob Alexander
Orion wrote:
> Well, the PSX is notorious for slow loading times, although I have never
> used one at length myself. Try a Saturn sometime. The loading times are
> only a few seconds long in all the games I've played on it -- except Magic
> Carpet.
The newer PSX stuff like Destruction Derby 2, Jet Moto, and Tomb Raider
have totally tolerable load times. Anyone who can't bear to wait this
long should see a Psychiatrist for Attention Deficit Disorder.
Alexander Nevermind
Phil Rutschman wrote:
>
> In article <YmgXyDS00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, Mauro Vito Fiore
> <fio...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> > Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.video.nintendo: 13-Dec-96 Re: N64 ony
> > 30,000 polygon .. by Phil Rutschman@nwhouse.c
> > > takes long enough to load that I give a fuck) is on magic carpet, and even
> >
> > you have to be kidding me.....
> > 12x..in a console?
> >
> > Let's see, the M2 is coming out around the time of the 64DD, if not
> > later, and it has a 4x...
> > and you think it's feasible for a 12x....
>
> time were as big a problem as everyone seems to think it is, then they
> could put 12x's in consoles. or even 6x or 8x's. The fact that they don't
> only underscores what a crock the load-time argument really is.
There's a little more to load time (IMHO) than just the sustained data
transfer rate.
While CD-ROM drive speeds have skyrocketed, their seek time barely seems
to break the
300 ms (average seek time) barrier in all but the most expensive drives.
The 64DD goes one better by offering a high sustained transfer rate and
a low
average seek time.
Obinani Mbadiwe
The load times are intolerable because games before did not have them.
People want games to go as fast as possible. Even 16 bit games did not
have load times as intolerable as 32 bit ones. The same goes for cd
quality sound. When the n64 was away, people got used the the red book
audio of the psx. Now that that is almost a standard, the n64 sound
makes people over-react. I got one just a while a go and the sound is
great, but since people are used to cd quality, you will hear people say
such things like "the N64 sound makes my ears hurt", and " whaa- could
that be Marge Simpson singing again"?
Phil Rutschman
In article <32BC4C28.35AC@vid>, Luc Charron <Sava...@videotron.ca> wrote:
> Phil Rutschman wrote:
> > Or maybe nintendo decided that by making a new format instead of using a
> > standard, they could ream developers on licensing fees.
> >
> > --
> > Phil Rutschman
> > mac...@nwhouse.com
>
> Just a question. Do you mean by that that you actualy like FMV ? Duh!
Well, actually, by that I wasn't saying ANYTHING about FMV, I was talking
about Nintendo making the 64DD instead of using CD-ROMs. However, (and this
may come as a shock to some people) I like -good- FMV. It can add a lot to
a game. I dislike bad FMV. FMV in and of itself is a game element which I
neither like nor dislike in general. As an anology, here's a question for
you: In cart-based RPGs, do you like those long sections in which the
characters talk to each other by scrolling text back and forth? Personally,
I like it when the dialog is good, and can't stand it when the dialog was
obviously translated by someone who spoke neither English nor the original
language fluently. Dialog in and of itself is a game element, etc etc etc.
Orion
In article <32b976f5...@news.hrz.uni-kassel.de>,
la...@hrz.uni-kassel.de (Benedikt Laube) wrote:
> > Is this some kind of a joke? Wondering why you haven't seen any
> >cutscenes or decent audio in an N64 game yet?--
>
> I guess by cutscenes you mean 'boring, badly done movies between two
> levels which you stop running the second time you are playing anyway'.
>
> Let me tell you, I am so glad that the N64 can't do these. They are
> redundant.
"Redundant?" How is that? Because they can be replaced with 'boring,
badly written text screens between two levels which you stop reading the
second time you are playing anyway?'
> Did you know that 99 % of all the PSX games are smaller than 50
> Megabytes ?
Did you know that 100% of all the N64 games are smaller than 15 Megabytes?
> The rest is 'decent audio and cutscenes'. ;-)
Neither of which the N64 has.
> Oh, by the way, I have both systems, but I haven't been playing a lot
> on the PSX sice I have a choice.
Oh, and by the way, I don't have a N64, because the games are drab,
uninteresting, and for the most part boring.
> Even my Pentium Pro with Voodoo makes the PSX look _old_.
Ahh, yes.. even your brand-new multi-thousand dollar PC makes your
two-year-old $200 PSX look old. Well, I'd say that you got ripped off on
the PC if it didn't.
And FYI, a Pentium Pro with Voodoo makes the N64 look old, too.
-Orion
Mitch Hulburt
In article <machack-ya0231800...@news.nas.com>,
mac...@nwhouse.com (Phil Rutschman) wrote:
>
> However, (and this may come as a shock to some people) I like -good- FMV.
> It can add a lot to a game. I dislike bad FMV. FMV in and of itself is a
game > element which I neither like nor dislike in general. As an
anology, here's a
> question for you: In cart-based RPGs, do you like those long sections in
> which the characters talk to each other by scrolling text back and forth?
> Personally, I like it when the dialog is good, and can't stand it when the
> dialog was obviously translated by someone who spoke neither English nor
the > original language fluently. Dialog in and of itself is a game
element, etc
> etc etc.
Well put!! I have been looking for a way to get this point across for
sometime but you did it nicely. FMV does not make a game 'horrible' just
because it exists in the game.
I have a friend who has been more or less the "VIVA NINTENDO!" type.
When I'd get a new PSX game like F1 or Tekken 2 which have extremely well
done FMV, he would just skip it, roll his eyes, sigh, and in a sarcastic
voice exclaim, "ooohhh, that's nice". And then usually follow up with the
cliche' "if i wanted to watch a movie i'd rent a movie". Yet when the
'non-FMV cinema' of DarkStalkers or SFA comes up he'll watch that with no
derrogatory remarks. Then if I would bring up Ninja Gaiden and it's
cinemas, those were completely acceptable to him.
I think FMV has been given an extremely tarnished image that die-hard
advocates can't forget. When someone says FMV, usually Sewer Shark and
Night Trap spring into mind. This is not the case anymore. FMV is only an
added element to a game, be it a snazzy intro that gets you psyched up to
play or cut scenes that relay information like in Soviet Strike. A game
like Soviet Strike is a good example, sure you can skip it if you detest
FMV *that* much, but you miss out on an element which is a part of the look
and feel of the game. You also miss out on key points of information. I
think most people who hate any and all FMV are either trying to advocate
their favorite system, or still have the bad taste in their mouths that
"games" like Sewer Shark left behind.
And Sorry guys, I own both a PSX and an N64... I see the benefits which
both of the systems have to offer. (Although I wish I had some actual GAMES
to play on my N64, but that's a whole 'nother topic. :) )
Mitch
Daniel Klugh
Da pimp (wea...@udel.edu) wrote:
: Orion wrote:
: >
: > In article <01bbe7dc$5232c160$b3892299@default>, "Nasty the villian"
: > <na...@earthlink.com> wrote:
: >
: > > I have heard better than decent audio on the N64, and since when can't the
: > > N64 do cutscenes? What fantasy world do you live in where video game
: > > systems can't display images? The reason that N64 games don't over use FMV
: > > and cutscenes is because of the space limitations of carts, not because it
: > > can't do it.
: >
: > But you see, the exclusion of a CD-ROM was a design flaw of the N64. You
: > can't just separate the different parts of a system like that. It would be
: > like me saying that "the reason that Saturn games don't use mip mapping is
: > because of the rendering limitations of the 3D hardware, not because it
: > can't do it." Sounds absurd? So does what you just said.
: >
: > > Also, the N64 does 30,000 polygons per seconds with all of its
: > > effects on. Without the effects the N64 pushes twice as many polys as the
: > > PSX with no effects.
: >
: > Hate the break this to you, but 30,000 polygons is a pathetic number, even
: > with "all of its effects on."
: >
: > -Orion
: Pathetic number yes, but the least you could do was correct him. The
: real number is 160,000 with all the effects on, not 30,000. And while
: you are busy kissing up to your cd-rom, it does have its flaws. Most of
: the games you have seen to this date have taken advantage of the cd-rom
: format. You haven't seen a game that has taken advantage of the 64dd's
: capabilities. Wait, and then judge. You may find out that it's your
: cd-rom which is very flawed.
The CD drive runs at 300k!!!
The fastest drive that I know of (IDE interface through the PBI) is only 58k.
(and the DOS to do that does not yet exist)
And while the memory cards hold 128k,that's not much when dealing with
games like DOOM.(maybe that's why you can't save your game in DOOM)
Also;there are only 15 allocation units (sectors) on the whole 128k cartridge.
They must be using something cheaper than AtariDOS!!!
(at least DOOM could let you save your password to cartridge)
--
The Doctor
Stephan Schaem
Seek time is important for computing... for gaming its should not matter, but
then they are hawfull designer out there that make cd rom seek time more then
important.
4x cd can effectivly fill memory at >600k second. in 4 second you can load
19.2 meg ('cardridges' mega bits that is).More then enought to start active
play.
Most cardrige game take way over 4 second to enter play mode... mario64 is
extremly slow at starting up, and could very well be loaded from cdrom.
My guess is 90% of the cardrige game can be as fast if they where cdrom based
and of better quality (better GFX/sound, and offer extra features)... 10%
left are games like tertris and are totaly waistfull of the hundreds of
megabytes a cdrom can offer. But then tetris on CD would cost maybe 5 time
less to manufacture. I'm sure mario64 take >4$ to produce... what a waist.
Anyway, my guess is nintendo dont want to compete with cd rom based games.
just want to make new 'nes' games, but in 3d... so limiting.
>The 64DD goes one better by offering a high sustained transfer rate and
>a low
>average seek time.
>
You dont need good seektime for console use.... you need it if you have a
brain dead data layout (using files/directory for example).
and 600Kbyte second read is plenty enought for the VERY puny amount
of memory the nu64 has (and all the other console on the market today).
Anyway, in the console market there is ALOT of room for improvment...
Maybe nintendo will get smart and offer a DVD option to expand their
gaming area.
Stephan
Gsjjz
Stephan Schaem wrote:
> You dont need good seektime for console use.... you need it if you have a
> brain dead data layout (using files/directory for example).
> and 600Kbyte second read is plenty enought for the VERY puny amount
> of memory the nu64 has (and all the other console on the market today).
The N64 has the most memory out of all the home consoles out right now.
They have 4 megaBYTES, plus another 2-4 megaBYTES to be added when the
64DD comes out next year. That's a lot for a home console system.
Gsjjz
Um, what is your point? Your talking about an IDE drive and 58k. The
64DD can transfer a butt load more than that buddy. Get your facts
straight, 'k?
Jarr
Kodogr
: Let me get this straight... in the 30 seconds it takes magic carpet to load
: (compared to the 30-90 minutes you play) you have time to have sex...
: Have you considered a desensitizing cream? I mean really, load time isn't
: even enough to start kissing..
Load Time Vs Choad Time.