Nintendo 64's graphics: A letdown?
Master
just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
64. What's the deal!?
Ryan Powell
I know! I really hate those polygon games. The graphics really
suck, but I guess I'll be proved wrong when it comes out, and
all the games will have cool rendered graphics and games that
are huge compared to SNES games.
xxx xxx
: I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
: just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
: that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
: Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
: to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
: like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
: the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
: 64. What's the deal!?
graphics are ray traced which as everyone know is impossilbe for any
computer to do in real time.
Wireframes and polygons techically aren't the same thing, but
co-exist together instead. If they where to use strictly wire frame then
teh characters would look like something out of Red alarm for VB.
The polygons are put on top of the wireframes so you probably won't see
the actual wireframes at all. They only use wireframes whem producing the
game, most of these lines disappear when applying polygons.
And as for those flat surfaces, well, the games are still in
thier very basic stages of creation so they probably won't apply the
anti-asling until later. Anti-asling will take out the flat surfaces and
curve them to make them more smooth.
The characters in KI2 are sprites anyways so you probably would be more
detailed. The models they used where in fact raytraced and had the neat
rendered hair added to them.
If I where you, I'd be waiting till June when Nintendo 64 comes out in
Japan before I make a final judgement on the games. All the mags and this
internet will send back pictures of what the games will look like at %100
completion. Make your observations at that time.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can talk to me in real time at my Favorite Chat system in the world:
Illusive Deceptions. If you feel like callin the distance to some very
friendly people and some smooth and colorful software, Dial
1-604-522-2115...522-7440 and 522-7417. If you call a G-TALK or STS system
then convice your system operator to LINK with us for a couple of hours.
We would love to chat with you. We will be Telinking soon so you won't
need to spend the money on LD or callin the numbers.
A message from
TETSUO(currently known as Tuxedo Mask)
"Leaving? So soon? HOW RUDE." - Megabyte
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shannara21
Woodchuck Takeuchi
Ryan Powell <rpo...@aztec.asu.edu> wrote:
>Master wrote:
>>
>> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
>> just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
>> that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
>> Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
>> to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
>> like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
>> the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
>> 64. What's the deal!?
>
>suck, but I guess I'll be proved wrong when it comes out, and
>all the games will have cool rendered graphics and games that
>are huge compared to SNES games.
Master,
You know, I think I'm one of those who realized something was hokey
when Nintendo demoed pictures of Robotech or something back in 1993,
or whenever Nintendo first announced N64 "Project Reality."
I knew that was B.S., cause it just looked too real. In other words,
the graphics were so good that I was incredulous.
So when I see Mario 64, I'm not surprised. That's what I expected.
I think there are pros and cons to N64-style 3-D graphics, and
the type used in Killer Instinct.
KI:
Pros: they look awesome!
COns: They kinda give away that they're 2-d in reality. You can't
do zoom ins, and you can't get different perspectives. Also, they
take up lots of memory!!! Creating a true 3-d environment would
be impossible. To do something like doom or Duke Nukem, you need
true 3-d.
N64/Mario 64:
Pros: Can create true 3-d environment/world were you can run around,
explore. It really is kind of "immersion" technology. There really
IS a 3-D world in that little box, and you can walk around in it. You
can't do that with pre-rendered 2-d 3-d graphics.
Cons: They don't look as nice as graphics that were rendered on
SGI computers, where 100% cpu time and 30 minutes per frame was
dedicated to draw one dazzling frame.
So it's a trade off.
My personal opinion is that the latter is better. Of course, I'd
like the best of both worlds, but it's not possible yet. Maybe
after I turn 90 years old and die will that technology be available.
And the reason why I prefer the latter is because I think gameplay
is more important than graphics. I'd rather be able to walk around
in a 3-d environment filled with traps and surprises and goodies and
treasures and gold coins and booby-traps than fiddle with funky
2-d rendered graphics.
May god let me live long enough,
--
Kenji Takeuchi ______/---------_______ 4-LINE SIGNATURE FILE
____------- / -----_
__-- /enji /akeuchi------ KENJI'S TOLL-FREE HOTLINE:
-____________---/---------/-----_____ eta...@vertex.ucls.uchicago.edu
John Babich
>From: eman...@airmail.net (Master)
>Subject: Nintendo 64's graphics: A letdown?
>Date: 13 Apr 1996 22:43:21 GMT
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
>just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
>that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
>Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
>to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
>like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
>the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
>64. What's the deal!?
Ok, if you want dinosaurs, then look at creator. It has the best looking dino
I've seen yet on a console. Mario is not supposed to look real, look at S.
Mario World for the SNES...are the graphics rendered, no. But that's fine
because the game was fun.
Remember, these are the first-gen games. The programmers are still trying to
get comfortable with the tools and hardware before they start unleashing their
graphic talents.
John
Rune Moe
>In article <317085...@aztec.asu.edu>,
>Ryan Powell <rpo...@aztec.asu.edu> wrote:
>>Master wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
>>> just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
>>> that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
>>> Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
>>> to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
>>> like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
>>> the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
>>> 64. What's the deal!?
>>
>Master,
I couldn't agee with you more!
Rune
Moronic Mick Demeglio
>
> Master wrote:
> >
> > I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
> > just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
> > that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
> > Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
> > to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
> > like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
> > the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
> > 64. What's the deal!?
>
> I know! I really hate those polygon games. The graphics really
> suck, but I guess I'll be proved wrong when it comes out, and
> all the games will have cool rendered graphics and games that
> are huge compared to SNES games.
>
>
that rival Jurasic Park
Richard T Jordan
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the
N64. I
>just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see
graphics
>that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the
upcoming
>Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky.
There seem
>to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire
frames
>like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing?
I see
>the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 &
Starfox
>64. What's the deal!?
Well, first, the games aren't even done yet. What people have seen
is still not the finished product. There's also the problem that
sometimes the computer doesn't do a video justice....I know that it's
hard to get an AVI that dosn't look blocky.
Also, the reason you don't see KI style graphics in Mario64 and
Starfox64 is because that's not their style. Mario games have always
been cartoonish and Starfox games that fit the mold of stereotype
polygon games is a given. But if you've seen the clips of things like
creator and whatnot, you see they're all not the same. And as stated,
KI graphics for the N64 will be of the same quality as in the arcade.
Hanson
> Also, the reason you don't see KI style graphics in Mario64 and
>Starfox64 is because that's not their style. Mario games have always
>been cartoonish and Starfox games that fit the mold of stereotype
>polygon games is a given. But if you've seen the clips of things like
>creator and whatnot, you see they're all not the same. And as stated,
>KI graphics for the N64 will be of the same quality as in the arcade.
>
SNES. KI64 will be a polygon based 3-D game. It will not look as
pretty, I assure you. There is not way in the world to ray trace 3-D
images on the fly. You will not get Jurassic Park quality images
produced on the fly. The closest you can get are pre-rendered scenes
or digitized 3-D. It's the limits of the hardware. There's no one to
blame, really -- this type of technology simply does not exist yet.
But you can blame Nintendo for imply that it was imminent with the
N64. Remember those Robotech screenshots? Nintendo never explained
if they were actual game shots or FMV sequences. Some people believed
the former, including me.
Hanson
Hanson
Isaiah Paradise
Let me just say that I feel your pain! I too was bewilderd by the lack of
anit-allised, smooth rendered, CGI graphics. "Where the hell is it?" I'd
question Nintendo. Well, now I understand. It's not the hardware folks.
The hardware is an absoult dream! I'm studying Electrical Engineering and
I know for a fact how powerful the hardware it! The problem lies in the
programmers. The graphics you see in T2, and Jurrasic park are the
pennicle of computer generated graphics today. They took months and
months of professional programming and rendering to achieve such flawless
graphics, and they were programmed by the best guys in the business, ILM
(which is the mother company of Silicon Graphics). Silicon Graphics is
responsible for the hardware, but they have not signed on to develop game
for the N64. The games you see are the work of Shigero Myaimoto
(slaughtered the spelling). He has roughly 3 year experience, with
Silicon Graphs, but nothing to create the wonders produced by ILM. Just
understand this: Mario 64 is a very rushed game--even though it's been in
development for over 2 years. The level of programming that's needed for
the N64 is very complicated and hard to grasp. I think it'll take years
for the software programmers to fully understand what the N64 is capable
of. However, I've got to say that I'm still impressed with Mario 64.
It's getting better day after day, and in September you and I will be in
for a big treat.
I also have to mention the fact that memory is a REAL problem with the
N64. By using Carts, developers are tremendously restricted. I think
that once Nintendo develops their Bulky Drive you'll be seing much MUCH
better graphs and deeper gameplay. However, I think that the DVD
technology is much more appitizing. Just think about a 4 gig game with
the speed of a Cart. Just remember the difference between CD graphics and
floppy disk graphics on the computer. The developers have tons of space
to include all the graphics they need with a CD, which obviously isn't the
case with a floppy disk.
So, my advice is to just sit and wait. I'll be getting a N64. If you
have your doubts, then just sit along the side lines and watch.
Everything will unfold the way it's ment to be.
-Isaiah
Jan Siren
back in August 93, and never changed it since. However it was delayed so
much that the standard which they ORIGINALLY wanted to have by Dec 1994 is
poor today.
nintendo boy
On 17 Apr 1996, it was written:
i don't understand how you can say right now that the N64 graphics look
poor?? compared to what the rest of the world has to offer in home gaming
technology and graphics the N64 is the best. If you don't think so tell
me what sytem right now has better graphics??
Jonathan Webb
> Master wrote:
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
> just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
> that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
> Dragonheart.
Are you Crazy?
Even the SGI machines used to create the FX for Jurassic Park didn't have the
power to produce them real-time. As for KI and KI2 characters, they're sprites
just like the ones found in a Mario platformer, only prerendered in a different
way.
J.
Hanson
>I think Nintendo and SGI set their sights for one strict level of quality
>back in August 93, and never changed it since. However it was delayed so
>much that the standard which they ORIGINALLY wanted to have by Dec 1994 is
>poor today.
>
1) Mario 64 is going for a certain "look" -- that is, Mario in 3-D.
Which means that the polygons are one color rather than texture
mapped. Did you think that the graphics in Yoshi's Island were crude
as well?
2) If you want a better idea of texture mapped graphics, look at
Shadows of the Empire. But maybe you'll think it's "poor" as well, I
don't know. They look pretty cool to me.
3) These are screen shots -- actual screen shots. Not SGI rendered
intros, not ray-traced art. A screen shot of Wipeout (a frame of the
game while it's actually playing) isn't the most impressive thing in
the world, but watching in motion is pretty cool. Same with Panzer
Dragoon. Same with a whole host of games. "Graphics" for videogames
are more than the sum of their screen shots -- fluidity of movement is
just as important, and perhaps even more so.
4) These games are not finished. *Not finished*. Check back with me
later.
Hanson
David Wilmot
<fat...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>4) These games are not finished. *Not finished*. Check back with me
>later.
The Mario 64 on show at Shonoshi was only "50% finished" this how
graphical finished it is. The developers say they develope the game
first and then add the high quality effects a few months before release,
since on the N64 it is easy to add and optimise these affects.
David
Bruce W. Tomlin
Pan of Anthrox
>
> I personly think that the graphics are as good as a PC.
it's amazing how people make comparison with a PSX they own and bad pics
from the net or magazines..
PSX games utilize 15 bit color in games ONLY and 24 bit in still shots
(graphics co-processor doesn't know what to do with the 24 bit colors)
So, what is 15 bit color? it's the same amount of colors that a SNES can
create, but a SNES can only display 256 of them.
--
+---------------------------------------------------+
| -Pan- of Anthrox http://www.anthrox.com |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Torbjorn
>sirenj (Jan Siren) wrote:
>>I think Nintendo and SGI set their sights for one strict level of quality
>>back in August 93, and never changed it since. However it was delayed so
>>much that the standard which they ORIGINALLY wanted to have by Dec 1994 is
>>poor today.
>>
>1) Mario 64 is going for a certain "look" -- that is, Mario in 3-D.
>Which means that the polygons are one color rather than texture
>mapped.
Or maybe they just going for fitting it in 96 Mbit ;-)
>Did you think that the graphics in Yoshi's Island were crude
>as well?
Yes ;-)
>2) If you want a better idea of texture mapped graphics, look at
>Shadows of the Empire. But maybe you'll think it's "poor" as well, I
>don't know. They look pretty cool to me.
True...Looks lots cooler than M64 IMHO...
>3) These are screen shots -- actual screen shots. Not SGI rendered
>intros, not ray-traced art.
Yes, from an unfinished games, so the final result may be better,
worse or the same...who knows???
> A screen shot of Wipeout (a frame of the
>game while it's actually playing) isn't the most impressive thing in
>the world, but watching in motion is pretty cool. Same with Panzer
>Dragoon. Same with a whole host of games. "Graphics" for videogames
>are more than the sum of their screen shots -- fluidity of movement is
>just as important, and perhaps even more so.
This is so very true! And this was Mario 64s greatest strongpoint the
motion fluidity, camera-movement and analog-control! Still doesn't
take away the fact that graphics is very "polygonic" and crude in a
sense. To be honest however the latest screenshots are a wast
improvement over the version shown at Shoshinkai...But to draw a lot
of conclusions and even expect this first N64 game to be "the best
video-game in the history" is optimistic, on the verge of silliness
IMO.
/TJ
>4) These games are not finished. *Not finished*. Check back with me
>later.
>Hanson
ellen gaban
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
>just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
>that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
>Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
>to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
>like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
>the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
>64. What's the deal!?
You have to understand that Nintendo deliberately disabled most or all
of the special features that made the games look like the N64 FF7
demo(the one with celes, locke, terra) or the Robotech demo.
Richard T Jordan
<Da...@Demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>In article <3177096d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Hanson
><fat...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>>later.
>
>graphical finished it is. The developers say they develope the game
>first and then add the high quality effects a few months before
release,
>since on the N64 it is easy to add and optimise these affects.
It was also only 20% mapped.
Andrew Crane
<bab...@azstarnet.com> writes
>Remember, these are the first-gen games. The programmers are still trying to
>get comfortable with the tools and hardware before they start unleashing their
>graphic talents
Totally true. Compare Virtua Fighter and Daytona on the Saturn to VF2
and Sega Rally. Also compare Super Mario World and Final Fantasy II to
Yoshi`s Island and Final Fantasy III. Etc.
I expect the graphical difference between N64 games at release to ones
in three years time to be astronomical in comparison to 16-bit and 32-
bit systems.
Of course though, graphics will never be as important in games as
GAMEPLAY, and you can expect tons of that from Nintendo & co. ...
--
Andrew C
xxx xxx
PC does not stand for PSX. PC means Personal computer, namely, IBM.
Despite this, I personally doubt even the 3D-blaster is going to help
make IBMs graphics comparable to N64's graphics.
Scott Anderson
>
> I personly think that the graphics are as good as a PC.
What kind of freaking weed do you have up your computer ass kissing
butt!? Don't you realize that the resoultion on Mario 64 is higher than
your stupid computer can handle? Further more, the graphics were
bi-linear-mip-mapped--which is something that can't be done on any PC
-OR MAC- today. Don't you understand what the game will look like after
the anti-allising kicks in and the graphics are tri-linearly-mip-mapped?
I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand your technology. The N64
will be 10 times more powerful than the Pentium Pro's and it will be
years before you'll see anything compairable on a PC -At a price someone
can afford. By the way....I've never seen any PC graphics that surpass
Mario 64--even at 50% progress.
Luigi Mattera
Scott Anderson (sc...@bmi.net) wrote:
: What kind of freaking weed do you have up your computer ass kissing
Now THIS is pure BUNK! There is nothing Ultra fancy about a 64 bit game
machine.. Do you know that computer's resolutions are so high because they use
screens three or four times as good as a television? You can't get 1024x768
with 24 million colors on a TV, let me tell you. If you tried, it would
flicker horribly. The best you could do is 640x480 and even then it would
flicker a bit. Why do you think when you see a computer monitor on TV it has
that bar going down the screen? The computer monitor resolution is too high
for the TV! HDTV hasn't even been standardized yet, and even then you would
need an RGB cable for it. The only reason why games on a PC take so much power
is because the PC has none of the fancy coprocessors that game machines do, so
everything has to be done in software! All those fancy terms like
antialiasing don't mean much either if there are no games which use them.
Nintendo can fail.. look at the Virtual Boy. I'm not saying I won't be buying
the Nintendo 64 when it comes out - if it is a success I will probably buy it.
--
___ ___
<*,*> Luigi Mattera - may...@acs.bu.edu <*,*>
[`-'] [`-']
-"-"- -"-"-
ellen gaban
may...@bu.edu (Luigi Mattera) wrote:
>Scott Anderson (sc...@bmi.net) wrote:
>: What kind of freaking weed do you have up your computer ass kissing
>: butt!? Don't you realize that the resoultion on Mario 64 is higher than
>: your stupid computer can handle? Further more, the graphics were
>: bi-linear-mip-mapped--which is something that can't be done on any PC
>: -OR MAC- today. Don't you understand what the game will look like after
>: the anti-allising kicks in and the graphics are tri-linearly-mip-mapped?
>: I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand your technology. The N64
>: will be 10 times more powerful than the Pentium Pro's and it will be
>: years before you'll see anything compairable on a PC -At a price someone
>: can afford. By the way....I've never seen any PC graphics that surpass
>: Mario 64--even at 50% progress.
> Now THIS is pure BUNK! There is nothing Ultra fancy about a 64 bit game
>machine.. Do you know that computer's resolutions are so high because they use
>screens three or four times as good as a television? You can't get 1024x768
>with 24 million colors on a TV, let me tell you. If you tried, it would
Yes, but the average computer uses 640x480 with 256 colors. You can
set the amount but why? TVs on the other hand can have as much colors
as you want(not really but you can have so many it doesn't matter at
all). The N64 can display millions of colors and so I would expect
Mario 64 or any other N64 game to do so as well. Do you seriously
think all games for all systems use 256 colors only?
>flicker horribly. The best you could do is 640x480 and even then it would
>flicker a bit. Why do you think when you see a computer monitor on TV it has
>that bar going down the screen? The computer monitor resolution is too high
>for the TV! HDTV hasn't even been standardized yet, and even then you would
>need an RGB cable for it. The only reason why games on a PC take so much power
>is because the PC has none of the fancy coprocessors that game machines do, so
>everything has to be done in software! All those fancy terms like
>antialiasing don't mean much either if there are no games which use them.
Uh, all of the N64 games use antialiasing. Other wise they'd look
like playstation games.
>Nintendo can fail.. look at the Virtual Boy. I'm not saying I won't be buying
>the Nintendo 64 when it comes out - if it is a success I will probably buy it.
How can you assume the N64 will be a failure? Name recognizibility
and the fact that there are still millions of gamers that haven't
bought a 32-bit machine could prove you otherwise
"-
Andrew Crane
In article <uSHGKBAn...@pg-drive.demon.co.uk>, Andrew Crane
<spi...@pg-drive.demon.co.uk> writes
I agree. With myself. :-)
Andrew C
Ian CR Mapleson
ega...@airmail.net (ellen gaban) writes:
> may...@bu.edu (Luigi Mattera) wrote:
> >Scott Anderson (sc...@bmi.net) wrote:
> >: What kind of freaking weed do you have up your computer ass kissing
> >: butt!? Don't you realize that the resoultion on Mario 64 is higher than
> >: your stupid computer can handle? Further more, the graphics were
> >: bi-linear-mip-mapped--which is something that can't be done on any PC
> >: -OR MAC- today. Don't you understand what the game will look like after
> >: the anti-allising kicks in and the graphics are tri-linearly-mip-mapped?
(yes - tri-linear, not bi-linear). For those who are confused by the tech-speak,
here's some info from Symmetric Multiprocessing Systems Technical Report, SGI
Press, 1993 (code EVER-IND-TR-01/93):
MIP mapping
To facilitate high-quality textured imagery, RealityEngine2
employs a technique called MIPmapping. Derived from the
Latin phrase, 'multum in parvo', MIPmapping suggests putting
"many things in a small space". The process involves the
generation of pre-filtered, lower-resolution versions of
each texture so that textures applied to a polygon closely
approximate its size.
Currently, the highest quality texture mapping in use in the
real-time image generation industry is based upon a
technique called Tri-linear MIPmapping. This technique has
been available on Silicon Graphics IRIS 4D/VGXT series of
graphics supercomputers as the highest level of texture
quality; the next lower mode, Bi-linear MIPmapping, has the
best performance. The RealityEngine2 graphics subsystem is
designed as a texture mapping machine, using Tri-linear
MIPmapping as the basic level of texture quality and
delivering the highest level of performance.
...
When possible, it is always best to use MIPmapping. By
performing much of the texture filtering in advance,
MIPmapping provides level-of-detail management in the
application of texture to polygons as the polygons vary in
scale during dynamic motion of the screen. The new
MIPmapping mode added by RealityEngine and RealityEngine2
is Quad-linear MIPmapping, which is used to render 3D
textures.
...
The target quality level and performance mode for
RealityEngine2 is 'Tri-linear Interpolation'. This is the
highest quality texture function available anywhere and may
be found on most of the newer high-end image generators for
visual simulation. To simplify the system architecture, all
MIPmapping texture modes below Tri-linear Interpolation
peform Tri-linear Interpolation while retaining the same
calling sequence as before for compatibility.
For those who are confused by the other techno-babble terms, I can supply
explanations for all of them (anti-aliasing, environment mapping, perspective
correction, texture mapping, depth cueing, etc.)
> >: I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand your technology. The N64
> >: will be 10 times more powerful than the Pentium Pro's ...
(in performance terms, not actually true, but anyway...)
Comparing the two is pointless. The P6 cannot do hardware environment
mapping, texture mapping, etc., because it's not *designed* to. On the other
hand, you can't balance your accounts, publish a newspaper or design a new
living room with a N64. :D
> >: years before you'll see anything compairable on a PC -At a price someone
> >: can afford. By the way....I've never seen any PC graphics that surpass
> >: Mario 64--even at 50% progress.
> >
> > Now THIS is pure BUNK! There is nothing Ultra fancy about a 64 bit game
> >machine..
There's plenty that's fancy. I use a 200MHz (1MB L2 cache) 64bit 64MB SGI Indy
and it is not as fast as the N64 at real-time graphics rendering because the N64
has a dedicated graphics chip specially designed and mass produced for
games.
Mass produced dedicated graphics chips for games consoles will *always* be
faster than low-end dedicated graphics workstations or PCs, but who cares?
They're designed for different things: the N64 for games, the Indy and the PC
for a zillion different other things as well (oddly enough, the development
system for the Saturn is an Indy).
> > ... Do you know that computer's resolutions are so high because they use
> >screens three or four times as good as a television? You can't get 1024x768
> >with 24 million colors on a TV, let me tell you. If you tried, it would
The N64 is the only console to provide future support for HDTV. If it wasn't
for the opposition of the US market, perhaps the N64 would have come with SVGA
and HDTV already built-in (when I visited NOA, I was told that the US market
didn't want to pay for hardware they couldn't use because most US buyers would
not have a PC monitor and HDTV is currently non-existant in the US. It was
therefore decided to follow an add-on approach for high-res support; with
hindsight, this is probably a good idea).
> Yes, but the average computer uses 640x480 with 256 colors. ...
(perhaps this merely tells us how bad the average computer is? :)
(I've never seen an SGI with anything less than 1280x1024. :D)
> ... You can
> set the amount but why? TVs on the other hand can have as much colors
> as you want(not really but you can have so many it doesn't matter at
> all). The N64 can display millions of colors ...
Not all at once. It can draw from a pallette of 16.8 million colours, but the
number of possible simultaneous different colours on a TV screen is just the
number of pixels on the screen, ie. 307200 for US TV, 442368 for European TV
and, in the future, 786432 for SVGA. Even HDTV's 1600x1200 standard would only
be able to use a max of just under 2 million different colours.
> ... and so I would expect
> Mario 64 or any other N64 game to do so as well. Do you seriously
> think all games for all systems use 256 colors only?
>
> >flicker horribly. The best you could do is 640x480 and even then it would
> >flicker a bit. Why do you think when you see a computer monitor on TV it has
> >that bar going down the screen? The computer monitor resolution is too high
> >for the TV! ...
What bar? I've converted many a 1280x1024 simulation video to 768x576 PAL (UK
TV) and didn't get any 'bar'...
> > ... HDTV hasn't even been standardized yet, ...
Actually it has, but the US hasn't bothered with it. Japan uses HDTV quite a
lot (HDTV laserdiscs are quite common), and trials have begun in Europe and, I
think, Canada.
> > ... and even then you would
> >need an RGB cable for it. The only reason why games on a PC take so much power
> >is because the PC has none of the fancy coprocessors that game machines do, so
> >everything has to be done in software! ...
Correct.
> > ... All those fancy terms like
> >antialiasing don't mean much either if there are no games which use them.
I'll be amazed if a company ever produces a N64 game that doesn't use texture
mapping...
> Uh, all of the N64 games use antialiasing. ...
I don't think this is true... the graphics chip produces better quality
texturing *anyway*. I don't think all of the initial N64 games will use the AA
feature, though some will (I hope PilotWings64 and Shadow O.T.E. do). I'll
check on this (contacts :)
> ... Other wise they'd look
> like playstation games.
Not necessarily - don't forget PSX & Saturn games have lower quality graphics
processors anyway. The MIPmapping can perform a subtle form of anti-aliasing
in the first instance, so for some situations using the separate anti-aliasing
hardware might not be needed.
>
> >Nintendo can fail.. look at the Virtual Boy. ...
Had a go on one when at NOA's HQ. Nice 3D effect, but the games are definitely
a bit iffy. I think it'll be a while before games designer really
understand how to take good advantage of a genuine 3D environment. I
won't ever get a VB because of lack of head-tracking, though.
> ... I'm not saying I won't be buying
> >the Nintendo 64 when it comes out - if it is a success I will probably buy it.
Catch 22. If people don't buy it, it won't be a success. You create your own
outcomes.
> How can you assume the N64 will be a failure? Name recognizibility
> and the fact that there are still millions of gamers that haven't
> bought a 32-bit machine could prove you otherwise
True.
I'm buying two, btw. Good for when friends come to visit - blast your pals in
UltraDOOM. 8)
Here's some info for y'all. I've been told that the main controller chip in
the N64 *is* an R4300 and that the 'customisation' that has been done is the
changing of the normal 32bit system bus to a 64bit system bus. Sneaky bams...
Someone emailed me who has received the R4300 technical manual. I'm waiting
for the R10000, R5000 and InfiniteReality technical manuals (on order) so
maybe I'll call up again and order the R4300 one too.
Byeee! :)
Ian.
PS. Hope to have my N64 web site back up in a while. Sorry to all those who
used the page and suddenly found it gone. Yes, I *did* visit Id Software,
Paradigm and NOA in the US last year, but my web pages vanished at about the
same time so I never was able to tell y'all what I saw. I lost my net access
completely for a time (moved house, country and got a new job: am now in charge
of 20 SGI graphics workstations :) - if/when I get my web pages going again,
I'll let y'all know.
SGI Network System Administrator,
Department of Computing (Vernon Building),
University of Central Lancashire,
Preston,
PR1 2HE,
England,
U.K.
email: mapl...@cee.hw.ac.uk
Fax: 01772 892913
The Doom Help Service (DHS).
Co-ordinator of rec.games.computer.doom.help (home of the DHS).
scannz
> Bruce W. Tomlin wrote:
> >
> > I personly think that the graphics are as good as a PC.
>
> butt!? Don't you realize that the resoultion on Mario 64 is higher than
> your stupid computer can handle? Further more, the graphics were
> bi-linear-mip-mapped--which is something that can't be done on any PC
> -OR MAC- today. Don't you understand what the game will look like after
> the anti-allising kicks in and the graphics are tri-linearly-mip-mapped?
> can afford. By the way....I've never seen any PC graphics that surpass
> Mario 64--even at 50% progress.
cbusylol
Fobius
I've played so much Mario Kart online with a buddy of mine and sunk so many hours into playing Hyrule Warriors with my wife. Bayonetta 2 is also fantastic. I don't know, the games on Wii U just have so much personality. Nintendo definitely didn't market the Wii U correctly but I don't think that there is anything wrong with the hardware or the software. I haven't met a dissatisfied Wii U owner yet to be honest. Well some like the gamepad more than others. Games are also kind of cheap compared to releases on Xbox One or PS4.
cbusylol
patrickl...@gmail.com
> Bruce W. Tomlin wrote:
> >
Don't you realize that the resoultion on Mario 64 is higher than
> your stupid computer can handle?
gfl...@gmail.com
patrickl...@gmail.com
tobias.v...@gmail.com
hotdogf...@gmail.com
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
> just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
> that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
> Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
> to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
> like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
> the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
> 64. What's the deal!?
ipodc...@gmail.com
> computer to do in real time.
Oh how the tables have turned
mackbl...@gmail.com
fredw...@gmail.com
Mojito
Mike Garcia
MrBelvedere
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:08:12 -0700, Mojito wrote:
>
>> Well we have come a long way. But I'm playing super mario 64 right now
>> and found this forum by accident when looking up a guide. a piece of
>> internet history right here.
>
> there was a N64 gamejam that ended a few months ago!
>
>
>
programming, if I had the free time.
I've gotta say, there's something special about continuing a thread that
is nearly 25 years old. If this was a forum, it've been locked a long
time ago. As it is, this thread is old enough to run for Congress (and
couldn't do worse.) Beat that streak, Snapchat!
Fire Striker
> Master wrote:
> >
> > I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
> > just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
> > that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
> > Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
> > to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
> > like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
> > the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
> > 64. What's the deal!?
The graphics don’t suck and you will be proved wrong when it comes out, and allthe games will have cool rendered graphics and games that are huge
Retro GameDev
> I don't want to be a pessimist. I REALLY am is anticipation the N64. I
> just have one problem. What's with the graphics? I expected to see graphics
> that would rival movie productions such as Jurassic Park and the upcoming
> Dragonheart. Instead I see pics and movies that are edgy, blocky. There seem
> to be TOO MANY FLAT surfaces! I thought the characters would use wire frames
> like in KI 1 & 2. Wire frames and polygons, are these the same thing? I see
> the graphics in KI2 and they look much more realistic than Mario 64 & Starfox
> 64. What's the deal!?
Retro GameDev
Retro GameDev
> Scott Anderson (sc...@bmi.net) wrote:
> : your stupid computer can handle? Further more, the graphics were
> : bi-linear-mip-mapped--which is something that can't be done on any PC
> : -OR MAC- today. Don't you understand what the game will look like after
> : the anti-allising kicks in and the graphics are tri-linearly-mip-mapped?
> : I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand your technology. The N64
> : will be 10 times more powerful than the Pentium Pro's and it will be
> : years before you'll see anything compairable on a PC -At a price someone
> : can afford. By the way....I've never seen any PC graphics that surpass
> : Mario 64--even at 50% progress.
> with 24 million colors on a TV, let me tell you. If you tried, it would
> flicker a bit. Why do you think when you see a computer monitor on TV it has
> that bar going down the screen? The computer monitor resolution is too high
> is because the PC has none of the fancy coprocessors that game machines do, so