I still can't remember if I found the n64 and ps1 graphics impressive when they first came out. What did you guys think?
>>12808453
>>12808453It felt more like a completely different paradigm, incomparable to what came before.
>>12808458sweet
They weren't impressive, they were mind boggling.
>>12808453I can remember being impressed by Goldeneye's graphics when it was released. PC shooters at that time were very pixelated but Goldeneye wasn't, smeary, foggy, and low res, sure, but not pixelated, and that impressed me.
>>12808504A lot of people thought the N64 was technically superior only thanks to its bilinear filtering.
>>12808469I felt the same way back then. Yes, the graphics were impressive for the time, but what really caught my attention was that most of the games were unlike anything we'd seen on previous consoles.
>>12808453Playstation graphics blew me away. Same with the PS2/Xbox. Ever since then, nothing seems that impressive. 4 generations of massive improvements that make your jaw drop and then nothing since.
>>12808558Well, 3D has been covered for decades now and resolution increase from 720p to 2k will never be as impressive as the jump to a whole new dimension.
3d graphics and worlds seemed limitless. everyone thought there were hidden levels and secrets everywhere due to being in awe of the graphics and ignorant of the actual game development process or how games worked on a technical level.
>>12808453The first time I ever found 3D games impressive was seeing a Crazy Taxi arcade. Every 3D game I played in the 90s didn't impress me on any console, I did occasionally find FMVs impressive.
>>12808596I thought most PS5/XSX games were still 1080p @ 20-30fps.
>>12808453>I still can't remember if I found the n64 and ps1 graphics impressive when they first came out.That's because you were in your dads ball sack at the time.
>>12808453I remember when I got the n64, and watched the opening to Shadows. The outrider flies down to Hoth as a 3d model and I shit myself
>>12808453I was already a hardcore PC gamer by the time they released, so I wasn't that impressed.
>>12808834PC didn't have nice looking texture mapping like the N64 though. It didn't have it for a long time.
>>12808453Yes 5th gen impressed me graphically, I remember nfl quarterback club 98 fooling my mom into thinking I was watching football on our old CRT in the basement. She was confused as to why the nfl was playing on a Friday night. But in general games like OOT and rogue squadron for my n64 and games like smackdown and FF8 had graphics that impressed me more than the jump from and NES to an SNES … which I also found very impressive at the age of 10
>>12808453>n64 and ps1 graphics impressivei don't recall anything about N64 back then except it had a mario game and a starcraft port. but i never played Starcraft 1 until like 2002.PSX graphics were not that impressive compared to some of the 480p games i played on a shitty "business" DOS laptop i had as a kid. but the 3D graphics hooked me, even though they were in lower-res. you would have to play a lot more to play 3D graphix smoothly on a PC. at least a thousand bucks for me , in my shitty cunt. and the vibration controller was kino in Silent Hill and some other action games.
>>12808453I remember not being impressed by Dreamcast's graphics when it came out. remember looking at the demo of some low poly rpg in babbages and saying it looked just like ps1 and n64 graphics and the wagie behind the counter getting mad at me
>>12808504If I wanted a smeared mess I could just take my glasses off. Not something that is impressive.
>>12808834Nice larp. PSX and Saturn had an edge on PCs for 3D when they released and it wouldn't be until 1997 and GPUs becoming the norm that things turned around. PCs did have 3D games during that time but they were usually in response to console games (Ridge Racer -> Screamer), so coming out later, or usually ran worse because they were only CPU powered and/or had terrible draw distance (Magic Carpet, Descent, Terminator Future Shock) and until mid 96 were only made by some of the best devs pushing limitations, while on console it was just everyone doing that stuff much more easilyIt's not me saying this BTW, it was the entire industry. Also, even 3DFX cards getting bilinear filtering was probably in response to the N64>>12808923The N64 though came out later, and textured mapped 3D PC had even before GPUs became the norm. The only edge the N64 had was on framerate and it would only take a few months for PCs to catch up to that as a norm, time during which very few games were being released on N64.
>>12808453As much as people jerk off good 2D graphics now, that was absolutely not the case in the mid to late 90s. A 2D game could've come over and personally blown you, and you'd still be completely enthralled by 3d graphics. It literally cannot be understated how much of a paradigm shift it was.
>>12808453I like the N64's lack of wobbling and warping
>>12808453Ocarina of Time looked pretty sick the first time I saw it at my friends house, so probably.
>>12809903Nta.Dude, we had stuff like Strike Commander before the PSX came out, so it didn't feel like a quantum leap but simply an incremental evolution of the medium.https://youtu.be/1eEIIpx69-w
>>12809903And arcades wiped the floor with everything
>>12809903I had a 486 which was normal and going from stuff like Slipstream 5000 to ps1 was crazy. Even by N64 you had full 3D like in Starfox while a lot of PC games were still 2.5 D.These days I like those early pc games since you can try and run stuff like Fatal Racing in 640x480 on a P3 and you have all those sharp 2D games.>>12809978You had stuff like that played to PC strengths and also ps1 ports that needed a P200. Carmageddon was that for me.>>12808453I sometimes would see Ridge Racer and Crash footage on some tech tv show and it was nuts seeing that detail at that framerate. Nowdays we can see that most of early games were far below that quality.
my reaction to early 3d graphics was a mixed bagthought they looked really nice but the jank fps really bothered meif the n64 and psx did the graphics that they had at 60 fps, i probably would have thought 2d games were completely obsolete at the time
>>12809978Thag video is bullshit. Strike commander ran at like 10-15fps on a 486 DX2/66 at 320x240. Your footage is dosbox with a modern PC. In the developers own interview they explained the limitations of 1993 PC hardware. When pentiums became affordable after 1995 this was no longer an issue but at the time the playstation launched most PC gamers were still on the old 486.In testing strike commander in the dec 1993 issue of computer gaming world they used a falcon V, the fastest purpose built gaming PC of the era with a DX2/66, a fast hard drive and the best gaming optimized VLB graphics card. It was considered the most damanding game to date, the "crysis" of the late dos era before the arrival of 3D cards.
>>12810387>Your footage is dosbox with a modern PC.Sure, nobody's claimed otherwise and the Crysis comparison is quite apt.I was just illustrating what was considered state-of-the-art on a PC at the time and why we weren't blown away by the PSX like someone who was coming from the SNES would.To reiterate, I'm not claiming that a PSX-launch era PC could CPU-bruteforce better 3D graphics than the GPU-accelerated Playstation, but simply that the difference wasn't big enough to be considered a paradigm shift.
>>12808453To me, The Playstation felt like graphics of the future. it blew me away.
>>12808453It was so mind blowing myself and my entire school collectively stopped caring about 2d games. It changed how our minds processed gaming on a fundamental level. Sounds dumb in hindsight but idk what to tell you man. It was some wild shit.
