PDA

View Full Version : Micro-64 Feature: Nintendo 64 Vs. Sega Saturn



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Guntz
03-01-2014, 04:43 AM
You all know Micro-64, right? Usually it has N64 articles. This time around, we've got a comparison between the N64 and Saturn. Check it out here:

http://micro-64.com/features/n64vssaturn.shtml

You can also comment on the feature on Micro-64's official forum here:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/Micro_64/index.php?showtopic=102&st=0&#last

KitsuneNight
03-01-2014, 07:54 AM
more balanced then i expected but there is still a clear n64 bias

yeah there is no pleasing sega fans ;)

cowboyscowboys
03-01-2014, 10:06 AM
Yikes really? I owned an N64 and about 35 games as a 8-12 year old and have almost no desire to ever play any of them every again. Saturn on the other hand I haven't played but being a 2D fan and action gaming I would already give it the edge.

DarkDragon
03-01-2014, 10:42 AM
I want to collect all the N64 fighters some day. Shouldnt be too hard since they said there's less than 25. Might be torture to play though since they mostly are going to be blocky and ugly textures. Ill still take the PSX over both of them because of the RPG's/Square Enix. That to me trumps all the Saturn's shooters since I dont care about shooters that much. When it comes to 2D fighters though Saturn is king there no doubt.

KitsuneNight
03-01-2014, 11:32 AM
^eeeh i wouldnt be so sure about that
there might not be that much but one fo them sure as fuck is expensive

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 11:53 AM
The most useless console ever, at least I think, vs the coolest console ever.

It's like comparing a Chevy Vega to a Trans Am

Moirai
03-01-2014, 12:53 PM
When it comes to 2D fighters though Saturn is king there no doubt.

There are quite a few great 3D fighters on Saturn too, i dont know how most people tend to ignore that.

You have Virtua Fighter 2, Fighting Vipers, Fighters Megamix, Dead or Alive, Savaki, Anarchy in the Nippon, Last Bronx, Virtua Fighter Remix, Virtua Fighter kids, Virtua Fighter 1.. (everyone says its bad but i think its underrated...)

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 01:33 PM
Blind Crapcom fanboys that have never played an SNK game love the Saturn's ports of Vampire Savior, Street Fighter Zero 3, and Marvel Super Heroes VS. Street Fighter.
Way to make your article look immature and stupid.

Barone
03-01-2014, 01:38 PM
i dont know how most people tend to ignore that.
Why would anyone play this:

FHkebZqfvSk


When you could wait just like three years to play this (at 1/4 the resolution and 1/2 the frame rate using poorer textures BUT with a fancy explosion effect):

0l3QC5ZgvFU

?

Guntz
03-01-2014, 02:07 PM
Way to make your article look immature and stupid.

That wasn't me who wrote that.

To the people saying the N64 sucks, the site owner wouldn't allow the article to be published if the Saturn won, so we ended it in a tie. The Saturn truly does miss out on some nice things the N64 had, like 3D platformers, racing titles and significantly more advanced 3D graphics. If you look over the article closely, we tried to keep evaluation equal, where a system would win if it clearly had a better advantage, or a tie if both had significant strengths.

Moirai
03-01-2014, 02:15 PM
Way to make your article look immature and stupid.

Offended?


I wrote the saturn side of this article. That part was meant more as a joke, as i've witnessed quite a few Capcom fanboys that act like that. I was mainly just poking fun at them. All those games i mentioned are actually quite good.

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 02:20 PM
No personal offense. I just don't think it's good idea for stuff like that to be in comparison articles that are attempting to be objective even if intended as a joke.


There is an abundance of 2D and 3D shmups, around 75 in total. The saturn is renowned for its shooting game library and many of them are considered the best of their genre, such as Soukyugurentai, Batsugun, Thunder Force V, the ever-popular Panzer Dragoon games, and the earlier-mentioned Radiant Silvergun. The Nintendo 64 on the other hand has only four shmups on it: Bangaioh, Dezaemon 3D, Robotron, and Star Soldier Vanishing Earth; none of which are very highly regarded.
No Sin And Punishment? That's my favourite shooter on those systems. Or was it left out because of having some other genre elements like jumping?

Moirai
03-01-2014, 02:23 PM
No personal offense. I just don't think it's good idea for stuff like that to be comparison articles that are attempting to be objective even if intended as a joke.


No Sin And Punishment? That's my favourite shooter on those systems. Or was it left out because of having some other genre elements like jumping?

hmmm, more like it was left out as an oversight. oops.

Maybe i can get it fixed...



No personal offense. I just don't think it's good idea for stuff like that to be in comparison articles that are attempting to be objective even if intended as a joke.

To each his own. Not like this is some kind of academic essay, Its supposed to be an entertaining read thats somewhat informative.

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 02:29 PM
On the plus side, I'm glad the see the Saturn getting some positive exposure on a Nintendo 64 site. Hopefully this will get some people to check out the system. :)

Moirai
03-01-2014, 03:27 PM
Theres another Saturn vs N64 related article in the works as well. stay tuned!

Chilly Willy
03-01-2014, 03:55 PM
In the end, what matters is games, and the ability to play them. So it's down to the library and the controller, both of which favor the Saturn. So while the N64 is clearly a far superior piece of technology, it wasn't better at the given purpose - being a game console. In essence, you can have more fun with the Saturn.

Guntz
03-01-2014, 04:24 PM
I'll take suggestions into account and make adjustments.

As said before, the site owner (cheaterdragon1) refused to believe the N64 could be beat, so we had to give both consoles an equally fair shake. N64 has good games in its abundant genres, no question. Does the Saturn have more games overall? No question. The big thing to note is the Saturn excelled in what was considered niche genres of the time. N64 had what was popular, good looking 3D games. That kind of history has to be taken into account. To say the Saturn is completely better, without any perspective, is wrong. People constantly do that with SNES, by saying it's better than Genesis because of RPGs. That's wrong, the Genesis was just as good, but for different reasons.

It might interest the rest of you to know, I guess partly due to this article, I'm trading AlecRob for one of his Saturns, I'll be getting a modchip for it and a stack of CD-Rs.

maxi
03-01-2014, 05:16 PM
Game genres tied?
Platformers, FPS and racing games are better on N64, and that's it.
But I agree that we should consider that the N64 did better by the bad administration of Sega, leaving behind half of the good games of the console in Japan. Is quite understandable that people at the time prefer to buy the N64.

spiffyone
03-01-2014, 05:17 PM
In the end, what matters is games, and the ability to play them. So it's down to the library and the controller, both of which favor the Saturn. So while the N64 is clearly a far superior piece of technology, it wasn't better at the given purpose - being a game console. In essence, you can have more fun with the Saturn.

Yeah...no. Gotta disagree. At least at the time.

At the time, N64 had the stronger library. But time has not been kind to the N64 library. Saturn's has aged quite a great deal better.

That being said, there were several genres that were just flat out better on N64, and still are (platformers, racers, FPS). The same holds true for Saturn, though (shmups, fighters, RPGs).

Neither really held a candle to the PS1 library, though. Doesn't mean the PS1 was the better hardware or anything, just that it had, pound for pound, the strongest library of the consoles of that gen. There really weren't many weaknesses in that library in terms of good games in a variety of genres.

spiffyone
03-01-2014, 05:20 PM
Game genres tied?
Platformers, FPS and racing games are better on N64, and that's it.
But I agree that we should consider that the N64 did better by the bad administration of Sega, leaving behind half of the good games of the console in Japan. Is quite understandable that people at the time prefer to buy the N64.

Action/adventure games were also better on N64 (Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, RE2, Shadow Man, Body Harvest, etc.).

Da_Shocker
03-01-2014, 05:30 PM
My fave N64 game of alltime


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCg7CLQ1T7U

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 05:46 PM
N64 wins for platformers in 3d but when including 2d, it's not an automatic win. The SS had stuff like Elevator Action Returns, Shinobi Legions, Rayman, etc.. The two systems are pretty much apples and oranges for the platform genre. And stuff like Banjo Kazooie could also be called action/adventure.

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 05:50 PM
That wasn't me who wrote that.

To the people saying the N64 sucks, the site owner wouldn't allow the article to be published if the Saturn won, so we ended it in a tie. The Saturn truly does miss out on some nice things the N64 had, like 3D platformers, racing titles and significantly more advanced 3D graphics. If you look over the article closely, we tried to keep evaluation equal, where a system would win if it clearly had a better advantage, or a tie if both had significant strengths.

I have a hard time believing that

Guntz
03-01-2014, 05:54 PM
N64 wins for platformers in 3d but when including 2d, it's not an automatic win. The SS had stuff like Elevator Action Returns, Shinobi Legions, Rayman, etc.. The two systems are pretty much apples and oranges for the platform genre. And stuff like Banjo Kazooie could also be called action/adventure.

You see, that's what makes this article so weird, Saturn and N64 are very different. Given the huge ups and downs, we couldn't really give the win to one console, it only made sense to end on a tie. I can see why Saturn should win in some eyes, but N64 had its own qualities.

The lesson we should all learn is to buy both an N64 and Saturn.

PS1 sucks though. :p


I have a hard time believing that

http://micro-64.com/database/genrerundown.shtml

57 racing games, out of 296 total releases. USA mind you.

Black_Tiger
03-01-2014, 05:56 PM
Action/adventure games were also better on N64 (Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, RE2, Shadow Man, Body Harvest, etc.).

Going by your last two posts, I have to assume that you are strictly judging them based on Western libraries.

Saturn has action/adventure stuff like Castlevania NitM, Legend of Oasis, AD&D SoM, Princess Crown, Magic Knight Rayearth, Dark Savior, etc.

Saturn also has a better libraries for stuff like digicomics, war sims, puzzle, etc.

Barone
03-01-2014, 06:09 PM
I'm going to promote this game for the nth time 'cause finally someone provided a proper capture of this game with sharp image quality.
This game puts Gran Turismo 2 graphics to shame. And it has superb gameplay.


Especially the tracks at 11:02, 35:04 and 45:47

wlz0622CAf4


The Las Vegas track is mind-blowing IMO (at 0:46)

wmA2qM6Eh00


Las Vegas track in hires mode at 19:23

ZFCSCiBr5pw

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 06:27 PM
I have a hard time believing that

Did you know that there are actually more racing games released for the N64 than there are for the Saturn? It's true! More and overall better. The Saturn has some good racing games, but not as much variety -- it doesn't have as good kart racers, it's got nothing as good as WDC in the simmish category, no water racing games like Wave Race 64 or Hydro Thunder, etc.

Soulis
03-01-2014, 06:36 PM
more balanced then i expected but there is still a clear n64 bias
As opposed to the Saturn bias around here?



In the end, what matters is games, and the ability to play them. So it's down to the library and the controller, both of which favor the Saturn. So while the N64 is clearly a far superior piece of technology, it wasn't better at the given purpose - being a game console. In essence, you can have more fun with the Saturn.
Is this a fact? Because if it is then i think i was wrong the whole time.

Guntz
03-01-2014, 06:57 PM
I gotta find a copy of World Driver Championship.

Soulis
03-01-2014, 07:02 PM
I gotta find a copy of World Driver Championship.
I got this game recently. Its the kind of game that you wish it would appear earlier in the console's lifecycle. N64 users only got their "Gran Turismo beater" waaay to late. It also shows what the N64 can do with this genre in terms of graphics.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 07:07 PM
ZYMK1Zt2B5s

1RWu0j6sGCQ
Excitebike 64 is another one of the N64's best-looking (and best-playing) racing games. Incredible game! It's still one of the best motorcycle racing games ever. The big outdoor levels do look better than the arena ones, though. Otherwise amazing stuff.


As opposed to the Saturn bias around here?
But any bias which doesn't conform to Sega-16 consensus is factually wrong, didn't you know?


Is this a fact? Because if it is then i think i was wrong the whole time.
Definitely isn't. :p


In the end, what matters is games, and the ability to play them. So it's down to the library and the controller, both of which favor the Saturn. So while the N64 is clearly a far superior piece of technology, it wasn't better at the given purpose - being a game console. In essence, you can have more fun with the Saturn.

The libraries are so different that it's a pure matter of opinion really (but more people in the West would like the N64's library than the Saturn's, even including import titles), but the N64 has the better controller for sure! The PS1 and Saturn have 3d games which control horribly because you've got to try to control a 3d game with a d-pad, but the N64's analog stick on the controller fixes that problem. That controller was the best thing to happen to 3d gaming ever. The Saturn has various analog controllers and they're great, but not all games which should support them do, while on the N64, since the main controller is analog, everything that should have analog, does. Big advance.


I got this game recently. Its the kind of game that you wish it would appear earlier in the console's lifecycle. N64 users only got their "Gran Turismo beater" waaay to late. It also shows what the N64 can do with this genre in terms of graphics.
Uh, WDC didn't release that late. The game released in May '99, about a year after GT1 on the PS1 and six months before GT2, going by US release dates.

Soulis
03-01-2014, 07:17 PM
Was it released too late in Europe then? Dunno, it felt that way. Or maybe i remember things wrong.

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 07:21 PM
(but more people in the West would like the N64's library than the Saturn's, even including import titles)
That's more of a guess than a fact.


The Saturn has various analog controllers and they're great, but not all games which should support them do
What Saturn games are these? I can't think of any good ones. Even Panzer Dragoon 1 supports analog control.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 07:29 PM
That's more of a guess than a fact.
Eh, not really. I mean, the Saturn is best at what? Shmups, fighting games, what else? Those aren't nearly as popular as the N64's top genres, which have been listed earlier (though I would also add wrestling; I can't stand those games myself, but the N64's wrestling games were hugely popular and are widely considered to be maybe the best ever, the Aki ones in particular.). And the other genres the Saturn is good at are mostly things the Playstation does just as well or better, too.


What Saturn games are these? I can't think of any good ones. Even Panzer Dragoon 1 supports analog control.
Impact Racing, Willy Wombat, Bulk Slash, Solar Eclipse, Independence Day, Sonic 3D Blast, Bug, Bug Too, etc etc...


Was it released too late in Europe then? Dunno, it felt that way. Or maybe i remember things wrong.
It looks like it released six months later in Europe, so November '99.

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 07:43 PM
Eh, not really. I mean, the Saturn is best at what? Shmups, fighting games, what else? Those aren't nearly as popular as the N64's top genres, which have been listed earlier. And the other genres the Saturn is good at are mostly things the Playstation does just as well or better, too.
Who knows, a lot of PS1 RPG fans might like Shining games or Panzer Dragoon Saga if they played them. These were released on a dying system in the West with virtually no advertising. I'm not saying more people wouldn't like the N64 but either way there isn't any big census to back that up.


Impact Racing, Willy Wombat, Bulk Slash, Solar Eclipse, Independence Day, Bug, Bug Too, etc etc...
The Bug games wouldn't really benefit from analog control. And aside from Bulk Slash, the rest of those games aren't very good.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 07:50 PM
Who knows, a lot of PS1 RPG fans might like Shining games or Panzer Dragoon Saga if they played them. These were released on a dying system in the West with virtually no advertising. I'm not saying more people wouldn't like the N64 but either way there isn't any big census to back that up.
But it wasn't those games which made the PS1 a hit in the West. Well, FF7 yes, but not any strategy games like the Shining Force ones. The big system sellers on the PS1 in the US were mostly Western-developed titles, along with certain Japanese games like Ridge Racer and FF7. And apart from shmups and fighting games, the Saturn doesn't quite match the PS1 in any genres the two systems are good at. I do think that with better marketing games like PDS, Grandia, and Burning Rangers should have been successful, but the Saturn just doens't have the library to beat the N64 in the West; it'd need a much better Western-developed library to do that.


The Bug games wouldn't really benefit from analog control. And aside from Bulk Slash, the rest of those games aren't very good.
Bug Too definitely would! The first Bug has mostly straight line planes and intersections, but the second game has a lot more areas with depth, and analog controls would be an improvement there.

As for those other games, Willy Wombat and Bulk Slash are pretty good. Impact Racing, Solar Eclipse, and Independence Day aren't great, but Solar Eclipse at least is okay, and they'd all be better with analog controls, that's for sure... the two flight games especially. Also I added Sonic 3D Blast to the list, since that game might benefit from analog controls as well. You can use the analog stick on the 3d controller in the game, but it's not actually analog.

And anyway, why should we say "Well that game isn't as good so it's fine that its controls are worse too"? On the N64 ALL games that would benefit from analog, have it. That is very definitely not true on Saturn or PS1.

NeoZeedeater
03-01-2014, 07:59 PM
but not any strategy games like the Shining Force ones
I was thinking of the whole franchise. Shining The Holy Ark is a regular RPG, and a pretty underrated one.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 08:01 PM
Shining The Holy Ark is a regular RPG.

First person dungeon crawlers haven't been popular in the West since the 1980s, though, and even then they were mostly popular on computers. They seem to have had a bit of a resurgence in the past few years, and there were a few released in the 1990s on the PC (finally dying out by about 2000), but on consoles, the genre never was popular in the West, really.

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 08:16 PM
Did you know that there are actually more racing games released for the N64 than there are for the Saturn? It's true! More and overall better. The Saturn has some good racing games, but not as much variety -- it doesn't have as good kart racers, it's got nothing as good as WDC in the simmish category, no water racing games like Wave Race 64 or Hydro Thunder, etc.

Yes, I'm aware the N64 had a lot of racing games. However more =/= better. As far as racing games go for me, its arcadey or nothing. Daytona/CE, Sega Rally, Hang On GP, Manx TT, F1 Challenge, Outrun, Power Drift, NFS, Road Rash, Touge King 1 & 2, Shoutoku '97 >>>> boring sims and kart games with cheating AI


Eh, not really. I mean, the Saturn is best at what? Shmups, fighting games, what else? Those aren't nearly as popular as the N64's top genres, which have been listed earlier (though I would also add wrestling; I can't stand those games myself, but the N64's wrestling games were hugely popular and are widely considered to be maybe the best ever, the Aki ones in particular.). And the other genres the Saturn is good at are mostly things the Playstation does just as well or better, too.

I call bullshit. I feel more people would enjoy the wide variety of titles in the Japan Saturn library (if they were aware of and had access to them), as opposed to the blurry 3D collectathons that make up the bulk of the still popular N64 games. Your last sentence agrees with that.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 08:30 PM
Yes, I'm aware the N64 had a lot of racing games. However more =/= better. As far as racing games go for me, its arcadey or nothing. Daytona/CE, Sega Rally, Hang On GP, Manx TT, F1 Challenge, Outrun, Power Drift, NFS, Road Rash, Touge King 1 & 2, Shoutoku '97 >>>> boring sims and kart games with cheating AI
Are you thinking of the Playstation or something? Because the N64 has lots of great arcade ports, and very few sim racers; other than a few F1 games and WDC, almost all of the rest of the N64 racing library is arcadey. It's the PS1 that has lots of boring sim racing games.


I call bullshit. I feel more people would enjoy the wide variety of titles in the Japan Saturn library (if they were aware of and had access to them), as opposed to the blurry 3D collectathons that make up the bulk of the still popular N64 games. Your last sentence agrees with that.
Look at the actual Japan-exclusive Saturn library, and just try to come up with games that are anywhere remotely near as likely to have sold in the West as the N64's library did. You won't find anything significant. There's enough there to have maybe doubled or tripled US Saturn sales, sure, if Sega was more competent, but that'd still leave it like 15 million systems behind the N64, overall. And as for "blurry", better that than the pixelization and perspective problems in Saturn 3d, for sure.

Seriously, more shmups, 2d fighting games, JRPGs, puzzle games, strategy games, and maybe visual novels would NOT have sold many units. It just wouldn't have. Fighting games excepted those were niche genres here! And all three systems had good enough fighting game libraries to get by, even if the Saturn's was the best (particularly for 2d fighters).

Soulis
03-01-2014, 08:36 PM
as opposed to the blurry 3D collectathons that make up the bulk of the still popular N64 games.
Dat bias.

Apart from the infinitely superior 3D platformers and 3D action/adventures the N64 also had the best console FPSes like Turok, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. And FPS games were always a big thing. Goldeneye alone sold more N64s than any "killer app" did for Saturn. Saturn had the better Duke Nukem port (which was awesome) but Goldeneye was the next-gen shooter anyone wanted to play/copy.

Black_Tiger
03-01-2014, 08:38 PM
So now the measure of how good any game is, is how commercially successful it might be in Western markets?

I guess the N64>all argument using this logic is saying it's as good as Justin Bieber then.

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 08:43 PM
Look at the actual Japan-exclusive Saturn library, and just try to come up with games that are anywhere remotely near as likely to have sold in the West as the N64's library did. You won't find anything significant. There's enough there to have maybe doubled or tripled US Saturn sales, sure, if Sega was more competent, but that'd still leave it like 15 million systems behind the N64, overall. And as for "blurry", better that than the pixelization and perspective problems in Saturn 3d, for sure.

Seriously, more shmups, 2d fighting games, JRPGs, puzzle games, strategy games, and maybe visual novels would NOT have sold many units. It just wouldn't have. Fighting games excepted those were niche genres here! And all three systems had good enough fighting game libraries to get by, even if the Saturn's was the best (particularly for 2d fighters).

We could talk about the popularity =/= quality thing, but that's not what this is about. The point that I'm trying to make (and that you kind of made) was that the Saturn had a lot of the same types of games that the PSX had. If Sega brought more of them over and marketed them properly (like Sony did) things may have been very different. There's such a chasm between the variety of the libraries on the PSX and Saturn vs the N64 that the only thing keeping the N64 ahead of the Saturn in the US was Sega.

Soulis
03-01-2014, 08:44 PM
the only thing keeping the N64 ahead of the Saturn in the US was Sega.
It's as if Mario64, Turok, OOT and Goldeneye never existed....

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 08:48 PM
It's as if Mario64, Turok, OOT and Goldeneye never existed....

A steady stream of good releases on the Saturn could keep up with the ~5 big games/year from Nintendo and Rare

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 09:14 PM
We could talk about the popularity =/= quality thing, but that's not what this is about. The point that I'm trying to make (and that you kind of made) was that the Saturn had a lot of the same types of games that the PSX had. If Sega brought more of them over and marketed them properly (like Sony did) things may have been very different. There's such a chasm between the variety of the libraries on the PSX and Saturn vs the N64 that the only thing keeping the N64 ahead of the Saturn in the US was Sega.

As I've said I think the Saturn should have sold several times what it sold in the US, but remember, it sold less than 1/10th what the N64 did in the US -- 20+ million to under 2 million. There is a HUGE gap there you'd have to make up, and while things like not releasing the 32X, not overpricing the Saturn at first, dealing with the software droughts better, etc. would have done a lot, compared to the strength of competition from Sony and Nintendo, I just don't think it would have been enough for Sega to finish anywhere other than third in the US. Not unless they did a totally different strategy with a more powerful system that released later, or something like that. Then who knows. But with the Saturn as it is, it just wasn't going to happen.

Another factor there is how early the Saturn died off, in Japan as well as in the West. While the Saturn was probably first place for 6th gen systems in 1994-1996, it faded quickly after that -- it couldn't match the PS1's one-two punch of FF7 and DQ7's exclusivity announcement. Sega stopped supporting the Saturn in Japan at the end of 1998, and their 1998 release list was weak after the first half, too. Third party support was similar. Meanwhile, Sony and Nintendo had their best years ever in 1998. In the US, December 1998 was the generation's hardware sales peak. Sega simply did not have the games to compete there. They could have sold some systems, sure, with stuff like Grandia and maybe lasting sales from Burning Rangers, PDO, and the like, had they marketed them and the system better, but compared to the breadth of Sony's library (1998 had Metal Gear Solid, Tenchu, Crash 3, Spyro, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, etc.), and the quality of Nintendo's (the N64 had Banjo-Kazooie, 1080 Snowboarding, OoT in 1998, along with third party stuff like Rogue Squadron and Turok 2, among others)... the games just aren't there, particularly not for the second half of the year as Sega changed its focus to the Dreamcast, but the market was still focused on 5th gen consoles and the DC wouldn't be out in the West for a long time anyway. And forget about 1999 and beyond.

So sure, with better sales and marketing, and with the games that exist, Sega could have been competitive in the West in 1995-1996, much more so than they were. But they would still have faded quickly after that, which is a big problem when 1997 to 1999 were the sales peak of the generation. Unless you can get the Saturn to survive as long as the PS1 and N64 did, Sega was doomed to a distant third place finish overall worldwide, and a distant second place finish in Japan.


A steady stream of good releases on the Saturn could keep up with the ~5 big games/year from Nintendo and Rare
The Saturn had plenty of software droughts too. Pot calling the kettle black situation there, I think... and Sega's biggest games weren't as big as Nintendo's.


Dat bias.

Apart from the infinitely superior 3D platformers and 3D action/adventures the N64 also had the best console FPSes like Turok, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. And FPS games were always a big thing. Goldeneye alone sold more N64s than any "killer app" did for Saturn. Saturn had the better Duke Nukem port (which was awesome) but Goldeneye was the next-gen shooter anyone wanted to play/copy.
On that note, Goldeneye alone sold almost as well as the Saturn did! Goldeneye sold 8 million copies, while the Saturn sold 9.5 million systems, both worldwide. Goldeneye may have released in fall 1997, but it was actually one of the best selling games in the US... in 1998.

zetastrike
03-01-2014, 09:38 PM
Another factor there is how early the Saturn died off, in Japan as well as in the West. While the Saturn was probably first place for 6th gen systems in 1994-1996, it faded quickly after that -- it couldn't match the PS1's one-two punch of FF7 and DQ7's exclusivity announcement. Sega stopped supporting the Saturn in Japan at the end of 1998, and their 1998 release list was weak after the first half, too. Third party support was similar. Meanwhile, Sony and Nintendo had their best years ever in 1998. In the US, December 1998 was the generation's hardware sales peak. Sega simply did not have the games to compete there. They could have sold some systems, sure, with stuff like Grandia and maybe lasting sales from Burning Rangers, PDO, and the like, had they marketed them and the system better, but compared to the breadth of Sony's library (1998 had Metal Gear Solid, Tenchu, Crash 3, Spyro, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, etc.), and the quality of Nintendo's (the N64 had Banjo-Kazooie, 1080 Snowboarding, OoT in 1998, along with third party stuff like Rogue Squadron and Turok 2, among others)... the games just aren't there, particularly not for the second half of the year as Sega changed its focus to the Dreamcast, but the market was still focused on 5th gen consoles and the DC wouldn't be out in the West for a long time anyway. And forget about 1999 and beyond.

The 1998 cancellation had to do with the situation in the west, not Japan. It could have remained a 2nd place console with steady software support there probably until 2000. Because they fucked it up in the west so much (not bringing over the best games and poor marketing) that they had to cut the cord, Japan be damned. It outsold the N64 there with less time on the market, and you seem to think sales are so indicative of quality. They didn't have enough software to compete in 1998 because things were shifting to the DC because of the western clusterfuck. Poor management doesn't say anything about the quality and potential success of the games it had. And if it had the proper management and success, whose to say it wouldn't have had some hits?


So sure, with better sales and marketing, and with the games that exist, Sega could have been competitive in the West in 1995-1996, much more so than they were. But they would still have faded quickly after that, which is a big problem when 1997 to 1999 were the sales peak of the generation. Unless you can get the Saturn to survive as long as the PS1 and N64 did, Sega was doomed to a distant third place finish overall worldwide, and a distant second place finish in Japan.

With the proper support and "being competitive" that you suggest, why would it taper off in 1997?



The Saturn had plenty of software droughts too. Pot calling the kettle black situation there, I think... and Sega's biggest games weren't as big as Nintendo's.

It had much more software coming out than the N64, especially 3rd party, and from Japan.


And you don't say much about the N64's struggles in Japan and in Europe, where sales weren't significantly better than the Saturn's. North America carried the thing on its back. So these mind blowing games available for the console didn't have much clout outside NA.

Soulis
03-01-2014, 10:06 PM
Well, in Europe, Sony's marketing and the endless adverts and word of mouth had everyone convinced that the PS1 was the next big thing. The new cool, trendy gadget that anyone should have. It was the 1st truly mainstream console. Even guys i knew from school, who never cared about videogames, even they had to have one.

In Greece (where i'm from) you could see PS1 adverts in every single magazine there was, even in ones that were completely unrelated to games or technology. Also in TVs and radios. They would also sell and advertise Playstations in most big electrical appliances stores, where Saturns and N64s were nowhere to be found. These were just toys you see. Our only games magazine, that wasn't a translation of an American or UK publication, was basically a Playstation magazine but it was sold as a multiplatform one (with a generic "Games" title) only so they can rip apart the other consoles. They always downplayed the best games on N64/Saturn by giving them seemingly decent scores but awfully, AWFULLY written reviews where basically praised the PlayStation in a subtle way. I still remember how many times they reminded me in reviews of games like Zelda and Banjo Kazooie that the games are for little children but when they had to review Croc or Spyro the dragon for the PS1 nothing about children was ever mentioned, instead they always repeated nonsense like "Mario beater" and other things like that. Things became even worse for the N64 when the the mod-chip for the PS1 was released in the wild. Suddenly everyone knew someone who pirates games.

Under these circumstances Nintendo or Sega would need a miracle to actually be able to compete. Great games alone couldn't even be heard, let alone help console sales. Instead everything was downplayed to non-existance. Most gamers in my country barely even knew Goldeneye, let alone played the thing... And that was the most popular game for the console. Still, the N64 was NOT a complete failure, it still sold ok and it was pretty popular in the game stores and game clubs circles. But in the mainstream market? It was pretty much non-existent.

saturndual32
03-01-2014, 10:18 PM
I prefer 2d gaming to 3d, so give me the Saturn. Also, the Saturn in my opinion has the best digital pad ever, and i like its 3d pad better than the N64s (a pad i have always hated). But yeah, i can easly understand why some people would choose the N64 over the Saturn, totally diferent strenghts and weakneses.

By the way, if the Saturn had the potential to do the graphics from the Shenmue video, then had it gotten supported by Sega into the 2000s like N64 and PS, then it could have easly hanged with them, graphics wise. I have never seen anything as impressive as Sat Shenmue on those 2 systems...

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 10:26 PM
The 1998 cancellation had to do with the situation in the west, not Japan.
Partially, but not entirely. The PS1 REALLY took off in Japan in 1997 for the obvious reasons (FF7, DQ7, their impact), and Sega lost its early lead. Yeah, the failure abroad probably hastened the shystem's demise, but even if that hadn't happened, Sega would have ended the generation far behind in second place, steadily losing ground over time. The only way around that is if they could crack those Sony-exclusive developers, but Sony had more money than Sega did to pay them off, if that proved necessary... as they proved with things like buying Tomb Raider 2's PS1-exclusivity on consoles.


It could have remained a 2nd place console with steady software support there probably until 2000.
Perhaps so, if Sega had continued to release a good first party library for the system until then. But remember, that's a fall -- Sega was in first in 1996.


Because they fucked it up in the west so much (not bringing over the best games and poor marketing) that they had to cut the cord, Japan be damned.
I know Saturn fans like to say that by not bringing over the best games Sega messed up, but I don't see it. I mean, I know there are lots more games in the genres I mentioned that we didn't get -- but those aren't games that were going to do much more than maybe doubling overall Western Saturn sales! And that's an optimistic estimate. At that time, the kinds of games that the Saturn were best at weren't as popular as the kinds of games the N64 and PS1 were best at. More games in less popular genres wouldn't change that. It would be great for fans of the system, and for people now going back to it, for certain, but it wouldn't make it competitive with the N64 and PS1, not really. The Saturn doesn't have things like the equal of MGS or FF7 that we didn't get here.

Complaining about the poor marketing I absolutely agree with, though, of course.


It outsold the N64 there with less time on the market,
Actually, only kind of. If you compare things launch-aligned, that is true in terms of first-party support -- Sega released Saturn games for 4 years in Japan, while Nintendo released N64 games for 4 years 10 months there (June '96 to April '01) -- but adding on third party support, the Saturn lasted longer, I believe, thanks to a release or two in mid 2000. The Saturn's '99 and '00 third party support was very thin, but if you count everything, it gets there. I forget when exactly the last (third-party) Saturn game released, but for the N64, in Japan, it was December 2001, about 5 1/2 years after the system launched there. That Sega sold more systems anyway does show how they got off to a good early start, though, yeah. I'm sure a LOT of those systems sold in 1995-1996, since as often happened Japan was earlier to buy into the new generation than the West was.


and you seem to think sales are so indicative of quality.
Sure, sales and quality don't always go together. But sales do mean something. Games that sell really, really well are rarely terrible games, at least compared to other games in their genre. There's usually SOME reason why they sold well, and most often it's because of some mix of great game design, and good marketing. So no, sales aren't indicative of quality, but they do indicate that the system had a good game library for the region where it sold well that suited to its tastes well. And that's exactly how the N64's library is for the US, and the PS1 for all regions.


They didn't have enough software to compete in 1998 because things were shifting to the DC because of the western clusterfuck.
Once again, no, that was only half of it.


Poor management doesn't say anything about the quality and potential success of the games it had. And if it had the proper management and success, whose to say it wouldn't have had some hits?
I would expect that if the Saturn had sold better here it would at least have had a lot more PS1 ports of Western games and a few more exclusives, yeah. But doing enough to actually damage the PS1 and N64 would have required a lot, and I just don't think Sega had the games. I mean, they had good games, but not enough great games that also would sell well in the West. Virtua Fighter 1 and 2 weren't much in the way of system sellers here, while they were in Japan. The Saturn could not recover from that. Better marketing was a partial answer, but when Sony has more popular games in just about every category, I don't know what more you can do... some of Sega's games were better, like how I at least think that Daytona is way better than the first Ridge Racer, but people liked the PS1 games more.


With the proper support and "being competitive" that you suggest, why would it taper off in 1997?
For Japan, because Square went Sony-exclusive and convinced Enix and others to follow them. After that it was pretty much over for Sega in Japan, it was a quick downhill slide after that. And for the West, because that fading Japanese library would have inevitably had a negative impact on sales by 1998, and given the strength of competition from Nintendo and Sony I have a hard time imagining that Sega could have kept up, even if they did come in with a lead.


It had much more software coming out than the N64, especially 3rd party, and from Japan.
More games total, yes, but as I said, most of them released early in the generation. More Japanese games from 1995-1996 are no help to the Saturn in 1997-1998 when it needed it. And anyway, it didn't necessarily have more top-quality games... lower licensing fees and CD media allowed for releases the N64 wouldn't have gotten. Also it has a lot more titles also available on Playstation.


And you don't say much about the N64's struggles in Japan and in Europe, where sales weren't significantly better than the Saturn's. North America carried the thing on its back. So these mind blowing games available for the console didn't have much clout outside NA.
North America was and is the biggest market, though, so being successful here can get you far. Case in point, the N64 and the GC, which both sold about 2/3rds of their worldwide total here.

As for the Saturn, it was only successful in Japan, and as I said even there only really in 1995-1997. Japan is to the Saturn what the US is to the N64 and GC. And the N64 was more successful here than the Saturn was there.


Well, in Europe, Sony's marketing and the endless adverts and word of mouth had everyone convinced that the PS1 was the next big thing. The new cool, trendy gadget that anyone should have. It was the 1st truly mainstream console. Even guys i knew from school, who never cared about videogames, even they had to have one.

In Greece (where i'm from) you could see PS1 adverts in every single magazine there was, even in ones that were completely unrelated to games or technology. Also in TVs and radios. They would also sell and advertise Playstations in most big electrical appliances stores, where Saturns and N64s were nowhere to be found. These were just toys you see. Our only games magazine, that wasn't a translation of an American or UK publication, was basically a Playstation magazine but it was sold as a multiplatform one (with a generic "Games" title) only so they can rip apart the other consoles. They always downplayed the best games on N64/Saturn by giving them seemingly decent scores but awfully, AWFULLY written reviews where basically praised the PlayStation in a subtle way. I still remember how many times they reminded me in reviews of games like Zelda and Banjo Kazooie that the games are for little children but when they had to review Croc or Spyro the dragon for the PS1 nothing about children was ever mentioned, instead they always repeated nonsense like "Mario beater" and other things like that. Things became even worse for the N64 when the the mod-chip for the PS1 was released in the wild. Suddenly everyone knew someone who pirates games.

Under these circumstances Nintendo or Sega would need a miracle to actually be able to compete. Great games alone couldn't even be heard, let alone help console sales. Instead everything was downplayed to non-existance. Most gamers in my country barely even knew Goldeneye, let alone played the thing... And that was the most popular game for the console. Still, the N64 was NOT a complete failure, it still sold ok and it was pretty popular in the game stores and game clubs circles. But in the mainstream market? It was pretty much non-existent.
Yeah, Sony's money, and good leadership, got them far. Sega could not have afforded marketing like Sony's, I think... and Sony's was very successful. So was Nintendo's, in the US. Sega could have done a lot better, but as the poorest of the big three, would have been limited by finances, as they were.

Bottino
03-01-2014, 10:53 PM
I'll just start this post by saying that everybody is biased. What varies is how much biased you are and how much that affects your judgement.

Let's go:
I don't know why the need to declare a "winner" in this type of console wars comparisons; why not just put the facts on the table and let the reader draw his/her own conclusions?

That way this could be avoided:

the site owner (cheaterdragon1) refused to believe the N64 could be beat, so we had to give both consoles an equally fair shake

Does that mean that the Saturn was going to "win" in the first place? Or that you had to make the N64 look good no mater what?

That being said, i leave the following questions:
For the genres that the N64 excels, i believe the Saturn has good contender in it's side. But does the opposite happens?

For Guardian Heroes , Die Hard Arcade...?
Radiant Silvergun , Soukyugurentai , Thunder Force V...?
Shining the Holy Ark , Panzer Dragoon Saga , Shining Force III...?
Street Fighter Alpha 2, KOF '97 , X-Men vs Street Fighter...?
Virtua Fighter 2 , Fighters Megamix , Last Bronx...?
Shinobi Legions , Silhouette Mirage , Astal...?

Please note that i'm not trying to be a dick, just asking a question.

Also, Sin and Punishment , World Driver Championship , Shadowgate and Mischief Makers are the shit.

A Black Falcon
03-01-2014, 11:00 PM
I'll just start this post by saying that everybody is biased. What varies is how much biased you are and how much that affects your judgement.
Agreed.


Let's go:
I don't know why the need to declare a "winner" in this type of console wars comparisons; why not just put the facts on the table and let the reader draw his/her own conclusions?
People always want there to be winners in competitions! "You're all equal" is unsatisfying...


That way this could be avoided:

Does that mean that the Saturn was going to "win" in the first place? Or that you had to make the N64 look good no mater what?

That being said, i leave the following questions:
For the genres that the N64 excels, i believe the Saturn has good contender in it's side. But does the opposite happens?

For Guardian Heroes , Die Hard Arcade...?
Radiant Silvergun , Soukyugurentai , Thunder Force V...?
Shining the Holy Ark , Panzer Dragoon Saga , Shining Force III...?
Street Fighter Alpha 2, KOF '97 , X-Men vs Street Fighter...?
Virtua Fighter 2 , Fighters Megamix , Last Bronx...?
Shinobi Legions , Silhouette Mirage , Astal...?

Please note that i'm not trying to be a dick, just asking a question.

Also, Sin and Punishment , World Driver Championship , Shadowgate and Mischief Makers are the shit.


For Guardian Heroes , Die Hard Arcade...? - Nothing good. For bad games there's Fighting Force 64 and Batman Beyond (both also on PS1).
Radiant Silvergun , Soukyugurentai , Thunder Force V...? - Star Soldier: Vanishing Earth, sort of Dezaemon 64, and also Bangai-Oh if you count it in this genre
Shining the Holy Ark , Panzer Dragoon Saga , Shining Force III...? - For strategy games: Command & Conquer, Starcraft 64, Ogre Battle 64. For RPGs: Paper Mario, Aidyn Chronicles, Shiren the Wanderer 2.
Street Fighter Alpha 2, KOF '97 , X-Men vs Street Fighter...? - Killer Instinct Gold, Mortal Kombat Trilogy (on all three systems), Super Smash Bros.
Virtua Fighter 2 , Fighters Megamix , Last Bronx...? - Fighter's Destiny, Fighter Destiny 2, Mace: The Dark Age, maybe Mortal Kombat 4 (also on PS1, PC, & DC)
Shinobi Legions , Silhouette Mirage , Astal...? - Mischief Makers, Goemon's Great Adventure, Kirby 64

The Saturn has more depth in most of those categories for sure, but the N64 does at least have a few great games in most of them.

gamevet
03-02-2014, 05:17 AM
You guys are wasting your time trying to bring a logical discussion with ABF and his beloved N64. Defending $70 cartridges should have been your 1st sign to run.


It was his 1st console. It's like you're trying to tell a guy that his 1st girlfriend is cheating on him. He won't believe anything you tell him.

A Black Falcon
03-02-2014, 06:25 AM
You guys are wasting your time trying to bring a logical discussion with ABF and his beloved N64. Defending $70 cartridges should have been your 1st sign to run.
Insults based on your own biases and not anything I've said in this thread? Yeah, how nice. And I've explained at length before exactly how cartridges were a good decision, and I stand by that. (I will admit that not buying an N64 until '99 might have helped on the price front though, I never spent more than $50 for a N64 game... they weren't $70 for new games anymore by the time I got the system.)

But anyway, I'm not as biased as you think. Not nearly. And you're no less biased, just towards different things.

It was his 1st console. It's like you're trying to tell a guy that his 1st girlfriend is cheating on him. He won't believe anything you tell him.
It wasn't my first console, the Game Boy was my first console. And I had a PC for almost eight years before I had an N64. I even had a 3DFX Voodoo2 card (for the PC) for a year before I had an N64! That has better graphics than the N64, you know.

Barone
03-02-2014, 07:34 AM
You guys are wasting your time trying to bring a logical discussion with ABF and his beloved N64. Defending $70 cartridges should have been your 1st sign to run.
It was his 1st console. It's like you're trying to tell a guy that his 1st girlfriend is cheating on him. He won't believe anything you tell him.
Pretty much this.

cheaterdragon1
03-02-2014, 01:15 PM
Err, I totally missed the party here as I was working on gathering some F-Zero X hacks together. Just want to say that I didn't say the Saturn can't win like Guntz said on the first page, but that I did ask them to do a good job of representing both consoles, and try not to rely much on Japan-only stuff as that stuff was mostly irrelevant back in the day. Otherwise I'll give the article a full read now.

NeoZeedeater
03-02-2014, 01:27 PM
It's only irrelevant if you don't want to give each system a fair shake and want to concentrate on what the most mainstream gamers were playing. Some of us were adults playing import Saturn games back then. They even sold them at EB.

spiffyone
03-02-2014, 01:55 PM
Going by your last two posts, I have to assume that you are strictly judging them based on Western libraries.

Saturn has action/adventure stuff like Castlevania NitM, Legend of Oasis, AD&D SoM, Princess Crown, Magic Knight Rayearth, Dark Savior, etc.

Saturn also has a better libraries for stuff like digicomics, war sims, puzzle, etc.

No, I'm judging by the total library (hence stating the RPGs on Saturn, even though most were left in Japan, and same with the shmups and fighters for that matter).

Even adding in those games you listed for Saturn, they simply don't hold a candle to OoT and MM, two of the best (top five of all time) action/adventure games ever made. Then add in games like Shadow Man, RE2, the aforementioned and very much hidden gem Body Harvest, the Indiana Jones game, etc.

Subjective measures, though. Milleage may vary.

spiffyone
03-02-2014, 02:08 PM
That being said, i leave the following questions:
For the genres that the N64 excels, i believe the Saturn has good contender in it's side. But does the opposite happens?

For Guardian Heroes , Die Hard Arcade...?
Radiant Silvergun , Soukyugurentai , Thunder Force V...?
Shining the Holy Ark , Panzer Dragoon Saga , Shining Force III...?
Street Fighter Alpha 2, KOF '97 , X-Men vs Street Fighter...?
Virtua Fighter 2 , Fighters Megamix , Last Bronx...?
Shinobi Legions , Silhouette Mirage , Astal...?

Bangai-O, Dezaemon 3D, Robotron 64, Star Soldier 64
Paper Mario, Ogre Battle 64 (weak point for N64 is RPGs, as I stated, so this would definitely go to Saturn as I stated earlier)
Smash Bros., Custom Robo, Killer Instinct Gold, Mortal Kombat 64, Fighter's Destiny (again, another weak point for N64 overall)
Mischief Makers, Kirby 64, Yoshi's Story

On that last note, I have no idea why folks are lumping in a general action game like Shinobi Legions with 2D platformers. They are not one and the same, IMO.

That aside, there's no real answer that Saturn has for Conker's BFD or games of that sort, Jet Force Gemini, Mario Party (fun while it lasted).

Again, though, the N64 library has not aged well at all. Saturn's aged far better, particularly the best of the 2D and 2.5D games. Back then, I'd pick N64. Nowadays I'd pick Saturn. Neither hold a candle to PS1's library, though.

Black_Tiger
03-02-2014, 02:24 PM
Err, I totally missed the party here as I was working on gathering some F-Zero X hacks together. Just want to say that I didn't say the Saturn can't win like Guntz said on the first page, but that I did ask them to do a good job of representing both consoles, and try not to rely much on Japan-only stuff as that stuff was mostly irrelevant back in the day. Otherwise I'll give the article a full read now.

I bought more Saturn imports bitd than the average N64 player bought domestic N64 games.

Although the article reads as though it was supposed to be a fair comparison of the entire library/hardware/accessories, you're saying here that it is actually a comparison of the experience that a casual game player would have experienced bitd.

Maybe you don't/can't realize that telling them to base the comparison around a specific narrow minded scenario which would favor the N64, is exactly saying that the N64 must win, but it's pretty straightforward.


I finally got to read the article and was surprised by how even under the "N64 must win" overall guidelines, that graphics were given the edge to N64 based on theoretical capability instead of judging the games which actually exist. The N64 may have created amazing 2D games in an alternate reality, but even judging the North American libraries alone, the difference in 3D isn't that great even with Nintendo goggles, but the difference 2D is astronomical.

Also calling the Saturn's 3D "an acquired taste" but not the N64's really destroys any guise of impartiality. Let alone saying things like, "the Saturn suffers from a few issues that are not present on the Nintendo 64. For instance, the Saturn generally has a lot of pop-in, which some gamers find to be distracting" or "Despite limitations, many late N64 releases would go on to rival that of early Dreamcast and PS2 releases".

The DC/PS2 straight ports of N64 games did indeed look reminiscent of those same N64 games. But the Saturn has games which rival or surpass late DC and PS2 releases. It's just twisting a technicality to further push a one-sided argument in a way that will appease Nintendo fanboys, who are the only ones that won't see through it.

j_factor
03-02-2014, 03:10 PM
As much as I love the Saturn and don't care for the N64 too much, that article wasn't too bad.


No, I'm judging by the total library (hence stating the RPGs on Saturn, even though most were left in Japan, and same with the shmups and fighters for that matter).

Even adding in those games you listed for Saturn, they simply don't hold a candle to OoT and MM, two of the best (top five of all time) action/adventure games ever made. Then add in games like Shadow Man, RE2, the aforementioned and very much hidden gem Body Harvest, the Indiana Jones game, etc.

Subjective measures, though. Milleage may vary.

I think the Saturn is, at worst, pretty competitive in action-adventure games. Herc's Adventures is one of the best games in the genre of all time, IMO. I know it didn't make much of a splash when it came out, but those who know it, love it. And then there's Tomb Raider, Enemy Zero, Deep Fear, RE1, Powerslave, Swagman, etc. Of course, neither system touches the Playstation in this genre. Actually I think PSX may be the best system of all time for action-adventure games.

Armoured Priest
03-02-2014, 03:52 PM
It's only irrelevant if you don't want to give each system a fair shake and want to concentrate on what the most mainstream gamers were playing. Some of us were adults playing import Saturn games back then. They even sold them at EB.

Yeah. As much as I hate to bring anecdotal evidence, Saturn gamers did tend to be more enthusiast, and were subscribing to the gaming magazines of the day...which did a good job at pointing people at how to import with the Saturn (which, thanks to the ST-key, and the Pro-Action Replay 4in1 made it pretty easy). Software ect. also sold import Saturn games. Its where I bought my first ST-key, and my copies of Saturn Castlevania: SotN, Vampire Savior, Thunder Force V, and Dungeons & Dragons Collection. Also, kicked myself often over missing out on getting Radiant Silvergun (until my finacee bought me copy in 2010 while she was in Japan. <3 her...she's awesome! :) ).

KitsuneNight
03-02-2014, 08:41 PM
As opposed to the Saturn bias around here?

saturn bias on a sega board ?

impossibrue !!

TrekkiesUnite118
03-02-2014, 09:28 PM
I'll take suggestions into account and make adjustments.

As said before, the site owner (cheaterdragon1) refused to believe the N64 could be beat, so we had to give both consoles an equally fair shake. N64 has good games in its abundant genres, no question. Does the Saturn have more games overall? No question. The big thing to note is the Saturn excelled in what was considered niche genres of the time. N64 had what was popular, good looking 3D games. That kind of history has to be taken into account. To say the Saturn is completely better, without any perspective, is wrong. People constantly do that with SNES, by saying it's better than Genesis because of RPGs. That's wrong, the Genesis was just as good, but for different reasons.

It might interest the rest of you to know, I guess partly due to this article, I'm trading AlecRob for one of his Saturns, I'll be getting a modchip for it and a stack of CD-Rs.

Show him Quake on the Saturn and then on the N64. Yeah the Saturn version runs at a lower frame rate, there's also a lot more details and effects going on:

RI0Q0VWOp3E

Honestly I'd say Lobotomy's work shows that the Saturn could stand proudly next to the N64 and PS1 in the realm of First Person Shooters. The only thing their ports lack is Multiplayer.

Lan Di
03-03-2014, 12:39 AM
Yikes really? I owned an N64 and about 35 games as a 8-12 year old

You were just a kid back then. I was well into my 20s. Damn I'm old. :(

Soulis
03-03-2014, 03:52 AM
saturn bias on a sega board ?

impossibrue !!
Yeah, it should be obvious i guess. Thing is, i usually stay away from branded boards like this (Nintendo for instance) where people seem to live in their own bubble but this board gave me a good impression at first. In the end, many people here are just as biased as the Nintendo fanboys they seem to rip all the time. The only difference is that the posts here are better written since 99% of Sega fans are adults (Nintendo is still relevant so they still produce new, young fans). Excluding Sonic fans of course :P

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 04:38 AM
One definite problem with the article is when it claims that Bangaioh "isn't very highly regarded", which is a somewhat bizarre thing to say! Bangaioh is definitely regarded to be a good game!

As for fighting games, as has been mentioned once, if you count the N64 Custom Robo games as fighting games... well, those games are really, really good. They're more 3d action games than fighting games, but they're definitely great, and better than Virtual-On.


As much as I love the Saturn and don't care for the N64 too much, that article wasn't too bad.



I think the Saturn is, at worst, pretty competitive in action-adventure games. Herc's Adventures is one of the best games in the genre of all time, IMO. I know it didn't make much of a splash when it came out, but those who know it, love it. And then there's Tomb Raider, Enemy Zero, Deep Fear, RE1, Powerslave, Swagman, etc. Of course, neither system touches the Playstation in this genre. Actually I think PSX may be the best system of all time for action-adventure games.
The N64 has two Zelda games, one of which is the best console game ever made in OoT. The Saturn and PS1 don't have anything on that level, and the Saturn doesn't have anything like 3d Zelda at all. Sure, there are a lot of action-adventure games on the PS1, but then I guess it goes back to the usual 'quality versus quantity' question that always seems to dominate N64 v. PS1 game comparisons... As for the Saturn, it does have a few 2d Zelda style games, like Shining Wisdom, Beyond Oasis, etc., but I don't know if any are great games... E.G.G. for Dreamcast is probably better, though the DC doesn't have anything quite like 3d Zelda either.


Yeah, it should be obvious i guess. Thing is, i usually stay away from branded boards like this (Nintendo for instance) where people seem to live in their own bubble but this board gave me a good impression at first. In the end, many people here are just as biased as the Nintendo fanboys they seem to rip all the time. The only difference is that the posts here are better written since 99% of Sega fans are adults (Nintendo is still relevant so they still produce new, young fans). Excluding Sonic fans of course :P
Yeah, and if you dare disagree with the Sega-is-always-better line, you're being crazy biased of course. It does get kind of old after a while...


I bought more Saturn imports bitd than the average N64 player bought domestic N64 games.

Although the article reads as though it was supposed to be a fair comparison of the entire library/hardware/accessories, you're saying here that it is actually a comparison of the experience that a casual game player would have experienced bitd.

Maybe you don't/can't realize that telling them to base the comparison around a specific narrow minded scenario which would favor the N64, is exactly saying that the N64 must win, but it's pretty straightforward.


I finally got to read the article and was surprised by how even under the "N64 must win" overall guidelines, that graphics were given the edge to N64 based on theoretical capability instead of judging the games which actually exist. The N64 may have created amazing 2D games in an alternate reality, but even judging the North American libraries alone, the difference in 3D isn't that great even with Nintendo goggles, but the difference 2D is astronomical.

Also calling the Saturn's 3D "an acquired taste" but not the N64's really destroys any guise of impartiality. Let alone saying things like, "the Saturn suffers from a few issues that are not present on the Nintendo 64. For instance, the Saturn generally has a lot of pop-in, which some gamers find to be distracting" or "Despite limitations, many late N64 releases would go on to rival that of early Dreamcast and PS2 releases".

The DC/PS2 straight ports of N64 games did indeed look reminiscent of those same N64 games. But the Saturn has games which rival or surpass late DC and PS2 releases. It's just twisting a technicality to further push a one-sided argument in a way that will appease Nintendo fanboys, who are the only ones that won't see through it.
As I was referencing above, is there much to this post beyond 'the article partially disagreed with my pro-Sega bias so it's wrong'? Well, I'll give you that the article mentions Saturn popup but not N64 fog, but that's about it.

-While the 3d graphics of any and all 5th gen consoles is, today, something of an acquired taste for sure, the N64's 3d, being more "modern" thanks to features like perspective correction, IS going to be easier for most people to go back to than the Saturn's is. Some people now hate all 5th gen 3d, though, of course. N64 3d is obviously very dated today, but at least the image holds together much better than PS1 or Saturn 3d does.

-2d games - Yoshi's Story shows that no theory is needed in saying that the N64 can do great 2d. Just look at that game, and some others: the proof is there. Theory says that it probably could have been even better than that, but what exists shows that it was quite good, easily as good as or better than anything 2d on the PS1. Versus Saturn I don't know, but you could make that case, particularly based on the point mentioned in the article -- that custom microcode would have allowed for even better 2d on the N64, since the microcode almost all games use is designed for 3d. That is a fact.

-Saturn games that rival late DC and PS2 releases? You obviously must mean 2d games only, since anything with polygons is very far behind. And you must mean only the 4MB cart games, versus 2d PS2 and DC games. But even with those restrictions, I doubt it; do you really think that the Saturn could have done games like Marvel vs Capcom 2 or SNK vs Capcom 2 just as well as the DC and PS2 did? Well no, polygonal backgrounds. But even besides that, those games go beyond what you see in Saturn games like Vampire Savior or SFA3. And what about SNK games? Could a 4MB version of Last Blade 2 matched the DC version? I'm skeptical for sure. Meanwhile, the N64 games that were close to early DC/PS2 graphics were 3d games, not 2d -- harder accomplishment there to keep up as well as it did.

-Fog - Saturn games do have more and closer draw distances on average than N64 games do, though. And many people will indeed find popup more distracting than fog is. But yeah, mentioning that N64 games, particularly earlier ones, also have draw distance issues too would be reasonable, but criticizing the Saturn for being worse in that respect is accurate. But I do agree that mentioning Saturn draw distances but not N64 ones is kind of odd.

Soulis
03-03-2014, 04:45 AM
But the Saturn has games which rival or surpass late DC and PS2 releases.
See, statements like these only exist in Sega-16. I've never seen anything like this anywhere else. Unless there is a secret, Sega-16 exclusive Saturn game people here played but the rest of the uninformed world don't know about.

What's next, the Master System could rival the Neo-Geo?

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 05:21 AM
See, statements like these only exist in Sega-16. I've never seen anything like this anywhere else. Unless there is a secret, Sega-16 exclusive Saturn game people here played but the rest of the uninformed world don't know about.

What's next, the Master System could rival the Neo-Geo?
The only thing I can possibly think of is Street Fighter Alpha 3, but that rivals an early DC game, not a late DC or PS2 game.

Soulis
03-03-2014, 05:34 AM
The only thing I can possibly think of is Street Fighter Alpha 3, but that rivals an early DC game, not a late DC or PS2 game.
Street Fighter Alpha 3 (and any other ports like these) is a 2D port that can only be as good as the arcade version. The Dreamcast is a 3D powerhouse but it can also easily handle a CPS-2 game... Its not a representative of Dreamcast's hardware though. You can port the game on the PS4, it will still look similar (unless they make a new HD game). It doesn't make the Saturn a comparable machine to a DC. Or a PS2. Because the statement "the Saturn has games which rival or surpass late DC and PS2" suggests something like that. Nor the Saturn or the N64 or the PS1 are anywhere rear that level, lets get this out of the way please.

j_factor
03-03-2014, 07:14 AM
See, statements like these only exist in Sega-16. I've never seen anything like this anywhere else. Unless there is a secret, Sega-16 exclusive Saturn game people here played but the rest of the uninformed world don't know about.

What's next, the Master System could rival the Neo-Geo?

I would bet that the Master System can produce a better looking and sounding 1 megabit game than the Neo Geo can. :p


The N64 has two Zelda games, one of which is the best console game ever made in OoT. The Saturn and PS1 don't have anything on that level, and the Saturn doesn't have anything like 3d Zelda at all. Sure, there are a lot of action-adventure games on the PS1, but then I guess it goes back to the usual 'quality versus quantity' question that always seems to dominate N64 v. PS1 game comparisons... As for the Saturn, it does have a few 2d Zelda style games, like Shining Wisdom, Beyond Oasis, etc., but I don't know if any are great games... E.G.G. for Dreamcast is probably better, though the DC doesn't have anything quite like 3d Zelda either.

This conversation was about action-adventure games in general, not 3D Zelda in the specific.


Yeah, and if you dare disagree with the Sega-is-always-better line, you're being crazy biased of course. It does get kind of old after a while...

It's a little ironic to say this immediately after a quote saying Sega was not better at something...

Kamahl
03-03-2014, 07:42 AM
How can OoT be the best console game ever when Majora's Mask is so much better?

Soulis
03-03-2014, 10:02 AM
How can OoT be the best console game ever when Majora's Mask is so much better?
Well, i also prefer MM for its darker atmosphere and the nice NPC subplots/sub quests. But OOT has better dungeons overall, its more "epic" and the time travel mechanic was great. OOT had that z-targeting thing too that became a standard in similar 3D games after this.

Xan
03-03-2014, 10:34 AM
-While the 3d graphics of any and all 5th gen consoles is, today, something of an acquired taste for sure, the N64's 3d, being more "modern" thanks to features like perspective correction, IS going to be easier for most people to go back to than the Saturn's is. Some people now hate all 5th gen 3d, though, of course. N64 3d is obviously very dated today, but at least the image holds together much better than PS1 or Saturn 3d does.
You really are generalizing here and ignoring the top-of-the-line PSX games. If you just take some random PSX games as an example, yeah, all of the technical issues are going to be very apparent there. But if you take the Crash or Spyro series, or Wipeout 3, now these graphics are more than competitive with the best looking N64 games, while offering much superior framerates. In general the issue is more complicated than just saying this or that console was better... for the most part, PSX excelled in tightly confined games (like Crash) where they managed to squeeze in a lot of detail and work around the hardware limitations, while the N64 was better suited for more solid, expansive worlds like those of Zelda.

Kamahl
03-03-2014, 10:44 AM
Well, i also prefer MM for its darker atmosphere and the nice NPC subplots/sub quests. But OOT has better dungeons overall, its more "epic" and the time travel mechanic was great. OOT had that z-targeting thing too that became a standard in similar 3D games after this.
I was mainly just joking around. MM is awesome because nintendo dared for the second time to do something different (only this time it actually worked).

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 01:10 PM
One definite problem with the article is when it claims that Bangaioh "isn't very highly regarded", which is a somewhat bizarre thing to say! Bangaioh is definitely regarded to be a good game!

Yeah it is...


On the Dreamcast.



As for fighting games, as has been mentioned once, if you count the N64 Custom Robo games as fighting games... well, those games are really, really good. They're more 3d action games than fighting games, but they're definitely great, and better than Virtual-On.

Custom Robo is certainly not better than Virtual On, though they don't really compare. Virtual On is much faster paced and involves a decent amount of skill to beat. Custom Robo is more in line with a party brawler. If you want games like that on the Saturn, I'd say these are better matches, and one of them I'd say is better due to it being 6 players:

F1Fpv0PffMI

IasgRf_e28o

nz-XTb6PhpY



The N64 has two Zelda games, one of which is the best console game ever made in OoT.

Panzer Dragoon Saga says hi. Ocarina of Time is great, but Nintendo fans really need to stop sucking it's dick. It's a good game, but it's certainly not the best game ever. Majora's Mask is the better of the two if you ask me. The World felt more alive and lush. Ocarina of Time's world felt dead and abandoned. Even as Young Link.


The Saturn and PS1 don't have anything on that level, and the Saturn doesn't have anything like 3d Zelda at all.

Well, there is Virtual Hydlide, but Saturn owners would much rather pretend that that game never existed. Though there are definitely games on the Saturn and PS1 that are on the same level as Ocarina of Time if you take off the N64 fanboy goggles.


Sure, there are a lot of action-adventure games on the PS1, but then I guess it goes back to the usual 'quality versus quantity' question that always seems to dominate N64 v. PS1 game comparisons... As for the Saturn, it does have a few 2d Zelda style games, like Shining Wisdom, Beyond Oasis, etc., but I don't know if any are great games...

Beyond Oasis and Dark Savior are generally considered great games for the Saturn. Shining Wisdom is the only one of those that's generally given mixed opinions.


E.G.G. for Dreamcast is probably better, though the DC doesn't have anything quite like 3d Zelda either.

Does Shenmue not count? Legacy of Kain? Draconus?




As I was referencing above, is there much to this post beyond 'the article partially disagreed with my pro-Sega bias so it's wrong'? Well, I'll give you that the article mentions Saturn popup but not N64 fog, but that's about it.

Saturn Pop-up is a bit silly though. It's really only a problem that exists in early games like Daytona USA. It pretty much went away after titles like Sega Rally started coming out.



-While the 3d graphics of any and all 5th gen consoles is, today, something of an acquired taste for sure, the N64's 3d, being more "modern" thanks to features like perspective correction, IS going to be easier for most people to go back to than the Saturn's is. Some people now hate all 5th gen 3d, though, of course. N64 3d is obviously very dated today, but at least the image holds together much better than PS1 or Saturn 3d does.

Of the three of them I'd say the Saturn has aged better. PS1 is full of fullscreen dithering which makes everything look like ass, especially over Component on a modern TV. N64 looks ok, but it's very VERY blurry by comparison. Saturn games still look ok though. Yes there's some glitches and dithered transparencies, but overall the picture quality is still acceptable and still looks good on a modern TV through RGB/Component. Don't get me wrong, the better N64 games that aren't full of fog and blurriness do look good, but those are few and far between.



-2d games - Yoshi's Story shows that no theory is needed in saying that the N64 can do great 2d. Just look at that game, and some others: the proof is there. Theory says that it probably could have been even better than that, but what exists shows that it was quite good, easily as good as or better than anything 2d on the PS1.

Symphony of the Night says hi:

F9LsZltG2YY


Versus Saturn I don't know, but you could make that case, particularly based on the point mentioned in the article -- that custom microcode would have allowed for even better 2d on the N64, since the microcode almost all games use is designed for 3d. That is a fact.

Yet the small size of Carts would limit the amount of graphics variation you could have. There's also the lack of VDP2. As good as Yoshi's Story looks, it doesn't compare to even the average 2D stuff on the Saturn and PS1. That's not to say the N64 couldn't do it if it was programmed that way, there's just nothing that exists to back that up or prove it. So there's pretty much no point debating that.



-Saturn games that rival late DC and PS2 releases? You obviously must mean 2d games only, since anything with polygons is very far behind. And you must mean only the 4MB cart games, versus 2d PS2 and DC games. But even with those restrictions, I doubt it; do you really think that the Saturn could have done games like Marvel vs Capcom 2 or SNK vs Capcom 2 just as well as the DC and PS2 did? Well no, polygonal backgrounds. But even besides that, those games go beyond what you see in Saturn games like Vampire Savior or SFA3. And what about SNK games? Could a 4MB version of Last Blade 2 matched the DC version? I'm skeptical for sure. Meanwhile, the N64 games that were close to early DC/PS2 graphics were 3d games, not 2d -- harder accomplishment there to keep up as well as it did.

_m6AyA70_dM

Seriously, the Saturn was on the verge of another 3D breakthrough by 1998. If Sega hadn't pulled the plug on it and rushed out the Dreamcast we probably would have seen some amazing things.



-Fog - Saturn games do have more and closer draw distances on average than N64 games do, though. And many people will indeed find popup more distracting than fog is. But yeah, mentioning that N64 games, particularly earlier ones, also have draw distance issues too would be reasonable, but criticizing the Saturn for being worse in that respect is accurate. But I do agree that mentioning Saturn draw distances but not N64 ones is kind of odd.

As I mentioned above though, a lot of those issues went away early on.

stu
03-03-2014, 02:47 PM
You really are generalizing here and ignoring the top-of-the-line PSX games. If you just take some random PSX games as an example, yeah, all of the technical issues are going to be very apparent there. But if you take the Crash or Spyro series, or Wipeout 3, now these graphics are more than competitive with the best looking N64 games, while offering much superior framerates. In general the issue is more complicated than just saying this or that console was better... for the most part, PSX excelled in tightly confined games (like Crash) where they managed to squeeze in a lot of detail and work around the hardware limitations, while the N64 was better suited for more solid, expansive worlds like those of Zelda.



Yep I agree ABF is generalizing there .. a LOT. But I think with those Nintendo "Virtual Boy" styled rose tinted glasses he's wearing it must make the N64's blurry graphics & washed out textures look like UltraHD 4K quality. I must see if I can pick some up off of Ebay sometime. :lol:

Chilly Willy
03-03-2014, 03:11 PM
Panzer Dragoon Saga says hi. Ocarina of Time is great, but Nintendo fans really need to stop sucking it's dick. It's a good game, but it's certainly not the best game ever.

QFT

I was just about to post the same thing. N64 fans seem to think N64 games were so far ahead of anything else of the time, but that's only their own opinion. I never cared for ANY Zelda games, much less the N64 ones. I especially hated that the N64 really doesn't have any 2D games... they have a few 3D games with a fixed camera, but that's about it. Even the PS3/XB360 have 2D games! Nintendo was an idiot to try to push 3D so hard.

Dragonmaster Lou
03-03-2014, 03:27 PM
I was just about to post the same thing. N64 fans seem to think N64 games were so far ahead of anything else of the time, but that's only their own opinion. I never cared for ANY Zelda games, much less the N64 ones. I especially hated that the N64 really doesn't have any 2D games... they have a few 3D games with a fixed camera, but that's about it. Even the PS3/XB360 have 2D games! Nintendo was an idiot to try to push 3D so hard.

Idiot? Maybe not, though it depends on the rationale they had for pushing 3D. One of the N64's strengths was its 3D capabilities. I could be wrong here, but I believe it was the best of its generation when it came to raw 3D polygon pushing and special effects. Its main weakness were the limited storage capacities of its cartridges, which meant fewer textures, and what textures they did have were low-resolution. The poor thing had to use its special effects, like anti-aliasing, to make those low-res textures not look like total crap but with the side effect of making them look super blurry. The same storage limitations probably would've also resulted in low-resolution sprites which also would've looked pretty crappy. I believe the hardware was also pretty much designed from scratch to be a polygon pusher (hey, they collaborated with SGI, and SGI was known at the time for its polygon-pushing hardware), so any sprite-based art would've been much more CPU intensive than the Saturn (courtesy of its sprite-munching VDPs) and probably the Playstation as well.

With these constraints, it made sense for Nintendo to push 3D as, really, that was the only real strength of their console (and even then it was handicapped due to low storage capacity).

I forget who posted originally, but one thing that could've fixed many (though perhaps not all) of the N64's ills would've been a CD drive. If nothing else, the greater storage capacity would've allowed for more and higher-resolution textures which probably would've solved the whole "blurry games" problem it faced from excessive anti-aliasing. Give the thing a CD-ROM drive and a good chunk of RAM for buffering game data, and you're all set.

Xan
03-03-2014, 03:31 PM
Anti-aliasing =/= bilinear filtering.

saturndual32
03-03-2014, 03:33 PM
Same here, the N64 Zelda games do nothing for me, i love the old 2d ones, though. I easly prefer Soul Reaver on PS over the N64 Zelda games.
By the way, the graphics on the Sat Shenmue video never stop amazing me, even if the frame rate was only around 15 fps, and everything is only real time cinemas, the polygons counts look higher than enything on the PS and N64 by far, to this biased Saturn fan, hehe. The texturing and lightnin seem superior too. I mean, considering the Saturn tech specs, should those graphics exist on the system?, and if thats how Segas first party games were going to start looking like for the Saturn... damn.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 03:36 PM
Same here, the N64 Zelda games do nothing for me, i love the old 2d ones, though. I easly prefer Soul Reaver on PS over the N64 Zelda games.
By the way, the graphics on the Sat Shenmue video never stop amazing me, even if the frame rate was only around 15 fps, and everything is only real time cinemas, the polygons counts look higher than enything on the PS and N64 by far, to this biased Saturn fan, hehe. The texturing and lightnin seem superior too. I mean, considering the Saturn tech specs, should those graphics exist on the system?, and if thats how Segas first party games were going to start looking like for the Saturn... damn.

Considering that the N64 was struggling to run Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask at a consistent 15-20fps and the PS1 struggled to run FF7/8/9 battles at a solid 15-24fps I'd say the Saturn doing Shenmue at 15-20fps is quite impressive.

Dragonmaster Lou
03-03-2014, 04:18 PM
Anti-aliasing =/= bilinear filtering.
Only mentioned anti-aliasing as it was the only special effect I could recall at the time. Now that you mention it, anti-aliasing only helped smooth jaggies along edges and such... Bilinear filtering is what the texture effects was. Thanks for the clarification.

Barone
03-03-2014, 05:57 PM
Excitebike 64 is another one of the N64's best-looking (and best-playing) racing games.
Yeah, not the usual poor textures and the animation of the drivers was the most fluid among all motocross games of that gen.



Incredible game! It's still one of the best motorcycle racing games ever. The big outdoor levels do look better than the arena ones, though. Otherwise amazing stuff.
I sense some overhype here.
It's a very good game and all but I'd say that it's just one of the best motocross games of that gen.
Championship Motocross 2001 was also very good, both in opposite sides in terms of gameplay and features.



The libraries are so different that it's a pure matter of opinion really (but more people in the West would like the N64's library than the Saturn's, even including import titles), but the N64 has the better controller for sure! The PS1 and Saturn have 3d games which control horribly because you've got to try to control a 3d game with a d-pad, but the N64's analog stick on the controller fixes that problem. That controller was the best thing to happen to 3d gaming ever. The Saturn has various analog controllers and they're great, but not all games which should support them do, while on the N64, since the main controller is analog, everything that should have analog, does. Big advance.
You always dismiss the existence of analog controllers for the Saturn and Playstation while you're having orgasms with the N64's analog stick...
Also, as pleasant as the N64 controller may be to you, most of the N64 racers suffer with lack of analog support for gas and brake due to its half-assed design.


Free space for ABF's conjectures about how is it better to not have the option of full analog controls, how Nintendo was ahead of its time and how stupid are the people who there to play racing games using manual transmission and full analog controls:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________





Eh, not really. I mean, the Saturn is best at what? Shmups, fighting games, what else?
:shame:



the N64's wrestling games were hugely popular and are widely considered to be maybe the best ever
You probably would be a better man if you're punched in the face every time you use "best ever" in your self-assertive lines.
Also, Fire Pro Gaiden: Blazing Tornado, Fire ProWrestling S: 6Men Scramble and All Japan Pro Wrestling Featuring Virtua say "Hi!".



On the N64 ALL games that would benefit from analog, have it. That is very definitely not true on Saturn or PS1.
Too bad that games which use dual analog controls, like Hydro Thunder, are half-digital on the N64.
Too bad that its genius controller design doesn't allow precise analog triggers like the Saturn's 3D Control Pad and all modern consoles' controllers do.



As far as racing games go for me, its arcadey or nothing. Daytona/CE, Sega Rally, Hang On GP, Manx TT, F1 Challenge, Outrun, Power Drift, NFS, Road Rash, Touge King 1 & 2, Shoutoku '97 >>>> boring sims and kart games with cheating AI
Chase H.Q. Special: Police S.C.I. makes a good pair with OutRun and it also has full analog support.
I really don't like F1 Challenge though.




Look at the actual Japan-exclusive Saturn library, and just try to come up with games that are anywhere remotely near as likely to have sold in the West as the N64's library did.
The N64 library brought to US games like Choro Q and Hiryu No Ken Twin. Your point?




And as for "blurry", better that than the pixelization and perspective problems in Saturn 3d, for sure.
m4q22noI9w0
H9VNgzpQQGM

Humm... No.




For Guardian Heroes , Die Hard Arcade...? - Nothing good. For bad games there's Fighting Force 64 and Batman Beyond (both also on PS1).
Radiant Silvergun , Soukyugurentai , Thunder Force V...? - Star Soldier: Vanishing Earth, sort of Dezaemon 64, and also Bangai-Oh if you count it in this genre
Shining the Holy Ark , Panzer Dragoon Saga , Shining Force III...? - For strategy games: Command & Conquer, Starcraft 64, Ogre Battle 64. For RPGs: Paper Mario, Aidyn Chronicles, Shiren the Wanderer 2.
Street Fighter Alpha 2, KOF '97 , X-Men vs Street Fighter...? - Killer Instinct Gold, Mortal Kombat Trilogy (on all three systems), Super Smash Bros.
Virtua Fighter 2 , Fighters Megamix , Last Bronx...? - Fighter's Destiny, Fighter Destiny 2, Mace: The Dark Age, maybe Mortal Kombat 4 (also on PS1, PC, & DC)
Shinobi Legions , Silhouette Mirage , Astal...? - Mischief Makers, Goemon's Great Adventure, Kirby 64
:lol:
MKT on the N64 is a bad joke and everybody knows that.




The N64 has two Zelda games, one of which is the best console game ever made in OoT.
http://static.fjcdn.com/large/pictures/63/b1/63b115_2725573.jpg




the N64's 3d, being more "modern" thanks to features like perspective correction
Too bad that "modern" 3D also requires a lot of lighting effects, which are quite poor in most of N64 games.
There's still that... uh, you know... Awful fog all over the place.
...And that iffy 15-24 fps frame rate in many games.



OOT had that z-targeting thing too that became a standard in similar 3D games after this.
You mean the target locking just like Panzer Dragoon had years before?
Yep, that's Nintendo being revolutionary once again...



N64 fans seem to think N64 games were so far ahead of anything else of the time, but that's only their own opinion.
This.

Moirai
03-03-2014, 06:28 PM
It seems like fanboys go wild at even the slightest mention of Saturn on this forum.

maxi
03-03-2014, 06:29 PM
I honestly think that Legend of Oasis is on pair with Link to the Past, but I do not know if I like it more than Majora's Mask. I believe it is my favorite game of the Saturn.
OoT is still awesome, but MM is better, plus it's the game that started the Zelda's cicle:
http://nintendo3dsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ZeldaCycle1.png

NeoZeedeater
03-03-2014, 07:18 PM
Panzer Dragoon Saga says hi. Ocarina of Time is great, but Nintendo fans really need to stop sucking it's dick. It's a good game, but it's certainly not the best game ever.
Has A Black Falcon even played Panzer Dragoon Saga? I recall in a previous Saturn/Nintendo 64 debate, he hadn't played it (among other great games including Sin and Punishment even). There are certain games I think people should play before they can properly compare consoles within a generation. Those would be two of such importance.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 07:56 PM
It seems like fanboys go wild at even the slightest mention of Saturn on this forum.

or the n64

Bottino
03-03-2014, 08:37 PM
I confess that i feel pretty stupid now. I mean, i had no idea that Ocarina of Time was the best game ever (Yay!!); and i'm here just playing Gunstar Heroes...

Silly me.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 08:45 PM
majora's mask is better anyway

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 08:56 PM
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/all?view=condensed&sort=desc

There's a reason why Ocarina of Time is tied for first place, and it's because most people disagree with Nintendo haters like you people are.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 09:00 PM
because metacritic score means everything

and there is a difference between beinga blind fanboy thats wallows any old bullshit nintendo serves them

a hter and merley being critical

and you can actually be a fan and be critical too !

crazy but true


and majora's mask is better anyway

Xan
03-03-2014, 09:04 PM
The fact that a Tony Hawk game is at second place says everything about the credibility of that list :D

But yeah, OoT is a pretty damn good game. Even as someone who believes the N64 really doesn't hold a candle to the PSX in most respects I have to say there is nothing comparable to it on the PSX. Not sure if there is any point in elevating it on that "best game ever" pedestal and getting worked up over it on the internets though...

Bottino
03-03-2014, 09:06 PM
So, by the Merda Critic logic the best games ever made are Zelda, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater and GTA?

Now, i feel even more stupid.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 09:10 PM
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/all?view=condensed&sort=desc

There's a reason why Ocarina of Time is tied for first place, and it's because most people disagree with Nintendo haters like you people are.

Because 90% of gaming "journalists" are Nintentards?

Barone
03-03-2014, 09:13 PM
The almighty Metacritic says: "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the N64 is the best game ever and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 on the PS1 is the second best game ever."
:lol:
Yeah, whoever disagrees with Metacritic is a blind biased fanboy or just a Nintendo hater; or both.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 09:14 PM
The almighty Metacritic says: "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the N64 is the best console game ever and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 on the PS1 is the second best console game ever."
:lol:
Yeah, whoever disagrees with Metacritic is a blind biased fanboy or just a Nintendo hater; or both.

well we are sega fans
we are bitter and jaded so off course we are both ;)

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 10:31 PM
So basically you'll all argue facts when you think the facts are in your favor, but when they aren't, you'll argue that the facts (that OoT is generally regarded to be the best game ever) are all wrong and a result of bias? :lol: :lol:

At least I admit when something's just my opinion and not fact... like, I certainly don't love Tony Hawk 2 or GTA V myself, but I know that those games are/were extremely highly regarded and can kind of see why they scored so high, even if I certainly would never score them like that based on my own opinion. (And yes, Tony Hawk 2 was a really, really popular and successful game that got extremely high scores, if you've forgotten.).

OoT isn't my favorite game of all time -- that would be Starcraft for the PC, of course, and Warcraft III (PC) is second -- but it is the best console game for sure.


Because 90% of gaming "journalists" are Nintentards?
This one's the funniest of all these responses by far! Anyone who has read anything in the press in the past decade-plus would know for sure that the press kind of hates Nintendo most of the time... the constant drumbeat of NIntendo-is-doomed is a narrative a lot of press people have been pushing for many years.

old man
03-03-2014, 10:42 PM
I love the N64 and I don't think Ocarina of Time is the best game ever. I probably wouldn't even put it in the top ten. I don't really understand the blind love for this game either. It's a good game, but that's it.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 10:49 PM
and you got any other sources other then meta critics inflated opinion ?

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 10:56 PM
So basically you'll all argue facts when you think the facts are in your favor, but when they aren't, you'll argue that the facts (that OoT is generally regarded to be the best game ever) are all wrong and a result of bias? :lol: :lol:

At least I admit when something's just my opinion and not fact... like, I certainly don't love Tony Hawk 2 or GTA V myself, but I know that those games are/were extremely highly regarded and can kind of see why they scored so high, even if I certainly would never score them like that based on my own opinion. (And yes, Tony Hawk 2 was a really, really popular and successful game that got extremely high scores, if you've forgotten.).

OoT isn't my favorite game of all time -- that would be Starcraft for the PC, of course, and Warcraft III (PC) is second -- but it is the best console game for sure..

Metacritic ratings aren't fact on the game's quality. They are a fact on the average of people's opinions in the gaming journalist world. Which again, a lot of them are Nintentards when it comes to anything retro.



This one's the funniest of all these responses by far! Anyone who has read anything in the press in the past decade-plus would know for sure that the press kind of hates Nintendo most of the time... the constant drumbeat of NIntendo-is-doomed is a narrative a lot of press people have been pushing for many years.

They hate them NOW. But everything they did in the past is a golden egg that can't be tarnished. In probably 5-10 years we'll see them talking about how the Wii, 3DS, and Wii U were the best systems ever with perfect games.

Soulis
03-03-2014, 11:08 PM
You mean the target locking just like Panzer Dragoon had years before?
Yep, that's Nintendo being revolutionary once again...
Erm... Is Panzer Dragoon a free-roaming 3D adventure? Funny, i thought it was an on-rails shooter with emphasis on shooting things. You know, a genre where locking in enemies was a thing even before Panzer Dragoon.

Barone
03-03-2014, 11:10 PM
So basically you'll all argue facts when you think the facts are in your favor, but when they aren't, you'll argue that the facts (that OoT is generally regarded to be the best game ever) are all wrong and a result of bias? :lol: :lol:

At least I admit when something's just my opinion and not fact... like, I certainly don't love Tony Hawk 2 or GTA V myself, but I know that those games are/were extremely highly regarded and can kind of see why they scored so high, even if I certainly would never score them like that based on my own opinion. (And yes, Tony Hawk 2 was a really, really popular and successful game that got extremely high scores, if you've forgotten.).

OoT isn't my favorite game of all time -- that would be Starcraft for the PC, of course, and Warcraft III (PC) is second -- but it is the best console game for sure.
This is dumb to no end.

A collection of opinions will never be a fact and to claim otherwise is to write "stupid" all over your post.

According to a collection of opinions, OoT is the best game ever.
The only fact in that statement, given the metacritic's rank, is that such a collection of opinions exist. End.

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 11:10 PM
and you got any other sources other then meta critics inflated opinion ?
If you seriously need sources to prove that OoT is generally regarded to be the best video game ever, then you must not spend any time on the internet apart from this site... I have no words for a question this unbelievably silly.


This is dumb to no end.

A collection of opinions will never be a fact and to claim otherwise is to write "stupid" all over your post.

According to a collection of opinions, OoT is the best game ever.
The only fact in that statement, given the metacritic's rank, is that such a collection of opinions exist. End.
A collection of opinions which line up with the opinion of most gamers overall. Review scores do not exist in a vacuum, they almost always reflect something about the game in general -- so the better-regarded a game is, the higher its scores will be. Game reviewing is, unfortunately, nowhere remotely near as objectively decided as it should be. OoT has such high scores because a LOT of people love it and think it's the best game ever. Period, end of story. Regardless of how great it actually is, it would not score that high if it wasn't so popular. That it's still the best-scoring game ever shows how incredibly great and innovative the game was, how popular it was and remains, and how well it's held up as well.


Erm... Is Panzer Dragoon a free-roaming 3D adventure? Funny, i thought it was an on-rails shooter with emphasis on shooting things. You know, a genre where locking in enemies was a thing even before Panzer Dragoon.
He could at least have mentioned After Burner, which has a very similar lockon to Panzer Dragoon but released much earlier... but yeah, that comparison is nonsense. After Burner/Panzer Dragoon/Galactic Attack-style lockons are absolutely nothing at all like OoT's locking camera. OoT was indeed the first game ever with that kind of lock-on camera in a 3d game, and it was a revolutionary mechanic that made 3d games immeasurably better.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 11:15 PM
Erm... Is Panzer Dragoon a free-roaming 3D adventure? Funny, i thought it was an on-rails shooter with emphasis on shooting things. You know, a genre where locking in enemies was a thing even before Panzer Dragoon.

Panzer Dragoon Saga has that same target locking mechanic and it's free roaming.


If you seriously need sources to prove that OoT is generally regarded to be the best video game ever, then you must not spend any time on the internet apart from this site... I have no words for a question this unbelievably silly.


A collection of opinions which line up with the opinion of most gamers overall. Review scores do not exist in a vacuum, they almost always reflect something about the game in general -- so the better-regarded a game is, the higher its scores will be. Game reviewing is, unfortunately, nowhere remotely near as objectively decided as it should be. OoT has such high scores because a lot of people love it and think it's the best game ever. Period, end of story.

Then why are all the user scores on that page much lower?



He could at least have mentioned After Burner, which has a very similar lockon to Panzer Dragoon but released much earlier... but yeah, that comparison is nonsense. After Burner/Panzer Dragoon/Galactic Attack-style lockons are absolutely nothing at all like OoT's locking camera. OoT was indeed the first game ever with that kind of lock-on camera in a 3d game, and it was a revolutionary mechanic that made 3d games immeasurably better.

Again, Panzer Dragoon Saga has that same damn mechanic and it came out before Ocarina of Time.

Barone
03-03-2014, 11:18 PM
Erm... Is Panzer Dragoon a free-roaming 3D adventure? Funny, i thought it was an on-rails shooter with emphasis on shooting things. You know, a genre where locking in enemies was a thing even before Panzer Dragoon.
And since when borrowing elements from other genres and games is a reason for worshiping?

Soulis
03-03-2014, 11:19 PM
Panzer Dragoon Saga has that same target locking mechanic and it's free roaming.
I only played this game for a couple of hours but i don't remember it being anywhere near the same genre as OOT. One is a free-roaming adventure with real time combat and the other is a mix of turn based/real time and it's definitely not free roaming during battles. Unless there are sections where you combat enemies on foot in a free roaming environment ala Zelda.



And since when borrowing elements from other genres and games is a reason for worshiping?Dude, nobody worshiped anything. I was comparing OOT with MM and mentioned that this system became standard after OOT. And i was talking about free roaming 3D adventures where you have a complete freedom of movement. I don't know if Zelda was the first game ever that did this for its genre but i know it was the one that was successful and made it a standard. But again, Sega fans are here to downplay anything significant Nintendo ever made, ever. I didn't say OOT was the best game ever, nor i agree with that statement. But that doesn't mean it didn't blow people away back then or that it wasn't a very important game for the industry because it was.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 11:22 PM
I only played this game for a couple of hours but i don't remember it being anywhere near the same genre as OOT. One is a free-roaming adventure with real time combat and the other is a mix of turn based/real time and it's definitely not free roaming during battles. Unless there are sections where you combat enemies on foot in a free roaming environment ala Zelda.

We're not talking about the battle systems here. We're talking about a simple targeting mechanic to interact with objects. Zelda just happens to use it with fighting mechanics as well. PDS uses it in the free roam sections when you're on foot and on your dragon to interact with objects and people. It's the same damn thing.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 11:22 PM
If you seriously need sources to prove that OoT is generally regarded to be the best video game ever, then you must not spend any time on the internet apart from this site... I have no words for a question this unbelievably silly..

then i am sure you also found people who dont like ocarina of time

...amazing im sure

in fact i got 11 negative reviews right here
yes they are all from the same source so ?

http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-77055
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-17243
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-127912
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-66335
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-90652
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-131002
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-10684
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-126327
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-135637
http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-155606

im sure all these people are haters and blind fanboys

Soulis
03-03-2014, 11:26 PM
We're not talking about the battle systems here.
I'm talking about the battle systems here, sorry.

saturndual32
03-03-2014, 11:28 PM
m4q22noI9w0
H9VNgzpQQGM

Humm... No.


LOL, i tought 64bit was better that 32bit but that comparison debunks that theory :confused:.
And keep in mind that Last Bronx wasnt using the programing libraries that were going to allow the Saturn:love: to display 750,000 polygons per second for its Virtua Fighter 3 port ;). Yep, Virtua Fighter 3, Shenmue, Scud Race and Sonic Adventure were going to stablish the Saturn:love: as the true most powerful system of its generation, you see, specs alone fail to show the hidden potential that the Saturn:love: really had :chewie:.

By the way, i am not a Sega Saturn:love: fanboy, i am a N64 fanboy that accepts the truth. By the way, it breaks my heart to say that Azel, Grandia, Shining Holy Ark, Tengai Makyou 4 and Shining Force 3 own the N64 Zeldas :cry:, and thats just mentioning some RPGish type games, dont let me get started with the rest of the Saturn:love: genres.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 11:29 PM
I'm talking about the battle systems here, sorry.

No, you were talking about Z-Targeting, which is a feature that is used throughout the entire game, not just in combat. PDS has the same exact mechanic when you're freely roaming around the game world, it's just not used in battle because it's a turn based RPG.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 11:30 PM
Yeah, it should be obvious i guess. Thing is, i usually stay away from branded boards like this (Nintendo for instance) where people seem to live in their own bubble but this board gave me a good impression at first. In the end, many people here are just as biased as the Nintendo fanboys they seem to rip all the time. The only difference is that the posts here are better written since 99% of Sega fans are adults (Nintendo is still relevant so they still produce new, young fans). Excluding Sonic fans of course :P

it kinda is just look at the rest of this thread

i ama sega fan and i like the saturn i have an ...affinity for it
however i wont claim its the machine machine evurr just because i like it nor will i compare it to anything but its own peers

and when it comes to its peers the playstation is superior if only because of its massive and varied library which has something for everybody
and the ps1 peaked in 98-2001

Soulis
03-03-2014, 11:36 PM
I love how people compare the shitty games of system A with the good games of system B to prove that System B is the better one. Its a very good practice that might fool some people but unfortunately not all.



No, you were talking about Z-Targeting, which is a feature that is used throughout the entire game, not just in combat. PDS has the same exact mechanic when you're freely roaming around the game world, it's just not used in battle because it's a turn based RPG.
OOT is a free roaming game where the battles take place in real-freaking-time. You don't get a loading screen, or a transition screen. You explore freely and an enemy pops up just there, while you were cutting the grass. Because the game is free-roaming-real-freaking-time 3D, without a targeting system it would be hard to aim. It would also be a pain if you were against 2 or more enemies and you didn't have to choose which one you want to attack in real-freaking-time. You could also move in 3D space freely while having your targets in one enemy. Z-targeting was the system OOT used to allow all of these things.

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 11:37 PM
Every game ever has people who dislike it, KitsuneNight. That OoT has some too means nothing -- every single game ever made has people who dislike it. Every one. The question is which one is, overall, the most popular. And OoT is that game, and it deserves it.

(As for Majora's Mask, I've never liked that game anywhere near as much as OoT.)


We're not talking about the battle systems here. We're talking about a simple targeting mechanic to interact with objects. Zelda just happens to use it with fighting mechanics as well. PDS uses it in the free roam sections when you're on foot and on your dragon to interact with objects and people. It's the same damn thing.
Uh, we are talking about battle systems. The whole point to OoT's lock-on is that it lets you fight enemies better. You lock on for combat, not just to interact with things. OoT's lockon is its battle system.

And if it's the same thing, does it have the same "while locked on you will auto-sidestep around the thing you're locked on to when you move" feature, and the same kind of camera lock too?

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 11:38 PM
^hmm i wouldnt call pd saga a shitty game

do you got a flame bunker ? you may need it soon

and popularity does not equate quality

to use a movie analogy if it did the transformers movies would be among some of the best movies ever made

they clearly are not

oot is a good game
but the best game ever ?

hardly
it was just the first 3d zelda and pulled off very well
and the first zelda for a lot of people me including ( i played the orignal 8 bit zelda but never got far in to it ) it was a strong engrossing title
and it still holds up decently btu its no where near the best game ever

Moirai
03-03-2014, 11:39 PM
Everyone in this thread should make a Micro-64 account.

KitsuneNight
03-03-2014, 11:41 PM
Everyone in this thread should make a Micro-64 account.

cross board flaming ?

yeaaah no

Moirai
03-03-2014, 11:48 PM
cross board flaming ?

yeaaah no

XD

A Black Falcon
03-03-2014, 11:56 PM
Yeah it is...


On the Dreamcast.
The only reason the Dreamcast version is better-known in the West is because the DC version got a US release, while the N64 version didn't. Otherwise both versions would have been popular here, because both versions of the game are good. The few reviews of the N64 version which exist reflect that.


Custom Robo is certainly not better than Virtual On, though they don't really compare. Virtual On is much faster paced and involves a decent amount of skill to beat. Custom Robo is more in line with a party brawler. If you want games like that on the Saturn, I'd say these are better matches, and one of them I'd say is better due to it being 6 players:
Sorry, but I don't like Virtual-On much at all. Whoever thought that that horrible "jump to lock on again" system was a good idea was as wrong as can be... and that they actually kept it in later Virtual-On games, released after other games used OoT-style lockon systems which actually work well, is surprising, and unfortunate. At least the Saturn game is an earlier 3d title; for the Dreamcast game there is no excuse for having such awful controls.

I agree that Virtual-On and Custom Robo are pretty different kinds of games, but Custom Robo is far better and more fun.

Also N64 Custom Robo isn't really a party game, it's two player only after all... only the GC Custom Robo game allows three or four player battles. The second N64 game has a four robot alternating mode, but only two fight at any one time. Custom Robo's battle system is simple but has good depth. Really brilliant design, and lots of fun. I first played the GC one, which is the best one for sure, but the N64 games are almost as good, apart from unfortunately not being in English and not having 3-4 player battles.


Panzer Dragoon Saga says hi. Ocarina of Time is great, but Nintendo fans really need to stop sucking it's dick. It's a good game, but it's certainly not the best game ever. Majora's Mask is the better of the two if you ask me. The World felt more alive and lush. Ocarina of Time's world felt dead and abandoned. Even as Young Link.

Well, there is Virtual Hydlide, but Saturn owners would much rather pretend that that game never existed. Though there are definitely games on the Saturn and PS1 that are on the same level as Ocarina of Time if you take off the N64 fanboy goggles.
You're the one with goggles, as I've proven. Nintendo-hater goggles which block you from recognizing that OoT is considered to be the best console game ever made.


Beyond Oasis and Dark Savior are generally considered great games for the Saturn. Shining Wisdom is the only one of those that's generally given mixed opinions.
Dark Savior... yeah, that's probably the best thing the Saturn has in the genre. It's not Zelda great, but that is a good game.


Does Shenmue not count? Legacy of Kain? Draconus?
Shenmue and Draconus are different kinds of things. Soul Reaver might count, though, perhaps.


Saturn Pop-up is a bit silly though. It's really only a problem that exists in early games like Daytona USA. It pretty much went away after titles like Sega Rally started coming out.
No, that's really not true. Later Saturn games still have plenty of pop-up... maybe the draw distance got pushed back a bit versus earlier titles, but lots of later 3d Saturn games have plenty of pop-up for sure.


Of the three of them I'd say the Saturn has aged better. PS1 is full of fullscreen dithering which makes everything look like ass, especially over Component on a modern TV. N64 looks ok, but it's very VERY blurry by comparison. Saturn games still look ok though. Yes there's some glitches and dithered transparencies, but overall the picture quality is still acceptable and still looks good on a modern TV through RGB/Component. Don't get me wrong, the better N64 games that aren't full of fog and blurriness do look good, but those are few and far between.
Only a Saturn fan would say that, that's for sure... generally, even back at the time, the quality of Saturn 3d was regarded to be the worst of the three major consoles, and overall, even though Saturn 3d does have fewer perspective issues than PS1 3d and that's good, that impression is accurate, I think. Lower polygon counts, often lower resolutions, more pixelated graphics... the Saturn can't quite keep up, and it was too hard to program for for developers to be able to get the most out of it, too. Not having real transparencies most of the time is also a huge issue.


Symphony of the Night says hi:

F9LsZltG2YY
Why do you think the N64 couldn't have done 2d graphics just as good? I think the quality of 2d we see on the system shows that it most definitely could. Developers just weren't interested in making many 2d games for the system, or in talking Nintendo into letting them use 2d-focused microcode.


Yet the small size of Carts would limit the amount of graphics variation you could have. There's also the lack of VDP2. As good as Yoshi's Story looks, it doesn't compare to even the average 2D stuff on the Saturn and PS1. That's not to say the N64 couldn't do it if it was programmed that way, there's just nothing that exists to back that up or prove it. So there's pretty much no point debating that.
... Yeah, no. Yoshi's Story beats most 2d PS1 or Saturn games, visually...


_m6AyA70_dM

Seriously, the Saturn was on the verge of another 3D breakthrough by 1998. If Sega hadn't pulled the plug on it and rushed out the Dreamcast we probably would have seen some amazing things.
While Saturn Shenmue would certainly have been the best-looking 3d game on the Saturn, you can still tell that that's a Saturn game. It would have been nice to see that, though, because as it is Saturn 3d looks badly dated compared to PS1 3d, since 3d games on the PS1 improved hugely after 1997, while the Saturn died off. The Saturn couldn't have quite matched the PS1, but it could have competed, at least. (This issue has been debated here before, and I think the most compelling argument made was that the Saturn couldn't quite have kept up with the PS1? Transparencies at least certainly put it behind, anyway.).


As I mentioned above though, a lot of those issues went away early on.
Not really, no.


^hmm i wouldnt call pd saga a shitty game
I don't know what you're talking about here, but that was pretty clearly a statement more about things like comparing Dark Rift to Last Bronx...


do you got a flame bunker ? you may need it soon

and popularity does not equate quality

to use a movie analogy if it did the transformers movies would be among some of the best movies ever made

they clearly are not

oot is a good game
but the best game ever ?

hardly
it was just the first 3d zelda and pulled off very well
and the first zelda for a lot of people me including ( i played the orignal 8 bit zelda but never got far in to it ) it was a strong engrossing title
and it still holds up decently btu its no where near the best game ever
Popularity is not the same as quality, but having a high review score means that a game is both popular AND great, not one or the other. High-grossing popular movies which score low critically fail on one of those two tests, obviously.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-03-2014, 11:57 PM
I love how people compare the shitty games of system A with the good games of system B to prove that System B is the better one. Its a very good practice that might fool some people but unfortunately not all.



OOT is a free roaming game where the battles take place in real-freaking-time. You don't get a loading screen, or a transition screen. You explore freely and an enemy pops up just there, while you were cutting the grass. Because the game is free-roaming-real-freaking-time 3D, without a targeting system it would be hard to aim. It would also be a pain if you were against 2 or more enemies and you didn't have to choose which one you want to attack in real-freaking-time. You could also move in 3D space freely while having your targets in one enemy. Z-targeting was the system OOT used to tackle these issues.

Your original fucking post:


OOT had that z-targeting thing too that became a standard in similar 3D games after this.

You didn't mention the battle system at all. Only Z-Targeting. Z-Targeting is not exclusive to the combat system of Ocarina of Time. It's used throughout the game to interact with objects and people. Panzer Dragoon Saga uses the same exact mechanic in its free roaming sections. Yeah, it may not have real time combat going on, but the targeting mechanic is the same damn thing.



Uh, we are talking about battle systems. The whole point to OoT's lock-on is that it lets you fight enemies better. You lock on for combat, not just to interact with things. OoT's lockon is its battle system.

See above.



And if it's the same thing, does it have the same "while locked on you will auto-sidestep around the thing you're locked on to when you move" feature, and the same kind of camera lock too?

No, that feature isn't there because there's no need for it. Why would you need to sidestep around objects that aren't attacking you?

Bottino
03-04-2014, 12:00 AM
OoT isn't my favorite game of all time -- but it is the best console game for sure.





If you seriously need sources to prove that OoT is generally regarded to be the best video game ever, then you must not spend any time on the internet apart from this site... I have no words for a question this unbelievably silly.


A collection of opinions which line up with the opinion of most gamers overall. Review scores do not exist in a vacuum, they almost always reflect something about the game in general -- so the better-regarded a game is, the higher its scores will be. Game reviewing is, unfortunately, nowhere remotely near as objectively decided as it should be. OoT has such high scores because a LOT of people love it and think it's the best game ever. Period, end of story. Regardless of how great it actually is, it would not score that high if it wasn't so popular. That it's still the best-scoring game ever shows how incredibly great and innovative the game was, how popular it was and remains, and how well it's held up as well.





Every game ever has people who dislike it, KitsuneNight. That OoT has some too means nothing -- every single game ever made has people who dislike it. Every one. The question is which one is, overall, the most popular. And OoT is that game, and it deserves it.



Ok.

Soulis
03-04-2014, 12:02 AM
@Trekkies

In my original "fucking" post i said something about "similar" games. Panzer Dragoon Saga isn't even in the same genre.

Secondly, when someone talks about OOT and mentions z-targeting, its IMPLIED that he is talking about the battle system because it was there where it made a difference. Targeting rocks to pick them up or NPCs to talk to wasn't all that necessary, you could do that just as easily without targeting them.

So there, i was talking about the battle system. I'm saying this to you now.

Its not rocket science.



No, that feature isn't there because there's no need for it. Why would you need to sidestep around objects that aren't attacking you?
ROFL! Oh my god.... /facepalmthroughthescull

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 12:03 AM
guess that means cod is one of the best too since its so popular and sells so well

gamevet
03-04-2014, 12:07 AM
then i am sure you also found people who dont like ocarina of time

...amazing im sure

in fact i got 11 negative reviews right here
yes they are all from the same source so ?

http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197771-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time/reviews/review-77055


im sure all these people are haters and blind fanboys



Gameplay: 5/10

Traditionally, Zelda games have outright excelled in gameplay. This is the series' bread and butter, the point where it outshines every other game of this magnitude.

So it was a surprise when I found that this wasn't true while playing this game. I'm going to put it VERY bluntly in less four words: the game is BORING.

The game itself is INCREDIBLY slow-paced. It feels like walking with boots made of lead in quicksand. In fact, very little actually HAPPENS in the game at one time to makes anyone even worry. You fight enemies once every blue moon, and it seems like most of the game you're just walking around or wandering or doing some other inane thing that just feels like a waste of time. Just GETTING to places by foot, places you feel that you should have some kind of easier access to, takes an incredibly long time, and oftentimes you'll have access to only one major route. By the time you get the warp song to GET to those places quicker, you rarely even need to warp there anyway. Sure, getting Epona helps the problem a little, but you still end up running slowly halfway to a location anyway because Epona lacks access or just isn't willing to go near a wall.

The controls themselves did not make the situation much better. The control scheme was very well done; Z-targeting (L-targeting) was easy to learn and get used to, and the C-buttons (stick) was a great way of changing between the items.

It was the character control and tightness of these controls that were the issue. Link's response is slow, the general movement was slow, the sword motions were slow, the items actually being used were slow, attempting to aim at something in first-person mode is aggravating when trying to move quickly and precisely, Link himself does not move very well in town limits and (especially) in houses.

I gotta agree with this guy. I really wanted to enjoy TooT, but it just didn't do it for me. I really liked A Link the the Past, and loved playing Wind Waker. I did not, however, have the greatest time playing The Ocarina of Time and even failed to play more than half of the game on the GC update.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 12:10 AM
We're less restrictive on the Micro-64 Forums, you guys would love it.

A Black Falcon
03-04-2014, 12:10 AM
Your original fucking post:



You didn't mention the battle system at all. Only Z-Targeting. Z-Targeting is not exclusive to the combat system of Ocarina of Time. It's used throughout the game to interact with objects and people. Panzer Dragoon Saga uses the same exact mechanic in its free roaming sections. Yeah, it may not have real time combat going on, but the targeting mechanic is the same damn thing.
I have no idea what you're talking about, but if you've played OoT before you'd remember that Z-targeting was the centerpoint of its battle system, and was almost exclusively used for combat...

And can you prove that PDS has "the exact same" system in its free-roaming parts? Post videos that show it in action, or something. But going by your next bit it sounds like it's not the exact same thing at all. Not even remotely.


No, that feature isn't there because there's no need for it. Why would you need to sidestep around objects that aren't attacking you?
Uh, I don't get it. The whole point of what Z-targeting IS is that you lock on to something, and then it centers your vision on that thing and you side-step around it by moving left or right, so that you then circle around the object when you move. I have no idea what kind of targeting system you're talking about, but if you aren't circling around things for purposes of actually being able to interact with or attack them much more effectively than just trying to bump into them in 3d worlds is, then that's not Z-targeting, not really.


@Trekkies

In my original "fucking" post i said something about "similar" games. Panzer Dragoon Saga isn't even in the same genre.

Secondly, when someone talks about OOT and mentions z-targeting, its IMPLIED that he is talking about the battle system because it was there where it made a difference. Targeting rocks to pick them up or NPCs to talk to wasn't all that necessary, you could do that just as easily without targeting them.

So there, i was talking about the battle system. I'm saying this to you now.

Its not rocket science.



ROFL! Oh my god.... /facepalmthroughthescull
Yeah, that was kind of my response as well... Trekkies seems to have forgotten what Z-targeting is, what it did, and why it was so important, and that statement there made that clear for sure!


You really are generalizing here and ignoring the top-of-the-line PSX games. If you just take some random PSX games as an example, yeah, all of the technical issues are going to be very apparent there. But if you take the Crash or Spyro series, or Wipeout 3, now these graphics are more than competitive with the best looking N64 games, while offering much superior framerates. In general the issue is more complicated than just saying this or that console was better... for the most part, PSX excelled in tightly confined games (like Crash) where they managed to squeeze in a lot of detail and work around the hardware limitations, while the N64 was better suited for more solid, expansive worlds like those of Zelda.
None of those PS1 games would get framerates anywhere remotely near what the N64 manages if they had to do perspective correction. Adding on the perspective correction, Z-buffering, triple buffering, anti-aliasing, and the like took the N64's polygon-pushing power from 500,000 to 600,000 polygons (its potential with PS1-level 3d) all the way down to at or under 180,000, which is what the PS1 generally maxed out at. It took a CPU triple the speed of the PS1 CPU to manage to do all those effects, and if PS1 games had to do even just the perspective correction they wouldn't run anywhere remotely near as well as they do! Perspective correction is HARD for 5th gen consoles to do and requires a lot of processor power. Direct PS1 to N64 comparisons have to take into consideration that the N64 is much more powerful than the other systems, but is using a lot of system power to make the image hold together in ways impossible on the PS1 or Saturn.

So yeah, I agree, Wipeout 3 is one of the best-looking PS1 games. But it still has some perspective issues, because they're impossible to avoid on the PS1. And solving that problem is not easy, as the N64 shows.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 12:35 AM
The only reason the Dreamcast version is better-known in the West is because the DC version got a US release, while the N64 version didn't. Otherwise both versions would have been popular here, because both versions of the game are good. The few reviews of the N64 version which exist reflect that.

It's generally accepted that the Dreamcast version is the better game. If you can use this logic with OOT, I can use it with Bangaio.



Sorry, but I don't like Virtual-On much at all. Whoever thought that that horrible "jump to lock on again" system was a good idea was as wrong as can be... and that they actually kept it in later Virtual-On games, released after other games used OoT-style lockon systems which actually work well, is surprising, and unfortunate. At least the Saturn game is an earlier 3d title; for the Dreamcast game there is no excuse for having such awful controls.

What on earth are you talking about? Virtual On auto-locks on whenever you attack. I never jump in a Virtual On match and I have no problems locking on to my enemy. Seriously, get a Twin Stick before you knock that game.



You're the one with goggles, as I've proven. Nintendo-hater goggles which block you from recognizing that OoT is considered to be the best console game ever made.

I used to think it was one of the best games ever myself when I was younger. Then I played PDS, Shining Force III, Grandia, etc. It quickly fell on my best games of all time list.



Dark Savior... yeah, that's probably the best thing the Saturn has in the genre. It's not Zelda great, but that is a good game.

Legend of Oasis is pretty good too.




Shenmue and Draconus are different kinds of things. Soul Reaver might count, though, perhaps.

Both are action adventure games, and in Draconus you literally walk around in a free roaming world hacking and slashing at things. Hell I'd say Phantasy Star Online is an adequate comparison to Ocarina of Time as far as gameplay is concerned.



No, that's really not true. Later Saturn games still have plenty of pop-up... maybe the draw distance got pushed back a bit versus earlier titles, but lots of later 3d Saturn games have plenty of pop-up for sure.

Examples please? Yeah there's faint pop-up far in the distance that you don't even notice when you're playing, but it's nothing like the horrific pop-up that get's mentioned for games like Daytona. The pop-up in later Saturn titles is no worse than the pop-up and fog in late PS1 and N64 titles.


Only a Saturn fan would say that, that's for sure... generally, even back at the time, the quality of Saturn 3d was regarded to be the worst of the three major consoles, and overall, even though Saturn 3d does have fewer perspective issues than PS1 3d and that's good, that impression is accurate, I think. Lower polygon counts, often lower resolutions, more pixelated graphics... the Saturn can't quite keep up, and it was too hard to program for for developers to be able to get the most out of it, too. Not having real transparencies most of the time is also a huge issue.

Sorry, I like crisp clean image quality with vibrant colors. Not blurry foggy images or dithered to hell images.


Why do you think the N64 couldn't have done 2d graphics just as good? I think the quality of 2d we see on the system shows that it most definitely could. Developers just weren't interested in making many 2d games for the system, or in talking Nintendo into letting them use 2d-focused microcode.

I'm not saying it couldn't, I'm saying there's no evidence to support it. The cart sizes would seriously hurt it when it came to graphic variety.



... Yeah, no. Yoshi's Story beats most 2d PS1 or Saturn games, visually...

Maybe if you had a stroke that caused you to forget every 2D Saturn and PS1 game ever made. Symphony of the Night, Legend of Oasis, Albert Odyssey, Magic Knight Rayearth, Sonic 3D Blast, Princess Crown, Guardian Heroes, Sakura Wars, etc. all have graphics on par with or better than Yoshi's Story. Yoshi's Story is your typical DKC style graphics. It's not that impressive and doesn't hold a candle to the best stuff on the Saturn and PS1.



While Saturn Shenmue would certainly have been the best-looking 3d game on the Saturn, you can still tell that that's a Saturn game. It would have been nice to see that, though, because as it is Saturn 3d looks badly dated compared to PS1 3d, since 3d games on the PS1 improved hugely after 1997, while the Saturn died off. The Saturn couldn't have quite matched the PS1, but it could have competed, at least. (This issue has been debated here before, and I think the most compelling argument made was that the Saturn couldn't quite have kept up with the PS1? Transparencies at least certainly put it behind, anyway.).

There is absolutely nothing on the PS1 or N64 that comes close to the Saturn Shenmue Prototype. Not to mention there's games like Dead or Alive, Virtua Fighter 2, Digital Dance Mix, Burning Rangers, NiGHTS, Shining Force III, etc. which all give some of the best PS1 and N64 games a run for their money.



@Trekkies

In my original "fucking" post i said something about "similar" games. Panzer Dragoon Saga isn't even in the same genre.

Considering how lose the genre definition for OOT is, I'd say PDS counts as a similar game. Some call it an RPG, others call it an Action RPG, some call it an action adventure game. So honestly PDS falls into the vague similar term.



Secondly, when someone talks about OOT and mentions z-targeting, its IMPLIED that he is talking about the battle system because it was there where it made a difference. Targeting rocks to pick them up or NPCs to talk to wasn't all that necessary, you could do that just as easily without targeting them.

So there, i was talking about the battle system. I'm saying this to you now.

Its not rocket science.

When you're first introduced to Z-Targeting, it's to talk to an NPC. I think that justifies my not seeing it as exclusive to the battle system.


ROFL! Oh my god.... /facepalmthroughthescull

The point I was making was that since it's not used in the battle system, there's no need for side stepping in it's use. It still has the basic mechanic of it where the camera focuses in on the object that you lock onto when you select it. It's not my fault you guys are vague as shit.


I have no idea what you're talking about, but if you've played OoT before you'd remember that Z-targeting was the centerpoint of its battle system, and was almost exclusively used for combat...

But it's not exclusive to combat. It's used when you're not in combat to target people and objects to interact with them. I've played Ocarina of Time before. I've played through it on the N64 on a Gold Cart, a Gray cart, and on the Gamecube. I know how the game plays.



And can you prove that PDS has "the exact same" system in its free-roaming parts? Post videos that show it in action, or something. But going by your next bit it sounds like it's not the exact same thing at all. Not even remotely.

Skip to 16:00:

Z9OtPPfJhBU



Uh, I don't get it. The whole point of what Z-targeting IS is that you lock on to something, and then it centers your vision on that thing and you side-step around it by moving left or right, so that you then circle around the object when you move. I have no idea what kind of targeting system you're talking about, but if you aren't circling around things for purposes of actually being able to interact with or attack them much more effectively than just trying to bump into them in 3d worlds is, then that's not Z-targeting, not really.

The whole point of Z-Targeting is simply that you lock onto far away objects to interact with them. Be that in combat or simply talking to an NPC it works the same. PDS simply doesn't have the strafing aspect since there's no need for that since it's combat system is a turn based RPG system.



Yeah, that was kind of my response as well... Trekkies seems to have forgotten what Z-targeting is, what it did, and why it was so important, and that statement there made that clear for sure!

Or you're so blinded by your N64 goggles that you can't see similarities unless it's in another N64/Zelda game.

A Black Falcon
03-04-2014, 12:35 AM
Yeah, not the usual poor textures and the animation of the drivers was the most fluid among all motocross games of that gen.

I sense some overhype here.
It's a very good game and all but I'd say that it's just one of the best motocross games of that gen.
Championship Motocross 2001 was also very good, both in opposite sides in terms of gameplay and features.
Excitebike 64 and the PC version of Moto Racer 2 are my two favorite motorcycle racing games ever, so not really; that's just my opinion, I haven't played any motorcycle games from the past two generations which match either of those games. I had some hopes for Nitrobike on the Wii, since it's from the same studio as Excitebike 64... but no. :( As for that game you mention there, that's probably a sim racer, isn't it? Yeah, I don't care for that kind of game at all.


You always dismiss the existence of analog controllers for the Saturn and Playstation while you're having orgasms with the N64's analog stick...
THat's not true at all! I have a Saturn 3D controller, Mission Stick, and Arcade Racer, and several analog PS1 things as well (the Performance pad with wheel mode, a wheel, and regular analog pads). They're all interesting, and the Saturn ones are pretty good. The problem is, as I said, support -- on the N64, all games that should use analog, have it. On the Saturn or PS1 that is not the case, and many, many games, particularly from about '94 to '98 but also some here and there later on, are stuck with digital-only controls in a 3d world. The N64 solves that problem thanks to analog on every controller, and it was a huge advance.

So yeah, the Mission Stick, 3D Controller, and Arcade Racer are great at what they do, but most people didn't have them, and developers knew that and as a result sometimes didn't bother programming in support in games that should have been designed around them. And that's the real difference.


Also, as pleasant as the N64 controller may be to you, most of the N64 racers suffer with lack of analog support for gas and brake due to its half-assed design.
Having analog gas and braking in racing games is something I, at least, have almost never cared about at all. It's kind of nice in some kinds of games, I guess, but it's hardly necessary. Nintendo must have agreed, with how the Wii and Wii U have digital-only shoulder buttons on all its controllers. I don't mind. The kinds of racing games I like wouldn't benefit from analog gas and brake controls much at all.


You probably would be a better man if you're punched in the face every time you use "best ever" in your self-assertive lines.
Also, Fire Pro Gaiden: Blazing Tornado, Fire ProWrestling S: 6Men Scramble and All Japan Pro Wrestling Featuring Virtua say "Hi!".
I know some people love the Fire Pro series, bu Aki's N64 wrestling games seem to still be regarded as the all-time best by fans of the genre. Go ahead and prove me wrong if you want to spend the time to find something that shows that those Saturn games there are considered to be just as good, though; as I said I hate wrestling games myself and never play any of them on any platform.


Too bad that games which use dual analog controls, like Hydro Thunder, are half-digital on the N64.
Hydro Thunder's controls on the N64 are fantastic. Couldn't be better.


Too bad that its genius controller design doesn't allow precise analog triggers like the Saturn's 3D Control Pad and all modern consoles' controllers do.
Analog shoulder buttons aren't necessary!


The N64 library brought to US games like Choro Q and Hiryu No Ken Twin. Your point?
What's your point here? Randomly listing a couple of okay but not great games for no apparent reason... why? Most systems have various random titles that got localized and other ones that didn't, I don't see a point here. That has nothing at all to do with my point that the Saturn's Japan-exclusive library doesn't have many great games in it that would also have sold big in the US. It has lots of games which would have sold well to the Saturn's hardcore base, and would have expanded that base slightly, but it'd still have been way, way behind in third unless something drastic changed.


m4q22noI9w0
H9VNgzpQQGM

Humm... No.
:lol:

As Soulis said... seriously? Seriously? You're comparing Dark Rift, a horribly bad N64 fighting game from the developers of the horrendously terrible PS1/Saturn game Criticom, to Last Bronx, a reasonably decent, and pretty nice-looking for the Saturn, Saturn fighting game from Sega itself? And you think that that's a reasonable comparison?

If you want a reasonable comparison, compare Criticom (Saturn and PS1 versions) to Dark Rift (N64 and PC versions) and Cardinal Syn (PS1) -- that is, the various fighting games by that same, really bad, team. You'll see that while it's awful, at least Dark Rift is an improvement over Criticom. I don't know about Cardinal Syn, never cared enough to look into it much.

And yes, even Dark Rift does show the advantages of having perspective correction, even if nothing much else about the game is any good... but that's not enough of an advantage to make such a bad game look or play any good at all, no.


:lol:
MKT on the N64 is a bad joke and everybody knows that.
It has some minor downgrades to fit onto one of those 8MB launch cartridges, but is a pretty good version otherwise, I think. Or at least that's what I've always read, I don't own MKT for any platform myself, yet.


http://static.fjcdn.com/large/pictures/63/b1/63b115_2725573.jpg
You Nintendo haters and your denial of the regard that OoT has rightly received...


Too bad that "modern" 3D also requires a lot of lighting effects, which are quite poor in most of N64 games.
There's still that... uh, you know... Awful fog all over the place.
...And that iffy 15-24 fps frame rate in many games.
The best games don't have fog. As for framerates those often are a problem, but you'll need to go to the next generation to get consoles powerful enough to have both visual effects like perspective correction, etc. AND high framerates, none of the 5th gen systems could manage that. I'm sure N64 framerates would have been much, MUCH higher with PS1 polygon effects and the same or slightly higher polygon counts, but they had to take the hit in the name of better graphics overall.


You mean the target locking just like Panzer Dragoon had years before?
Yep, that's Nintendo being revolutionary once again...
:lol: as has already been pointed out. If you think that we're going to buy that those two things are actually the same, you're the only one being fooled. Generic lockon and OoT Z-targeting are different things.

Soulis
03-04-2014, 12:42 AM
Or you're so blinded by your N64 goggles that you can't see similarities unless it's in another N64/Zelda game.
Or maybe you are so blinded by your N64 hate that you can't see the differences.

Also, even though we established that we are talking about the BATTLE system 2 or 3 times by now, you still don't get it and you post unrelated videos.

Lets try again. Me, Soulis, im saying this to you TrekkiesUnite118, in this forum named Sega16 that i'm talking about the battle system in OOT made by Nintendo. Please, read this sentence carefully and try to understand its meaning. I'm 100% sure that i didn't left any information out and i'm as less vague as i can be.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 12:43 AM
Ok ABF, what's a good 3D Fighter on the N64 to compare against Last Bronx, which isn't even the best 3D Fighter on the Saturn?

As for no console being able to do good frame rates, they may not be perspective correct but there's plenty of 30 and 60fps games on the Saturn and PS1. Honestly, the lack of perspective correction on the Saturn isn't really that noticeable in most games, so I don't get the need to make such a big deal out of it. The lack of filtering and transparencies is a bigger issue to focus on if you want to bash the Saturn really.


Or maybe you are so blinded by your N64 hate that you can't see the differences.

I don't hate the N64 though. Back when these systems were competing against each other I owned all 3. Of those 3 I only still own 2 of them. Want to guess which ones they are? I'll give you a hint, the PS1 is NOT one of them.


Also, even though we established that we are talking about the BATTLE system 2 or 3 times by now, you still don't get it and you post unrelated videos.

Lets try again. Me, Soulis, im saying this to you TrekkiesUnite118, in this forum named Sega16 that i'm talking about the battle system in OOT made by Nintendo. Please, read this sentence carefully and try to understand its meaning. I'm 100% sure that i didn't left any information out and i'm as less vague as i can be.

Or you're just desperately backpedaling.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 12:43 AM
well since you insist
two fo the best saturn beat em ups

dead or alive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sbQcrb1iRc

virtua fighter 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peGheI2vAmI

versus some of the n64 offerings
fighters destiny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7Sx22dzjMo

smash bros

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbDKMSTp4ZU

let nobody say i dont fairly pour oil on the flames

Soulis
03-04-2014, 12:47 AM
I'd say the best N64 fighting game is Mace the Dark age. Although i do agree that the other systems have better fighting games overall, however i think graphically at least, Mace has more things going on with more detailed 3D arenas where you can actually interact with instead of a single surface + bitmap backgrounds.



Or you're just desperately backpedaling.
I don't even know how to respond to this but whatever.

Did i mention i was talking about the battle system?

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 12:49 AM
Smash Bros isn't really a 3D Fighter. It's a 2.5D party brawler. A game like Die Hard Arcade is a closer comparison really. I remember there is one game that's a lot like Smash Bros on the Saturn in Japan, but I can't remember the name.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 12:50 AM
i heard good things about fighters destiny

flying dragon or whatever its called looks decent too biofreaks is better on the n64 too

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 01:02 AM
I'd say the best N64 fighting game is Mace the Dark age. Although i do agree that the other systems have better fighting games overall, however i think graphically at least, Mace has more things going on with more detailed 3D arenas where you can actually interact with instead of a single surface + bitmap backgrounds.

Ok, let's compare.

FWGKRC1_83M

Oh boy look at that sub 30fps! The PS1 and Saturn will have a hard time beating that! I do admit the 3D objects are nice looking, but it looks like the Frame rate has taken a bad hit from it.

DEbtotudIgU

4mXfGbEta4A

H9VNgzpQQGM

Those games have more than just a single plane and bit-map background, and Fighters Megamix has destroyable walls while maintaining 60fps. This is really just one genre where the N64 just can't compete.



Did i mention i was talking about the battle system?

Yeah you did, only after earlier examples of similar systems were brought up. Hence the backpedaling comment.

NeoZeedeater
03-04-2014, 01:06 AM
I love OoT but I never understood why people made such a big deal over the Z-targeting. It worked well but functionally it's similar to the already popular "lock on, jump around and attack" mechanic in Tomb Raider.

Soulis
03-04-2014, 01:19 AM
This is really just one genre where the N64 just can't compete.
I'm not saying the opposite. Although i'm not into "modern" fighting games that much. My favorites are still MK2 and SF2. Although the latest MK game is great.



Yeah you did, only after earlier examples of similar systems were brought up. Hence the backpedaling comment.
No i was implying it in my first post. Just because you didn't understand it it doesn't mean i didn't mean it.



I love OoT but I never understood why people made such a big deal over the Z-targeting. It worked well but functionally it's similar to the already popular "lock on, jump around and attack" mechanic in Tomb Raider.That's a better example. Still i would argue that the "z-targeting" is different in that you actually have better control over the whole system. Hence the letter "z" which refers the the trigger button.

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 01:27 AM
No i was implying it in my first post. Just because you didn't understand it it doesn't mean i didn't mean it.

Well then I guess you suck at implying. Because I didn't pick up on that you only cared about one aspect of Z-Targeting and neither did anyone else but ABF. All you said was Z-Targeting which is vague and could mean any aspect of that mechanic. I assumed you meant what it generally allows you to do, lock on to entities from a distance.



That's a better example. Still i would argue that the "z-targeting" is different in that you actually have control over the whole system. Hence the letter "z" which refers the the trigger button. In TR it was very random and sometimes i would lock on enemies even though i didn't want to, lock on the wrong enemy, etc.

The point is it's not an original concept that Nintendo should be praised for inventing. It's just a logical evolution of what other games had been doing before it. It's like the Analog stick. Nintendo didn't invent it. All three were developing them around the same time, and the one that became standard was Sony's. Yet Nintendo constantly get's praised for inventing modern analog sticks, which just isn't true.

Soulis
03-04-2014, 01:38 AM
Well then I guess you suck at implying.
Everyone knows z-targeting is about OOT's combat system. At least people who are into videogames know. I don't usually state the obvious in my posts but i think i will have to make an exception for this board.



It's like the Analog stick. Nintendo didn't invent it. All three were developing them around the same time, and the one that became standard was Sony's. Yet Nintendo constantly get's praised for inventing modern analog sticks, which just isn't true.
Do you have a proof that "all 3 were developing it at the same time"? Because we know Nintendo was on it ever since they showed the console for the first time, years before release and Mario 64 was the game where the analog stick was used perfectly in the end. Nintendo didn't invent the analog sticks, in fact there were analog controllers even in older generation consoles (but never used properly). We are talking about when the analog stick became so successful before it became a standard in consoles. Its the same thing as the rumble pack. Nintendo didn't invent the idea of this kind of feedback but they were the first who used it so successfully on consoles and of course everyone had to follow.

Think about this: With the "revolution" Nintendo didn't show the motion controls until the console was ready. They kept it a secret for so long. Why do such a thing? In the end, it was too late for Sony and Microsoft to copy/improve this idea. That's why their motion control solutions were introduced so late compared to the Wii.

NeoZeedeater
03-04-2014, 02:04 AM
Nintendo didn't invent the analog sticks, in fact there were analog controllers even in older generation consoles (but never used properly)
Never used properly before? Even if you hate Atari's shoddy 5200 controllers, there's nothing wrong with the Vectrex analog stick. And what's wrong with playing Sega rail shooters on Mega Drive with an XE-1 AP controller?

Soulis
03-04-2014, 02:14 AM
And what's wrong with playing Sega rail shooters on Mega Drive with an XE-1 AP controller?
Like i said, Nintendo didn't invent the thing (nor Sega or Sony), i have absolutely no idea who did. Nintendo were just the ones who invested in it/pushed it/made it popular/standard. They basically convinced the gaming world that it was absolutely needed for 3D gaming and that should be a standard.

Edit: Having said that, my "not used properly" comment was hyperbolic i guess.

gamevet
03-04-2014, 03:01 AM
PC users had analog controls for 3D flight sims with the introduction of the Sidewinder Pro Flight stick in 1995. I'm pretty sure there were several arcade games that used analog controls way before that.

j_factor
03-04-2014, 03:54 AM
If you seriously need sources to prove that OoT is generally regarded to be the best video game ever, then you must not spend any time on the internet apart from this site... I have no words for a question this unbelievably silly.

Seriously? Cooooome on. I could accept "one of", maybe. But the best? There is no general consensus on the best video game ever. Give me a freakin' break.


He could at least have mentioned After Burner, which has a very similar lockon to Panzer Dragoon but released much earlier... but yeah, that comparison is nonsense. After Burner/Panzer Dragoon/Galactic Attack-style lockons are absolutely nothing at all like OoT's locking camera. OoT was indeed the first game ever with that kind of lock-on camera in a 3d game, and it was a revolutionary mechanic that made 3d games immeasurably better.

Fade to Black had a similar targeting system. Unfortunately it's not a very good game overall, but it did have it.


Do you have a proof that "all 3 were developing it at the same time"? Because we know Nintendo was on it ever since they showed the console for the first time, years before release and Mario 64 was the game where the analog stick was used perfectly in the end.

When Nintendo showed the N64 for the first time, they didn't show the controller. They didn't reveal the controller until after NiGHTS was announced and significantly into development (and the Mission Stick was already out as well), and outside of Japan the Saturn's 3D analog controller beat the N64 to market. Nintendo may have started development earlier but that's certainly around the same time, and I doubt Sega had corporate spies giving them inside knowledge of the N64 controller long before the public saw it. Sony kind of had a different tack, their dual analog controller was originally envisioned as a miniaturized version of their dual analog joystick. The stick came out in early '96 (originally planned for '95 but got pushed back), though the pad did come later. Bottom line, if you're excluding joysticks for some reason, you could say Nintendo and Sega were developing analog controllers at the same time and Sony came a bit later; or, including the joysticks, Sega and Sony were developing them around the same time, with Sega coming slightly earlier, and Nintendo last.


Nintendo didn't invent the analog sticks, in fact there were analog controllers even in older generation consoles (but never used properly). We are talking about when the analog stick became so successful before it became a standard in consoles. Its the same thing as the rumble pack. Nintendo didn't invent the idea of this kind of feedback but they were the first who used it so successfully on consoles and of course everyone had to follow.

In Japan, Sony's dual analog controller with rumble came out literally two days before the N64 rumble pack. I don't know why they removed the rumble feature from the US version of that controller, but they did have it, they weren't just following Nintendo.


Like i said, Nintendo didn't invent the thing (nor Sega or Sony), i have absolutely no idea who did. Nintendo were just the ones who invested in it/pushed it/made it popular/standard. They basically convinced the gaming world that it was absolutely needed for 3D gaming and that should be a standard.

I don't think they "convinced the gaming world" of anything, it doesn't really work like that IMO. The industry as a whole was moving in that direction. Nintendo was the first to have an analog controller as the standard controller from the launch of the system, but that's partly a factor of them releasing their console significantly later than the competition.


PC users had analog controls for 3D flight sims with the introduction of the Sidewinder Pro Flight stick in 1995. I'm pretty sure there were several arcade games that used analog controls way before that.

I believe Space Harrier (1985) was the first arcade game with a true analog joystick. Previously, Sinistar (1982) used a "49 way" joystick that was basically analog in effect, albeit with a more basic range.

A Black Falcon
03-04-2014, 03:55 AM
Ok ABF, what's a good 3D Fighter on the N64 to compare against Last Bronx, which isn't even the best 3D Fighter on the Saturn?

[QUOTE]As for no console being able to do good frame rates, they may not be perspective correct but there's plenty of 30 and 60fps games on the Saturn and PS1. Honestly, the lack of perspective correction on the Saturn isn't really that noticeable in most games, so I don't get the need to make such a big deal out of it. The lack of filtering and transparencies is a bigger issue to focus on if you want to bash the Saturn really.
All three consoles have lots of games well below smooth (30 or 60 fps) framerates. I don't know which has the lowest average, honestly; yes, the N64 has many low-framerate games, but there are lots of (often early) PS1 and Saturn games that are no better, or worse! All three systems have plenty of games with framerate problems. And as I said, the N64 is using a lot of its power on hardware features that the other systems can't do and which make the system's graphics look better, perspective correction for 3d most prominently. I think a bit of a framerate hit is WELL worth getting perspective correction. Even if the Saturn has fewer popping, warping polygons than the PS1, it still has them.


Or you're just desperately backpedaling.
No, you seem to have forgotten how Z-targeting worked or what its purpose was. Talking about Z-targeting can only mean one thing...


well since you insist
two fo the best saturn beat em ups

dead or alive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sbQcrb1iRc

virtua fighter 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peGheI2vAmI

versus some of the n64 offerings
fighters destiny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7Sx22dzjMo

smash bros

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbDKMSTp4ZU

let nobody say i dont fairly pour oil on the flames
SSB is flat 2.5d, so it should be compared to flat 2.5d games on the other systems, I think, not games with any kind of depth component... and yeah, Mace: The Dark Age is definitely one of the better looking N64 fighting games. It's a good-looking game with some great features like multi-level fighting arenas. Still, this is a much, MUCH better comparison than Barone's, for sure!


Smash Bros isn't really a 3D Fighter. It's a 2.5D party brawler. A game like Die Hard Arcade is a closer comparison really. I remember there is one game that's a lot like Smash Bros on the Saturn in Japan, but I can't remember the name.
SSB absolutely is a fighting game, just a unique one (I know, this is an object of contention for any SSB game). But yeah, it's not 3d, it's flat 2.5d, like PS1 games like Rival Schools or the Street Fighter EX games. I'm sure some Saturn fighting games are like that as well.


i heard good things about fighters destiny

flying dragon or whatever its called looks decent too biofreaks is better on the n64 too
Yeah, if you want to play N64 3d fighting games, those ones, Mace: The Dark Age, and SD Hiryu no Ken Densetsu, the Japan-only sequel to Flying Dragon (with a higher framerate than the previous game, and just as good graphics!), are definitely ones to play. Maybe also Clayfighter 63 1/3 if you find it cheap -- it's amusingly bad. Unfortunately the second Clayfighter, Clayfighter 63 1/3: Sculptor's Cut, is expensive... but it's different enough from the first versione to be interesting -- the first Clayfighter 63 1/3 has 3d movement (plane shifting with shoulder buttons), while the second is flat 2.5d, and you move along a preset route through the levels. Also it has a few more characters and removes some of the (KI-style) combo system from the first game.

Oh yeah, and Flying Dragon's a bit slow. I don't know what its framerate is, but it feels a bit slow. SD Hiryu fixes all of that and runs much better and more smoothly. It only has SD mode, not Virtual mode, but oh well... the SD mode was the better one anyway, and you can choose to either enable or disable 3d movement, which is interesting. (In Flying Dragon, SD mode has 3d movement, while Virtual mode does not. I don't know if it has Sega-style plane-shifting moves either, or if it's just on a flat plane; haven't played it enough to tell, I always play '3d' mode.)


Ok, let's compare.

FWGKRC1_83M

Oh boy look at that sub 30fps! The PS1 and Saturn will have a hard time beating that! I do admit the 3D objects are nice looking, but it looks like the Frame rate has taken a bad hit from it.
There aren't any fighting games I know of on the PS1 or Saturn with multi-tiered, interactive 3d arenas! And they really do affect the gameplay, since you can jump up onto higher platforms in some arenas and get a height advantage, etc. It's pretty cool stuff, and unique for it. Good graphics too, for a 1997 N64 game. it's too bad that Midway stopped making 3d fighting games for a while after MK4, they released a bunch in '97-'98 (War Gods, Bio FREAKS, Mace, MK4), but then nothing after that until MKV in 2002.

As for the framerate, yeah, Mace could be faster, but at least it's mostly stable, I think; unstable, jumpy framerates are the worst.


DEbtotudIgU

4mXfGbEta4A

H9VNgzpQQGM

Those games have more than just a single plane and bit-map background, and Fighters Megamix has destroyable walls while maintaining 60fps. This is really just one genre where the N64 just can't compete.
Those games all play on a flat plane, though. Mace has multi-tiered arenas which are NOT just flat ground. And they have full walls, pillars, floors, etc., too, which look much better than those not-so-great walls in Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix. The actual gameplay in Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix is better though, yes. Mace is one of the better N64 3d fighting games, along with Fighter's Destiny, but it's not as good as those two. Midway made decent 3d fighting games, the best from any American studio (this is why their fighting game team survived and continues to make MK games, now for WB Games), but they weren't quite as good as Sega. As for Capcom and SNK, those two were better at 2d fighters, but their 3d fighters took a bit longer... but anyway, yes, the N64 is the weakest of the three major 5th gen consoles at fighting games. But it has some solid, fun ones which are reasonably decent in quality.


Yeah you did, only after earlier examples of similar systems were brought up. Hence the backpedaling comment.
It wasn't backpedaling, you just didn't understand the original comment!


I love OoT but I never understood why people made such a big deal over the Z-targeting. It worked well but functionally it's similar to the already popular "lock on, jump around and attack" mechanic in Tomb Raider.
I guess that's kind of like it, but Z-targeting is a much better, more advanced thing which makes fighting in a 3d game fast and natural, in a way that hadn't been seen before. And that's why it was so great.

(Oh yeah, and Tomb Raider is a great case of a game which would have been better with analog controls!)


Well then I guess you suck at implying. Because I didn't pick up on that you only cared about one aspect of Z-Targeting and neither did anyone else but ABF. All you said was Z-Targeting which is vague and could mean any aspect of that mechanic. I assumed you meant what it generally allows you to do, lock on to entities from a distance.
But the whole point of Z-targeting is to lock on to something and circle around it for attacks or interaction! I'm not sure what else that could have meant... what other elements of Z-targeting are there?


The point is it's not an original concept that Nintendo should be praised for inventing. It's just a logical evolution of what other games had been doing before it. It's like the Analog stick. Nintendo didn't invent it. All three were developing them around the same time, and the one that became standard was Sony's. Yet Nintendo constantly get's praised for inventing modern analog sticks, which just isn't true.
Most inventions are an evolution of something which came before. They are still inventions.

For instance, the telephone is just an evolution of the telegraph, so it shouldn't count as an invention, right?

As for analog sticks, Nintendo didn't invent those because they'd been done before -- the Atari 5200 has a (non-self-centering) analog stick on its controller. Analog joysticks had also existed for computers since the 1980s. Also remember the XE-1AP gamepad, which is an analog gamepad for various Japanese computers that also works with the Genesis and (with adapter) Turbografx/PC Engine, whcih works with the handful of analog-supporting games on those consoles. Analog gamepads did exist before the N64. There just had never been a truly successful one, on a gamepad, on a console -- PC joysticks were successful and had existed for many years, but those aren't on consoles, and aren't gamepads (PC gamepads wouldn't have analog sticks until well after the N64, gamepads on the PC were dpad-only).


Everyone knows z-targeting is about OOT's combat system. At least people who are into videogames know. I don't usually state the obvious in my posts but i think i will have to make an exception for this board.
Heh... true.


Do you have a proof that "all 3 were developing it at the same time"? Because we know Nintendo was on it ever since they showed the console for the first time, years before release and Mario 64 was the game where the analog stick was used perfectly in the end. Nintendo didn't invent the analog sticks, in fact there were analog controllers even in older generation consoles (but never used properly). We are talking about when the analog stick became so successful before it became a standard in consoles. Its the same thing as the rumble pack. Nintendo didn't invent the idea of this kind of feedback but they were the first who used it so successfully on consoles and of course everyone had to follow.

Think about this: With the "revolution" Nintendo didn't show the motion controls until the console was ready. They kept it a secret for so long. Why do such a thing? In the end, it was too late for Sony and Microsoft to copy/improve this idea. That's why their motion control solutions were introduced so late compared to the Wii.
I don't believe that there's any evidence that Sony was working on it at the same time. Sega ... may have been. I don't know if the idea for the NiGHTS controller predates or post-dates Nintendo's first showing of the N64 pad. At least Sega has the excuse that they had their analog controller out very soon after Nintendo's, so it MIGHT have been in development at the same time (even if I too am very skeptical), though. But Sony... Sony has nothing. Their first analog gamepad didn't release until well after Sega and Nintendo's, after all. Clearly reactionary moves there, not anticipatory.


PC users had analog controls for 3D flight sims with the introduction of the Sidewinder Pro Flight stick in 1995. I'm pretty sure there were several arcade games that used analog controls way before that.
No, PC analog joysticks LONG predate the Sidewinder! You've really never heard of DOS joysticks? Look them up.

j_factor
03-04-2014, 04:15 AM
There aren't any fighting games I know of on the PS1 or Saturn with multi-tiered, interactive 3d arenas!

Sup. (skip to 1:25 if you're impatient)

esDszRtUdTQ

gamevet
03-04-2014, 07:27 AM
No, PC analog joysticks LONG predate the Sidewinder! You've really never heard of DOS joysticks? Look them up.

I wasn't trying to list the earliest computer analog joysticks. If I was going for that, I would have mentioned the crappy analog sticks for the TRS-80. Look it up.

I was talking about a PC analog joystick designed for use in 3D movement. Flight sticks are designed for (flying) games with 3D movement.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 08:30 AM
Like i said, Nintendo didn't invent the thing (nor Sega or Sony), i have absolutely no idea who did. Nintendo were just the ones who invested in it/pushed it/made it popular/standard. They basically convinced the gaming world that it was absolutely needed for 3D gaming and that should be a standard.

Edit: Having said that, my "not used properly" comment was hyperbolic i guess.

the vectrex from 1982 and the atari 5200 also 1982 both used analouge sticks

chinitosoccer
03-04-2014, 08:41 AM
Sup. (skip to 1:25 if you're impatient)

esDszRtUdTQ

Ehrgeiz is too much for the poor N64, Mace the Dark Age can only be comprared to another crappy game for the PS1, like Cardinal Syn:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APwoa0FE_xM

Barone
03-04-2014, 10:00 AM
This bullshit about Nintendo and, especially, the N64 being the pioneers of everything is really laughable.
Every time it's brought up it ends up just showing how little about other game libraries the Nintendon'ters actually know and how much they can hype every little detail of their favorite games.
A reality check is all they need...

About Tomb Raider's, Fade to Black's and Metal Gear Solid's (http://youtu.be/ZgeVrNONuYA?t=49m38s) targetting system, they don't count 'cause they aren't on a Nintendo system. Nintendo saved gaming and it's always revolutionizing it. Whatever happens outside the Nintendo world just doesn't count.




SSB is flat 2.5d, so it should be compared to flat 2.5d games on the other systems, I think, not games with any kind of depth component... and yeah, Mace: The Dark Age is definitely one of the better looking N64 fighting games. It's a good-looking game with some great features like multi-level fighting arenas. Still, this is a much, MUCH better comparison than Barone's, for sure!
I was comparing two games running at 60 fps. It's not my fault if the N64 needs to shit its pants to do so at 1/4 of the resolution of the Saturn game.

Mace: The Dark Age fits that common N64 category of sub-30 fps games. Good luck with that.




Oh yeah, and Flying Dragon's a bit slow. I don't know what its framerate is, but it feels a bit slow. SD Hiryu fixes all of that and runs much better and more smoothly. It only has SD mode, not Virtual mode, but oh well... the SD mode was the better one anyway, and you can choose to either enable or disable 3d movement, which is interesting.
Virtual Hiryu No Ken on the PS1 runs at 60 fps and has a mode with side stepping as well.
It was released a few months before the N64 game, it doesn't have the SD mode but it has 14 fighters to select from, compared to 8 on N64's Virtual.

I like this game. It has a very deep gameplay and four different fighting modes, each one tweaking the battle system a bit.



(In Flying Dragon, SD mode has 3d movement, while Virtual mode does not.
This is incorrect.
The Virtual mode does have side stepping, you just have to select "3D mode" instead of "2D mode" in the next screen.




There aren't any fighting games I know of on the PS1 or Saturn with multi-tiered, interactive 3d arenas!
Hype! Hype! Hype!
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

Ehrgeiz (PS1) (already covered by j_factor) (By the way, 384 x 480 and steady 60 fps)


One Piece Grand Battle! (PS1)
ZlDDmLNkZZQ


One Piece Grand Battle! 2 (PS1)
WFv1V4AAEGQ


Poy Poy 2 (PS1) (pre-dates Super Smash Bros.)
mz_1xfDZnXM


Destrega (PS1)
AnvQn_AWblw


Cardinal Syn (PS1) (especially around 15:37) (The art style in this game is very similar to Mace's IMO)
xxHyg5JEgSw



These are interactive but don't seem to be "multi-tiered":
Poy Poy (PS1) (pre-dates Super Smash Bros.)
oLLvyrfSU1I


Keriotosse! (Saturn) (pre-dates Super Smash Bros.)
4jTgdh8T4Vg




it's too bad that Midway stopped making 3d fighting games for a while after MK4, they released a bunch in '97-'98 (War Gods, Bio FREAKS, Mace, MK4), but then nothing after that until MKV in 2002.
Nobody needs more War Gods...



As for the framerate, yeah, Mace could be faster, but at least it's mostly stable, I think; unstable, jumpy framerates are the worst.
Mace: The Dark Age has stable frame rate? lol.



It wasn't backpedaling, you just didn't understand the original comment!
:bull:




Ehrgeiz is too much for the poor N64, Mace the Dark Age can only be comprared to another crappy game for the PS1, like Cardinal Syn:
ahahahah

Jeckidy
03-04-2014, 10:16 AM
As much as I'm flattered by people's fascination with the hardware of these games (moreso if it amounts to something practical like better hacking, indie hardware development, etc.) I am actually quite sick of this blabbering of obsolete machinery that really has no bearing on what ultimately mattered and cannot be changed in the end, which is whether or not there were enough good games on the systems for it to be worth owning. I would give N64 more credibility because of the fact that I have more first-hand experience with the library in games that I understand whereas Saturn I am still 'getting there'. Being a serious student of japanese I hope to be able to explore the more text-driven titles in the near-future, but regardless I don't think even with imports there are enough to seriously contend to an english-speaker that Saturn was any more superior than N64's offerings. Keriotosse does not hold a candle to Smash Bros. in any regard, despite the vague similarities. At most, Saturn has as many good games for it as N64 if you want to be critical, and the performance of non-exclusive, multi-platform titles is really a mixed bag. If SEGA's first party games didn't stand out so well on the system, I would've probably been more critical of it as a person who lived in a country where it was not popular.

Barone
03-04-2014, 10:53 AM
I was comparing OOT with MM and mentioned that this system became standard after OOT. And i was talking about free roaming 3D adventures where you have a complete freedom of movement. I don't know if Zelda was the first game ever that did this for its genre but i know it was the one that was successful and made it a standard.
Even if you completely ignore the existence of rail shooters using targeting systems and Panzer Dragoon Saga as a prime example of how it could be adapted to 3D adventures, well, even so looks like this "standard" came from somewhere else:

http://www.1up.com/media/03/9/5/9/lg/354.jpg

Z-Targeting
"The addition of the Z-axis to gaming brought with it a wealth of possibilities, but also forced developers to rethink how players encountered obstacles. Since enemies in a 3D world could theoretically attack from every angle, designers had to provide shortcuts so their audience could keep a specific opponent in their sights without constantly fumbling with the controls. Mega Man Legends came into being in a pre-Dual Shock world, so Capcom didn't have the luxury of a right analog stick that could effortlessly nudge the perspective in the proper direction. Instead, they implemented a lock-on button, previously seen in vehicle combat sims, but rarely (if ever!) in a character action game; pressing it centers an enemy in the middle of the screen, allowing Mega Man to snap his attention to a foe regardless of his location. (Sadly, he wouldn't gain the ability to move and shoot until the sequel.) Ocarina of Time's Z-targeting gave players a little more nuance, and required multiple enemies to wait their turn before taking a shot at Link, but Mega Man Legends' targeting solution still felt sophisticated at the time -- especially considering the PlayStation's digital-only control options during its early life."
http://www.1up.com/features/4-ways-mega-man-legends-ocarina

Considering that Mega Man Legends was released in Japan 11 months prior to Ocarina of Time and how successful it was, I think it's safe to say that Nintendo just improved what was already there.

Chilly Willy
03-04-2014, 03:17 PM
Like i said, Nintendo didn't invent the thing (nor Sega or Sony), i have absolutely no idea who did. Nintendo were just the ones who invested in it/pushed it/made it popular/standard. They basically convinced the gaming world that it was absolutely needed for 3D gaming and that should be a standard.


The earliest analog stick I can think of that was commonly used was for the Apple 8-bit computer. And before people go back to sucking Nintendo's ---- for "inventing" the "modern" analog stick (they like to nuance the invent term when you point out conflicting evidence), I'd like to point out this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Analog_Joystick

It was sold and used in a number of games well before the N64 even shipped. It had been anounced almost a year earlier, so I wonder where Nintendo REALLY got their idea for an analog stick from. ;)

Anywho, I don't hate Nintendo, I hate people who like to pretend that Nintendo invented anything remotely game related. The "modern" analog stick is just one example. We've seen some others mentioned in the thread.

Nintendo had the strongest hardware out (and shipping last, they BETTER have had the strongest hardware), but it was hampered by Nintendo's need to control every aspect of games on their console. That's still the biggest problem with Nintendo consoles - Nintendo's need for absolute control. The prime example of that for the N64 was the fact that Nintendo never made a 2D "microcode" library for the N64. If you look into the hardware, the N64 COULD have been a 2D powerhouse to rival the Saturn, but Nintendo would have none of that - 3D was the future, whether you wanted to go that way or not!

Nintendo itself is the main reason I don't buy Nintendo consoles until LONG after they're dead. Once Nintendo is mostly ignoring the console and home brew becomes possible, THEN I start to consider getting the console. That's why the last Nintendo I have is still just the GameCube.

Soulis
03-04-2014, 03:30 PM
I wonder where Nintendo REALLY got their idea for an analog stick from.
Maybe from the Ultra 64 controller ;)

http://www.platypuscomix.net/interactive/protoboxes29.jpg

http://assemblergames.com/images/Ultra64/Ultra64_6.jpg



Considering that Mega Man Legends was released in Japan 11 months prior to Ocarina of Time and how successful it was, I think it's safe to say that Nintendo just improved what was already there.
Except Ocarina's z-targeting was shown on early betas, waaaaay before it's release. By the way, OOT was more than 3 years in development. Also, i'm pretty sure Megaman's lock-on isn't nearly the same thing. But anyway... i don't know how long Megaman was in development so i guess i can't be 100% sure about the whole thing.

j_factor
03-04-2014, 03:41 PM
I wonder if the base of the stick on the Ultra 64 prototype controller is supposed to be a dial, or if it just looks like that. I'm guessing the latter. The 3DO M2 prototype controller, which is the only controller I've seen that substantially mimics the N64 controller, had a big dial around the d-pad. I always thought that was a neat idea.

Do you have a date on that Ultra 64?

Soulis
03-04-2014, 03:46 PM
Do you have a date on that Ultra 64?
I don't have a date but it's safe to say these pictures exist before the name was changed to "Nintendo 64". I don't remember the first time i saw the change, i'll have to check my old magazines some time.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 04:09 PM
can we agree then that the whole "z targetting" thing has been done before and was refined and popularised by megaman legends and zelda oot ?

j_factor
03-04-2014, 04:29 PM
The new name (minus "Ultra") was first shown at Space World in November of 1995. That was also when they first officially showed the controller, which was the middle one in your image. At E3 '95, they showed the Ultra 64 system itself, but no controller. For what it's worth, the Saturn Mission Stick was shown at that same E3.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 04:49 PM
The N64 isn't nearly as new as the haters in here make it out to be. The Ultra 64 was at one point fully intended for release in 1995. Among other things, that was why Starfox 2 on SNES was canceled. All sources state Starfox 2 would have conflicted with the launch of the Ultra 64. As we all know now, the Ultra 64 didn't see release in 1995, it would be much later in 1996 as the Nintendo 64.

Word of Project Reality date back to around 1994, magazine information on the Ultra 64 can be found throughout 1995, with details on high profile titles like Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. It is said Ocarina of Time borrowed many engine elements from Mario 64. There's enough evidence floating around the internet to suggest Ocarina of Time is a pretty old game, with magazine coverage in 1995.

bultje112
03-04-2014, 04:53 PM
Did you know that there are actually more racing games released for the N64 than there are for the Saturn? It's true! More and overall better. The Saturn has some good racing games, but not as much variety -- it doesn't have as good kart racers, it's got nothing as good as WDC in the simmish category, no water racing games like Wave Race 64 or Hydro Thunder, etc.

who cares. I rather take quality over quantity. daytona usa and sega rally 1 are easily one of the 10 best maybe even 5 best racing games of all time. that alone beats the entire n64 racing library except perhaps rush, which I wouldn't qualify as just a racing game though and the dreamcast version is also superior

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 05:07 PM
who cares. I rather take quality over quantity. daytona usa and sega rally 1 are easily one of the 10 best maybe even 5 best racing games of all time. that alone beats the entire n64 racing library except perhaps rush, which I wouldn't qualify as just a racing game though and the dreamcast version is also superior

i care about variety thanks
you can only play the same goes over and over again so often ( which oddly enough is the case with the n64 especially the usual suspects )

never cared much for sega rally but daytona usa was and still is aces

rush never really was a racing game more an exploration where the hell am i going now game
spend hours and hours and hours in the first n64 game in the late 90's

bultje112
03-04-2014, 05:09 PM
I won't even bother reading past page 3 as it's clear a black falcon has hijacked another nintendo topic :roll:

bultje112
03-04-2014, 05:11 PM
i care about variety thanks
you can only play the same goes over and over again so often ( which oddly enough is the case with the n64 especially the usual suspects )

never cared much for sega rally but daytona usa was and still is aces

rush never really was a racing game more an exploration where the hell am i going now game
spend hours and hours and hours in the first n64 game in the late 90's

no. rush, if you had friends, was the greatest multiplayer game ever made and it still is for one thing only: battle mode. it blows twisted metal or vigilante completely out of the water.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 05:11 PM
who cares. I rather take quality over quantity. daytona usa and sega rally 1 are easily one of the 10 best maybe even 5 best racing games of all time. that alone beats the entire n64 racing library except perhaps rush, which I wouldn't qualify as just a racing game though and the dreamcast version is also superior

The original question was how N64 could possibly have more racing games than Saturn. As it turns out, it does. Again, Micro-64 has a very nice Genre Rundown list, quantifying each genre. N64 has over 50 racing games, covering nearly every popular sub-genre of the time. Saturn is sorely lacking by comparison. Yes, Saturn has some good arcade racers, but not nearly as much variety as N64. Saturn also doesn't have much in the way of kart racers or sims. N64 has many of the third party arcade racers of the time, like PS1. Saturn was most notable for its Sega arcade ports.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 05:14 PM
^ and in comparison to the ps 1 ?

Guntz
03-04-2014, 05:20 PM
I thought we weren't talking about PS1 in here? Obviously the PS1 beats the N64 and Saturn combined. It was the single most popular console of the time. It was so successful, it killed Atari, 3DO, nearly killed Sega and severely maimed Nintendo.

If there was a N64 Vs PS1 article on Micro-64, I think we all know what system would win. The N64 is only better in graphics. Though, me personally, the PS1 lacks first party support, which was very strong on the N64. PS1 was very much a third party console. Today it was the pioneer system of the modern multimedia entertainment appliance, like the PS3, 360, PS4 and XBone. The concept behind the CD-i was fully realized in 2005 with the launch of the 360. I don't think the games improved much honestly.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 05:23 PM
it was never stated that we wouldnt talk about the ps1 in here
and as you said its the single most popular machine of that generation

sooner or later will have to be discussed

and i agree no matter how good the saturn is it just doesnt stand up to the veritable onslaught of the playstation

Guntz
03-04-2014, 05:39 PM
I never mentioned "the most popular machine of the time". All I said was the most popular sub-genres of the time.

People say the PS1 was great, sure it was... But there is plenty of evidence to suggest it was the catalyst behind what is wrong with gaming today. The PS1 was similar to a VCR, in that it was simply a format. It had no personality or 1st party support of its own (not much anyway). Whatever 1st party games there were, Sony bought them for the sole purpose of PS1. It sold tons of systems singularly on strong third party support. PS1 had plenty of original titles, but homogenous game design was most celebrated. People complain there is no originality in games today, they should thank the PS1 for providing a platform for grossly overrated games to flourish unhindered by competing hardware. This was succeeded by the PS2 and fully realized on the PS3/360, where the Call of Duty dynasty was born.

Xan
03-04-2014, 06:59 PM
It did have more casual style games (sports games and other garbage) compared to other platforms, yes. But even then, unless you totally live behind the times, it has so much quality stuff that bashing on it just shows your fanboyism. Blame Nintendo for its N64 hardware design that almost no 3rd party devs could use properly, their retarded cartridge business model etc., not Sony for avoiding these pitfalls. Not to mention that the original Dualshock controllers still work fine, while most N64 ones are wrecked due to the analog stick bowl having been ground to dust.

Three letters represent what is wrong with games today: D, L, and C. The PSX had nothing to do with that, Xbox first popularized it and the subsequent generation truly established that folly.

KitsuneNight
03-04-2014, 07:21 PM
I never mentioned "the most popular machine of the time". All I said was the most popular sub-genres of the time.

what's this then ?


I thought we weren't talking about PS1 in here? Obviously the PS1 beats the N64 and Saturn combined. It was the single most popular console of the time.

unless we are somehow talking along side each other all i am saying is that the ps1 was the most popular machine of the fifth gen and that sooner or later in any discussion about the fifth gen it will pop up

and yes dlc truely is the devils arse
lets release half a game at full price and then drip feed the rest fo the contents for "micro transactions"so we can wrin twice the revenue out of the same content

fuck dlc

used to be atime when all of that was included as unlockable rewards not buyable extra's

NeoZeedeater
03-04-2014, 07:57 PM
The original question was how N64 could possibly have more racing games than Saturn. As it turns out, it does. Again, Micro-64 has a very nice Genre Rundown list, quantifying each genre. N64 has over 50 racing games, covering nearly every popular sub-genre of the time. Saturn is sorely lacking by comparison. Yes, Saturn has some good arcade racers, but not nearly as much variety as N64. Saturn also doesn't have much in the way of kart racers or sims. N64 has many of the third party arcade racers of the time, like PS1. Saturn was most notable for its Sega arcade ports.
Speaking of genres, I don't understand how you guys came up with a tie for the "Genres" category of the article. Stuff like these -


many genres represented on it that are near non-existant on the Nintendo 64.


Overall, the Saturn has a very good North American library that is about on par with the the Nintendo 64's, but the Saturn's vast import library that the Nintendo 64 severely lacks puts the Saturn over the edge in the games department.

make it sound like you give the edge to the Saturn overall. And it makes sense the Saturn would win a genres category given that the Nintendo 64 has very little worth noting for gun games, graphic adventures, classic compilations, traditional fighters, RPGs, beat 'em ups, pinball, and 2d games in general. With the genres the N64 is arguably better at (like racers, action/adventures, and FPS), the SS still has some great games.

I disagree with this-

The Saturn sorely lacks in 3D, while the N64 in 2D
It's probably meant to sound like they even out with their strengths and weaknesses but that's not the case. A lot of the Saturn's good games are in 3D while very few good 2d N64 games exist. The Saturn doesn't sorely lack in 3d like the N64 does with 2d.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 07:59 PM
what's this then ?



unless we are somehow talking along side each other all i am saying is that the ps1 was the most popular machine of the fifth gen and that sooner or later in any discussion about the fifth gen it will pop up

I forgot I said that. To say PS1 was most popular is a pretty obvious statement, one that doesn't have to be pointed out. I think we all know PS1 was king.


and yes dlc truely is the devils arse
lets release half a game at full price and then drip feed the rest fo the contents for "micro transactions"so we can wrin twice the revenue out of the same content

fuck dlc

used to be atime when all of that was included as unlockable rewards not buyable extra's

Though there may not have been DLC on the PS1, the market conditions to support bad business were created on that system. PS1 marked the first time a truly mainstream console had massive market share against its competitors. The NES was similar in the late 80s, but it was not mainstream in any sense. PS1 was so popular, some of its games became movies, see the Final Fantasy Movie and Tomb Raider. With such immense popularity, overhyped and overrated games could attain higher sales than previously recorded. This is precisely what has caused the FPS genre to dominate and stagnate, while suffocating out other genres. PS1 created this phenomenon, it has only been intensified with future consoles.

The advent of DLC meant the already crummy business practices of the industry's most profitable companies could make things even worse.


Speaking of genres, I don't understand how you guys came up with a tie for the "Genres" category of the article. Stuff like these -





make it sound like you give the edge to the Saturn overall. And it makes sense the Saturn would win a genres category given that the Nintendo 64 has very little worth noting for gun games, graphic adventures, classic compilations, traditional fighters, RPGs, beat 'em ups, pinball, and 2d games in general. With the genres the N64 is arguably better at (like racers, action/adventures, and FPS), the SS still has some great games.

I don't see the point in defending the decision considering the N64 hate going on, but N64 had a significant advantage over the Saturn in 3D games. We were also considering North American releases first, with imports second. We understand importing is a big aspect of Saturn, but most people only care about USA releases, we focused on that. Where appropriate we would include certain Japanese things, like N64's brief online support with the 64DD, where the Saturn had Netlink in North America.


I disagree with this-

It's probably meant to sound like they even out with their strengths and weaknesses but that's not the case. A lot of the Saturn's good games are in 3D while very few good 2d N64 games exist. The Saturn doesn't sorely lack in 3d like the N64 does with 2d.

Most of the good Saturn games are 2D. Saturn has far fewer worthwhile 3D games than N64. You guys like to take age into account, a lot of Saturn 3D games haven't aged well (like on PS1). Though, you guys will also say N64 hasn't aged well either. Considering graphics dictate a lot of what ages badly and what doesn't, N64 has the edge with better 3D rendering.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 08:08 PM
It did have more casual style games (sports games and other garbage) compared to other platforms, yes. But even then, unless you totally live behind the times, it has so much quality stuff that bashing on it just shows your fanboyism. Blame Nintendo for its N64 hardware design that almost no 3rd party devs could use properly, their retarded cartridge business model etc., not Sony for avoiding these pitfalls. Not to mention that the original Dualshock controllers still work fine, while most N64 ones are wrecked due to the analog stick bowl having been ground to dust.

Three letters represent what is wrong with games today: D, L, and C. The PSX had nothing to do with that, Xbox first popularized it and the subsequent generation truly established that folly.

I never said PS1 was bad. Look at my posts. Where did I say that? I simply said PS1 represents a lot of what's wrong with the video games of today. To ignore the evidence would be, well, dumb.

DLC started out bad because of what the industry had become prior, thanks to PS1 and its third party appliance effect. It was very much like a VCR. Here, I already explained my thoughts in my previous post.


Though there may not have been DLC on the PS1, the market conditions to support bad business were created on that system. PS1 marked the first time a truly mainstream console had massive market share against its competitors. The NES was similar in the late 80s, but it was not mainstream in any sense. PS1 was so popular, some of its games became movies, see the Final Fantasy Movie and Tomb Raider. With such immense popularity, overhyped and overrated games could attain higher sales than previously recorded. This is precisely what has caused the FPS genre to dominate and stagnate, while suffocating out other genres. PS1 created this phenomenon, it has only been intensified with future consoles.

The advent of DLC meant the already crummy business practices of the industry's most profitable companies could make things even worse.

Barone
03-04-2014, 08:10 PM
The NES was similar in the late 80s, but it was not mainstream in any sense.
http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2012/02/ice_cube_wtf_gqvqs30u.gif

NeoZeedeater
03-04-2014, 08:23 PM
Seriously, WTF? The NES was in around a third of US/Can homes. It was the definition of mainstream. And the PS1 movie comment makes no sense. There was The Wizard, not to mention other pre-Playstation game-based movies like Double Dragon and Super Mario Bros..


Considering graphics dictate a lot of what ages badly and what doesn't
Not for me. I'm fine with ancient 3d graphics if the game plays well.

Xan
03-04-2014, 08:26 PM
So because FFVII (a RPG) and Tomb Raider (a 3rd person adventure game) were popular and overhyped, this caused the FPS genre to flourish afterwards. Sorry, I can't follow that logic.

I really don't understand why you are listing games that have actual quality to them. Myself, I think the FFVII hype is weird and nothing that is really rooted at the time of the game's release... in fact, the game had its share of negative reception if you read magazines from the time, by people who didn't know anything about JRPGs... particularly the PC crowd. I've seen enough people who bought into the hype with the Compilation, while at the same time being disgusted at the original game's "lego" graphics, as they call it, if that makes any sense. I interpret this as the game itself being more or less irrelevant here. FWIW I played Crisis Core and that's where it's at for those people: mindless gameplay, but it has those graphics, art style and storytelling they apparently care for.

As far as the PSX goes, the amount of shovelware is what has to be criticized, not the games with actual quality to them. Yearly rehashes of FIFA, cookie-cutter racing/sports/fighting games etc. That's what you could argue might have predated that DLC mentality we have nowadays, not FFVII, which is a respectable RPG that has to be viewed seperately from all of the sequels and hype.

gamevet
03-04-2014, 08:51 PM
This DLC stuff is funny. If I recall correctly, the 1st videogame console (excluding the Sega Channel) that had DLC was the Dreamcast, with stuff like a special sword in Skies of Arcadia. Oh, no! The evil Sega created console DLC!

Xan
03-04-2014, 09:02 PM
I doubt you had to pay for that. It was more for the novelty of it, if anything. This was way before the times where you could get away with charging money for things like that.

A Black Falcon
03-04-2014, 09:03 PM
I wasn't trying to list the earliest computer analog joysticks. If I was going for that, I would have mentioned the crappy analog sticks for the TRS-80. Look it up.

I was talking about a PC analog joystick designed for use in 3D movement. Flight sticks are designed for (flying) games with 3D movement.

I was talking about flight sticks, yes. You've seriously never heard of DOS joysticks? And remember, for PC games, "joystick" means a flight-style stick. As I said PC joysticks have existed since the '80s, or at the latest the early '90s. DOS supports analog joysticks, you know, and so analog joysticks existed. For instance, the Microsoft Sidewinder 3D Pro, from 1995, supports DirectInput for Windows games, and has a switch on it to turn it into a clone of either a Thrustmaster FCS or CH Flightstick Pro for DOS games. Those were hardly the first DOS joysticks, either. DOS joysticks like the two the 3D Pro emulates can have up to one analog stick, four buttons, a throttle wheel, and maybe a four-way hat switch as well (depending on model).


The earliest analog stick I can think of that was commonly used was for the Apple 8-bit computer. And before people go back to sucking Nintendo's ---- for "inventing" the "modern" analog stick (they like to nuance the invent term when you point out conflicting evidence), I'd like to point out this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Analog_Joystick

It was sold and used in a number of games well before the N64 even shipped. It had been anounced almost a year earlier, so I wonder where Nintendo REALLY got their idea for an analog stick from. ;)

Anywho, I don't hate Nintendo, I hate people who like to pretend that Nintendo invented anything remotely game related. The "modern" analog stick is just one example. We've seen some others mentioned in the thread.
... The Playstation Analog Joystick is a JOYSTICK, not a gamepad. No one has ever said that Nintendo invented joysticks! Just that they popularized analog sticks on gamepads. Joysticks had existed for computers for many years, and other examples of console ones have been mentioned as well (XE-1AP, Atari 5200, Vectrex). But no post-crash console had had an analog gamepad packed in with the system, and no post-crash hardware manufacturer had itself made an analog gamepad for their console, until Nintendo. Sega and Sony's joysticks and wheels are different things (as for the neGcon, that was made by Namco, not Sony, and it's for one genre only of course.)


Nintendo had the strongest hardware out (and shipping last, they BETTER have had the strongest hardware), but it was hampered by Nintendo's need to control every aspect of games on their console. That's still the biggest problem with Nintendo consoles - Nintendo's need for absolute control. The prime example of that for the N64 was the fact that Nintendo never made a 2D "microcode" library for the N64. If you look into the hardware, the N64 COULD have been a 2D powerhouse to rival the Saturn, but Nintendo would have none of that - 3D was the future, whether you wanted to go that way or not!
If there had been a third party as dedicated to making a great 2d game on the N64 as there were with 3d games, I'm sure we'd have seen a 2d game with 2d-centric microcode. After all, Boss Games and Factor 5 managed to get Nintendo to let them do custom microcode in their 3d games. The reason why no one did that with 2d was that no one wanted to make "old, dated" 2d-style game on the N64 unless they were cheap stuff like puzzle games, so there was no developer interest. So don't just blame NIntendo, blame the market ("3d is the future, 2d is dead") and third-party developers just as much.


Nintendo itself is the main reason I don't buy Nintendo consoles until LONG after they're dead. Once Nintendo is mostly ignoring the console and home brew becomes possible, THEN I start to consider getting the console. That's why the last Nintendo I have is still just the GameCube.
And Sony is the reason why I don't buy Sony consoles until long after they're dead! I don't want to support Sony with money.


Even if you completely ignore the existence of rail shooters using targeting systems and Panzer Dragoon Saga as a prime example of how it could be adapted to 3D adventures, well, even so looks like this "standard" came from somewhere else:

http://www.1up.com/media/03/9/5/9/lg/354.jpg

Z-Targeting
"The addition of the Z-axis to gaming brought with it a wealth of possibilities, but also forced developers to rethink how players encountered obstacles. Since enemies in a 3D world could theoretically attack from every angle, designers had to provide shortcuts so their audience could keep a specific opponent in their sights without constantly fumbling with the controls. Mega Man Legends came into being in a pre-Dual Shock world, so Capcom didn't have the luxury of a right analog stick that could effortlessly nudge the perspective in the proper direction. Instead, they implemented a lock-on button, previously seen in vehicle combat sims, but rarely (if ever!) in a character action game; pressing it centers an enemy in the middle of the screen, allowing Mega Man to snap his attention to a foe regardless of his location. (Sadly, he wouldn't gain the ability to move and shoot until the sequel.) Ocarina of Time's Z-targeting gave players a little more nuance, and required multiple enemies to wait their turn before taking a shot at Link, but Mega Man Legends' targeting solution still felt sophisticated at the time -- especially considering the PlayStation's digital-only control options during its early life."
http://www.1up.com/features/4-ways-mega-man-legends-ocarina

Considering that Mega Man Legends was released in Japan 11 months prior to Ocarina of Time and how successful it was, I think it's safe to say that Nintendo just improved what was already there.
Interesting detail. As I've said though, most inventions are an improvement on something which previously existed, so it was still a big step forward.


Sup. (skip to 1:25 if you're impatient)

esDszRtUdTQ
Huh, interesting. It doesn't look as good as Mace and the arenas seem smaller, but it's cool that it does have 3d arenas.


I don't have a date but it's safe to say these pictures exist before the name was changed to "Nintendo 64". I don't remember the first time i saw the change, i'll have to check my old magazines some time.
Didn't Nintendo first show the controller in late 1995?


can we agree then that the whole "z targetting" thing has been done before and was refined and popularised by megaman legends and zelda oot ?
The concept of locking on to an enemy had been done before, but OoT's refinement had not, and was a major advance that made the idea work much better. That's more new ground there than plenty of "inventions" have.


The new name (minus "Ultra") was first shown at Space World in November of 1995. That was also when they first officially showed the controller, which was the middle one in your image. At E3 '95, they showed the Ultra 64 system itself, but no controller. For what it's worth, the Saturn Mission Stick was shown at that same E3.
Once again, joysticks are not gamepads. Flightstick-style joysticks had existed for many years. Look up the PC joysticks I mention earlier in this post. Also look up the 3DO's joystick, which I believe is a version of the CH Flightstick (or Flightstick Pro). Also look up the XE-1AP and that original joystick version of it, not the gamepad. Etc.


The N64 isn't nearly as new as the haters in here make it out to be. The Ultra 64 was at one point fully intended for release in 1995. Among other things, that was why Starfox 2 on SNES was canceled. All sources state Starfox 2 would have conflicted with the launch of the Ultra 64. As we all know now, the Ultra 64 didn't see release in 1995, it would be much later in 1996 as the Nintendo 64.

Word of Project Reality date back to around 1994, magazine information on the Ultra 64 can be found throughout 1995, with details on high profile titles like Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. It is said Ocarina of Time borrowed many engine elements from Mario 64. There's enough evidence floating around the internet to suggest Ocarina of Time is a pretty old game, with magazine coverage in 1995.
Good point to remind some people of -- the N64's hardware was done in 1995. The hardware was ready for a 1995 launch, but the games weren't, so it was delayed to mid 1996 for Japan and late 1996 for the West. Nintendo would do this again with the Gamecube, which was ready in late 2000 I believe, but the games weren't so it didn't release until late '01.

Guntz
03-04-2014, 09:06 PM
Seriously, WTF? The NES was in around a third of US/Can homes. It was the definition of mainstream. And the PS1 movie comment makes no sense. There was The Wizard, not to mention other pre-Playstation game-based movies like Double Dragon and Super Mario Bros..

NES never pulled in numbers anywhere close to PS1. Yes, NES was mainstream, but compared to PS1? No, it wasn't. I said it with perspective, you guys took it with no perspective at all.


So because FFVII (a RPG) and Tomb Raider (a 3rd person adventure game) were popular and overhyped, this caused the FPS genre to flourish afterwards. Sorry, I can't follow that logic.

You missed my point entirely.


I really don't understand why you are listing games that have actual quality to them. Myself, I think the FFVII hype is weird and nothing that is really rooted at the time of the game's release... in fact, the game had its share of negative reception if you read magazines from the time, by people who didn't know anything about JRPGs... particularly the PC crowd. I've seen enough people who bought into the hype with the Compilation, while at the same time being disgusted at the original game's "lego" graphics, as they call it, if that makes any sense. I interpret this as the game itself being more or less irrelevant here. FWIW I played Crisis Core and that's where it's at for those people: mindless gameplay, but it has those graphics, art style and storytelling they apparently care for.

FF7 was the game that made JPRGs popular in North America. If that isn't hype I don't know what is. The good games I listed aren't exactly that great, there were better games that didn't sell as much, as true with anything. The thing is though, PS1 was big enough with low competition, to allow big sellers to encourage more of the same and fewer original titles. That is what is wrong with games today.


As far as the PSX goes, the amount of shovelware is what has to be criticized, not the games with actual quality to them. Yearly rehashes of FIFA, cookie-cutter racing/sports/fighting games etc. That's what you could argue might have predated that DLC mentality we have nowadays, not FFVII, which is a respectable RPG that has to be viewed seperately from all of the sequels and hype.

Correct.


This DLC stuff is funny. If I recall correctly, the 1st videogame console (excluding the Sega Channel) that had DLC was the Dreamcast, with stuff like a special sword in Skies of Arcadia. Oh, no! The evil Sega created console DLC!

DLC was treated differently then and most people didn't use their DCs online at the time, dialup was pretty expensive for long term use. I don't remember any patches for game breaking flaws (because DC games were properly tested before release), or any day one DLC for half-finished games.

Xan
03-04-2014, 09:18 PM
It was popular because it was simply a quality game, whether you like it personally or not. Before it I'd say there were almost 10 years of JRPGs without any radical advancement in presentation. It brought the genre up to date while still staying true to the gameplay formula of the past.

Also, I don't remember competition being that low, exactly. N64 was a big name. I for one grew up with a PSX as one might guess from my posts and I drooled over OoT and Turok 2 back in the day. The grass is always greener on the other side :)

A Black Falcon
03-04-2014, 09:31 PM
NES never pulled in numbers anywhere close to PS1. Yes, NES was mainstream, but compared to PS1? No, it wasn't. I said it with perspective, you guys took it with no perspective at all.
If you are talking about North America first, this is wrong! According to Nintendo and Sony's numbers, the NES sold 34 million consoles in the Americas (mostly US/Canada, as Latin America had little official distribution I believe). The PS1 sold 40.78 million in North America. The PS1 did sell more, but only by a moderate margin. The NES was a massive success in the US.


FF7 was the game that made JPRGs popular in North America. If that isn't hype I don't know what is. The good games I listed aren't exactly that great, there were better games that didn't sell as much, as true with anything. The thing is though, PS1 was big enough with low competition, to allow big sellers to encourage more of the same and fewer original titles. That is what is wrong with games today.
Low competition? What? Not in the US! The N64 sold almost as well in the Americas as the SNES had, after all, and may have beaten the SNES in the US alone (since the SNES seems to have sold slightly better in other parts of the Americas?). Sony won because they expanded the market, not because the competition was weak.

In Europe Sony had no serious competition, though. That's true. And in Japan Sony utterly dominated from 1998 on, after beating the Saturn in 1997.


DLC was treated differently then and most people didn't use their DCs online at the time, dialup was pretty expensive for long term use. I don't remember any patches for game breaking flaws (because DC games were properly tested before release), or any day one DLC for half-finished games.
... Just because fewer people used it doesn't make the things not exist or something... (But anyway, wasn't the Genesis Meganet Modem the first console with download-exclusive games? Until they released them all on those two Sega CD collections, of course. There were a few console online services before then, but not for exclusive game downloads.)

NeoZeedeater
03-04-2014, 09:43 PM
(But anyway, wasn't the Genesis Meganet Modem the first console with download-exclusive games? Until they released them all on those two Sega CD collections, of course. There were a few console online services before then, but not for exclusive game downloads.)
I believe Save The Whales was exclusive to the Gameline service on 2600.

gamevet
03-04-2014, 09:46 PM
DLC was treated differently then and most people didn't use their DCs online at the time, dialup was pretty expensive for long term use. I don't remember any patches for game breaking flaws (because DC games were properly tested before release), or any day one DLC for half-finished games.

What are you talking about? 2 of the best selling games on the DC (NFL 2K1 and PSO) were online games. I don't know about you, but I was playing DC games online as soon as the service became available.

Sony had just as much to do with DLC as Sega did. The whole thing is really silly.



I believe Save The Whales was exclusive to the Gameline service on 2600.

I barely remember seeing that thing in a gaming magazine, along with devices like Starpath. I honestly didn't think that either of those sold enough units to be considered relevant.

chinitosoccer
03-04-2014, 09:58 PM
Huh, interesting. It doesn't look as good as Mace and the arenas seem smaller, but it's cool that it does have 3d arenas.



Pfffffffff....Ehrgeiz does look a LOT better than Mace, starting by the character models, the art is better and it pushes more polygons too, it is a much better game in every aspect, theres no contest... seriously, you really are a N64 fanboy.

gamevet
03-04-2014, 10:02 PM
I was talking about flight sticks, yes. You've seriously never heard of DOS joysticks? And remember, for PC games, "joystick" means a flight-style stick. As I said PC joysticks have existed since the '80s, or at the latest the early '90s. DOS supports analog joysticks, you know, and so analog joysticks existed. For instance, the Microsoft Sidewinder 3D Pro, from 1995, supports DirectInput for Windows games, and has a switch on it to turn it into a clone of either a Thrustmaster FCS or CH Flightstick Pro for DOS games. Those were hardly the first DOS joysticks, either. DOS joysticks like the two the 3D Pro emulates can have up to one analog stick, four buttons, a throttle wheel, and maybe a four-way hat switch as well (depending on model).


I was talking about one example (of a well know product) that was an analog (PC) controller before Nintendo supposedly revolutionized gaming with the N64 controller. If I was going for ancient analog joysticks, I would have mentioned the craptacular TRS-80 analog joystick. I brought up the Sidewinder Pro (A refinement of the 3D pro), because he was talking about the N64 controller being the first designed for 3D gameplay. Me:"PC users had analog controls for 3D flight sims.."

You're being stupid (it's why I'm trying to not respond to you) if you believe I'd never heard of a DOS joystick. Hell, I have a much later model that was one of the last to support to the ancient game port for PC, right before USB became the standard. I've told you before, when you tried to get all high and mighty about old PC gaming and assumed that I'd never played them: "My old man had a Tandy 1000".


Hey look! There's an old Tandy (DIN) analog joystick being shown with this Tandy 1000!

Hn0q3IS5Tyk

TrekkiesUnite118
03-04-2014, 10:03 PM
Everyone knows z-targeting is about OOT's combat system. At least people who are into videogames know. I don't usually state the obvious in my posts but i think i will have to make an exception for this board.

I know what Z-Targeting is. You two seem to have forgotten that it's also used greatly throughout the game outside of combat. As I said before, the tutorial for it is talking to an NPC who's far away. Z-Targeting is just a targeting system for focusing and interacting with far away objects. It just so happens to be present in the combat system as well as the rest of the game.


Do you have a proof that "all 3 were developing it at the same time"? Because we know Nintendo was on it ever since they showed the console for the first time, years before release and Mario 64 was the game where the analog stick was used perfectly in the end. Nintendo didn't invent the analog sticks, in fact there were analog controllers even in older generation consoles (but never used properly). We are talking about when the analog stick became so successful before it became a standard in consoles. Its the same thing as the rumble pack. Nintendo didn't invent the idea of this kind of feedback but they were the first who used it so successfully on consoles and of course everyone had to follow.

Think about this: With the "revolution" Nintendo didn't show the motion controls until the console was ready. They kept it a secret for so long. Why do such a thing? In the end, it was too late for Sony and Microsoft to copy/improve this idea. That's why their motion control solutions were introduced so late compared to the Wii.

Well let's think about this. The N64 came out in July of 1996. NiGHTs came out in July of 1996 for the Saturn in Japan. In the US NiGHTS came out before the N64. I'd say that's being developed around the same time. NiGHTS development started in 1994 right after Sonic 3 & Knuckles was completed. So again I'd say that's being developed around the same time.

If anyone has the excuse of saying their Analog stick was so successful it became a standard it's Sony's as their design is what's still in use today.





All three consoles have lots of games well below smooth (30 or 60 fps) framerates. I don't know which has the lowest average, honestly; yes, the N64 has many low-framerate games, but there are lots of (often early) PS1 and Saturn games that are no better, or worse! All three systems have plenty of games with framerate problems. And as I said, the N64 is using a lot of its power on hardware features that the other systems can't do and which make the system's graphics look better, perspective correction for 3d most prominently. I think a bit of a framerate hit is WELL worth getting perspective correction. Even if the Saturn has fewer popping, warping polygons than the PS1, it still has them.

On the Saturn I can think of the following games with known poor frame rates:

Daytona USA (20fps)
Panzer Dragoon (20fps, but it's not really noticeable as the speed is adjusted to compensate. And with a code it can run at 30fps)
Wipeout and Wipeout XL (20fps)
Sega Touring Car Championship (15-30fps)
Doom (10fps lol)
Quake (20-30 fps, but still damn impressive at that)
Panzer Dragoon Saga (15-30fps depending on the scene)
Burning Rangers (is actually running at 30-40fps, but you only see 15-20fps)
Layer Section 2 (inconsistent 30-60fps if I remember correctly)

That's about all I can remember off the top of my head right now. Of that list a lot of them can be explained by being either late titles really pushing the hardware, or being rushed ports/launch games or just bad conversions. That's a bit different than the N64, where most of it's best and most respected games are running well below the 30fps mark.

The point is, the Saturn in it's short lifespan still has more 3D titles that run at 60fps than the N64. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's more hitting the 30fps mark as well.




No, you seem to have forgotten how Z-targeting worked or what its purpose was. Talking about Z-targeting can only mean one thing...

No, I remember exaclty what Z-Targeting is and how it worked. You just seem to be brain damaged and have forgotten that it was used outside of combat as well. Z-Targeting is NOT exclusive to combat.


SSB absolutely is a fighting game, just a unique one (I know, this is an object of contention for any SSB game). But yeah, it's not 3d, it's flat 2.5d, like PS1 games like Rival Schools or the Street Fighter EX games. I'm sure some Saturn fighting games are like that as well.

It's a party brawler.




There aren't any fighting games I know of on the PS1 or Saturn with multi-tiered, interactive 3d arenas! And they really do affect the gameplay, since you can jump up onto higher platforms in some arenas and get a height advantage, etc. It's pretty cool stuff, and unique for it. Good graphics too, for a 1997 N64 game. it's too bad that Midway stopped making 3d fighting games for a while after MK4, they released a bunch in '97-'98 (War Gods, Bio FREAKS, Mace, MK4), but then nothing after that until MKV in 2002.

This has been covered by other people already, so I'll just suffice to say you're wrong.


As for the framerate, yeah, Mace could be faster, but at least it's mostly stable, I think; unstable, jumpy framerates are the worst.

Imagine how much better it would be if it ran at 60fps.



Those games all play on a flat plane, though. Mace has multi-tiered arenas which are NOT just flat ground. And they have full walls, pillars, floors, etc., too, which look much better than those not-so-great walls in Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix. The actual gameplay in Fighting Vipers and Fighters Megamix is better though, yes. Mace is one of the better N64 3d fighting games, along with Fighter's Destiny, but it's not as good as those two. Midway made decent 3d fighting games, the best from any American studio (this is why their fighting game team survived and continues to make MK games, now for WB Games), but they weren't quite as good as Sega. As for Capcom and SNK, those two were better at 2d fighters, but their 3d fighters took a bit longer... but anyway, yes, the N64 is the weakest of the three major 5th gen consoles at fighting games. But it has some solid, fun ones which are reasonably decent in quality.

I'd rather play a 3D fighter that runs at a rock solid 60fps with flat planes than a god awful gimmicky fighter that sacrifices smooth gameplay for intrusive obstacles


It wasn't backpedaling, you just didn't understand the original comment!

I understood it exactly as it was written. You're backpedaling because you've been proven wrong. You're simply now narrowing your focus to something extremely specific just to maintain your delusional fanboy opinion.



But the whole point of Z-targeting is to lock on to something and circle around it for attacks or interaction! I'm not sure what else that could have meant... what other elements of Z-targeting are there?

That's only in one specific situation. The other use for Z-Targeting is to target objects that aren't directly infront of you so you can interact with them. Did you forget that this is how Z-Targeting is introduced?

3BUjR5MG3Ho

Skip to the 9 minute mark.




Most inventions are an evolution of something which came before. They are still inventions.

For instance, the telephone is just an evolution of the telegraph, so it shouldn't count as an invention, right?

The telegraph does not transmit human voices. Recording and playback is a major breakthrough. Z-Targeting however is simply a slight modification to an already existing gameplay mechanic that other people were working on around the same time.


There just had never been a truly successful one, on a gamepad, on a console -- PC joysticks were successful and had existed for many years, but those aren't on consoles, and aren't gamepads (PC gamepads wouldn't have analog sticks until well after the N64, gamepads on the PC were dpad-only).

Here's the question to ask yourself. If Nintendo hadn't made an analog controller for the N64, would they have still come out and around the same time? The answer is yes because Sega and Sony were developing them at the same time.



I don't believe that there's any evidence that Sony was working on it at the same time. Sega ... may have been. I don't know if the idea for the NiGHTS controller predates or post-dates Nintendo's first showing of the N64 pad. At least Sega has the excuse that they had their analog controller out very soon after Nintendo's, so it MIGHT have been in development at the same time (even if I too am very skeptical), though. But Sony... Sony has nothing. Their first analog gamepad didn't release until well after Sega and Nintendo's, after all. Clearly reactionary moves there, not anticipatory.

Are you seriously implying that Sega put together their analog controller and mass produced it in the time frame of a week after the N64 launched to then use the excuse that they had it in in development for a long time? It's pretty obvious that it was in development for some time as NiGHTS development dates back to 1994 after Sonic Team completed Sonic 3&K.

j_factor
03-05-2014, 12:10 AM
The N64 isn't nearly as new as the haters in here make it out to be. The Ultra 64 was at one point fully intended for release in 1995. Among other things, that was why Starfox 2 on SNES was canceled. All sources state Starfox 2 would have conflicted with the launch of the Ultra 64. As we all know now, the Ultra 64 didn't see release in 1995, it would be much later in 1996 as the Nintendo 64.

Word of Project Reality date back to around 1994, magazine information on the Ultra 64 can be found throughout 1995, with details on high profile titles like Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. It is said Ocarina of Time borrowed many engine elements from Mario 64. There's enough evidence floating around the internet to suggest Ocarina of Time is a pretty old game, with magazine coverage in 1995.

The Ultra 64 was only planned for 1995 very early on, before Nintendo had a clear picture of when they would be able to get it out. At Winter CES, January 1995, Nintendo showed an "Ultra 64" video, but it was not actually running on Ultra 64 hardware. Nor did they have a finalized hardware design displayed at the show. And they conspicuously would not say when the system would be coming out. Most people took that to mean it was coming out in 1996.


If there was a N64 Vs PS1 article on Micro-64, I think we all know what system would win. The N64 is only better in graphics. Though, me personally, the PS1 lacks first party support, which was very strong on the N64. PS1 was very much a third party console. Today it was the pioneer system of the modern multimedia entertainment appliance, like the PS3, 360, PS4 and XBone. The concept behind the CD-i was fully realized in 2005 with the launch of the 360. I don't think the games improved much honestly.

Yeah, I don't see that. I think the Playstation had great first-party support. And while it can play audio CDs, it's not a multimedia device. Sony didn't release a VCD adapter (though an unofficial one exists) or a modem, and I don't think you can even play CD+G on it. All three of those existed on the Saturn.


... The Playstation Analog Joystick is a JOYSTICK, not a gamepad. No one has ever said that Nintendo invented joysticks! Just that they popularized analog sticks on gamepads. Joysticks had existed for computers for many years, and other examples of console ones have been mentioned as well (XE-1AP, Atari 5200, Vectrex). But no post-crash console had had an analog gamepad packed in with the system, and no post-crash hardware manufacturer had itself made an analog gamepad for their console, until Nintendo. Sega and Sony's joysticks and wheels are different things (as for the neGcon, that was made by Namco, not Sony, and it's for one genre only of course.)

The post you quoted didn't use the word "gamepad". Between that and "post-crash", you're pulling arbitrary distinctions out of thin air.


If there had been a third party as dedicated to making a great 2d game on the N64 as there were with 3d games, I'm sure we'd have seen a 2d game with 2d-centric microcode. After all, Boss Games and Factor 5 managed to get Nintendo to let them do custom microcode in their 3d games. The reason why no one did that with 2d was that no one wanted to make "old, dated" 2d-style game on the N64 unless they were cheap stuff like puzzle games, so there was no developer interest. So don't just blame NIntendo, blame the market ("3d is the future, 2d is dead") and third-party developers just as much.

This is back-asswards on so many levels. For one thing, Boss Games and Factor 5 didn't write "custom microcode" from scratch, they merely tweaked Nintendo's. That's a far cry from the type of investment creating a whole new microcode would require. Secondly, very very few games even did that, which required a lot of effort. Why should developers of 2D games be saddled with such a burden? Plus, the onus is on Nintendo to create an environment that is conducive to having a third-party "dedicated to making a great 2d game" if they want such a thing, which apparently they did not. How many hoops do you really expect third-parties to jump through?

And on top of all that, you know, Nintendo makes games too. They could have done this for their own purposes, but they chose not to.


The concept of locking on to an enemy had been done before, but OoT's refinement had not, and was a major advance that made the idea work much better. That's more new ground there than plenty of "inventions" have.

OoT's "refinement"? The claim was that OoT had "created the standard" with its Z-targeting. If you're going to be that precise to exclude prior examples, then consistency would require you to be just as precise for the games that came after. Which would mean it didn't create a standard at all, because to this day different games do it in different ways.


Once again, joysticks are not gamepads. Flightstick-style joysticks had existed for many years. Look up the PC joysticks I mention earlier in this post. Also look up the 3DO's joystick, which I believe is a version of the CH Flightstick (or Flightstick Pro). Also look up the XE-1AP and that original joystick version of it, not the gamepad. Etc.

I didn't say joysticks are gamepads. You're the one saying "gamepad", for no reason.

A Black Falcon
03-05-2014, 12:53 AM
The Ultra 64 was only planned for 1995 very early on, before Nintendo had a clear picture of when they would be able to get it out. At Winter CES, January 1995, Nintendo showed an "Ultra 64" video, but it was not actually running on Ultra 64 hardware. Nor did they have a finalized hardware design displayed at the show. And they conspicuously would not say when the system would be coming out. Most people took that to mean it was coming out in 1996.
Yeah, as I said, the games weren't ready yet. The hardware, though, was. Nintendo originally wanted it out Christmas '95, but missed that deadline (Mario 64 wasn't done), and pushed it back.


Yeah, I don't see that. I think the Playstation had great first-party support. And while it can play audio CDs, it's not a multimedia device. Sony didn't release a VCD adapter (though an unofficial one exists) or a modem, and I don't think you can even play CD+G on it. All three of those existed on the Saturn.
Sony has by FAR the worst first-party support of the three major consoles that generation, though... and back in the mid '90s, being able to play audio CDs made your thing a "multimedia device" of sorts... "multimedia" in the mid '90s seemed to often refer to having CD support, yes? And anyway, audio CDs and game CDs, it can do two things.


The post you quoted didn't use the word "gamepad". Between that and "post-crash", you're pulling arbitrary distinctions out of thin air.
Oh come on, how stupid can you get? When anyone talks about the N64 and analog, obviously they mean analog sticks. As in, analog sticks on gamepads. Everyone knows that analog joysticks predate the N64, the question is gamepads! And as I've said repeatedly the various other analog gamepads that predate the N64. Nintendo just had the first successful one, and the first one packed in with a post-crash console.

Also, "post-crash" is a quite valid distinction because pre-crash and post-crash game controllers are, obviously, VERY different. The NES created a new standard in game controllers that essentially every console for decades would build off of.


This is back-asswards on so many levels. For one thing, Boss Games and Factor 5 didn't write "custom microcode" from scratch, they merely tweaked Nintendo's. That's a far cry from the type of investment creating a whole new microcode would require. Secondly, very very few games even did that, which required a lot of effort. Why should developers of 2D games be saddled with such a burden? Plus, the onus is on Nintendo to create an environment that is conducive to having a third-party "dedicated to making a great 2d game" if they want such a thing, which apparently they did not. How many hoops do you really expect third-parties to jump through?

And on top of all that, you know, Nintendo makes games too. They could have done this for their own purposes, but they chose not to.
The point is that neither Nintendo nor any third parties had any interest in putting effort into custom microcode for 2d games on the N64, because they all knew that the market wanted 3d games. Why put lots of effort into something that most people won't care about or buy? It'd be a waste of resources, really. If Capcom, say, or SNK or something, could have been convinced to support the N64 with 2d games, now, then you'd have a reason to want 2d-centric microcode... but as it is, nobody cared enough to want to do it because they knew that most all people who owned N64s wanted 3d games, not 2d. Blaming Nintendo more than third parties or the gaming market is silly, because all three are responsible equally -- and probably gamers most of all, since "2d isn't as good" was very much a thing at the time.


OoT's "refinement"? The claim was that OoT had "created the standard" with its Z-targeting. If you're going to be that precise to exclude prior examples, then consistency would require you to be just as precise for the games that came after. Which would mean it didn't create a standard at all, because to this day different games do it in different ways.
The sheer number of games which copied OoT's Z-targeting system should, on its own, show how important a change it was. Suddenly everyone was using something like it!


I didn't say joysticks are gamepads. You're the one saying "gamepad", for no reason.
... No comment, you're being ridiculous. Why would anyone ever talk about the N64 and analog in any context other than gamepads?? They wouldn't. Intentionally missing a point just in order to bash Nintendo more is stupid.

Guntz
03-05-2014, 01:10 AM
I'm playing Majora's Mask, amazing game.

A Black Falcon
03-05-2014, 01:15 AM
I know what Z-Targeting is. You two seem to have forgotten that it's also used greatly throughout the game outside of combat. As I said before, the tutorial for it is talking to an NPC who's far away. Z-Targeting is just a targeting system for focusing and interacting with far away objects. It just so happens to be present in the combat system as well as the rest of the game.
Yeah, that tutorial where you target a person was kind of odd, that's not something you'll almost ever have to do in the game... it's almost always used for combat. And it doesn't "just happen" to be present in the combat system, the combat system basically IS Z-targeting! I mean, locking on to enemies and then circling around and fighting them is how you fight in OoT, and the other 3d Zelda games as well.


Well let's think about this. The N64 came out in July of 1996. NiGHTs came out in July of 1996 for the Saturn in Japan. In the US NiGHTS came out before the N64. I'd say that's being developed around the same time. NiGHTS development started in 1994 right after Sonic 3 & Knuckles was completed. So again I'd say that's being developed around the same time.

If anyone has the excuse of saying their Analog stick was so successful it became a standard it's Sony's as their design is what's still in use today.
As has already been pointed out, Nintendo first showed the N64 controller in November 1995. That's more than enough time for Sega to then take the idea for their own controller, if they hurried. It could have been Sega's own idea, as Sega did have some analog arcade controllers of course, and while they didn't make the XE-1AP their system supported it, but there's no proof of that. I'm pretty sure that Sega first mentioned the 3D Controller after the N64 pad had been shown.


On the Saturn I can think of the following games with known poor frame rates:

Daytona USA (20fps)
Panzer Dragoon (20fps, but it's not really noticeable as the speed is adjusted to compensate. And with a code it can run at 30fps)
Wipeout and Wipeout XL (20fps)
Sega Touring Car Championship (15-30fps)
Doom (10fps lol)
Quake (20-30 fps, but still damn impressive at that)
Panzer Dragoon Saga (15-30fps depending on the scene)
Burning Rangers (is actually running at 30-40fps, but you only see 15-20fps)
Layer Section 2 (inconsistent 30-60fps if I remember correctly)

That's about all I can remember off the top of my head right now. Of that list a lot of them can be explained by being either late titles really pushing the hardware, or being rushed ports/launch games or just bad conversions. That's a bit different than the N64, where most of it's best and most respected games are running well below the 30fps mark.

The point is, the Saturn in it's short lifespan still has more 3D titles that run at 60fps than the N64. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's more hitting the 30fps mark as well.
There are most certainly a lot more lower-framerate Saturn games than that, no one person's list will have everything. Anyway though it doesn't really matter, as I've said the biggest reason for the N64's lower framerates, I think, are all of those hardware features it's running at all times... and those are things the other systems cannot do. But I've gone over that already. I would MUCH rather have perspective-correct graphics than a few more frames per second, that's for sure.


It's a party brawler.
It certainly isn't. SSB is a far deeper game than a "party brawler", whatever that genre is, exactly. Is that a genre of SSB-style games, like a few that have been mentioned, or more recently Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale? If so they're definitely their own kind of fighting games, but they're absolutely in the genre. Melee especially has just as much depth as any great fighting game. I'm not the biggest SSB fan, as I get bored after a little while, but it's definitely a fighting game.


Imagine how much better it would be if it ran at 60fps.
30fps, 60fps, I don't really care. I've looked at those "30fps vs. 60fps" gifs online, and I'm one of the people who can almost never tell the difference between the two. I'd rather have perspective correction, texture filtering, etc. every time. Mace isn't a fast game, that's true, but it's not as slow as some 3d fighting games that generation, either. I like that the game plays more slowly than Mortal Kombat, I've always preferred Street Fighter's pace to MK's and Mace feels a bit more SF-like in pace than the other Midway fighters do.

As for 60fps with that stuff, well, that's what 6th gen consoles are for. I've said before how I think that 3d fighting games were one of the most improved genres, between the 5th and 6th generations; the 5th gen consoles juat aren't quite powerful enough to do a great job with 3d fighting games, but the 6th gen consoles all are. Looking at Rival Schools vs. Project Justice or Soul Blade vs. Soul Calibur should make that quite clear! Both of those PS1 games aren't very good (slow, etc...), but the two DC games are amazing...


I'd rather play a 3D fighter that runs at a rock solid 60fps with flat planes than a god awful gimmicky fighter that sacrifices smooth gameplay for intrusive obstacles
Fortunately Mace isn't most of those things. It's flawed, sure, but it's a more solid fighting game than most of Midway's efforts were. Mace is definitely my favorite Midway fighting game; I've never been fan of Mortal Kombat, as far as the gameplay goes.


I understood it exactly as it was written. You're backpedaling because you've been proven wrong. You're simply now narrowing your focus to something extremely specific just to maintain your delusional fanboy opinion.
You're just unwilling to admit the obvious and keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. Ah well.


That's only in one specific situation. The other use for Z-Targeting is to target objects that aren't directly infront of you so you can interact with them. Did you forget that this is how Z-Targeting is introduced?
Of course I didn't forget that. You just do very, very little of that in the game -- the use of Z-targeting, almost all the time, is for fighting something. Sure you can target other things (and go into "combat mode" since that's basically what Z-targeting something is), but fighting is its primary purpose.


The telegraph does not transmit human voices. Recording and playback is a major breakthrough. Z-Targeting however is simply a slight modification to an already existing gameplay mechanic that other people were working on around the same time.
The telegraph transfers sounds. So does the telephone. They just made those sounds more complex. It's an evolutionary invention, not a revolutionary one, technologically, I think... telegraph is the key invention that led to the phone, then the radio, and internet. OoT is the telephone to those previous games' telegraph, in this comparison. Of course it's nothing remotely near that level of importance, but as an analogy it works.


Here's the question to ask yourself. If Nintendo hadn't made an analog controller for the N64, would they have still come out and around the same time? The answer is yes because Sega and Sony were developing them at the same time.
As I've said, I don't think Sony was developing them at the same time, no. An analog joystick isn't an analog gamepad, and gamepads -- the primary interaction method for videogames -- is the thing that matters most. Analog joysticks and wheels are nice, but those limit analog to only certain types of games, like flight and racing games. Including an analog stick on the controller, so that all games can benefit, was a huge advance... and no, I don't think Sony was going to do it anytime soon, unless they were pushed as they were. You can see that with how long it took Sony to release their first analog gamepad -- it wasn't until 1997, long after Sega and Nintendo.

Sega I've already addressed; there's no proof that they were working on it before Nintendo -- remember, Nov. '95 is when the N64 controller was first shown -- but it is possible. Who knows how likely, but possible.


Are you seriously implying that Sega put together their analog controller and mass produced it in the time frame of a week after the N64 launched to then use the excuse that they had it in in development for a long time? It's pretty obvious that it was in development for some time as NiGHTS development dates back to 1994 after Sonic Team completed Sonic 3&K.
See above. November 1995.

Soulis
03-05-2014, 01:18 AM
Both the NES and PSX were succesfull and "mainstream". But PSX took things one step further. The NES was still a gamers only console. Non-gamers had nothing to do with it. Even the "Wizard" movie was targeted to gamers. Someone outside that circle wouldn't care about it. However, the Tomb Raider movies? These are your average action movies that anyone can watch despite knowing the games or not.

The PSX was so much more popular and mainstream that it became the console which attracted the first "non-gamers" or "casuals". I remember so many "jocks" in school who never cared about videogames, but they did buy a PSX just because it was the next trendy/cool thing. They never cared about the NES/GENESIS/SNES these were toys for nerds. The PSX though? That wasn't a toy, that was a cool gadget. It was still a gamers console, more than the Wii ever was, but IMO it was Sony who made the industry mainstream. With every good or bad thing that comes with it.

And lets not forget piracy. How many people bought it just to play cheap games, despite liking the library or not? I personally know some people who bought a PSX only to mod it, without even knowing which games are released in which system. Something like: "Hey, i'll buy the console with the free games and lets pray i will like them". Im not pulling these from my ass, i was there and i did experience those things, at least in my country where the N64 was small and the Saturn pretty much non-existent.



It was popular because it was simply a quality game, whether you like it personally or not.
There was a similar discussion a few pages ago where we established that OOT wasn't all that great and it's popularity doesn't count because popularity doesn't equal quality. Whether we agree to this or not it should count for all games.



it has so much quality stuff that bashing on it just shows your fanboyism.
In case you haven't noticed, in this topic its the N64 which gets bashed. If someones reads this topic and never played a 5th gen console, he would think that the N64 has absolutely NOTHING for it. All it's faults are over-analyzed and pointed out with great emphasis making them sound worse than they really are, while its strong points and games are downplayed or flat out ignored. For the Saturn, its the opposite. Personally, even though i'm defending the N64, i never even said a single bad thing about the Saturn.

j_factor
03-05-2014, 01:33 AM
Yeah, as I said, the games weren't ready yet. The hardware, though, was. Nintendo originally wanted it out Christmas '95, but missed that deadline (Mario 64 wasn't done), and pushed it back.

The hardware was ready in the sense that it was finalized, but I've seen many references to there having been production delays in the chips.


Sony has by FAR the worst first-party support of the three major consoles that generation, though...

I still don't agree. Sony just didn't make as big a deal out of pushing the fact that a game was published by them. They also didn't have a mascot (Polygon Man doesn't count :p). So, they didn't do much in terms of putting their name out there, but in terms of actually releasing games, they did very well IMO.


Oh come on, how stupid can you get? When anyone talks about the N64 and analog, obviously they mean analog sticks. As in, analog sticks on gamepads. Everyone knows that analog joysticks predate the N64, the question is gamepads! And as I've said repeatedly the various other analog gamepads that predate the N64. Nintendo just had the first successful one, and the first one packed in with a post-crash console.

The analog input on the N64 controller is a joystick. The only difference is that it's smaller.


The point is that neither Nintendo nor any third parties had any interest in putting effort into custom microcode for 2d games on the N64, because they all knew that the market wanted 3d games. Why put lots of effort into something that most people won't care about or buy? It'd be a waste of resources, really. If Capcom, say, or SNK or something, could have been convinced to support the N64 with 2d games, now, then you'd have a reason to want 2d-centric microcode... but as it is, nobody cared enough to want to do it because they knew that most all people who owned N64s wanted 3d games, not 2d. Blaming Nintendo more than third parties or the gaming market is silly, because all three are responsible equally -- and probably gamers most of all, since "2d isn't as good" was very much a thing at the time.

The market wanted 3D games, but not completely to the exclusion of 2D games. There were some popular 2D games for the Playstation, Saturn, arcade, and PC. Even on the N64, Yoshi's Story did pretty well, though it's not "real" 2D. You're putting the cart before the horse when you say "If Capcom, say, or SNK or something, could have been convinced to support the N64 with 2d games..." That wasn't happening because of what Nintendo did (or didn't do) in the first place.


The sheer number of games which copied OoT's Z-targeting system should, on its own, show how important a change it was. Suddenly everyone was using something like it!

Plenty of games continued to use an auto-targeting system more along the lines of Tomb Raider. You also had different implementations of lock-on targeting, such as what was used in Syphon Filter. That's not to say that no games copied z-targeting, but I don't think it was particularly predominant.


... No comment, you're being ridiculous. Why would anyone ever talk about the N64 and analog in any context other than gamepads?? They wouldn't. Intentionally missing a point just in order to bash Nintendo more is stupid.

Because the context is controllers, not gamepads in the specific. You are just imposing arbitrary narrow distinctions for the sake of making the N64 look better.

These conversations always go this way. There is always some excuse why this or that doesn't count, to fit the preconceived narrative of Nintendo as the innovator.


As has already been pointed out, Nintendo first showed the N64 controller in November 1995. That's more than enough time for Sega to then take the idea for their own controller, if they hurried. It could have been Sega's own idea, as Sega did have some analog arcade controllers of course, and while they didn't make the XE-1AP their system supported it, but there's no proof of that. I'm pretty sure that Sega first mentioned the 3D Controller after the N64 pad had been shown.

NiGHTS was already well into development and getting its share of hype by November of 1995, though. I don't know when the 3D analog controller was first shown, but interviews with people who worked on it have all said that the game was intended for analog control from the beginning. Which should be very clear if you ever try to play the game with a d-pad -- it doesn't work very well and goes against the underlying nature of the game.

goldenband
03-05-2014, 01:42 AM
The analog input on the N64 controller is a joystick. The only difference is that it's smaller.

If you were to glue a piece of plastic to the top of the Vectrex stick, you'd have something very close to the N64's analog stick. The Vectrex controller has a gamepad-like design and analog control, and works very well; I'm hard-pressed to think of another pre-NES first-party controller that's as good, actually.

Soulis
03-05-2014, 01:59 AM
NiGHTS was already well into development and getting its share of hype by November of 1995, though. I don't know when the 3D analog controller was first shown, but interviews with people who worked on it have all said that the game was intended for analog control from the beginning. Which should be very clear if you ever try to play the game with a d-pad -- it doesn't work very well and goes against the underlying nature of the game.
The same thing applies for Mario 64. I remember an interview somewhere (i think it was Miyamoto) who said that the controller was designed with this game in mind. Hence the naming of the "c-buttons" (which means camera buttons) that Mario 64 uses for camera control, even though other games use them like usual buttons.

Barone
03-05-2014, 02:01 AM
Sony has by FAR the worst first-party support of the three major consoles that generation, though...
Are you considering Psygnosis as a second-party despite Sony owning it since 1993 and Psygnosis being the developer of the first PS1's SDKs?
By the way, what's your point now? Find a new excuse to thrash the PS1 or something?


Also, this whole thing about PS1 being sold as a multimedia device is pure ignorance of whoever said and supported this idea.
If you weren't born back in the days, OK, but give us a break and go read something outside of Nintendo's wikia.

Seriously, both CD-i and 3DO were by FAR the consoles from the 90s which were really pushed to the customers as multimedia solutions, at least during a crucial period of their lifespans.
CD-i was pretty much your "digital VCR" and it even looked like one depending on the model you chose. Some of its games actually required the VCD card.
3DO didn't have all those CD-i movies but it had its share of educational shit, as well as an official VCD expansion and an official Karaoke expansion. Goldstar's and Sanyo's 3DO models look A LOT like a VCR IMO.
Then you have the Saturn also with official Photo CD/VCD cards, the Sega Saturn Electronic Book Operator and also 3rd parties manufacturing the system like the 3DO.
Before that, you also had the Mega CD with CD+G support, the Karaoke expansion and a lots of FMVs along with stuff as "My Paint", "The San Diego Zoo Presents: The Animals!" and "Make My Video". And it was also manufactured by JVC.
The PS1 didn't have an official karaoke expansion nor an official VCD one AFAIK, the non-game software of its library is barely existent... Also, it was only Sony manufacturing it.

Now, please, if you want to find excuses to hate a console at least do your homework instead of saying so much stupid shit.

Soulis
03-05-2014, 02:07 AM
Also, this whole thing about PS1 being sold as a multimedia system is pure ignorance of whoever said and supported this idea.
I hope this isn't referring to my post because i never said or implied such a thing.

Edit: Oh nevermind.

j_factor
03-05-2014, 02:20 AM
The same thing applies for Mario 64. I remember an interview somewhere (i think it was Miyamoto) who said that the controller was designed with this game in mind. Hence the naming of the "c-buttons" (which means camera buttons) that Mario 64 uses for camera control, even though other games use them like usual buttons. And first screens of Mario 64 were shown before Nights was even known.

The controller was designed around Mario 64, absolutely. I don't dispute that, or that the controller was in development for a significant length of time before it was officially shown to the public. I am merely saying that Sega wasn't copying Nintendo with that controller, and also that this doesn't mean that the two companies were simultaneously inventing the same thing either, because there was more history for them to draw from. Nintendo doesn't do things in a vacuum. Notice how I'm not talking up any of Sega's accomplishments, I'm only responding to claims made and trying to put things in context.

Gaming history is interesting to me precisely because almost everything draws from what came before it. I am tired of it being made out that Nintendo copies no one and everyone copies Nintendo. I challenge that version of events, but that isn't to bash Nintendo.

Guntz
03-05-2014, 02:28 AM
Also, this whole thing about PS1 being sold as a multimedia device is pure ignorance of whoever said and supported this idea.
If you weren't born back in the days, OK, but give us a break and go read something outside of Nintendo's wikia.

When I said the PS1 was like a VCR, I meant it was a VCR of gaming. That is, it was a system defined by third party content, a similar way VHS was defined by third party content. Sony's first party support has a similar feeling.

Never did I say PS1 was a bad console.

Soulis
03-05-2014, 02:34 AM
The controller was designed around Mario 64, absolutely. I don't dispute that, or that the controller was in development for a significant length of time before it was officially shown to the public. I am merely saying that Sega wasn't copying Nintendo with that controller, and also that this doesn't mean that the two companies were simultaneously inventing the same thing either, because there was more history for them to draw from. Nintendo doesn't do things in a vacuum. Notice how I'm not talking up any of Sega's accomplishments, I'm only responding to claims made and trying to put things in context.

Gaming history is interesting to me precisely because almost everything draws from what came before it. I am tired of it being made out that Nintendo copies no one and everyone copies Nintendo. I challenge that version of events, but that isn't to bash Nintendo.
I actually agree with you. I will admit that even i, personally, may have over-hyped some positive stuff about Nintendo here but that's only because i feel that, in this topic (and generally in this board) Nintendo is being bashed/downplayed so much that even if they did something good, it gets ignored. I mean they can't possibly be that bad. Sure, they didn't invent the whole universe but you just can't ignore their many contributions in the industry. You guys always talk about how retarded Nintendo fanboys are and how places like Nintendo age are the worst places to be but, personally, i don't see a big difference with this place. It's just Sega fanboys vs Nintendo fanboys.

gamevet
03-05-2014, 04:05 AM
I actually agree with you. I will admit that even i, personally, may have over-hyped some positive stuff about Nintendo here but that's only because i feel that, in this topic (and generally in this board) Nintendo is being bashed/downplayed so much that even if they did something good, it gets ignored. I mean they can't possibly be that bad. Sure, they didn't invent the whole universe but you just can't ignore their many contributions in the industry. You guys always talk about how retarded Nintendo fanboys are and how places like Nintendo age are the worst places to be but, personally, i don't see a big difference with this place. It's just Sega fanboys vs Nintendo fanboys.

I defended the GameCube hardware, in that other thread, because I believe that Nintendo did a lot of right with the hardware. I can't say the same for the N64, because I believe it hurt Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties, and they have never really got back that strong 3rd party support they had with the SNES and NES.


I had an N64 from day 1, a Saturn from day 1 and a Playstation about 6 months after launch. I've always been about the games 1st, the hardware second. The N64 was always the console where I was waiting for the next big game, while I always found something I wanted to play on the other 2 consoles.

I grew up an Atari fan, but that wasn't enough to convince me that I needed a 5200, or 7800 console. I had thought that I needed an Atari 800 computer at one time, until a played on a friends C64. Loyalty? Pfff!

j_factor
03-05-2014, 05:57 AM
I actually agree with you. I will admit that even i, personally, may have over-hyped some positive stuff about Nintendo here but that's only because i feel that, in this topic (and generally in this board) Nintendo is being bashed/downplayed so much that even if they did something good, it gets ignored. I mean they can't possibly be that bad. Sure, they didn't invent the whole universe but you just can't ignore their many contributions in the industry. You guys always talk about how retarded Nintendo fanboys are and how places like Nintendo age are the worst places to be but, personally, i don't see a big difference with this place. It's just Sega fanboys vs Nintendo fanboys.

It's hard not to sound anti-Nintendo when posting in the same topic as A Black Falcon. :p

I'm not a blind Sega fanboy. The Playstation is one of my absolute favorite systems, right up there with the Genesis. I really like the Turbo and the original Xbox, which I think is underappreciated. On the Nintendo side, I'm a big fan of the GBA, I like the SNES a lot (just not as much as Genesis), and I'm one of the Wii's biggest defenders. Everything I just named is a system I like moreso than the SMS or Dreamcast. I also have a positive opinion of the Gamecube, admiration for the C64, and I just recently got a 3DO which I am excited to get into for the first time.

I admit I may be carrying baggage from participating in internet conversations for the past 15 years. N64 in particular left a bad taste in my mouth. And by that I don't mean the system itself, but the fans. But I digress.

Xan
03-05-2014, 08:22 AM
There was a similar discussion a few pages ago where we established that OOT wasn't all that great and it's popularity doesn't count because popularity doesn't equal quality. Whether we agree to this or not it should count for all games.
I was talking about FFVII in that post, but both games are very good. A million times better than anything they recently came up with in those series. Really one can like ALttP better, sure, but if you think OoT is not a quality game then you are just jaded.


In case you haven't noticed, in this topic its the N64 which gets bashed. If someones reads this topic and never played a 5th gen console, he would think that the N64 has absolutely NOTHING for it. All it's faults are over-analyzed and pointed out with great emphasis making them sound worse than they really are, while its strong points and games are downplayed or flat out ignored. For the Saturn, its the opposite. Personally, even though i'm defending the N64, i never even said a single bad thing about the Saturn.
I have noticed enough fanboyism in this topic, but I personally don't bash any 5th gen console. They are all much better than what we have nowadays, in terms of game quality, unless it's only about graphics and DLC crap. Therefore, even though the PSX had it's flaws (too much casual crap), I don't see why one would single it out and call it reponsible for the bland crap we have nowadays. I think the overall quality of the good games should speak for itself.

Jeckidy
03-05-2014, 09:27 AM
I actually agree with you. I will admit that even i, personally, may have over-hyped some positive stuff about Nintendo here but that's only because i feel that, in this topic (and generally in this board) Nintendo is being bashed/downplayed so much that even if they did something good, it gets ignored. I mean they can't possibly be that bad. Sure, they didn't invent the whole universe but you just can't ignore their many contributions in the industry. You guys always talk about how retarded Nintendo fanboys are and how places like Nintendo age are the worst places to be but, personally, i don't see a big difference with this place. It's just Sega fanboys vs Nintendo fanboys.

Right on, here. The bias is blatantly obvious. There's also a need to side for the most obscure games/consoles just for hipster points, much akin to the Neo Geo community but in some ways more mild. I'm all for praising the underdog, but bashing popular stuff that was successful for good reason just to appear more knowledgable and "indie" is really pretentious.

Black_Tiger
03-05-2014, 09:47 AM
I actually agree with you. I will admit that even i, personally, may have over-hyped some positive stuff about Nintendo here but that's only because i feel that, in this topic (and generally in this board) Nintendo is being bashed/downplayed so much that even if they did something good, it gets ignored. I mean they can't possibly be that bad. Sure, they didn't invent the whole universe but you just can't ignore their many contributions in the industry. You guys always talk about how retarded Nintendo fanboys are and how places like Nintendo age are the worst places to be but, personally, i don't see a big difference with this place. It's just Sega fanboys vs Nintendo fanboys.

In the more hardcore retro game forums like this, you find more genuine fans of retro gaming in general and people who were around while all this stuff is happening. This place and similar forums are full of people who love old Nintendo games just like old games in general. Regularly people ask, "why aren't there any dedicated forums for NES or SNES?" It's because "Nintendo" has become another kitch novelty for the masses emulating the current faux-hipster lifestyle which is so popular but everyone says they hate while living it. This is why terms like "8-bit" mean NES/SNES games to most people.

Old fashioned fans of Nintendo are a drop in the sea of people who started retroactively Nintendo-ing as a hobby. People who were first attracted to the old games because they thought it was ugly and primitive, but know from modern media that Nintendo is "classic" because it's always been around since they invented video games in the mid-80's. It's led to a modern culture of Nintendi-ists who ate completely oblivious to everything Nintendo produces, they just accept that Nintendo = perfect. So you see so many Nintendo pop cultures references which don't make any sense and stuff like memes about "Zelda" being the measure of perfection. People late to the party, but with a very narrowminded interest are reverse engineering their "gaming" knowledge to fit their pre-installed conclusion which existed before the actual interest did. The same kinds of people who equate popularity with quality and are mostly concerned with the greatest hits, the Justin Biebers and Brittany Spears of games, because they want to complete their complete set of vintage trivia asap. After settling in, they'll keep an eye out for truly obscure tid bits and games to hokd over the heads of others, like this hip game I found the ither day that nobody's ever heard of. It's called Earthbound.

Black Falcon is a great example of this. His first console was the N64 and he became a Nintendo worshipper before absorbing his skewed mainstream distortion of history. So many of his "facts" rely on you accepting the Nintendo = perfection rule. All classic Mario and Zelda games are perfect, let alone their exists such a thing as a perfect game. Games cancel out others and "legendary" Nibtendo titles cancel out entire libraries. Most of the people here are fans of the actual games and actual history of the medium. So many people here only love one Sega console, dislike one or have varying views on Sega itself. You have more discussions here critical of Sega than those worshipping it. But most people in this and other game (not collecting)-based dedicated retro game communities look at games and history for what it is and it is so crazy having people who weren't hardcore enthusiasts at the time, who weren't playing everything available while it was current, coming in and telling you that things were radically different than they actually were.

If you have Nintendo goggles, then this is all crazy talk. But so many of the shortcomings of that article and the Nintendo = pioneering perfection revisionist propaganda spouted casually in absolutes and as absolute fact, has been repeatedly, very clearly and rationally been debunked by quantifiable facts. Particularly indisputable are the ones based on timelines. Every time it's proven that Nintendo did something last, the presentation of facts and their presenters blasted as "Nintendo hatred" and we get constant sanity-questioning comments like "so maybe it's not 100% certain that Nintendo invented it".

As for not bowing down to the "fact" that N64>Saturn, the first thing you'd realize after stepping outside if the Nintendo realm, is that the 32-bit generation is infamous as the first baby steps of crude 3D. All 3D of that generation is an acquired taste. But the quality 2D visuals of countless Saturn games still looks like beautiful paintings that non-artists can't casually doodle. The crude 3D of than gen is the equivalent of very crude paoercraft. We can all appreciate it, but it still pales in comoarison to detailed 2D art. It's a similar situation with 3D gameplay. At the time people accepted all the imperfections because they knew that it was still being figured it. Unfortunately, it didn't evolve nearly as far as people predicted early on and 3D gaming will always be imprecise comoared to 2D gameplay. Crap like Z-targetting is the gameplay equivalent of training wheels on a bicycle and bumpers on a bowling lane. The overal design of stages was akso comoromused by the limited 3D capability of hardware at the time combined with inferior-to-2D controles/gameplay. 3D is still great and fun and provided so many new and unique experiences. It transformed genres like racing and FOS ganes are great. But the quality of 2D games hasn't been cancelled out revisionist-style to this day and certainly wasn't during our most basic and crude generation of mainstream 3D gaming.

The Saturn's 2D library is priceless. Combined with its 3D games, it's a no-brainer that the N64 can't compete overall in the typical quantity + quality overall comparison. But that's why comparisons shouldn't be reduced to such simple winner-deckaring summarization. Everyone has diffetent tastes and each person can explain why particular games are enjoyable for them.

But that comparison article, was built using several loaded criteria designed to favor the N64. But even within such limited and biased context, the Saturn is still noticeably superior in each category. Even giving less value to the Saturn's imports, they still completely tip the scale over. I'd rather have the Capcom Generations discs alone, than the worldwide N64 library. Even the Nintendo-hardware based titles. Because Nintendo hating or loving has nothing to do with it.

Dragonmaster Lou
03-05-2014, 10:43 AM
Good points made about 3D vs. 2D in that generation.

Hell, a well-made 16-bit 2D game for the Genesis, Turbo, or SNES still holds up pretty well graphically today. Given the extra 2D capabilities of the Saturn and you got some 2D works of real beauty. The early 3D stuff, frankly, looks like crap today because the tech was so primitive at the time. 2D entered the acceptably beautiful threshold in the 16-bit generation and pretty much reached the pinnacle during the 32-bit generation. I doubt you'll find any modern 2D games that look any better than the best of those released during the 32-bit generation. Maybe, with modern CPUs (or perhaps tricks in the GPUs, even though those are all 3D optimized these days), you'll be able to have more sprites or sprite-like objects flung up on screen at any given time, but as far as colors and stuff, we haven't gotten past that point.

Barone
03-05-2014, 10:53 AM
In the more hardcore retro game forums like this, you find more genuine fans of retro gaming in general and people who were around while all this stuff is happening. This place and similar forums are full of people who love old Nintendo games just like old games in general. Regularly people ask, "why aren't there any dedicated forums for NES or SNES?" It's because "Nintendo" has become another kitch novelty for the masses emulating the current faux-hipster lifestyle which is so popular but everyone says they hate while living it. This is why terms like "8-bit" mean NES/SNES games to most people.

Old fashioned fans of Nintendo are a drop in the sea of people who started retroactively Nintendo-ing as a hobby. People who were first attracted to the old games because they thought it was ugly and primitive, but know from modern media that Nintendo is "classic" because it's always been around since they invented video games in the mid-80's. It's led to a modern culture of Nintendi-ists who ate completely oblivious to everything Nintendo produces, they just accept that Nintendo = perfect. So you see so many Nintendo pop cultures references which don't make any sense and stuff like memes about "Zelda" being the measure of perfection. People late to the party, but with a very narrowminded interest are reverse engineering their "gaming" knowledge to fit their pre-installed conclusion which existed before the actual interest did. The same kinds of people who equate popularity with quality and are mostly concerned with the greatest hits, the Justin Biebers and Brittany Spears of games, because they want to complete their complete set of vintage trivia asap. After settling in, they'll keep an eye out for truly obscure tid bits and games to hokd over the heads of others, like this hip game I found the ither day that nobody's ever heard of. It's called Earthbound.

Black Falcon is a great example of this. His first console was the N64 and he became a Nintendo worshipper before absorbing his skewed mainstream distortion of history. So many of his "facts" rely on you accepting the Nintendo = perfection rule. All classic Mario and Zelda games are perfect, let alone their exists such a thing as a perfect game. Games cancel out others and "legendary" Nibtendo titles cancel out entire libraries. Most of the people here are fans of the actual games and actual history of the medium. So many people here only love one Sega console, dislike one or have varying views on Sega itself. You have more discussions here critical of Sega than those worshipping it. But most people in this and other game (not collecting)-based dedicated retro game communities look at games and history for what it is and it is so crazy having people who were hardcore enthusiasts at the time, who weren't playing everything available while it was current, coming in and telling you that things were radically different.

If you have Nintendo goggles, then this is all crazy talk. But so many of the shortcomings of that article and the Nintendo = pioneering perfection revisionist propaganda spouted casually in absolutes and as absolute fact, has been repeatedly, very clearly and rationally been debunked by quantifiable facts. Particularly indisputable are the ones based on timelines. Every time it's proven that Nintendo did something last, the presentation of facts and their presenters blasted as "Nintendo hatred" and we get constant sanity-questioning comments like "so maybe it's not 100% certain that Nintendo invented it".

As for not bowing down to the "fact" that N64>Saturn, the first thing you'd realize after stepping outside if the Nintendo realm, is that the 32-bit generation is infamous as the first baby steps of crude 3D. All 3D of that generation is an acquired taste. But the quality 2D visuals of countless Saturn games still looks like beautiful paintings that non-artists can't casually doodle. The crude 3D of than gen is the equivalent of very crude paoercraft. We can all appreciate it, but it still pales in comoarison to detailed 2D art. It's a similar situation with 3D gameplay. At the time people accepted all the imperfections because they knew that it was still being figured it. Unfortunately, it didn't evolve nearly as far as people predicted early on and 3D gaming will always be imprecise comoared to 2D gameplay. Crap like Z-targetting is the gameplay equivalent of training wheels on a bicycle and bumpers on a bowling lane. The overal design of stages was akso comoromused by the limited 3D capability of hardware at the time combined with inferior-to-2D controles/gameplay. 3D is still great and fun and provided so many new and unique experiences. It transformed genres like racing and FOS ganes are great. But the quality of 2D games hasn't been cancelled out revisionist-style to this day and certainly wasn't during our most basic and crude generation of mainstream 3D gaming.

The Saturn's 2D library is priceless. Combined with its 3D games, it's a no-brainer that the N64 can't compete overall in the typical quantity + quality overall comparison. But that's why comparisons shouldn't be reduced to such simple winner-deckaring summarization. Everyone has diffetent tastes and each person can explain why particular games are enjoyable for them.

But that comparison article, was built using several loaded criteria designed to favor the N64. But even within such limited and biased context, the Saturn is still noticeably superior in each category. Even giving less value to the Saturn's imports, they still completely tip the scale over. I'd rather have the Capcom Generations discs alone, than the worldwide N64 library. Even the Nintendo-hardware based titles. Because Nintendo hating or loving has nothing to do with it.
QFT

I really couldn't agree more.
I'd like just to add some appointments though:
- I'm also against score on reviews and stuff like in this article, where the whole thing is driven to declare a result of a very superficial and simplified contest of both consoles.

- There isn't and there will never be a consensus about "Best evarrr" games, controller, consoles... It's nonsense talking for people who really enjoy gaming prior to trying to play a role as a pop culture or "retro" culture persona; and stuff like that is just as idiotic as trying to represent the value of game or a system as a score.

- There's no such a rule declaring that the N64 games "aged" better or that its 3D looks better than the other consoles of the time. In a situation when you have pros and cons for each system (despite of what dumbass reading of specs may suggest), it really comes down to tastes and personal preferences what you consider more "modern" or up-to-date or what you think that "aged better".

- I've several friends which cut their teeth on the NES or the SNES in terms of gaming and some of them bought the N64 after abandoning the SNES. They did enjoy the system for a while and we sure played the hell out of games like Goldeneye, Mario Kart 64, Super Mario 64, Wave Race 64, Diddy Kong Racing, WDC, Duke Nukem Zero Hour, etc... But at some point, right there around 1998-1999, most of them just dropped the N64 and got a PS1 for the games. We had this opinion that the N64 has the most advanced hardware of that gen but we just wanted to play stuff like MGS and GT2, which content and presentation-wise you'd NEVER have on the N64.
And we really didn't regret the choice. There was so MANY great games to play on the PS1 that we would arrange these gameplay parties like 3 or 4 times a week. We played the hell out of MGS, GT2, Driver, Driver 2, Winning Eleven (its graphics were ugly even back then when compared to the ISS games on the N64 but the gameplay was way way way better), KOF '98 (the possibility to play great 2D games like that was also a factor when people decided to abandon the N64), Metal Slug X, TOCA games (there wasn't a similar option on the N64 and we really dig those games), etc...

- At the same time, we were also playing a lot of PC games, whose background I feel that a lot of the "new wave" of retro enthusiasts really lacks and it seems to contribute some very nonsense and narrow minded statements of how revolutionary certain N64 games were.
A10 Cuba, Rally Championship 2000, Screamer games, Blood, Shogo, Half-Life, GP500, Sim City 2000, Carmageddon games (includign the TDR one), Sports Car GT, Rally Masters, Sega Rally (yep), Hexen, Alien vs Predator 2, Crimson Skies, FIFA games, Monaco GP II, F1 RC, Johnny Herbert's Grand Prix World Champions (graphics were the shit, controls were a shit; lol) etc. Just some that I can remember right now.
We had stuff like Speedboat Attack waaaaay before you could enjoy Hydro Thunder on consoles, we had Geoff Crammond's Grand Prix games way before any F1 game on the N64 claim to be "ultra realistic" due to a good cockpit view while having very poor physics and very limited car setup options. We had played a lot of Tomb Raider and Tomb Raider 2 on the PC to be able to swallow that games with open world exploration were a N64 gift-only. To not talk about Z-targeting again.
We also had played too many hours of the original Unreal to be able to swallow this shit that the N64 is the ultimate FPS platform. Unreal on the PC was just so much more intense, gruesome and better looking than any FPS on any console that it's really hard to discuss with people who never experienced it.
We played ALL the first four NFS games on the PC first, so I think we had a good background in terms of games with arcade gameplay but with some sense of physics (with the exception of NFS II) and proper presentation. The Rush games never really had much of an appeal for us.

- In terms of arcade, we had played a lot of Daytona USA and Indy 500 prior touching turds like Cruis'n USA or San Francisco Rush. Rush wasn't as bad as Cruis'n and it had some fun, but you would be a freakin' retard to spend your coins on Rush instead of Daytona, Indy 500, Sega Super GT, Top Skater... And all those Nintendo fans also agreed about that. Back in the days, all the arcade rooms that I went had Cruis'n machines eating dust in the poor end of the room and the Sega arcade were always in the front. Top Skater was a big deal for us back then, too bad it was never ported to consoles.
We sorely never had access to the awesomeness of Hydro Thunder arcade back in those days, 'cause I'm pretty sure we'd have loved it just as much.
KOF machines you could find in cheapo snack bars and we would play them eventually, a bit more when we had enough age to drink and play those games drunk, ahahaha.

- If propaganda is all that made the PS1 for you, it wasn't for us. We lived in Brazil, and the very little TV propaganda that we had here was about the N64 IIRC. I'm pretty sure we never watched a single PS1 game being advertised on the TV. And the magazines, until when the Saturn was barely alive, weren't one sided since TecToy and Gradiente were putting money in those things to ensure that both the Saturn and N64 would have their good share of space in the relevant magazines.
Piracy really helped the PS1 here though, that's undeniable, but pirates don't tell you which games you should play and they don't convince you that Crash games were fun. Playing with friends and having fun was the real deal for us.

- About the article, if you're going to advocate the N64 you should do a better job in terms of exploring its local multiplayer advantages, especially when comparing its 3D library with the Saturn's (which is weak in that local multiplayer spot IMO). It feels like the design weaknesses of the N64 and the Nintendo stupid policies limited what most of the games could perform in terms of good looking games with good frame rate, but the extra CPU power seems to make a difference in some aspects, IDK...
There are lots of N64 games with 4P split screen but, above that IMO, there are several games with AI competitors in 2P split screen mode; something very uncommon on the Saturn and still unlikely on the PS1. Some games are really boring to play without any AI challenge IMO.
Too bad that people are so concerned about promoting Nintendo-ish myths about its supposed revolutionary legacy that they neglect such N64 advantages which really affect the gameplay.

- You can't just compare a consistent 3D library like the Saturn has to a barely existent N64's 2D one and say that both are equivalent. That's what going "full retard" is all about. ;)

Guntz
03-05-2014, 11:09 AM
I dunno, I think the article was a success. Just look at the 14 pages in this thread. ;)

The article wasn't intended to be a meticulous, one million word long definitive absolute comparison. It was meant more in a casual format. Such a comparison is inherently subjective, not everyone can be happy with it. The Saturn half of it was actually written by a Saturn fan, someone who understood it better than me. The article was not without restriction, as I have said earlier. Saturn wasn't allowed to win with no contest, so we simply ended it with both systems being equal, counting their many ups and downs. I know Cheaterdragon1 denied this, but I remember what I was told. Looking over the evidence myself, I too felt the Saturn simply had more in its favor over N64, even though I like N64. With no restriction, Saturn would have won.

Clearly I can see you guys are well versed in the N64 and Saturn. I welcome you all to write articles on Micro-64. Anything that hasn't been covered is up for grabs.

http://micro-64.com/index.shtml

j_factor
03-05-2014, 11:27 AM
- There's no such a rule declaring that the N64 games "aged" better or that its 3D looks better than the other consoles of the time. In a situation when you have pros and cons for each system (despite of what dumbass reading of specs may suggest), it really comes down to tastes and personal preferences what you consider more "modern" or up-to-date or what you think that "aged better".

Just my personal opinion, I think what's "aged better" from that generation is games that aren't just straight 3D. Either they're on rails, or have a very fixed camera, or use sprites, or prerendered backgrounds, or something like that. The likes of Fear Effect, Grandia, Final Fantasy IX, etc. have aged pretty gracefully and still look pretty good IMO. For whatever reason, this type of thing was seldom done on the N64. So I think N64 has "aged worse" (graphically) for that reason. It would have been interesting to see what the N64 could do in the style of Road Rash 3DO, Bug!, or N2O: Nitrous Oxide.

Moirai
03-05-2014, 12:29 PM
But guise, Saturn is a third party console.. How can it be better? It has no Zelda!

Team Andromeda
03-05-2014, 01:11 PM
Both machines were class imo. The trouble is though that like the Mega Drive and XBox in Japan the Saturn had a hard time in the West and so many of its better games were import and Japanese only . So in many ways the N64 will come out better thanks to most of its games A) Being in English and B) Out in all parts of the World .

Black_Tiger
03-05-2014, 01:15 PM
When it comes to multiplayer games on Saturn, the Netlink was a big deal and you essentially had matchmaking which made it even better. But most people seem to forget all the 6 - 12 player games the Saturn supported locally, let alone all the 2 - 5 player games.

Some of them are listed on these pages:

http://www.racketboy.com/retro/saturn-multiplayer-games-best-multi

http://www.gametrog.com/GAMETROG/SEGA_Saturn_Accessories_2.html


It was cool that the N64 had 4 controller ports built-in. But if it had a bunch of <12 player games bitd (let alone netplay), do think we'd ever here the end of it in threads like this?

NeoZeedeater
03-05-2014, 01:20 PM
I dunno, I think the article was a success. Just look at the 14 pages in this thread. ;)

The article wasn't intended to be a meticulous, one million word long definitive absolute comparison. It was meant more in a casual format. Such a comparison is inherently subjective, not everyone can be happy with it. The Saturn half of it was actually written by a Saturn fan, someone who understood it better than me. The article was not without restriction, as I have said earlier. Saturn wasn't allowed to win with no contest, so we simply ended it with both systems being equal, counting their many ups and downs. I know Cheaterdragon1 denied this, but I remember what I was told. Looking over the evidence myself, I too felt the Saturn simply had more in its favor over N64, even though I like N64. With no restriction, Saturn would have won.

Clearly I can see you guys are well versed in the N64 and Saturn. I welcome you all to write articles on Micro-64. Anything that hasn't been covered is up for grabs.

http://micro-64.com/index.shtml
Itís kind of funny youíre encouraging people to write for that site right after mentioning how you were pretty much forced to write your article in a biased way. ;)

Guntz
03-05-2014, 01:21 PM
There's no restrictions to write about N64 stuff.

stu
03-05-2014, 02:23 PM
Are you considering Psygnosis as a second-party despite Sony owning it since 1993 and Psygnosis being the developer of the first PS1's SDKs?
By the way, what's your point now? Find a new excuse to thrash the PS1 or something?


The thing is that even if you discount Psygnosis as being a 1st party PS1 dev, Sony had already started to put together 1st party teams in Japan, Europe and the US, MotorToon GP is a good example of an early 1st part Sony title. TBH after looking over this thread and the DC vs PS2 thread it's clear that ABF is full of Playstation hate. I'm starting to wonder if "ABF" really stands for A Butthurt Fanboy rather than "A Black Falcon" :lol:




Also, this whole thing about PS1 being sold as a multimedia device is pure ignorance of whoever said and supported this idea.
If you weren't born back in the days, OK, but give us a break and go read something outside of Nintendo's wikia.

Seriously, both CD-i and 3DO were by FAR the consoles from the 90s which were really pushed to the customers as multimedia solutions, at least during a crucial period of their lifespans.
CD-i was pretty much your "digital VCR" and it even looked like one depending on the model you chose. Some of its games actually required the VCD card.
3DO didn't have all those CD-i movies but it had its share of educational shit, as well as an official VCD expansion and an official Karaoke expansion. Goldstar's and Sanyo's 3DO models look A LOT like a VCR IMO.
Then you have the Saturn also with official Photo CD/VCD cards, the Sega Saturn Electronic Book Operator and also 3rd parties manufacturing the system like the 3DO.
Before that, you also had the Mega CD with CD+G support, the Karaoke expansion and a lots of FMVs along with stuff as "My Paint", "The San Diego Zoo Presents: The Animals!" and "Make My Video". And it was also manufactured by JVC.
The PS1 didn't have an official karaoke expansion nor an official VCD one AFAIK, the non-game software of its library is barely existent... Also, it was only Sony manufacturing it.


Agreed, the Playstation was marketed exclusively as a game console, not some multimedia set top box like the CDi and 3DO (and even the Saturn to some extent) There was no MPEG cartridge for the PS1 (unlike the other systems I mentioned) and it seems like that just because it uses CD-Roms and can play music CD that all of a sudden its "a multimedia device", a load of crap imo.




Now, please, if you want to find excuses to hate a console at least do your homework instead of saying so much stupid shit. QFT

Chilly Willy
03-05-2014, 03:25 PM
Once again, joysticks are not gamepads. Flightstick-style joysticks had existed for many years. Look up the PC joysticks I mention earlier in this post. Also look up the 3DO's joystick, which I believe is a version of the CH Flightstick (or Flightstick Pro). Also look up the XE-1AP and that original joystick version of it, not the gamepad. Etc.

While a few games are easier to play with one rather than the other, most folks don't make a distinction between sticks and pads. I certainly don't. It's disengenuous to try to use that minor difference as positive proof of your incorrect assumptions.



Good point to remind some people of -- the N64's hardware was done in 1995. The hardware was ready for a 1995 launch, but the games weren't, so it was delayed to mid 1996 for Japan and late 1996 for the West. Nintendo would do this again with the Gamecube, which was ready in late 2000 I believe, but the games weren't so it didn't release until late '01.

The controllers were probably ready for an xmas 95 launch, but the hardware was not. It still had serious bugs that SGI was working feverishly to fix. Nintendo did not want to "pull a Jaguar" and put off launching the N64 until SGI had fixed the major bugs. It launched with two minor bugs - one in the video, and one in the audio. Those were later fixed as well, and the "microcode" updated with work-arounds for the two different chipsets.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 03:44 PM
I'm starting to wonder if "ABF" really stands for A Butthurt Fanboy rather than "A Black Falcon" :lol:
Agreed, the Playstation was marketed exclusively as a game console, not some multimedia set top box like the CDi and 3DO (and even the Saturn to some extent) There was no MPEG cartridge for the PS1 (unlike the other systems I mentioned) and it seems like that just because it uses CD-Roms and can play music CD that all of a sudden its "a multimedia device", a load of crap imo.

a bitter fanboy maybe
but most fanbosy tend to be bitter to an extent

and there was a vcd extension for the ps 1 it was unofficial but does it excist
http://www.trhonline.com/obscure/psxvcd/top1.jpg

i had that thing and it played vcd's

course so did my saturn

Bottino
03-05-2014, 05:21 PM
In the more hardcore retro game forums like this, you find more genuine fans of retro gaming in general and people who were around while all this stuff is happening. This place and similar forums are full of people who love old Nintendo games just like old games in general. Regularly people ask, "why aren't there any dedicated forums for NES or SNES?" It's because "Nintendo" has become another kitch novelty for the masses emulating the current faux-hipster lifestyle which is so popular but everyone says they hate while living it. This is why terms like "8-bit" mean NES/SNES games to most people.

Old fashioned fans of Nintendo are a drop in the sea of people who started retroactively Nintendo-ing as a hobby. People who were first attracted to the old games because they thought it was ugly and primitive, but know from modern media that Nintendo is "classic" because it's always been around since they invented video games in the mid-80's. It's led to a modern culture of Nintendi-ists who ate completely oblivious to everything Nintendo produces, they just accept that Nintendo = perfect. So you see so many Nintendo pop cultures references which don't make any sense and stuff like memes about "Zelda" being the measure of perfection. People late to the party, but with a very narrowminded interest are reverse engineering their "gaming" knowledge to fit their pre-installed conclusion which existed before the actual interest did. The same kinds of people who equate popularity with quality and are mostly concerned with the greatest hits, the Justin Biebers and Brittany Spears of games, because they want to complete their complete set of vintage trivia asap. After settling in, they'll keep an eye out for truly obscure tid bits and games to hokd over the heads of others, like this hip game I found the ither day that nobody's ever heard of. It's called Earthbound.

Black Falcon is a great example of this. His first console was the N64 and he became a Nintendo worshipper before absorbing his skewed mainstream distortion of history. So many of his "facts" rely on you accepting the Nintendo = perfection rule. All classic Mario and Zelda games are perfect, let alone their exists such a thing as a perfect game. Games cancel out others and "legendary" Nibtendo titles cancel out entire libraries. Most of the people here are fans of the actual games and actual history of the medium. So many people here only love one Sega console, dislike one or have varying views on Sega itself. You have more discussions here critical of Sega than those worshipping it. But most people in this and other game (not collecting)-based dedicated retro game communities look at games and history for what it is and it is so crazy having people who were hardcore enthusiasts at the time, who weren't playing everything available while it was current, coming in and telling you that things were radically different.

If you have Nintendo goggles, then this is all crazy talk. But so many of the shortcomings of that article and the Nintendo = pioneering perfection revisionist propaganda spouted casually in absolutes and as absolute fact, has been repeatedly, very clearly and rationally been debunked by quantifiable facts. Particularly indisputable are the ones based on timelines. Every time it's proven that Nintendo did something last, the presentation of facts and their presenters blasted as "Nintendo hatred" and we get constant sanity-questioning comments like "so maybe it's not 100% certain that Nintendo invented it".

As for not bowing down to the "fact" that N64>Saturn, the first thing you'd realize after stepping outside if the Nintendo realm, is that the 32-bit generation is infamous as the first baby steps of crude 3D. All 3D of that generation is an acquired taste. But the quality 2D visuals of countless Saturn games still looks like beautiful paintings that non-artists can't casually doodle. The crude 3D of than gen is the equivalent of very crude paoercraft. We can all appreciate it, but it still pales in comoarison to detailed 2D art. It's a similar situation with 3D gameplay. At the time people accepted all the imperfections because they knew that it was still being figured it. Unfortunately, it didn't evolve nearly as far as people predicted early on and 3D gaming will always be imprecise comoared to 2D gameplay. Crap like Z-targetting is the gameplay equivalent of training wheels on a bicycle and bumpers on a bowling lane. The overal design of stages was akso comoromused by the limited 3D capability of hardware at the time combined with inferior-to-2D controles/gameplay. 3D is still great and fun and provided so many new and unique experiences. It transformed genres like racing and FOS ganes are great. But the quality of 2D games hasn't been cancelled out revisionist-style to this day and certainly wasn't during our most basic and crude generation of mainstream 3D gaming.

The Saturn's 2D library is priceless. Combined with its 3D games, it's a no-brainer that the N64 can't compete overall in the typical quantity + quality overall comparison. But that's why comparisons shouldn't be reduced to such simple winner-deckaring summarization. Everyone has diffetent tastes and each person can explain why particular games are enjoyable for them.

But that comparison article, was built using several loaded criteria designed to favor the N64. But even within such limited and biased context, the Saturn is still noticeably superior in each category. Even giving less value to the Saturn's imports, they still completely tip the scale over. I'd rather have the Capcom Generations discs alone, than the worldwide N64 library. Even the Nintendo-hardware based titles. Because Nintendo hating or loving has nothing to do with it.

One of the reasons that i frequent this forum is to read what some members post here, and Black_Tiger is one of them.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 05:27 PM
^ you mean he counters a bitter fanboy's histronic nintendo rants with even handed replies ?

GreyFox
03-05-2014, 05:51 PM
Am I right in thinking Sony released a white PlayStation 1 that did have VCD playback built in but only in Asia due to the popularity of VCD as a film format in that region. Might be wrong but I am sure I saw that back in the day. Not that it matters at all but it is one of those snippets of info batting round in the back of my head. Might be wrong though.

stu
03-05-2014, 06:15 PM
a bitter fanboy maybe
but most fanbosy tend to be bitter to an extent

and there was a vcd extension for the ps 1 it was unofficial but does it excist
http://www.trhonline.com/obscure/psxvcd/top1.jpg

i had that thing and it played vcd's

course so did my saturn

Yeah I guess bitter would work too, from reading his posts ABF tends to act either bitter or butthurt and sometimes both together, just lately he seems bitter that hardly anyone else has such undying love for Nintendo and their consoles/games that he has and been getting easily butthurt when someone comments on the same subject in a way that he alone feels is negative.

As for that VCD addon for the PS1 I honestly had never heard of it before either unofficial or official, but interesting nevertheless.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 06:26 PM
Am I right in thinking Sony released a white PlayStation 1 that did have VCD playback built in but only in Asia due to the popularity of VCD as a film format in that region. Might be wrong but I am sure I saw that back in the day. Not that it matters at all but it is one of those snippets of info batting round in the back of my head. Might be wrong though.


no you are right it does excist according to this thread http://www.assemblergames.com/forums/showthread.php?38665-Recent-purchase-VCD-model-PS1


Yeah I guess bitter would work too, from reading his posts ABF tends to act either bitter or butthurt and sometimes both together, just lately he seems bitter that hardly anyone else has such undying love for Nintendo and their consoles/games that he has and been getting easily butthurt when someone comments on the same subject in a way that he alone feels is negative.

As for that VCD addon for the PS1 I honestly had never heard of it before either unofficial or official, but interesting nevertheless.

this may sound a bit obvious but even though this is a retro forum its a sega forum first and foremost
so regardless of people's feelings towards nintendo we are here for sega in its various guises

and the idea that anybody on a sega forum has an undying love for nintendo is a bit peculair even more so if said person who has an undying love for nintendo looks for others to support him

if you want undying nintendo love you are better off on a nintendo forum ( a certain wretched hive of scum and villany i hear is good for that )

or maybe thats just my sega bias talking

and there is actually a white vcd ps 1
an official one

an gallery of various playstations including the white VCD psx
http://imgur.com/gallery/ekQFn

Kamahl
03-05-2014, 06:44 PM
http://i2.wp.com/www.thespeedgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Radiant-Silvergun-Picture-2.png

Saturn > N64

stu
03-05-2014, 06:48 PM
this may sound a bit obvious but even though this is a retro forum its a sega forum first and foremost
so regardless of people's feelings towards nintendo we are here for sega in its various guises

and the idea that anybody on a sega forum has an undying love for nintendo is a bit peculair even more so if said person who has an undying love for nintendo looks for others to support him

if you want undying nintendo love you are better off on a nintendo forum ( a certain wretched hive of scum and villany i hear is good for that )

or maybe thats just my sega bias talking



Oh I would totally agree with that, in fact I am puzzled as to why he feels the need to post the "Nintendo Worship" on a Sega forum. He must secretly love the "attention" it gets him.

zetastrike
03-05-2014, 06:49 PM
http://i2.wp.com/www.thespeedgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Radiant-Silvergun-Picture-2.png

Saturn > N64

BUT.....BUT THAT WOULDN'T HAVE SOLD AS WELL AS OOT IN THE WESTERN MARKET! INFERIOR INFERIOR!

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 06:56 PM
http://i2.wp.com/www.thespeedgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Radiant-Silvergun-Picture-2.png

PS1> Saturn > N64

fixed that for you ;)

Guntz
03-05-2014, 07:28 PM
I won't argue with that, because it's true. Yes, it's painfully obvious the PS1 was best, it had all the games. Saturn wasn't nearly as good with the cutting edge, poorly aging 3D games, but was better at arcade ports. Everyone raves about all those amazing PS1 RPGs and action games. Not so much on Saturn. Nobody praises N64 except for how collectible it is.

gamevet
03-05-2014, 07:49 PM
I won't argue with that, because it's true. Yes, it's painfully obvious the PS1 was best, it had all the games. Saturn wasn't nearly as good with the cutting edge, poorly aging 3D games, but was better at arcade ports. Everyone raves about all those amazing PS1 RPGs and action games. Not so much on Saturn. Nobody praises N64 except for how collectible it is.

I don't give the N64 a whole lot of praise, but I can say that there were a few really great games on that console that I still enjoy today. I enjoyed Rogue Squadron quite a bit and because of that game, I'd bought the Gamecube for its sequel.


Both machines were class imo. The trouble is though that like the Mega Drive and XBox in Japan the Saturn had a hard time in the West and so many of its better games were import and Japanese only . So in many ways the N64 will come out better thanks to most of its games A) Being in English and B) Out in all parts of the World .

I'm perfectly fine with the North American released games I have on my Saturn now. Yeah, it would have been nice to have Grandia, Thunderforce V, Radiant Silvergun, Policenauts and all of those Capcom fighters, but I don't think having any of those games in the West would increased my appreciation for the Saturn as a gaming console. I only have about 5 imports for my Saturn and still play a lot of the Western released titles today. The rest of the arcade games I can play with MAME or with ports like RS on my Xbox 360.

Guntz
03-05-2014, 07:52 PM
I've been enjoying Majora's Mask immensely. It's just as good today as it was in 2005 when I first played it.

Really though, most of this is up to individual opinion. There are people who are interested in Superman 64 just for the train wreck aspect. If someone is dead set on a dumb opinion, might as well let them have it. Always look at it this way, if you like a console that others think sucks, that just means there's more cheap games for you to enjoy on it.

gamevet
03-05-2014, 07:59 PM
I've been enjoying Majora's Mask immensely. It's just as good today as it was in 2005 when I first played it.

Really though, most of this is up to individual opinion. There are people who are interested in Superman 64 just for the train wreck aspect. If someone is dead set on a dumb opinion, might as well let them have it. Always look at it this way, if you like a console that others think sucks, that just means there's more cheap games for you to enjoy on it.


That's true, I've been thinking about picking up a few more N64 titles, before the internet starts jacking up the prices on its games. I've been meaning to replace the Ridge Racer carts I'd sold years ago (I still have the box and manual) along with the Waverace cart that got stolen about 13 years ago.

Kamahl
03-05-2014, 08:10 PM
fixed that for you ;)
No Radiant Silvergun on the PS1, your argument is invalid.

Guntz
03-05-2014, 08:11 PM
That's true, I've been thinking about picking up a few more N64 titles, before the internet starts jacking up the prices on its games. I've been meaning to replace the Ridge Racer carts I'd sold years ago (I still have the box and manual) along with the Waverace cart that got stolen about 13 years ago.

So far, only the boxes and manuals for N64 games have seen a significant price hike since 2010/2011. The only cartridge that's over $100 is Clayfighter: Sculptor's Cut. I think anyone here can easily deduce that those NES/SNES cardboard collectors got tired of paying high prices and turned to the cheap N64 instead, which is now expensive on that front.

The carts overall are reasonably inexpensive still, won't be a problem at all to grab some more. Ridge Racer and Wave Race are pretty cheap last I checked.

There's never a great time to comment on one's sig, but I love the Diablo III graphic on your PSN Profile, great game. I hope Reaper of Souls sees a 360 release before the console becomes discontinued.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 08:26 PM
No Radiant Silvergun on the PS1, your argument is invalid.

bollocks !
it has einhander
gradius gaiden
donpachi
dodonpachi
harmfull park
raiden project
raiden dx
kyuiin
raystorm
ray crisis
r type delta
thunderforce 5
and a fuckload more

it doesnt need silvergun especially not at silverguns ridicilously inflated price tag

http://www.racketboy.com/retro/phenominal-playstation-ps1-2d-shooters-shmups-library

NeoZeedeater
03-05-2014, 08:27 PM
I won't argue with that, because it's true. Yes, it's painfully obvious the PS1 was best, it had all the games. Saturn wasn't nearly as good with the cutting edge, poorly aging 3D games, but was better at arcade ports. Everyone raves about all those amazing PS1 RPGs and action games. Not so much on Saturn. Nobody praises N64 except for how collectible it is.
I don't find it painfully obvious that the PS1 was best. I would probably pick PS1 as my favourite of the three but not by big margin over the SS. Both systems have a huge amount of variety and quality games. And since art direction trumps graphic detail, I think the SS still has some of the best looking polygon games of that era (NiGHTS, Panzer Dragoon series, VF2). A lot of those people raving about PS1 RPGs don't even venture outside of the overrated Final Fantasy series anyway.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 08:32 PM
I've been enjoying Majora's Mask immensely. It's just as good today as it was in 2005 when I first played it.

Really though, most of this is up to individual opinion. There are people who are interested in Superman 64 just for the train wreck aspect. If someone is dead set on a dumb opinion, might as well let them have it. Always look at it this way, if you like a console that others think sucks, that just means there's more cheap games for you to enjoy on it.


hmm the cdi 32x and the sega cd would argue with that statemnet
there is a finite amount of them to go around
they are getting more and more expensive

and all three sport several ludicrously expensive games the 32X especially so

Guntz
03-05-2014, 09:17 PM
I don't find it painfully obvious that the PS1 was best. I would probably pick PS1 as my favourite of the three but not by big margin over the SS. Both systems have a huge amount of variety and quality games. And since art direction trumps graphic detail, I think the SS still has some of the best looking polygon games of that era (NiGHTS, Panzer Dragoon series, VF2). A lot of those people raving about PS1 RPGs don't even venture outside of the overrated Final Fantasy series anyway.

It's hard to compete with what, over 2000 games? The PS1 was unstoppable, too many quality games. Saturn feels lacking by comparison. The only thing Sony lacked was Nintendo and Sega games. N64 was a failure by comparison.

That said, I'm not a big fan of all the shovelware on PS1. I'm happy enough with N64 for now. Alecrob sent me a Saturn... I'm getting a modchip for it.


hmm the cdi 32x and the sega cd would argue with that statemnet
there is a finite amount of them to go around
they are getting more and more expensive

and all three sport several ludicrously expensive games the 32X especially so

For a long time, all three of those systems were easy to come by and cheap, because nobody liked them. Of course, then it became hip to collect failures, that's where we are today.

I don't think any system can touch NES or SNES for the sheer number of games over $100 now.

A Black Falcon
03-05-2014, 09:24 PM
In the more hardcore retro game forums like this, you find more genuine fans of retro gaming in general and people who were around while all this stuff is happening. This place and similar forums are full of people who love old Nintendo games just like old games in general. Regularly people ask, "why aren't there any dedicated forums for NES or SNES?" It's because "Nintendo" has become another kitch novelty for the masses emulating the current faux-hipster lifestyle which is so popular but everyone says they hate while living it. This is why terms like "8-bit" mean NES/SNES games to most people.
"Why aren't there dedicated forums for the NES or SNES" isn't really the right question; I mean, there are lots of Nintendo-fan forums out there, if you look. They're just usually not dedicated to only a single platform, which is fine. I don't think that just because a site covers all Nintendo systems it counts less as a fansite than one like this that focuses more on a single system... but on that note, do the DC, Saturn, or SMS have any forums nearly as popular as this one? I don't think they do... while the site here is 4th gen Sega focused, the forum's got a broader range for sure.


Old fashioned fans of Nintendo are a drop in the sea of people who started retroactively Nintendo-ing as a hobby. People who were first attracted to the old games because they thought it was ugly and primitive, but know from modern media that Nintendo is "classic" because it's always been around since they invented video games in the mid-80's. It's led to a modern culture of Nintendi-ists who ate completely oblivious to everything Nintendo produces, they just accept that Nintendo = perfect. So you see so many Nintendo pop cultures references which don't make any sense and stuff like memes about "Zelda" being the measure of perfection. People late to the party, but with a very narrowminded interest are reverse engineering their "gaming" knowledge to fit their pre-installed conclusion which existed before the actual interest did. The same kinds of people who equate popularity with quality and are mostly concerned with the greatest hits, the Justin Biebers and Brittany Spears of games, because they want to complete their complete set of vintage trivia asap. After settling in, they'll keep an eye out for truly obscure tid bits and games to hokd over the heads of others, like this hip game I found the ither day that nobody's ever heard of. It's called Earthbound.
There are some people like that, but fortunately there are just as many or more who aren't like that.


Black Falcon is a great example of this. His first console was the N64 and he became a Nintendo worshipper before absorbing his skewed mainstream distortion of history.
Stop lying and making up lies about me. I've said all this before, including in this thread, but you clearly don't pay att3ention and just want to attack, so it's understandable that you can't remember... but I guess I have to repeat myself, though I imagine it'll be ignored again because, like, computer games don't count or something? I have no idea what kind of "logic" would lead to that thinking.

My first gaming platform was not the N64, it was a PC we got in early 1992. Then I got a Game Boy in 1993. I loved both of them, and the PC is still by far my favorite gaming platform. I didn't have TV consoles at home, but I did play TV console games at friend/relatives' houses and in store demo machines, NES and Genesis mostly, but also some SNES here and there (and PS1 later, mostly in store demos, since I didn't know anyone who owned one before the last years of its life). I had one friend who got an N64 in 1996, and had played it in a demo station the summer before its release, but didn't actually get one myself for several years. We got more computers over the years, and in 1998 I bought a 3DFX card; I considered getting an N64, but got the Voodoo2 card instead ($180! I don't have the card anymore, but still have the box.). Finally in September '99 I got an N64 (I was in 11th grade at the time. Not exactly a kid!). No, I never considered the Playstation, with how I hated Sony (far worse than now, for sure). I did consider a Dreamcast, but that would have cost twice as much and I couldn't have gotten games, so I passed. Also no OoT or Mario 64 on the DC... while with the N64, I could get the system with two controllers and those two games for under $200 plus tax.

What did I think of the N64 at first? Well, graphically, it was definitely underwhelming. The N64 may have better graphics than the PS1 or Saturn for sure, but compared to my PC it was well behind, the Voodoo2 with our P233 is more powerful. Mario 64 was great and is one of my favorite games, but didn't look quite as amazing in 1999 as I'd remembered it being playing it in demo stations in '96. And OoT as a game is incredible, but things like those flat tree-walls that form the sides of Hyrule Field and the like looked kind of stupid; PC games could do better, by that time. I knew the N64 was more dated hardware, and it looked okay, but it certainly wasn't amazing like I'd remembered it being in '96.

So yeah, if I have a problem with PS1 and Saturn 3d, it's because it's even worse than N64 3d is, compared to late '90s PC 3d. You seem unable to understand that in the '90s, while I loved Nintendo, I loved PC gaming even more. I mean, I've said this many times before. And yes, I still think PC gaming is better than any console.


So many of his "facts" rely on you accepting the Nintendo = perfection rule.
There are people who believe this, but I am not one of them. I mean, I think PC gaming is better than console gaming, and consider the Genesis to be just as great a console as the SNES is! Stop making up lies for the sake of enhancing your anti-Nintendo-fan insults.


All classic Mario and Zelda games are perfect, let alone their exists such a thing as a perfect game.
There is no such thing as a perfect game, of course, but OoT and Mario 64 are the closest things console gaming has to perfect. But no, of course they aren't absolutely perfect, there is no such thing.


Games cancel out others and "legendary" Nibtendo titles cancel out entire libraries.
Most fans believe something like this about their favorite platform, except substitute "Sega" or "Atari" or what have you in place of "Nintendo". The only difference with Nintendo fans is that you dislike them. You wouldn't be complaining about the many comments like that people make here about Sega games, for sure!


Most of the people here are fans of the actual games and actual history of the medium. So many people here only love one Sega console, dislike one or have varying views on Sega itself. You have more discussions here critical of Sega than those worshipping it.
Sorry, but you're idealizing Sega-16 a bit much here. Why do you think that Nintendo fans have no disagreements or something? That's absurd, almost as absurd as your assumption that Nintendo fans are all casuals. Some are, some aren't. Not all Nintendo fans like all Nintendo consoles (there are plenty who love the NES or SNES but don't like the N64!), just like is true for Sega fans and Sega consoles. And there are always plenty of things to analyze and disagree about. For instance, my opinion on Zelda: LttP has never been a very popular one among its many fans... (It's good, but over-rated and flawed.)


But most people in this and other game (not collecting)-based dedicated retro game communities look at games and history for what it is and it is so crazy having people who weren't hardcore enthusiasts at the time, who weren't playing everything available while it was current, coming in and telling you that things were radically different than they actually were.

If you have Nintendo goggles, then this is all crazy talk. But so many of the shortcomings of that article and the Nintendo = pioneering perfection revisionist propaganda spouted casually in absolutes and as absolute fact, has been repeatedly, very clearly and rationally been debunked by quantifiable facts. Particularly indisputable are the ones based on timelines. Every time it's proven that Nintendo did something last, the presentation of facts and their presenters blasted as "Nintendo hatred" and we get constant sanity-questioning comments like "so maybe it's not 100% certain that Nintendo invented it".
You really have no idea that there are plenty of people playing just about every retro console who didn't own the system back during its life? Sure, Nintendo systems have benefited the most from that, but they're certainly not the only ones! All post-crash consoles and games have overall been going up in value in recent years, and that is most definitely not just becacause of new people for nintendo consoles and just because of old owners returning for non-Nintendo systems, or something. Seriously, you have no actual point here except for bitterness about how older Nintendo systems are more popular now, but you don't seem to have recognized that Sega consoles have increased in value too in recent years, which shows that yes, their popularity has increased too versus where it was. Not as much, but it has increased.


As for not bowing down to the "fact" that N64>Saturn, the first thing you'd realize after stepping outside if the Nintendo realm, is that the 32-bit generation is infamous as the first baby steps of crude 3D. All 3D of that generation is an acquired taste. But the quality 2D visuals of countless Saturn games still looks like beautiful paintings that non-artists can't casually doodle. The crude 3D of than gen is the equivalent of very crude paoercraft. We can all appreciate it, but it still pales in comoarison to detailed 2D art. It's a similar situation with 3D gameplay. At the time people accepted all the imperfections because they knew that it was still being figured it. Unfortunately, it didn't evolve nearly as far as people predicted early on and 3D gaming will always be imprecise comoared to 2D gameplay. Crap like Z-targetting is the gameplay equivalent of training wheels on a bicycle and bumpers on a bowling lane. The overal design of stages was akso comoromused by the limited 3D capability of hardware at the time combined with inferior-to-2D controles/gameplay. 3D is still great and fun and provided so many new and unique experiences. It transformed genres like racing and FOS ganes are great. But the quality of 2D games hasn't been cancelled out revisionist-style to this day and certainly wasn't during our most basic and crude generation of mainstream 3D gaming.

The Saturn's 2D library is priceless. Combined with its 3D games, it's a no-brainer that the N64 can't compete overall in the typical quantity + quality overall comparison. But that's why comparisons shouldn't be reduced to such simple winner-deckaring summarization. Everyone has diffetent tastes and each person can explain why particular games are enjoyable for them.
That's your opinion. The problem is that you seem to think that your opinion is objective fact -- and it most assuredly is not.


But that comparison article, was built using several loaded criteria designed to favor the N64. But even within such limited and biased context, the Saturn is still noticeably superior in each category. Even giving less value to the Saturn's imports, they still completely tip the scale over. I'd rather have the Capcom Generations discs alone, than the worldwide N64 library. Even the Nintendo-hardware based titles. Because Nintendo hating or loving has nothing to do with it.
... Your third from last sentence is an extremely biased fanboy comment, and then your last one tries to pretend that you aren't being just as much of a fanboy as any of the Nintendo fans you hate? Are you even trying here?

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 09:27 PM
It's hard to compete with what, over 2000 games? The PS1 was unstoppable, too many quality games. Saturn feels lacking by comparison. The only thing Sony lacked was Nintendo and Sega games. N64 was a failure by comparison.

That said, I'm not a big fan of all the shovelware on PS1. I'm happy enough with N64 for now. Alecrob sent me a Saturn... I'm getting a modchip for it.



For a long time, all three of those systems were easy to come by and cheap, because nobody liked them. Of course, then it became hip to collect failures, that's where we are today.

I don't think any system can touch NES or SNES for the sheer number of games over $100 now.

which sucks because i want a 32X but im not prepared to pay through the nose for it

the ps1 has around 2400 games i believe

j_factor
03-05-2014, 09:38 PM
It's hard to compete with what, over 2000 games? The PS1 was unstoppable, too many quality games. Saturn feels lacking by comparison. The only thing Sony lacked was Nintendo and Sega games. N64 was a failure by comparison.

That said, I'm not a big fan of all the shovelware on PS1. I'm happy enough with N64 for now. Alecrob sent me a Saturn... I'm getting a modchip for it.

Number of releases is only a statistic. The different systems still have different strengths and weaknesses in their libraries. Even with 2000+ games, it's not the best in every category. It all depends on what you're looking for.

Come to think of it, 3DO has about the same number of games as N64, doesn't it? Hmm...


I don't think any system can touch NES or SNES for the sheer number of games over $100 now.

The Turbografx says hi. Much to my chagrin.

A Black Falcon
03-05-2014, 09:39 PM
That's true, I've been thinking about picking up a few more N64 titles, before the internet starts jacking up the prices on its games. I've been meaning to replace the Ridge Racer carts I'd sold years ago (I still have the box and manual) along with the Waverace cart that got stolen about 13 years ago.

Just like just about every classic console, N64 games cost more now than they did eight or ten years ago, that's for sure! The same thing has happened to the Genesis, it's much more expensive to collect for now than it was in the mid '00s.


Number of releases is only a statistic. The different systems still have different strengths and weaknesses in their libraries. Even with 2000+ games, it's not the best in every category. It all depends on what you're looking for.
Indeed. Otherwise there wouldn't be any debate over which is the best console, the most successful one of its generation, with the most games, would win every contest.


Come to think of it, 3DO has about the same number of games as N64, doesn't it? Hmm...
No, I don't think so. The N64 has over 380 worldwide releases, while the 3DO has what, 310-something?


The Turbografx says hi. Much to my chagrin.

Yeah, the Turbografx has a really high asking price for just about any decent game. Very pricey console to collect for. It was never cheap, but has gone up above that, like everything.

KitsuneNight
03-05-2014, 09:57 PM
Number of releases is only a statistic. The different systems still have different strengths and weaknesses in their libraries. Even with 2000+ games, it's not the best in every category. It all depends on what you're looking for.

Come to think of it, 3DO has about the same number of games as N64, doesn't it? Hmm...


oh i am quite sure the ps1 is not the best in everything but at times its huge library helps
because there is so much to choose from

after a while even the best games will get boring no matter how good they are
after a while you will get tired of the usual suspects
and the ps1 is one of those consoles you can actually go off the beaten track and dig up something good

TrekkiesUnite118
03-05-2014, 10:44 PM
Yeah, that tutorial where you target a person was kind of odd, that's not something you'll almost ever have to do in the game... it's almost always used for combat. And it doesn't "just happen" to be present in the combat system, the combat system basically IS Z-targeting! I mean, locking on to enemies and then circling around and fighting them is how you fight in OoT, and the other 3d Zelda games as well.

You're ignoring the point to further your own agenda here. The point is that Z-Targeting is not exclusive to the battle system. I don't care if you never personally used it outside of battle. It doesn't change the fact that it's a system that's used throughout the game. Be it in combat or just talking to an NPC doesn't matter, the purpose of the system is still simple and plain. It's simply a system for interacting with objects in a 3D world.

You're just ignoring the systems full purpose just to focus on one specific aspect to paint it as an amazing innovation.



As has already been pointed out, Nintendo first showed the N64 controller in November 1995. That's more than enough time for Sega to then take the idea for their own controller, if they hurried. It could have been Sega's own idea, as Sega did have some analog arcade controllers of course, and while they didn't make the XE-1AP their system supported it, but there's no proof of that. I'm pretty sure that Sega first mentioned the 3D Controller after the N64 pad had been shown.

As has been pointed out, NiGHTs development started in 1994 and the game was intended to have Analog controls from the beginning. Once again you're wrong. Deal with it.



There are most certainly a lot more lower-framerate Saturn games than that, no one person's list will have everything. Anyway though it doesn't really matter, as I've said the biggest reason for the N64's lower framerates, I think, are all of those hardware features it's running at all times... and those are things the other systems cannot do. But I've gone over that already. I would MUCH rather have perspective-correct graphics than a few more frames per second, that's for sure.

You're right, there are probably more games with low frame rates. The point is that the Saturn has a lot more games running at 60fps and most likely 30fps than the N64. That's absolutely pathetic for a system that's supposedly superior. As for the perspective correctiveness, I really can't tell the difference in that sense between Saturn 3D and N64 3D. The Trilinear Filtering is noticable, but the perspective correction doesn't really stand out as that noticeable.

Does the lack of perspective correct polygons really jump out at you in this?:

25QNBWdn4EU

Does that really look all that different from this?:

HC3Euk4i6iw

Obviously I mean aside from the texture filtering and better draw distance. I don't really see that much of a difference in perspective correctness between the two. It's not like the PS1 where we have textures warping like crazy, polygons seams breaking apart, and stuff just going bonkers. Saturn 3D is pretty solid in that regard.

So with that in mind, I'd much rather have a game with a higher frame rate with out perspective correctness than a game that runs at sub 20 fps with perspective correctness. When it comes to these two systems, the difference is minimal for perspective correctness.



It certainly isn't. SSB is a far deeper game than a "party brawler", whatever that genre is, exactly. Is that a genre of SSB-style games, like a few that have been mentioned, or more recently Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale? If so they're definitely their own kind of fighting games, but they're absolutely in the genre. Melee especially has just as much depth as any great fighting game. I'm not the biggest SSB fan, as I get bored after a little while, but it's definitely a fighting game.

It's a party brawler. It's not a serious fighter like Street Fighter or Virtua Fighter. It's a 4 player free for all that's focuses more on what's fun and crazy rather than what's balanced and technical. This doesn't mean it's not a bad game or competitive, it's just more of a game you pull out when you want some good multiplayer fun when you have a lot of friends over. It's not a game I'd pull out to satisfy my fighting game fix.



30fps, 60fps, I don't really care. I've looked at those "30fps vs. 60fps" gifs online, and I'm one of the people who can almost never tell the difference between the two. I'd rather have perspective correction, texture filtering, etc. every time. Mace isn't a fast game, that's true, but it's not as slow as some 3d fighting games that generation, either. I like that the game plays more slowly than Mortal Kombat, I've always preferred Street Fighter's pace to MK's and Mace feels a bit more SF-like in pace than the other Midway fighters do.

We're not talking about 30fps vs 60fps here. If it was only that I wouldn't have an issue. We're talking about 30-60fps vs struggling to maintain 20fps at best. It's not about the speed of the game, it's about how smooth it plays. Mace looks really choppy to me, enough to give me a headache.


As for 60fps with that stuff, well, that's what 6th gen consoles are for. I've said before how I think that 3d fighting games were one of the most improved genres, between the 5th and 6th generations; the 5th gen consoles juat aren't quite powerful enough to do a great job with 3d fighting games, but the 6th gen consoles all are. Looking at Rival Schools vs. Project Justice or Soul Blade vs. Soul Calibur should make that quite clear! Both of those PS1 games aren't very good (slow, etc...), but the two DC games are amazing...

Yeah, 5th gen was terrible for 3D Fighters. Oh wait, that was only if you lived in N64 land. If you lived in Saturn or Playstation land you had a gold mine of great 3D Fighters that ran at solid frame rates, many of which hit 60fps.



Fortunately Mace isn't most of those things. It's flawed, sure, but it's a more solid fighting game than most of Midway's efforts were. Mace is definitely my favorite Midway fighting game; I've never been fan of Mortal Kombat, as far as the gameplay goes.

The game is a complete joke in comparison to the offerings on the Saturn and PS1. If it weren't for the fact that the N64 is a barren wasteland in the realm of good Fighting games it would probably have been forgotten.



You're just unwilling to admit the obvious and keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. Ah well.

Oh the irony!



Of course I didn't forget that. You just do very, very little of that in the game -- the use of Z-targeting, almost all the time, is for fighting something. Sure you can target other things (and go into "combat mode" since that's basically what Z-targeting something is), but fighting is its primary purpose.

It doesn't change the fact that it's used through out the game and it's sole purpose is to target entities in a 3D world that are not directly in front of you.



The telegraph transfers sounds. So does the telephone. They just made those sounds more complex. It's an evolutionary invention, not a revolutionary one, technologically, I think... telegraph is the key invention that led to the phone, then the radio, and internet. OoT is the telephone to those previous games' telegraph, in this comparison. Of course it's nothing remotely near that level of importance, but as an analogy it works.

The Telegraph (depending on which you mean, let's stick with the traditional Morse one for this) doesn't transmit sound. It transmits electronic pulses. The wireless version transmits radio signals, but again it's pulses. It's not a sound that gives you the message, it's the pattern of the pulses.



As I've said, I don't think Sony was developing them at the same time, no. An analog joystick isn't an analog gamepad, and gamepads -- the primary interaction method for videogames -- is the thing that matters most. Analog joysticks and wheels are nice, but those limit analog to only certain types of games, like flight and racing games. Including an analog stick on the controller, so that all games can benefit, was a huge advance... and no, I don't think Sony was going to do it anytime soon, unless they were pushed as they were. You can see that with how long it took Sony to release their first analog gamepad -- it wasn't until 1997, long after Sega and Nintendo.

Sony's was in development around the same time. It was first unveiled at the Playstation Expo in November of 1996. You seriously think Sony threw that together in a matter of a few months after the N64 release? The Playstation Analog controller was conceived from the analog twin joystick as a cheaper alternative. That's why it has a Flight stick mode. It wasn't done as a reaction to Nintendo as you want us to believe.



Sega I've already addressed; there's no proof that they were working on it before Nintendo -- remember, Nov. '95 is when the N64 controller was first shown -- but it is possible. Who knows how likely, but possible.

The proof is in NiGHTS development and what Sonic Team mentioned in interviews. You're just too busy sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "lalalala I can't hear you" to notice it.



See above. November 1995.

See above, NiGHTs development started in 1994 with the intention of using analog controls from the start.

A Black Falcon
03-06-2014, 12:32 AM
You're ignoring the point to further your own agenda here. The point is that Z-Targeting is not exclusive to the battle system. I don't care if you never personally used it outside of battle. It doesn't change the fact that it's a system that's used throughout the game. Be it in combat or just talking to an NPC doesn't matter, the purpose of the system is still simple and plain. It's simply a system for interacting with objects in a 3D world.
No, it isn't. When you Z-target something, left and right turn into circle-around-the-target commands, and the A and B buttons change into attack commands. It is a system designed for combat.


You're just ignoring the systems full purpose just to focus on one specific aspect to paint it as an amazing innovation.
Nope. Just talking about its intended purpose, and the reason why it IS a very important innovation.


As has been pointed out, NiGHTs development started in 1994 and the game was intended to have Analog controls from the beginning. Once again you're wrong. Deal with it.
Prove it. I mean, prove that they had an analog gamepad in mind from before Nintendo announced the N64 controller in Nov. '95. You do have proof for this, yes? Just saying it isn't proof...


You're right, there are probably more games with low frame rates. The point is that the Saturn has a lot more games running at 60fps and most likely 30fps than the N64. That's absolutely pathetic for a system that's supposedly superior. As for the perspective correctiveness, I really can't tell the difference in that sense between Saturn 3D and N64 3D. The Trilinear Filtering is noticable, but the perspective correction doesn't really stand out as that noticeable.

Does the lack of perspective correct polygons really jump out at you in this?:

25QNBWdn4EU

Does that really look all that different from this?:

HC3Euk4i6iw

Obviously I mean aside from the texture filtering and better draw distance. I don't really see that much of a difference in perspective correctness between the two. It's not like the PS1 where we have textures warping like crazy, polygons seams breaking apart, and stuff just going bonkers. Saturn 3D is pretty solid in that regard.

So with that in mind, I'd much rather have a game with a higher frame rate with out perspective correctness than a game that runs at sub 20 fps with perspective correctness. When it comes to these two systems, the difference is minimal for perspective correctness.
I emphasized perspective correction because it's the most important thing the N64 has and the other systems don't -- and yes, 3DO and Saturn games have plenty of perspective issues despite using quads, using quads just reduces perspective issues, it doesn't get rid of all of them -- but all of those hardware features use up processor power. And yeah, that's a good comparison there, those two videos. It really shows how much more powerful the N64 is. Sonic R looks okay, but that draw distance is VERY short (so much for the "but only early Saturn games have bad draw distances" thing), the polygon count isn't nearly as high (Saturn clearly can't do quite as many polygons as the N64 or PS1, most of the time at least...). The polygons look a lot worse too, with so much pixelization instead of all the nice N64 polygon effects. There's a huge difference there. But as for perspective issues, I think that you can see visible polygon seams here and there, yeah, and that's something you almost never see on the N64 because of its added features. You are right that there are many more on the PS1 than the Saturn, but they do exist on Saturn too.

Also, Sonic R has so many clipping problems... ugly looking stuff. Those two games released around the same time, but even though it was much farther into the Saturn's life, Sonic R is nowhere near DKR. Maybe if it wasn't loaded with clipping problems and had, like, twice the draw distance... but the textures themselves would still be pixelated.


It's a party brawler. It's not a serious fighter like Street Fighter or Virtua Fighter. It's a 4 player free for all that's focuses more on what's fun and crazy rather than what's balanced and technical. This doesn't mean it's not a bad game or competitive, it's just more of a game you pull out when you want some good multiplayer fun when you have a lot of friends over. It's not a game I'd pull out to satisfy my fighting game fix.
I don't think I've ever heard this "party brawler" term before you invented it here in this thread (as far as I know), but I do know that some fighting game fans have always refused to admit that SSB is a fighting game. Well, it is. Deal with it. And of course it's a serious fighting game, Melee especially. It's a serious fighting game with a deep game system and lots of complexity, challenge, and skill required to win, if you're good. It's a fun multiplayer title too, but it's not only that.


We're not talking about 30fps vs 60fps here. If it was only that I wouldn't have an issue. We're talking about 30-60fps vs struggling to maintain 20fps at best. It's not about the speed of the game, it's about how smooth it plays. Mace looks really choppy to me, enough to give me a headache.
Have you played it before? Videos aren't always a good way to tell framerates... sure it's not fast, but it plays well enough for the time.


Yeah, 5th gen was terrible for 3D Fighters. Oh wait, that was only if you lived in N64 land. If you lived in Saturn or Playstation land you had a gold mine of great 3D Fighters that ran at solid frame rates, many of which hit 60fps.
Yeah, such a great "gold mine" of great 3d fighting games that my favorite 3d fighter of the generation, by far, is Evil Zone on the PS1... which doesn't play like a normal fighting game at all.

No, 3d fighting games are probably the most improved genre between the 5th and 6th generations. The genre needed more powerful systems before it could reach its potential.


The game is a complete joke in comparison to the offerings on the Saturn and PS1. If it weren't for the fact that the N64 is a barren wasteland in the realm of good Fighting games it would probably have been forgotten.
No, Mace is a decent game. It wouldn't be quite as good on PS1 or Saturn, sure, but the graphics wouldn't be quite as good either... and the N64 isn't a "barren wasteland" for 3d fighters, it's got other decent ones. Most of them have been mentioned already, but I've guess you've forgotten. Fighter's Destiny 1 and 2, Flying Dragon, SD Hiryu no Ken, MK4, Bio FREAKS, etc.

Also, Mace is certainly one of the best Western-developed 3d fighting games of the generation. Can you name any which are better, not counting Japanese stuff? MK4 some people like more, but I don't. Bio Freaks is okay but also isn't quite as good. And otherwise, well, most of the best 3d fighting games that gen are Japanese...


It doesn't change the fact that it's used through out the game and it's sole purpose is to target entities in a 3D world that are not directly in front of you.
Its purpose is to target things, circle around them, and attack them. You can also use it for interaction, but that's generally unnecessary; there's no reason to Z-target someone to talk to them for example. You don't need to circle-strafe around and jump attack civilians, not for any gameplay purpose at least. :p


The Telegraph (depending on which you mean, let's stick with the traditional Morse one for this) doesn't transmit sound. It transmits electronic pulses. The wireless version transmits radio signals, but again it's pulses. It's not a sound that gives you the message, it's the pattern of the pulses.
Sound waves, like a vibrating wire in a telegraph, are both types of waves that have to be transmitted over a wire somehow... without the telegraph, you would not have the telephone. The one led to the other. But both were major, amazing inventions.


Sony's was in development around the same time. It was first unveiled at the Playstation Expo in November of 1996. You seriously think Sony threw that together in a matter of a few months after the N64 release? The Playstation Analog controller was conceived from the analog twin joystick as a cheaper alternative. That's why it has a Flight stick mode. It wasn't done as a reaction to Nintendo as you want us to believe.
November 1996 isn't "around the same time" as November 1995! That's a full year later! Sony waited not only until after Nintendo had announced their analog controller, but Sega too, and then they waited until both of those controllers were actually available and on shelves for a good six months before they finally got around to announcing their analog controller... and you're saying that that was "at around the same time"? Hah! No way. Sony only made an analog controller because the other companies were doing them, and they decided to copy them but add a second analog stick to the thing because that PS Analog Joystick had had one, or because they wanted to one-up Nintendo in some way, or whatever. And you can tell, the Dual Shock is just the original controller but with some analog sticks pasted on, of course. It doesn't exactly look like a design that spent a long time in development... but I have always disliked its layout, so yeah. Their first design was so rushed that the rumble mechanism was badly flawed, so for the US release of the controller (the Playstation Dual Analog Gamepad) they had to remove the rumble motor, which is why the Western version of that pad doesn't support rumble! There's another sure sign of how rushed they were. And then they revised the pad a few months later and re-released it in a new, smaller form, the Dual Shock controller, with different analog sticks and two, now not failure-prone, rumble motors, and Sony finally had an analog pad they could stick with, even if the design is and always was mediocre at best. The Dual Shock didn't release until November 1997, though. That's long after Nintendo and Sega. Sony clearly wasn't anywhere near ready as far as analog gamepads go when Nintendo pushed things forward. Sega was, but only supported their analog pad somewhat half-heartedly, never packed the 3D Controller in with the Saturn (as I've said before, I think that this was a mistake!), and them and their third parties made many games that didn't support it but should have.


The proof is in NiGHTS development and what Sonic Team mentioned in interviews. You're just too busy sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "lalalala I can't hear you" to notice it.

See above, NiGHTs development started in 1994 with the intention of using analog controls from the start.
Where are those interviews? Link them. With proof that Sega was working on an analog gamepad before November 1995. They might have been, but is there proof?

TrekkiesUnite118
03-06-2014, 03:03 AM
No, it isn't. When you Z-target something, left and right turn into circle-around-the-target commands, and the A and B buttons change into attack commands. It is a system designed for combat.

And what's it's purpose when you're not in combat? When you boil it down what are you doing in combat when you use Z-targeting? Why you're interacting with an entity that's not directly in front of you.

As I said, you're focusing on one aspect of it to paint a skewed picture.



Nope. Just talking about its intended purpose, and the reason why it IS a very important innovation.

How can it be an innovation when Megaman Legends did it before it was released?



Prove it. I mean, prove that they had an analog gamepad in mind from before Nintendo announced the N64 controller in Nov. '95. You do have proof for this, yes? Just saying it isn't proof...

Going off of patents the earliest patent I can find for the final Saturn 3D controller is March of 1996. Considering they went through tons of revisions until they got it right I doubt they threw it together in 3 months. Especially considering the game had been in development long before that.

We know they went through multiple revisions and that NiGHTS was intended to have analog movement from the get go from this interview:

http://www.nightsintodreams.com/?p=1343

There's also interviews from old magazines from the era that back this up.



I emphasized perspective correction because it's the most important thing the N64 has and the other systems don't -- and yes, 3DO and Saturn games have plenty of perspective issues despite using quads, using quads just reduces perspective issues, it doesn't get rid of all of them -- but all of those hardware features use up processor power. And yeah, that's a good comparison there, those two videos. It really shows how much more powerful the N64 is. Sonic R looks okay, but that draw distance is VERY short (so much for the "but only early Saturn games have bad draw distances" thing), the polygon count isn't nearly as high (Saturn clearly can't do quite as many polygons as the N64 or PS1, most of the time at least...). The polygons look a lot worse too, with so much pixelization instead of all the nice N64 polygon effects. There's a huge difference there. But as for perspective issues, I think that you can see visible polygon seams here and there, yeah, and that's something you almost never see on the N64 because of its added features. You are right that there are many more on the PS1 than the Saturn, but they do exist on Saturn too.

Way to miss the point. I said with the exception of better draw distance and texture filtering. Yet low and behold that's what you're debating. I know DKR has texture filtering and a higher draw distance. THAT WASN'T THE POINT. The point was do you see any perspective errors in Sonic R to support your argument that Perspective correct polygons were a huge deal in comparison with the N64? I certainly don't. You don't see textures warping as you move past them, you don't see distortions around where polygons meet, or any of that. This is the error that perspective correction fixes:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Perspective_correct_texture_mapping.jpg/800px-Perspective_correct_texture_mapping.jpg

Now, the affine mapping example is the error that you are making a big deal out of. Did you see that kind of distortion happening in the Sonic R video? You see that happening all the time on the PS1, but you don't see it that often on the Saturn, and if you do see it it's on the extreme edges of the screen, which is usually obscured by overscan. And if it's not fully obscured by overscan you still rarely notice it because most people don't play games focusing on the absolute edge of the screen.

The point is that the perspective issue isn't one that's that big of a deal when comparing to the Saturn. It rarely rears it's ugly head and when it does it's usually only in bad ports or early titles. Now the PS1, that's a system that suffers greatly from affine mapping distortions. If we were comparing to that, I'd totally agree with you that the N64's perspective correct rendering is a huge bonus.

And for the hell of it, I'll address your complaints with Sonic R. Sonic R's tracks have a lot more routes and details in them than Diddy Kong Racing. So it makes sense that the draw distance will be shorter. Sonic R's draw distance is no worse than you're typical N64 fog fest. It's definitely acceptable I'd say. I wouldn't say the Textures are worse either, they're just not filtered. They certainly don't look extremely pixelated. They're actually pretty crisp. Honestly I'd say Sonic R is a good example that with good texture work you didn't need the N64's heavy filtering to have a nice looking game free of pixelated textures. And where are these polygon seams you're seeing? Sonic R has no more visible polygon seams than Diddy Kong Racing or any other N64 game for that matter.


Also, Sonic R has so many clipping problems... ugly looking stuff. Those two games released around the same time, but even though it was much farther into the Saturn's life, Sonic R is nowhere near DKR. Maybe if it wasn't loaded with clipping problems and had, like, twice the draw distance... but the textures themselves would still be pixelated.

Yeah Sonic R has clipping problems. So do a lot of games from that era on all three systems. Mario 64 for example has clipping issues if you get the camera in the right spot. Sonic R's clipping issues are obviously caused by the camera being a bit to far out so you see through walls when you get to close.

Draw distance wise you're right, Sonic R doesn't compare to DKR because it's tracks are much more open resulting in it drawing more in a given frame. DKR has a lot of tracks that are in canyons and pits which reduces the rendering load by quite a bit. The reason I did the comparison was not to say one was better than the other, it was because they both have similar art styles. So it made it a bit easier to do a comparison as it eliminates the issue of stylistic choices.

But if you want a good example of excellent Draw Distance on the Saturn there's always Sonic Jam:

hs-iBAeNZKk



I don't think I've ever heard this "party brawler" term before you invented it here in this thread (as far as I know), but I do know that some fighting game fans have always refused to admit that SSB is a fighting game. Well, it is. Deal with it. And of course it's a serious fighting game, Melee especially. It's a serious fighting game with a deep game system and lots of complexity, challenge, and skill required to win, if you're good. It's a fun multiplayer title too, but it's not only that.

Smash Bros is only seen as a serious fighter by those who suck at serious fighters. Tourny Smash Bros players are some of the bitchiest and hilarious people I've ever encountered. When I was in college I ran the fund raising tournaments for my club. Our two biggest tournaments each year were Street Fighter IV and Smash Bros Melee/Brawl (more people showed up for Brawl believe it or not). The difference between the two was night and day. Street Fighter IV players showed up with their Arcade sticks ready to go. They didn't demand special case scenario rules or anything like that. Our main set up was each fight was 3 matches, best 2 out of 3 advanced. This was accepted with no issues and everything went fine.

We tried a similar set up with Smash Bros and we got sent tons of whiny complaints demanding the rules be bent to each players whim to set up a scenario to let them win. Some players wanted certain stages banned, others wanted us to only allow those stages. Some wanted certain characters banned because they claimed they were too unfair to play against. Some would demand we only use CRT's even though the AV set up we were using had no lag due to the fact that we were using Component and eliminating the need for Deinterlacing. Others couldn't deal with the fact that if you lost you lost and demanded we set up a loser bracket for them to win a prize as well, which we couldn't feasibly do. They basically all demanded we set up the rules in a very specific way to make it so they could win. This is NOT how a serious fighting game community behaves.

When you go to a Street Fighter Tournament you don't demand that they ban Sagat or you refuse to participate. You accept the fact that there will be people using Sagat and that you need to come up with a strategy to defeat him. You don't demand that certain stages be banned because they distract you. You accept that they might be used and deal with it. When a new Street Fighter comes out you don't hack it to play more like the previous entry. You accept that the game is new and has new mecahnics. So you learn how they work and how to use them. This is how a serious fighting game community behaves.

Smash Bros is a party game that's main purpose is to be fun game to play when you have friends over. Nintentards however have tried to turn it into. I would not consider it a fighting game at all. It's in the same party brawler category as games like Power Stone. They're fun games and you technically fight in them, but they're not in the same category as games like Street Fighter or Virtua Fighter.



Have you played it before? Videos aren't always a good way to tell framerates... sure it's not fast, but it plays well enough for the time.

No I haven't played it before, because I don't buy garbage fighters simply to have a fighter on the N64. But let's do a comparison here. Both videos are uploaded by the same person from real hardware. So there's no possibility of one uploader using better equipment or better encoding.

VF Remix (confirmed 30fps):

IaW5zC_I1q4

Mace: The Dark Age (Unconfirmed but totally just as good!):

FWGKRC1_83M

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that Mace is a lot more choppy. It's definitely lower than 30fps. I'd wager it's around the 20fps mark. The issue here isn't how fast the game plays, it's how smooth it plays.


Yeah, such a great "gold mine" of great 3d fighting games that my favorite 3d fighter of the generation, by far, is Evil Zone on the PS1... which doesn't play like a normal fighting game at all.

Just because you have terrible taste in games doesn't mean the Saturn and PS1 don't have excellent 3D Fighting Libraries. On the Saturn alone there's the following:

Virtua Fighter Remix
Virtua Fighter 2
Fighting Vipers
Fighter's Megamix
Virtua Fighter Kids
Last Bronx
Anarchy in the Nippon
Dead or Alive
Zero Divide: The Final Conflict

On the PS1 we have the following:
Tekken
Tekken 2
Tekken 3
Soul Edge
Dead or Alive
Ehrgeiz
Zero Divide
Zero Divide 2
Bloody Roar
Bloody Roar 2

And a ton more that I'm probaby forgetting. All of these are great 3D Fighters that play great and look great. A lot of them are 60fps and a few of the Saturn ones are even High Res! Seriously, how is this not a gold mine of excellent 3D Fighters?

Oh wait I forgot, these aren't on the N64, and they possibly paint the N64 in a negative light. Guess we gotta spin them off as bad and not counting then.




No, 3d fighting games are probably the most improved genre between the 5th and 6th generations. The genre needed more powerful systems before it could reach its potential.

They did get improved, that doesn't mean they weren't good on 5th generation consoles. 3D Fighters on 6th gen consoles mostly got just a face lift and some new mechanics. Those new mechanics could have been done on 5th gen systems. I'd say the genres to benefit the most from 6th gen consoles were racers and platformers.



No, Mace is a decent game. It wouldn't be quite as good on PS1 or Saturn, sure, but the graphics wouldn't be quite as good either... and the N64 isn't a "barren wasteland" for 3d fighters, it's got other decent ones. Most of them have been mentioned already, but I've guess you've forgotten. Fighter's Destiny 1 and 2, Flying Dragon, SD Hiryu no Ken, MK4, Bio FREAKS, etc.

Let me put this in perspective for you with the Saturn equivalent of that list:

DXhird
Battle Arena Toshinden
Battle Arena Toshinden URA
Final Fight Revenge

That's the level of quality we're talking about here. Fighters Destiny is ok, but it's certainly not in the same league as the best 3D Fighters the Saturn and PS1 have to offer.



Also, Mace is certainly one of the best Western-developed 3d fighting games of the generation. Can you name any which are better, not counting Japanese stuff? MK4 some people like more, but I don't. Bio Freaks is okay but also isn't quite as good. And otherwise, well, most of the best 3d fighting games that gen are Japanese...

So now we're discounting the best Saturn and PS1 fighter's because they were made in Japan? How desperate can you get? I'm not going to even entertain that argument because it's stupid and not worth my time. Why should it matter where the game is made? No one separates Mortal Kombat from Street Fighter and says it's not fair to compare them because one's Japanese and the other is Western. So why the hell should we start doing that for 3D Fighters?

This is once again you narrowing down the scope to create a situation where only the N64 wins, not because of quality, but because the situation is so specific that only the N64 counts.



Its purpose is to target things, circle around them, and attack them. You can also use it for interaction, but that's generally unnecessary; there's no reason to Z-target someone to talk to them for example. You don't need to circle-strafe around and jump attack civilians, not for any gameplay purpose at least. :p

How did you talk to King Zora? Oh that's right, you Z-Targeted him.



Sound waves, like a vibrating wire in a telegraph, are both types of waves that have to be transmitted over a wire somehow... without the telegraph, you would not have the telephone. The one led to the other. But both were major, amazing inventions.

An electric pulse isn't a vibrating wire. It's simply does the wire have current or not. It's not making the wire vibrate or make a sound, at least not intentionally. The message is in the pattern of electric pulses over the wire, not the possible vibration the wire makes from the electrical current going through it.

You're right, both are amazing inventions. But to say that the Telephone is just an eveolution of the telegraph and nothing more is severely down playing it's significance. This isn't the same as Z-Targeting. Z-Targeting existed in various forums in earlier games and in Megaman Legends it's almost the exact same thing as others have brought up. The correct telegraph comparison here would be the difference between early telegraphs and the morse code style one.



November 1996 isn't "around the same time" as November 1995! That's a full year later! Sony waited not only until after Nintendo had announced their analog controller, but Sega too, and then they waited until both of those controllers were actually available and on shelves for a good six months before they finally got around to announcing their analog controller... and you're saying that that was "at around the same time"? Hah! No way. Sony only made an analog controller because the other companies were doing them, and they decided to copy them but add a second analog stick to the thing because that PS Analog Joystick had had one, or because they wanted to one-up Nintendo in some way, or whatever. And you can tell, the Dual Shock is just the original controller but with some analog sticks pasted on, of course. It doesn't exactly look like a design that spent a long time in development... but I have always disliked its layout, so yeah. Their first design was so rushed that the rumble mechanism was badly flawed, so for the US release of the controller (the Playstation Dual Analog Gamepad) they had to remove the rumble motor, which is why the Western version of that pad doesn't support rumble! There's another sure sign of how rushed they were. And then they revised the pad a few months later and re-released it in a new, smaller form, the Dual Shock controller, with different analog sticks and two, now not failure-prone, rumble motors, and Sony finally had an analog pad they could stick with, even if the design is and always was mediocre at best. The Dual Shock didn't release until November 1997, though. That's long after Nintendo and Sega. Sony clearly wasn't anywhere near ready as far as analog gamepads go when Nintendo pushed things forward. Sega was, but only supported their analog pad somewhat half-heartedly, never packed the 3D Controller in with the Saturn (as I've said before, I think that this was a mistake!), and them and their third parties made many games that didn't support it but should have.

They unveiled a working prototype shortly after the N64 launched. As mentioned it's designed to emulate the Dual Analogue joystick, which was shown in August of 1995 (which predates the November 1995 date you are clinging to). So I'd say development on it started around then, as it's an evolution of that joystick controller. It's clear that it's a reaction to people wanting a cheaper alternative to the Dual Analogue Joystick, not the N64 controller.


Where are those interviews? Link them. With proof that Sega was working on an analog gamepad before November 1995. They might have been, but is there proof?

Here you go:

http://www.outofprintarchive.com/articles/interviews/SegaSaturn/Sega-SonicTeam-NiGHTS-OSSM11-4.html

In this Sega Saturn Magazine Article they are interviewing Sonic Team right after NiGHTS was completed. So this is from probably late July early August. In the artcile they mention that after S3&K was completed they did a few months of research and development to learn the Saturn hardware, with the actual first game specific work for NiGHTS starting around late March Early April. Now on that page I linked they say Summer of last year, which would be Summer of 1995, they started working on it. They said 6 months after development started, but from the April date that wouldn't be Summer anymore, that would be fall. So it's probably 6 months after the research began after S3&K's completion. That would put us right around June/July of 1995, or Summer of 1995. They went through over 100 designs before getting it right. There's also no mention about the N64, it focuses entirely on how it was needed for a game like NiGHTS to play properly.

How's that for proof that they started work on it before November 1995?

Soulis
03-06-2014, 06:01 AM
This whole discussion about z-targeting being used outside of combat is completely pointless. We already established, many times, that i was originally referring to OOT's combat system. Was i vague about it? Trekkies didn't understand it? Well, ok but it was explained in later posts. Many times. But He still argues about it being used outside of combat to prove what exactly? I don't know. Who cares if you can target rocks? Who cares if you can Target king Zora? Only Trekkies do i think. At this point i don't understand why he is still arguing about it or what he is trying to prove here. And i don't really care, i'm just saying its kinda weird.

A Black Falcon
03-06-2014, 06:03 AM
I will write a full reply, but on the perspective correct texturing issue, this is discussed about the 3DO in this video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_m4wZLqk2M (go to about 23 minutes in, though all of their videos are often quite interesting -- note both of them worked on the 3DO, they aren't just random people). I'm mentioning the 3DO because it's the only other console to use quads. Does the Saturn have something the 3DO doesn't? I'd think the problem would be just as bad on Saturn, though, and I sure think Saturn does that kind of thing too...



This whole discussion about z-targeting being used outside of combat is completely pointless. We already established, many times, that i was originally referring to OOT's combat system. Was i vague about it? Trekkies didn't understand it? Well, ok but it was explained in later posts. Many times. But He still argues about it being used outside of combat to prove what exactly? I don't know. Who cares if you can target rocks? Who cares if you can Target king Zora? Only Trekkies do i think. At this point i don't understand why he is still arguing about it or what he is trying to prove here. And i don't really care, i'm just saying.
On the note of King Zora, I actually remember that, because I found it confusing at first -- how do you talk to that guy?? You can't just run up next to him and talk, you can't walk to the pad area and hit A or something... that had me stuck for a while, I think. As far as I can remember you never, ever have to use A to talk to anyone, except for when they introduce Z-targeting, and that one time. Forcing you to use it there was bad design, I'd say. It's not consistent with how you talk to NPCs in the rest of the game.

Soulis
03-06-2014, 06:14 AM
As far as I can remember you never, ever have to use A to talk to anyone, except for when they introduce Z-targeting, and that one time. Forcing you to use it there was bad design, I'd say. It's not consistent with how you talk to NPCs in the rest of the game.
It doesn't matter though. Even if you absolutely needed to z-target any NPC in the game to talk to it still wouldn't matter because we were discussing about OOT's combat system. Anyway, i'm not going to mention this again, you guys can still argue about it's other uses if you must.

A Black Falcon
03-06-2014, 07:13 AM
When it comes to multiplayer games on Saturn, the Netlink was a big deal and you essentially had matchmaking which made it even better. But most people seem to forget all the 6 - 12 player games the Saturn supported locally, let alone all the 2 - 5 player games.

Some of them are listed on these pages:

http://www.racketboy.com/retro/saturn-multiplayer-games-best-multi

http://www.gametrog.com/GAMETROG/SEGA_Saturn_Accessories_2.html


It was cool that the N64 had 4 controller ports built-in. But if it had a bunch of <12 player games bitd (let alone netplay), do think we'd ever here the end of it in threads like this?
Yeah, but those lists really highlight the difference -- on systems which require multitaps for multiplayer, most games that require the multitap are sports games. That's very true on the Saturn -- only a handful of non-sports titles support 4+ players. There are a few, but very few. The N64, though, has a LOT of games which support 4 players, across every genre on the platform with multiplayer games. 12 players is great, but having a strong library of 3/4-plus player games is even better.

Also, in what world was the Netlink a "big deal"?


While a few games are easier to play with one rather than the other, most folks don't make a distinction between sticks and pads. I certainly don't. It's disengenuous to try to use that minor difference as positive proof of your incorrect assumptions.
If you seriously don't make a distinction between joysticks and gamepads, and controllers which come in the box with a system versus expensive addon controllers that not all games use, then you've got to be one of the few people who doesn't. To state the obvious, different types of controllers are different.


The controllers were probably ready for an xmas 95 launch, but the hardware was not. It still had serious bugs that SGI was working feverishly to fix. Nintendo did not want to "pull a Jaguar" and put off launching the N64 until SGI had fixed the major bugs. It launched with two minor bugs - one in the video, and one in the audio. Those were later fixed as well, and the "microcode" updated with work-arounds for the two different chipsets.
That may be true, yeah. But I do know that I've read about how the games were done last, even after the hardware was finally ready.


who cares. I rather take quality over quantity. daytona usa and sega rally 1 are easily one of the 10 best maybe even 5 best racing games of all time. that alone beats the entire n64 racing library except perhaps rush, which I wouldn't qualify as just a racing game though and the dreamcast version is also superior
Black Tiger, here's an example of a Sega-biased "two games are better than an entire library" comment. But I don't see you complaining about ones like this.

Anyway, yeah, those two are great games, but not so great that they outweigh the N64's entire library of racing games. The Saturn just doesn't have the breadth or depth of the N64's racing game library. Many fewer subgenres are covered well, and it's got one game with 3+ player splitscreen versus probably dozens on the N64, as well. Sure, Sega started off well, but 1995 turned out to be the Saturn's peak as far as racing games go.


i care about variety thanks
you can only play the same goes over and over again so often ( which oddly enough is the case with the n64 especially the usual suspects )

never cared much for sega rally but daytona usa was and still is aces

rush never really was a racing game more an exploration where the hell am i going now game
spend hours and hours and hours in the first n64 game in the late 90's
The first Rush game is mostly a racing game, though. Sure there are some things to find, but it's the sequels which added the other modes.... all three are incredible games though, for sure!


no. rush, if you had friends, was the greatest multiplayer game ever made and it still is for one thing only: battle mode. it blows twisted metal or vigilante completely out of the water.
Oh, you mean Rush 2049? Rush 2049 is my favorite racing game ever, yeah, and battle mode is outstanding! I agree, best car combat mode of the generation, for multiplayer; if only they'd had bots and a single player campaign, it could have won the genre overall, but sadly it's MP only. Ah well. I spent much more time in race and stunt modes than I did battle, but all three modes are exceptionally well done. Rush 2049 is my favorite stunt game ever, for instance.


The original question was how N64 could possibly have more racing games than Saturn. As it turns out, it does. Again, Micro-64 has a very nice Genre Rundown list, quantifying each genre. N64 has over 50 racing games, covering nearly every popular sub-genre of the time. Saturn is sorely lacking by comparison. Yes, Saturn has some good arcade racers, but not nearly as much variety as N64. Saturn also doesn't have much in the way of kart racers or sims. N64 has many of the third party arcade racers of the time, like PS1. Saturn was most notable for its Sega arcade ports.
If the Saturn had had as good a library of racing games after 1995 as it had in that first year maybe it could have been closer, but unfortunately, it didn't... the Saturn's racing library faded after a strong start, while the N64 had great racing game support up until the end of 2000 (oddly none of the 2001 releases were racing games).

TrekkiesUnite118
03-06-2014, 09:17 AM
I will write a full reply, but on the perspective correct texturing issue, this is discussed about the 3DO in this video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_m4wZLqk2M (go to about 23 minutes in, though all of their videos are often quite interesting -- note both of them worked on the 3DO, they aren't just random people). I'm mentioning the 3DO because it's the only other console to use quads. Does the Saturn have something the 3DO doesn't? I'd think the problem would be just as bad on Saturn, though, and I sure think Saturn does that kind of thing too...

I'm not really seeing any major issues in that video at 23 minutes. That just reconfirms my point, on the Saturn (and I guess now the 3DO), it's an issue that certainly is there, but it's not really noticable. It's not like the PS1 where it looks like the world is warping and ripping apart at the seams. It's at worst minor stretch/warp as things hit the edge of the screen. It's not that big of a deal, I definitely wouldn't trade a solid frame rate just to fix that. Those resources could be used for something more important in that case.



On the note of King Zora, I actually remember that, because I found it confusing at first -- how do you talk to that guy?? You can't just run up next to him and talk, you can't walk to the pad area and hit A or something... that had me stuck for a while, I think. As far as I can remember you never, ever have to use A to talk to anyone, except for when they introduce Z-targeting, and that one time. Forcing you to use it there was bad design, I'd say. It's not consistent with how you talk to NPCs in the rest of the game.

It's consistent with you how interact with NPCs who are at a distance in the game. But yeah, let's blame this on bad game design instead of actually admitting that Z-Targetting is a game wide system that's used everywhere, not just in combat.

Kamahl
03-06-2014, 10:36 AM
bollocks !
it has einhander
gradius gaiden
donpachi
dodonpachi
harmfull park
raiden project
raiden dx
kyuiin
raystorm
ray crisis
r type delta
thunderforce 5
and a fuckload more
None of those games is Radiant Silvergun. You're trying to approach the light of god by burning 10 candles, a futile endeavour.