OoT

[Pseudo Enigma]

Originally Posted by Dynam0

Is the term sprite a misnomer for something else? I'm talking about these ugly character graphics lmao. I'm not well-versed in shit like this sry

np yeah they were pretty bad I have to agree. They didn't try very hard to make them look better than the engine could handle though so it's better than what happened with OOT.

(sprites refer to 2D shit like SNES/NES era specifically, I think they call 3d stuff models)

[Reincarnate]

Dynam0: No, sprites are basically 2D images (think Doom or Wolfenstein or most SNES games)

[Dynam0]

Gotchas, thx duders

[Mike Weedmark]

Originally Posted by Dynam0

FFVII had some pretty disgusting looking sprites but I didn't give two fucks, game is 10/10

Christ, you know what was a hojillion times worse than the "sprites?"

How some of the videos had fairly realistic characters:

And others pulled THIS bullshit:

That 2nd one is a pre-fucking rendered FMV.

WHY.

This is the mark of a mediocre production team imo. Thank fuck the FMVs in 8 and 9 were a titanic improvement.

[Hateandhatred]

Originally Posted by Mike Weedmark

Christ, you know what was a hojillion times worse than the "sprites?"

How some of the videos had fairly realistic characters:

And others pulled THIS bullshit:

That 2nd one is a pre-fucking rendered FMV.

WHY.

This is the mark of a mediocre production team imo. Thank fuck the FMVs in 8 and 9 were a titanic improvement.

What are you talking about, they did with the engines they had in hand, do you have any idea what FFVII cost???

Also, want to see elite Playstation graphics? Heads to Parasite Eve II:

Imo this kicks a lot of PS2 productions in the face.

Interestingly (but getting slowly off topic), the 3rd birthday (Parasite Eve 3) featured graphics that actually kick pretty much ANYTHING the PS Vita has to offer, and it's a PSP game. Linking shower scene from that game.

[Mike Weedmark]

The point wasn't that FF7's FMVs were bad so much as they were jarring in their inconsistencies.

[Hateandhatred]

Originally Posted by Mike Weedmark

The point wasn't that FF7's FMVs were bad so much as they were jarring in their inconsistencies.

Well that's a point. You could have put Aerith's death too, imo was the worst quality fmv in the entire game.

[Pseudo Enigma]

Originally Posted by Hateandhatred

Well that's a point. You could have put Aerith's death too, imo was the worst quality fmv in the entire game.

considering Japan's rules for gore and violence, especially at the time, I wouldn't be surprised if they had to make a rush job fixing up what was a more realistic movie there. I doubt such an important scene, and trust me the creator felt that was one of the most important scenes in the game, would have such a poor quality for no good reason.

[Hateandhatred]

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

considering Japan's rules for gore and violence, especially at the time, I wouldn't be surprised if they had to make a rush job fixing up what was a more realistic movie there. I doubt such an important scene, and trust me the creator felt that was one of the most important scenes in the game, would have such a poor quality for no good reason.

Uhm...

seriously?

I know I keep referring to that game, but it was made by the same studio and in the same era...

Imo it's maybe because the characters were pre modelled to ease the animation? Or something?

EDIT: Nevermind I'm retarded, the reason is obviously that they didn't want FFVII to be released as "M".

[rushyrulz]

btw Mike Weedmark out of nowhere

[Reach]

I would agree it's overrated. It's a great game but probably not the best zelda for a couple reasons.

Having beat every game in the series at least once and most of them multiple times, my opinion is that:

OoT has pretty average dungeons. There are surprisingly few dungeons that stand out in this game across the series. If you have played them all, recently, seriously replay this game and tell me the dungeons are great compared to other entries. They're not. Many of the dungeon designs in Majora's mask are almost objectively I would say much more creative and interesting (the only exception being Woodfall). I would say this also applies to Twilight princess and Skyward sword, both of which had a few brilliant dungeons.

The world is also quite bland overall. Most of the individual areas themselves are fairly interesting, but Hyrule field is extremely boring (it's empty except for some holes in the ground and a ranch). Compare it directly to area design in many other zelda games and it just falls short.

I'd put it, design wise, on par with Wind Waker, though wind waker pissed everyone off with the slow sailing and wind directionality so there's that (which was fixed in the HD remake if you're interested. LOVED the HD remake).


Skyward sword had amazing dungeon and area design and doesn't get enough credit for it because most people don't like the motion controls. Personally, I think the biggest mistake was actually the jab control, as it's extremely unreliable and inaccurate. Definitely a piss off at several points.

Majoras mask also underrated in the shadow of OoT imo. The dungeon and world design was just superior, IMO.

And twilight princess...I felt like this was basically a better and darker version of OoT. Lakebed > Water temple (probably one of the most boring designs in the entire series). Goron mines > Fire temple. Snowpeak > Everything in OoT. The only exception being maybe the OoT forest temple was better.

I won't mention any of the 2D zelda games in comparison though because it's not really a fair comparison.

[choof]

I could listen to forest temple music for hours

[Nullifidian]

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

(sprites refer to 2D shit like SNES/NES era specifically, I think they call 3d stuff models)

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

Dynam0: No, sprites are basically 2D images (think Doom or Wolfenstein or most SNES games)

Technically everything on a monitor is 2D : - )

I think what people like Mike Weedmark or Pseudo Enigma severely underestimate nowadays with games like Ocarina of Time is how small the game actually is in terms of size and how little tools people had to work with at the time. The pipelines that exist for today's games allow for much more content to be created in a shorter time period, but back in the day it wasn't that easy and they also had deadlines to meet. Apart from that though, they also had to optimize everything and sometimes downgrade several things in order to fit a game on a cartridge (Ocarina of Time fits on a freakin' 32MB cartridge! Only a couple of games used a 64 mb cartridge) whereas the playstation had much more wiggle room with 700MB space on a disc (zzz loading times) and a max 64MB memory card for saving your progress.

Also, the graphics, the sheer size of the worlds, the fluidness of the gameplay and the story were all revolutionary for that period in gaming history. You have to review it from that period of time, a period that was still pretty much in its infancy in terms of 3D gameplay/visuals (and/or added storytelling). It's like if you reviewed the VFX of a 70's or 80's movie to today's standard of VFX. That's what I see happening here with OoT.

Of the two N64 Zelda games, I prefer Majora's Mask by a long shot though. While I acknowledge that OoT was revolutionary, I feel Majora's Mask was severely underrated due to late release but the story (and the various subplots) as well as the grim setting of the game personally appealed to me a lot more.

[Pseudo Enigma]

Originally Posted by _.Spitfire._

Technically everything on a monitor is 2D : - )

and technically you're part monkey but nobody cares enough to dispute it

Originally Posted by _.Spitfire._

That's what I see happening here with OoT.

l2read because nowhere did I say that it was horrible in comparison to our standards.

At the time Sony had totally outclassed them and it's funny to hear anyone try to say "oh but they did the best they could". The bottom line is that at the time the graphics sucked, and I don't care how you try to justify it. Game's fine but the visual aspect was horrendous even to my 2004 eyes. Jeez.

[Nullifidian]

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

l2read because nowhere did I say that it was horrible in comparison to our standards.

Ok maybe -you- didn't say it explicity but I got that vibe from you that you're comparing it to more modern games and you mentioning your 2004 eyes isn't exactly helping because in 2004 we already had games like doom 3 which is a whole different ball park of graphics development already.

Suikoden is also not a great comparison because it was 99% 2D with 3D environments in battles.

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

At the time Sony had totally outclassed them and it's funny to hear anyone try to say "oh but they did the best they could". The bottom line is that at the time the graphics sucked, and I don't care how you try to justify it. Game's fine but the visual aspect was horrendous even to my 2004 eyes. Jeez.

Sony had totally outclassed them? In terms of real-time rendered visuals? I don't think so..
Different art styles aside, the visual quality of them was really not -that- great as you make it out to be.




<---- I love MGS1 but they had no facial animations at all btw, they just nodded their head like a retard whenever they spoke



All of these were best-selling ps1 games from around the same time of release date or later than ocarina of time (with the exception of gran turismo, which was released as early as 1997 but w/e).




Now tell me again how Sony totally outclassed Nintendo.

Sure Sony dominated the market but that was because they catered to an audience that was previously not exactly catered to (hence games like Gran Turismo and Tony Hawk's pro skater sold so well) and their production costs were a bit cheaper cause of their use of CDs but that doesn't mean the ps1 was better in terms of graphics or gameplay.

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

and technically you're part monkey but nobody cares enough to dispute it

What the fuck was your point with this?

[Charu]

Dynamic lighting in 1998 was super impressive, just saying.

Also, is this seriously going to turn to which renderer is better? The Playstation render or the N64 render?

Mind you, to carry on with spitfire, the N64 had 4MB of RAM. Do you realize how low that is? Do you realize that is the primary reason almost all N64 games have blurry textures?

[Pseudo Enigma]

Originally Posted by _.Spitfire._

Suikoden is also not a great comparison because it was 99% 2D with 3D environments in battles.

it's like you suck at reading or something

Originally Posted by _.Spitfire._

What the fuck was your point with this?

le epic imgur maymay.gif
maybe if you understood why your "technically x" point was so dumb you wouldn't be saying that.

I'm not disputing this. PS1 was way better than N64 graphically and there's literally nothing you can say to prove otherwise, because quite frankly the proof doesn't exist. All the screens you provided look millions of times better than anything I've seen on the N64.

The hardware was worse. Get over it.

edit: I really liked the N64 but seriously you fanboys get cancerous sometimes.
edit2: I took the time to look at your broken ass image and no wonder you think it looks good. It's at a tiny resolution, which is what the N64 was intended for.

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by Charu

4MB of RAM.

But if you think about it.. thats FOUR THOUSANDS NINETY SIX KILOBYTES of ram. Holy shit wow.

[Charu]

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

It's at a tiny resolution, which is what the N64 was intended for.

You do realize that the Playstation also had a small native resolution.

Both consoles native were 320x240

[choof]

Originally Posted by Pseudo Enigma

it's like you suck at reading or something

le epic imgur maymay.gif
maybe if you understood why your "technically x" point was so dumb you wouldn't be saying that.

I'm not disputing this. PS1 was way better than N64 graphically and there's literally nothing you can say to prove otherwise, because quite frankly the proof doesn't exist. All the screens you provided look millions of times better than anything I've seen on the N64.

The hardware was worse. Get over it.

edit: I really liked the N64 but seriously you fanboys get cancerous sometimes.
edit2: I took the time to look at your broken ass image and no wonder you think it looks good. It's at a tiny resolution, which is what the N64 was intended for.