Multiplatform games always looked better on XBOX 360 and even PS3 fans can’t deny the fact. Cell processor in PlayStation 3 was very complicated and was not easy to develop on as a result XBOX 360 became the first choice for developers, we witnessed some really bad PS3 ports like Bayonetta, Skyrim, Half Life and not to mention games often get delayed due to the complications in development. Well those days are not going to last much long as Sony is going to release Playstation 4
PlayStation wowed gamers from day one, but developers managed to push the console much further - TechStomper tracks the progress made over the PS1's years at the top through five games that show how programmers and artists unlocked the legendary grey box's potential.
Look, I loved my PS1. Graphically though N64 delivered a better overall experience. The difference that gave PS1 an advantage was CD storage PS1 had some beautiful cut scenes, but in terms of graphical power N64 hands down was better. PS1 had WAY more GAMES though. I think Developers preferred the tstorage over squeezing everything onto a cartridge with VERY limited space!
GameCube same thing Nintendo went with storage that was limited, but had games using multiple disks. RE4 is one port that clearly showed GC advantage. Rouge Squadron 2 and Luigi's mansion were beautiful launch games. Again PlayStation didn't Limit developers storage space. Nintendo's mini discs were expensive, and developers went with PS2! PS2 I am pretty sure has the largest game library of all consoles. Maybe not if you in include the vast amount.of.shovel wear on current consoles.
After that ugh, Nintendo seems to have given up on graphical power. Switch 2 games look really good, but I am usually going to buy ports on PS5/Series X.
N64 had some stunning games, but a lot of the library ran poorly. PS1 games tended to hit a playable 30 more often, albeit with less complex geometry and less/no filtering of textures, and the inherent flaws in how PS1 rasterises graphics.
I played loads of both back in the day and I definitely preferred the solid geometry and smooth textures of N64.
While the N64 was technically more powerful than the PS1, it in fact did not have better graphics than the PS1. Not even close. Not even a little bit.
The N64 was all about Vaseline-looking textures and a blurry-ass mess, while the PS1 had gorgeous colors, sharp, pixelated textures, and god-tier dithering, and just a better image quality overall. Just look at Quake 2 for a perfect example of the differences.
On a side note, the PS1 dithering was like having a virtual canvas for the graphics. So, so good. With the added benefit that it had allowed the PS1 graphics to age like fine wine.
With that said, if you still doubt how awesome the PS1's graphics were or how big the worlds could get, then check out:
Ghost in the Shell
Mizzurna Falls
Vagrant Story
Colony Wars
Omega Boost
Alien Resurrection
Terracon
The PS1 just had better graphics with better textures, lighting, image quality, and even better overall framerate than the N64.
Zelda and Mario would disagree. Nothing the PS1 had touched those games and others. You’re comparing a 32 bit system vs a 64 bit system. While cds did have advantages, speed wasn’t one of them. Not to mention the 64 was much more powerful.
Now if you’re talking ps2 vs the n64 then that would be a much better comparison.
@rlow1
They can disagree all they want, but that changes nothing. While the Mario developers were smart enough to keep the graphics and textures simple, thus maintaining the cartoon-like quality look, the Zelda developers did not. Basically, Zelda does not look as good as you think it does, and the PS1 has better-looking games than Mario and Zelda both.
"Nothing that the PS1 had touched those games and others."
Except there are. You're talking with nostalgia-fogged glasses and dismissing without any knowledge of the PS1 catalogue. Hell, you don't even do research before commenting.
Like I said, the PS1 has plenty of games that look way better than those two games. But since you're not going to go see any of the games I listed, I'll do the same thing you're doing and just name-drop super popular games like Final Fantasy 8 and 9, with a side of Vagrant Story, and that takes care of that. Three games that, to this day, look absolutely amazing and much better than Mario and Zelda.
"You’re comparing a 32-bit system vs. a 64-bit system."
Listen, I won't insult you for coming here and arguing that 64 is a bigger number than 32, because, I mean… yikes. Next thing you'll say is that the Jaguar made the PS1 look like the Atari. It's not a good look, is all I'm saying. So I'll just suggest you do a bit of research on both systems' architectures, their advantages and disadvantages, and their bottlenecks, and learn a bit. Then, you know, actually see the games running on native hardware, and if you can't, there are plenty of videos out there.
There's no need for the PS2 when the PS1 had better graphics than the N64, and you mentioning two popular games is not an argument; it's you not even trying.
i dunno about that one. which n64 games rival the graphical experiences of mgs, soul reaver, vagrant story, ffix, chrono cross, dino crisis 2, silent hill, crash bandicoot 3, and countless others?
PlayStation 1 Devs were so innovative back in the day utilising so many techniques to achieve the best results. I think this article needed to focus on the games that used pre-drawn backgrounds like Resident Evil, In Cold Blood and FF8 to produce visuals that surpassed anything at the time.
I think you are right and I might add in an honourable mentions to at least discuss pre-rendered backgrounds in the visual history of PS1. It was hugely important and should have been in there.
I was going to include Resident Evil for 1996 but I wanted to talk about a second-generation 3D engine versus Ridge Racer, and I also wanted to talk about Lara's animation.
I was also going to put FF8 for 1999 on the list, even wrote a sentence. But then I figured that Driver would say more about how far programmers (and artists) had come in getting the most from the console.
Could even do an 'alternative PS1 graphics' history. Focus on atypical presentations, like pre-rendered, 2D, BSP engines etc.
I think we need remake for these games :
Driver 1 & 2
Final fantasy 8
Legend of dragon
Dino crisis 1 & 2
Fatal frame 1
Parasite Eve 1 & 2
I would buy at least half of those if remade, easily.
I would love a remake of Driver 3 also.
PlayStation has scaled back expectations for Bungie after reassessing Destiny 2 development costs, highlighting the risks tied to live-service games.
Honestly Thank Goodness!! Yet another good sign of a possibility of returning to what made them great and undoing Jim Tyans trend chasing love service gamble. Still gotta wait and see just what direction they're going but this is a good sign in my book that they're not betting it all on live service anymore
Not sure what you lot are talking about anymore. They need to cover all range of games. Im primarily a single player gamer, but even I cannot be daft enough to ignore the fact that we need all manner of games including live service games. Everyone here seems to be a market expert.
Yes "all manner" not just exclusively live service like Jim was doing, but you also shouldn't be forcing devs to make games they not only have no experience making, but also flatout dont want to do.
Assuming that anything like that is actually the case and not just a perception of n4g commenters of course.
@isarai_lee
Yes "all manner" not just exclusively live service like Jim was doing.
I don't understand why you people have to keep making up lies. You can say you don't like some or most of their focus being on live service games, but to say they were exclusively focusing on live service games is pure copium. At most half of their games were live service and the rest were single player games. Seriously why lie about something so obvious?
@Redemption-64
You say that as if we don't have word directly from Jim Ryan and PlayStation stating they wanted at least 12 live service games released within a year. Followed by tons of official word of those Live Service games being cancelled after he was pushed out. All studios combined at the time PS had 15 studios, 12 is a hell of a lot more than half of 15, and it was definitely their primary focus evident by the fact that a huge portion of their studios have taken uncharacteristically long to release or announce anything since, hell some studios have yet to release anything this gen almost 6 YEARS LATER! The only one making stuff up is you.
It may take a while but maybe they are finally learning. Good! Now stop with the live service crap.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with a live service here or there, but to have many of your studios start focusing on it when there has been little to no experience among them was wild.
They say this and then immediately release news of the Horizons co-op game that will definitely be a Live Service game.
I feel like they knew that given the fact that the very furst thing they say in the trailer is to reassure they still make so games 😆
I feel like they knew that given the fact that the very first furst thing they say in the trailer is to reassure they still make so games 😆
They will not. Destiny has been popular for over 10 years, something most games can never hope to achieve. Most people, including myself those Bungie was going to make a D3 after the final shape DLC. Marathon looks to be a hit and a D3 announcement could break records.
PlayStation’s latest financials show digital game sales now make up most purchases, shaping how the platform operates beyond hardware sales.
I have to say... this news is old and there digital share keeps fluctuating between 70 and 80 percent. Digital has made up the bulk for quite some time.
As far as next gen is concerned I assume they will just do what the did this gen with the Pro. That is to say that the console will ship and the drive will be sold separately. Either that or two SKUs again.
Either way you know it will support physical because the want to monetize the disc drive.
Holding on for dear life when it comes to physical games. I knew this day was upon us collectors but it is still sad nevertheless.
I reckon they'll go the same route as PS5 and have a detachable drive, which I personally don't see as a problem. I bought a digital for my daughter, then got a disc drive later on and it cost the same as a disc edition.
Also, Playstation is popular in countries that don't have the best internet.
They also still have 3.5mm jacks on their phones, one of the reasons I still buy Xperia so I'm pretty confident the PS6 will have a drive
I agree, the thing I’m most curious about is will they redesign the drive or will you be able to carry over the PS5 drive to use on a PS6? I figure the drive will have mostly the same specs and it’s not like they’ll be creating a new type of Blu-Ray so from a technical standpoint I can’t see why they’d need to try to sell another one except for naked greed reasons.
I haven’t bought a physical game since Cyberpunk back in 2020. I think that was only because I had a gift card.
We know nothing about the next xbox, not even its name. We could wait for ...um some specs or ...um a annoncement but your way is more logical :P
P.S. I don't care about rumors they are rumors!
I remember reading that developers had to sign an agreement with MS that no PS3 multiplatform game can look any better than the 360 version, was that true?
I swear I read that somewhere
If its true, I hope it dont happen again
Said the time traveler.
I hope this is true but we all know the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 so why don't they make their PS3 games look like Sony's PS3 games look? Do they want to help Microsoft? There's no reason to not push the PS3 harder than they do now.
Yes, i think this true, Ps4 better and powerful hardware than new Xbox.
I dont understand why make this Microsoft:S