-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Which new generations do you think had the best visual improvements?
- Thread starter Sosokrates
- Start date
coffinbirth
Member
Hands down, the LEAP from 16bit to 32/64bit.
We went from this:
To this:
The transition from 2D to 3D was a magical time to be a gamer.
We went from this:
To this:
The transition from 2D to 3D was a magical time to be a gamer.
Ivan
Member
Many people chose ps2 and that gen as the biggest jump, but for me, that's the one that was spoiled by the advancement of pc hardware.
I know we're talking about consoles here, but you just couldn't ignore or unsee what was happening there.
3D accelerator era that started in 1996 and really took off with voodoo 2 in 98. was still something fresh and exciting, so ps2 didn't look THAT impressive at start to me.
I know we're talking about consoles here, but you just couldn't ignore or unsee what was happening there.
3D accelerator era that started in 1996 and really took off with voodoo 2 in 98. was still something fresh and exciting, so ps2 didn't look THAT impressive at start to me.
Last edited:
Naked Lunch
Member
Seeing Dreamcast's Soul Calibur was the one ill remember the most.
Absolutely amazing and still looks stunning to this day.
Absolutely amazing and still looks stunning to this day.
CamHostage
Member
It's the funny thing about this thread, that everybody can pull up wow-factor comparisons from one gen to the next, yet if you really dig into your memories of the stories if the time, you will eventually find out the truth, which his...
The leap was just NEVER enough...
Even the mind-blowing leap from 2D to 3D for those of us who were there, it's worth remembering how much of the complaints (from critics but also kids on the playground) were that these 3D games were just the same old 2D gameplay 'unnecessarily' done in polygons. The graphics were often uglier because the poly-pushing/texturing sucked for a long time, the framerate could often be problematic, the gameplay could be frustrating because the controllers and camera/lock-on design was all experimental, and the game design was rarely polished or complex in 3D games because the developers spent most of their time making these danged things.
Remember also that it didn't jump from 2D to 3D... it went from 2D (and some really good 2D in the SNES/Genesis era, plus NeoGeo was around) to pseudo-3D with Doom and Marathon to early 3D with StarFox and Virtua Racing to then the 3DO and some of those middle-machines with Road Rash and Road&Track Need for Speed and also some big arcade breakthroughs like VF 1/2 and Daytona USA, finally to the Saturn and PlayStation but even then these machines were full of 2D and 2.5D like Gex and Beyond the Beyond for the first few years with only a few standout 3D titles until they hit their stride with the games people remember these systems for. That gen was a long curve, not a single massive spike.
It also had possibly the longest ramp. Not only was PC miles ahead of consoles back then with 3D acceleration and also Arcades were still better-than-console experiences, but the Dreamcast suffered early on under the impression that it was a mid-gen console, like a "PlayStation Pro", with a lot of PS1 up-ports and a lot of PC down-ports and arcade conversions as well as fluffy SEGA games that really didn't set a new paradigm. SoulCaliber was of course amazing, Shenue was ambitious, and Sonic Adventure was finally the Sonic that could never be anywhere else; DC had some qualities that still kept it competitive with PS2. But because of all the cross-gen and ports and its PowerVR graphics, DC seems to often appear as the best-quality of a current-gen experience rather than a revolutionary new generational device.
The leap was just NEVER enough...
Even the mind-blowing leap from 2D to 3D for those of us who were there, it's worth remembering how much of the complaints (from critics but also kids on the playground) were that these 3D games were just the same old 2D gameplay 'unnecessarily' done in polygons. The graphics were often uglier because the poly-pushing/texturing sucked for a long time, the framerate could often be problematic, the gameplay could be frustrating because the controllers and camera/lock-on design was all experimental, and the game design was rarely polished or complex in 3D games because the developers spent most of their time making these danged things.
Remember also that it didn't jump from 2D to 3D... it went from 2D (and some really good 2D in the SNES/Genesis era, plus NeoGeo was around) to pseudo-3D with Doom and Marathon to early 3D with StarFox and Virtua Racing to then the 3DO and some of those middle-machines with Road Rash and Road&Track Need for Speed and also some big arcade breakthroughs like VF 1/2 and Daytona USA, finally to the Saturn and PlayStation but even then these machines were full of 2D and 2.5D like Gex and Beyond the Beyond for the first few years with only a few standout 3D titles until they hit their stride with the games people remember these systems for. That gen was a long curve, not a single massive spike.
It also had possibly the longest ramp. Not only was PC miles ahead of consoles back then with 3D acceleration and also Arcades were still better-than-console experiences, but the Dreamcast suffered early on under the impression that it was a mid-gen console, like a "PlayStation Pro", with a lot of PS1 up-ports and a lot of PC down-ports and arcade conversions as well as fluffy SEGA games that really didn't set a new paradigm. SoulCaliber was of course amazing, Shenue was ambitious, and Sonic Adventure was finally the Sonic that could never be anywhere else; DC had some qualities that still kept it competitive with PS2. But because of all the cross-gen and ports and its PowerVR graphics, DC seems to often appear as the best-quality of a current-gen experience rather than a revolutionary new generational device.
Last edited:
InverseAgonist
Banned
I will post a controversial opinion.
To those that make the jump, this generation will provide some experiences with next-generation VR that eclipse those previous jumps in terms of discontinuous increase in immersion and graphics. This isn't limited to the consoles, but will be seen first on PS5 due to the development talent focusing on the core enabling technologies (4K, foveated rendering, inside-out cameras, etc) and the graphical power of PS5. Not all products will do it right, but those that do will really be something special.
To those that make the jump, this generation will provide some experiences with next-generation VR that eclipse those previous jumps in terms of discontinuous increase in immersion and graphics. This isn't limited to the consoles, but will be seen first on PS5 due to the development talent focusing on the core enabling technologies (4K, foveated rendering, inside-out cameras, etc) and the graphical power of PS5. Not all products will do it right, but those that do will really be something special.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
PS1, N64, Saturn gen.
I think the resolution of the games were the same as the 16 bit era (might be wrong), but with a combo of FMV, 3D game engines and way more colours, it totally stood out better.
Although to be fair, 2D games like all those SNES DK kinds of games still could go to toe to toe with whatever 2D game was on those next gen systems. And the hit and miss frame rate of 3D games did suck against the almost always smooth playing 16 consoles.
But when you got games like Tekken, Super Mario, Zelda, Resident Evil, VF2, Formula ONe etc.... it blew away 16 bit.
I think the resolution of the games were the same as the 16 bit era (might be wrong), but with a combo of FMV, 3D game engines and way more colours, it totally stood out better.
Although to be fair, 2D games like all those SNES DK kinds of games still could go to toe to toe with whatever 2D game was on those next gen systems. And the hit and miss frame rate of 3D games did suck against the almost always smooth playing 16 consoles.
But when you got games like Tekken, Super Mario, Zelda, Resident Evil, VF2, Formula ONe etc.... it blew away 16 bit.
Yeah I was about to bring up it wasn't 2600 to nes it was 2600 to intellvision to colecovision/5200 to nes
And they will also reference only the first year 2600 games like star ship
But later 2600 games grew leaps and bounds past the early years
The unreleased sweat is probably the 2600 highpoint
And the intellivision could actually handle a recognizable port of castlevania
Plus the commodore 64 had been out well before the nes and the c64 definitely is competitive with the nes
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Gold Member
PS4/XBOX ONE Era
To this day I'm still impressed with most of the games that came out on both system. Tomb Raider Definitive Edition still looks fantastic on the PS4. I replay it every year, and it still looks visually impressive.
To this day I'm still impressed with most of the games that came out on both system. Tomb Raider Definitive Edition still looks fantastic on the PS4. I replay it every year, and it still looks visually impressive.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Parallax scrolling in an old 2600 game. Wow.
Too bad many of those old games were done on shoestring budgets. Some of the early Intellivision games were programmed by college students for course credit. And I think 2600 Pacman was programmed by one guy in 6 weeks.
Goes to to show if games back then had more time, the games could be so much better than what we all played back then.
Solaris is another excellent 2600 game.
rubenburgt
Member
Wtf guys.
Do all of you forgot the transition from 2D to 3D? That was a big deal.
I remember seeing Mario 64 for the first time and it blew my mind when I saw Mario squishing a Goomba.
Do all of you forgot the transition from 2D to 3D? That was a big deal.
I remember seeing Mario 64 for the first time and it blew my mind when I saw Mario squishing a Goomba.
Emet_bp
Member
Technically speaking going from 2D to real 3D was the biggest change, but... from the pure visual standpoint the biggest change was between the PS1/N64 and PS2/GCN/Xbox generations.
3D graphics in PSX/N64 era were quite basic (but of course impressive at the time - I remember like it was yesterday when I first saw the first Gran Turismo and said "It looks like a real thing"
) and the next gen gave us the first really convincing worlds and relatively realistic graphics (Gran Turismo 3 and later 4 on PS2, Splinter Cell and Chronicles of Riddick on Xbox or Star Wars: Rougue Squadron II on GCN).
3D graphics in PSX/N64 era were quite basic (but of course impressive at the time - I remember like it was yesterday when I first saw the first Gran Turismo and said "It looks like a real thing"
) and the next gen gave us the first really convincing worlds and relatively realistic graphics (Gran Turismo 3 and later 4 on PS2, Splinter Cell and Chronicles of Riddick on Xbox or Star Wars: Rougue Squadron II on GCN).
Team Andromeda
Member
The 32 Bit era for me. Its when game development really got serious with big teams and big budgets.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
All the ones except this latest one (so far) have been pretty major leaps (whether you consider PS1/N64 games to look better than SNES/MD games is subjective - I suspect most would say no - but it was definitely a massive leap), but yeah, I would agree that PS2/GameCube/Xbox was maybe the most significant. Games went from awful 3D that was barely functional to really good 3D. Then each new leap after that has been a bit smaller, and this latest one so far feels like we're still in the PS4 generation but at 4K and/or 60fps (but we've had other great improvements such as all but eliminated load times).
TheBROgamer
Banned
Gen 9 so far is pretty much gen 8 with faster load times and 4K or 60 FPS in more games, other than that the visual jump is negligible at best thus far.
Ceadeus
Gold Member
We literally seen the transition between 2D to 3D with the 4rth to 5th gen which was absolutely incredible. But we could already have a good sneak peak at the arcade before the 5th gen arrived in our living room.
The 6th gen, particularly the dreamcast, was imo, a giant step though.
Graphics were insanely clear. The 60 frames second standard by Sega was a game changer, coming from 15-20 frames of most ps1 and n64 games. Also, playing phantasy star online, online, on a console was the future.
Then Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft joined but Sega were the one starting this gen in full force.
The 6th gen, particularly the dreamcast, was imo, a giant step though.
Graphics were insanely clear. The 60 frames second standard by Sega was a game changer, coming from 15-20 frames of most ps1 and n64 games. Also, playing phantasy star online, online, on a console was the future.
Then Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft joined but Sega were the one starting this gen in full force.
BbMajor7th
Member
Last gen wasn't the biggest leap forward, but having physically based materials systems become standard, was pretty huge I think. It's probably what got us to close to photorealism in the past decade than anything else.
Mohonky
Member
Except nearly all of those games struggled to hit even 30fps and PS1 and Saturn 3D was so horrendous you could barely tell wtf was happening in screen; always felt they tried to push 3D before it was really able to be done well.
DC / PS2 / Xbox / GameCube was a substantial leap over those systems.
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
Right? Dreamcast had a higher output than GC (although I owned every console from 6th gen). At any rate, I think seeing texture filters applied correctly, the right hardware/software, some of the best games I can remember and the introduction of 'live' gaming for consoles. I believe the poll results are accurate:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Same with the Atari, Tandy, and Apple computers.
There were top quality games that were done in months, time wasn't the issue, it was the tech and the familiarity with it. Also who the programmers were. Compare the fast work of Pacman 2600 and Pacman 5200 to see hardware familiarity and programmer experience matters. Coleco had a bunch of newbies and they were able to put out Smurfs.
As for Parallax many 2600 games had parallax, the difference with this one is that there were two layers of parallax. Which was more rare, and it didn't chug unlike other games that attempted it. Also notice the multi-colored sprite that looks more like a human than a vague human shape of rectangles. Impressive.
Not to mention if you started on 3DO or Jag, or had been using computers, that jump to Ridge Racer and Rayman wouldn't be too substantial of a leap, the leap would have been GEN/SNES late games like Star Fox and Virtua Racer, to Cybermorph and Need for Speed.
3DO was the base of the generation, the SAT, N64, and PSX all did things better than it but traded for weaknesses that made it so you were always falling short some where and the tech was falling behind. That's why Xbox PS2 and GameCube were so important. Going from Syphon Filter 3 to Splinter Cell Chaos Theory, or Tekken 3 to HD Soul Calibur 2, or Doom 64 to Doom 3, that was a jump. You finally had 3D gaming without the compromise, the controls figured out, the graphical effects finally completed and build into the hardware, and better resolution.
TheBROgamer
Banned
Well said
digoutyoursoul
Member
I remember seeing SNES games for the first time, there wasn’t many world wide day one releases back then and going from NES to SNES with Mario World, Contra 3 etc blew me away particularly the FX effects and audio improvements.
Although i have to somewhat agree with the posters talking about the PS2/Xbox/DC/GC gen, I remember playing Rogue Squadron on the cube for the first time, amazing .
Although i have to somewhat agree with the posters talking about the PS2/Xbox/DC/GC gen, I remember playing Rogue Squadron on the cube for the first time, amazing .
Replace the NES gifs with Kirby Adventure and Joy Mech Fight, my post wouldn't change its meaning by a inch anyway.
(though the barrel connection would have been lost lol)
Last edited:
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The N64 generation and it's not even close. That was the 2D -> transition.
Crayon
Member
it's weird to see people saying anything but 16bit -> 32bit. The most impressive 16 bit game I can think of is maybe virtua racing. Compare it to ridge racer, one of the more basic early arcade ports. Let alone later ps1 titles likt gran turismo. And calling virtua racing representative of 16 bit games in general is a stretch.
Self_Destructive
Member
No. Just fucking no.
Those games looked incredible back then... And nobody gave a shit about fps and frametimes back then... they simply played great games. Some of the best games period.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
Graphical improvement? Probably Ps1/N64/Saturn, the jump top 3D was massive.
Visual improvement? Probably Ps1/N64 to Ps2/Gamecube. Those early 3D games felt like a big technological jump and completely changed gameplay, but most of them were ugly as fuck. Ps2/Gamecube was the gen where most 3D games actually started to look good
Visual improvement? Probably Ps1/N64 to Ps2/Gamecube. Those early 3D games felt like a big technological jump and completely changed gameplay, but most of them were ugly as fuck. Ps2/Gamecube was the gen where most 3D games actually started to look good
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You are comparing a massively enhanced cartridge from the 2000's to games from a 1983 consoles with marginal chip enhancement by comparison that came out in 1993.
A realistic comparison would be Cosmic Epsilon NES against Racing Hero Neo-Geo, that or Magician Lord. NES wasn't even the strongest console anyway of the 4 so it's silly anyway, but if using the NES, that would be a more fair comparison.
Yes they did, and it's why another version of RR was put out later at 60fps.
N64 FPS were commonly complained about in press, reader commentary sections, and online. Games that promoted certain graphical effects were questioned on whether what they compromised to use them was worth it.
If you look at the best sellers from the magicbox thread from awhile back, all the best selling games were either some of the best looking performing games of the gen, or were earlier games that were going for simpler looks that aged better and performed well. Very few games that looked like garbage and/or performed badly were widely purchased, N64 too, although due to the droughts there was a bit more leniency.
You even saw it with the 3Do if you look at it's top sellers thread. Most cared. The system sellers weren't the games you're thinking of that YOU don't care about the graphics or performance of.
How? Are you comparing the arcade machine? If not VR was a Genesis Cartridge so it would be 16-bit. Of course, the thread isn't making it clear if we are talking consoles only.
I find this odd because there wasn't that much of an improvement between SMB3 and SMW. At least graphically.
Crayon
Member
Yes, I mean the genesis cartridge virtua racing. So I'm comparing a late gen 16bit game with that expensive svp chip to a 32-bit launch game (rr).
Another fun comparison would be vf2 on genesis v saturn.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Except if you are doing that you can't skip the 32X, so it would be Virtua Fighter 32X vs/. Virtua Fighter Saturn, and that's not too big of a jump but a decent one. It's still part of a 16-bit console and is actually one of it's biggest weaknesses.
cinnamonandgravy
Member
Crayon
Member
I CAN skip the 32x!
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
cmon now.
Now compare SMW to Bonk and Sonic compared to SMB3 and you'll see my point.
JimRyanGOAT
Member
This Gen For Sure
Last edited:
VeganElduderino
Member
i said gamecube era , but actually after the snes to N64 jump , ill go with N64 era
Dust-by-Monday
Member
For me it was the PBR transition from PS3 to PS4. Physically based materials really made each individual surface look and react to light realistically. Before that, all textures were artificially colored which made the lighting look really flat.
Self_Destructive
Member
lmao no. Nobody gave a shit... not even close to like people do today... give me a break.
Some reviewers and press mentioning performance issues isn't the same as having dedicated tech analysis sites picking apart every aspect of the technical design and implementations of a game, zooming in 800%, where frametimes were analyzed and scrutinized.... and even a single frame drops gets mentioned..
The 32bit gen was god damn magical.
delirium trigger
Member
PS1 and N64 all day. Ironically those games have held up like shit but 3d games were mindblowing at the time. It was what everyone wanted but no one knew when they'd really get it.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
No, because the PS one image you postest is actually from the Gamecube.Allow me to clear this up:
Metal Gear Solid (PlayStation)
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater (PlayStation 2)
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots (PlayStation 3)
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain (PlayStation 4)
Are we all on the same page now?
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Which is what happened, and fans were online arguing about it just like now online in the later 90's. you either have bad memory or weren't around. Saturn was maimed by tech analysis, often times unfairly.
It wouldn't be close to as people due today, because the Internet is much more accessible, so that's not really much of an argument.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Allow me to clear this up:
Metal Gear Solid (PlayStation)
You must have forgotten what PS1 graphics looked like because that's not MGS on the PS1.
Now we are talking, nice muddy unclean edgy PS1 graphics. Ain't no smoothness in the MGS I remember.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Google indicated that the screenshot I used was from the PSX version. I have updated my post with a better image.
Similar threads
- Poll