https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzI1RBdK2_g
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm fairly certain that's an oxymoron.Tadaomi Karasuma said:Atari remasters
I gotta agree with this, Super Mario 64 and 64 games in general (aside from maybe Paper Mario) look really ehLord Bowser said:possibly controversial opinion, but super mario 64's graphics (and n64 graphics in general really) are hideous
yeah i'm aware of the whole "it's 20 years old, it was a landmark, first time, etc." argument but that doesn't really shake off the fact that they look really ugly. of course the games are still fun but the graphics did not age well at all
The DS is more powerful than say a N64 or PS1 in terms of graphics but yet it is weaker than say a Dreamcast, PS2, GameCube, Original Xbox, and hell even its handheld competitor the PSP which probably goes about closer to PS2 level.Baby Luigi said:DS models have more polygons than 64's model, most certainly.
It's just their texture resolution is eh, but it's better quality than the single-color textures from the 64 version.
The N64 is more capable than that. We've seen other N64 games look much better than Mario 64. Even some PS1 games look much better than many N64 games. PS1 games had more room for textures due to the big storage capacity of the CD whereas N64 carts didn't hold as much due to the very small capacity of the cartridges.LeftyGreenMario said:My criticism of the video is that they failed to show us the actual textures (I mean the images) and also not telling us the texture resolution of the models. Not to mention, the later models have the nice stuff like normal maps and specular maps, stuff that used to be reserved for full-on artwork. Also, no mention of bone structure, that's also important, though I guess it concerns mainly with animation. Finally, the Galaxy Mario appears distorted relative to later Mario models, as you see the proportions around the stomach look a little stretched.
I think the 64 Mario might have marginally more faces because the body and arms themselves are composed of whole pieces of polygon rather than being a unified model like in 64DS (meaning the pieces are essen.ially floating circles and therefore, faces normally not visible since they overlap with other polygons would be counted). They talked about it earlier in the video at 2:00 or so.
I also think the Mario Party Mario looks marginally better despite being lower poly.
IDK the models in the video look pretty dang messy in terms of mesh makeup. The Melee Mario has an n-gon (a face with more than 4 vertices) in the palm of his hand and the Galaxy model also has two n-gons on Mario's body and the edge flow around the leg looks bad: there seems to be an n-gon there too. The Brawl Mario has an n-gon in his hair. I don't know if it's supposed to be like that, only partially triangulated or even has a n-gons, or not. Models I usually see have ALL tris (for optimization reasons such as fixing nonplanar or concave faces, as tris are to be mainly avoided in modeling) or 99% quads. The edge flow just doesn't seem clean to me at all and I don't think the video shows an accurate representation of the mesh I fear. I mean, the Galaxy one has a very bad geometry.
And no Ultra Smash model in that video. FOR FUX SAKE THAT TEXTURE HAS 1024 x 1024 pixel RESOLUTION. The rest are only a measly 512 x 512 at most, including 3D World.
Still nominate Mario Kart DS Mario for ugliest Mario. Dat texture stretch where the mustache is... NO.
Otherwise, great video, complaints are kinda pet peeves.
Don't know why nintendo would choose to make a SNES-level console (even if it was a handheld and had more technical limitations as opposed to home consoles) when they already had the Gamecube which was much more powerful, and essentially went back 10 years in terms of technical evolution.