2 ms·
Goldeneye may have been a very good game, but visually, what the Quake 2 engine was capable of on PC, was far ahead of what the games running on the N64 hardwar
by ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Goldeneye may have been a very good game, but visually, what the Quake 2 engine was capable of on PC, was far ahead of what the games running on the N64 hardware could ever dream of as it was limited to only 4k texture cache vs PC GPUs back then had 4MB or more of VRAM for textures. This is why N64 textures were blurry.
Maybe you weren't blown away because the games you tried were not great or your PC had bottlenecks, since if you do a side by side of PC games of the era that were also ported to the N64, they look obviously worse on the N64.
Goldeneye engine was written bespoke for the N64 hardware and the devs were absolute wizards to make it look as good as it did on that limited hardware, but if you look without the rose tinted glasses, you can see the rough edges of the N64 HW limitations.
- bennysomething 5y agoYou make some fair points. Thing is I've been back to Goldeneye a lot, on original hardware, emulators and even the leaked Xbox 360 version. Gameplay wise it feels quite far a head of quake 1 and 2. I read that the half life team saw Goldeneye and went and made significant changes because of it. The fact that quake 2 and Goldeneye came out in the same year is strange, Goldeneye plays like it's a generation a head of, it's environments are way more interactive, it's level design is also something that still stands up (this might be something to do with designing the levels as real places and fitting the game around it). Bizarrely I don't think perfect dark was as good. Even worse, I kept waiting for an FPS that took Goldeneyes lessons onboard. Only thing that was timesplitters 1 and 2 (though that's because free radical were ex Goldeneye staff). If someone could recommend an FPS that plays as well as Goldeneye I'd really want to play it :)