This is NOT how Zelda would look on PS1. This shows what Zelda would look like when you tun off certain filters N64 used like bilinear filtering, mip mapping, and anti-aliasing. N64 games are built with developers realizing they will have to stretch low quality textures (due to N64's small texture cache) over polygons, then blur them to Hell and back. If built specifically for PS1, the game would have more detailed textures and more complex polygonal models/environments. And better audio.
You are neglecting the wobbly polygons, additional loading times, jaggies and reduced draw distance. You act as if the PS1 would have no drawbacks for a game like OoT.
@dunnono00 Oh there would definitely be loading times, no way around that with CD format. Wobbly polygons (I assume you mean texture warping) is something developers came to grips with after awhile on PS1, but I would rather have little perspective correction issues when I'm too close to a wall rather than a wall constantly looking blurry. Jaggies suck but in turn you get to throw around more polygons at higher framerates. Even N64 had a lot of draw distance problems...one word, FOG.
Yet the draw distance was definitely ahead of what the PS1 displayed, hence the awe that lingers in the memories of those taking their first steps around Peach's castle, or the Hylian fields. Cutting those environments in half, adding jaggies, fog, loading, etc, is that worth the tradeoff for more, but lower quality polygons? They work for some games, not so much for others. The tradeoffs can go either way.
@dunnono00 Usually, the only games that did a good job displaying large environments without fog on N64 were made by Rareware or Nintendo. Most other developers had to deal with the many bottlenecks of the N64 hardware. On PS1, cutting these environments in half as you say, would actually allow for even LESS fog and less loading points so the tradeoff ain't too shabby. Keeping a far draw distance would mean lower framerate, but that happened on N64 at times too. I see what you're saying tho
The N64 was a better looking system than the PS1 or Saturn (at least in real time graphics), just get over it, it's not a big deal its to be expected. The latest consoles in a generation to come out almost always have superior hardware
I doubt this game would even run on a PS1. The N64 had much more powerful hardware. Majora's Mask definitely wouldn't run on the PS1. The biggest issue the N64 had was that it used cartridges- which limited the amount of texture detail and game length. If Nintendo went with discs, Square-Enix (and many other publishers/developers) wouldn't have migrated to the Playstation, and games would've looked even better.
The thing is this game was not designed to play on a system without bilinear intepolated textures. If this was actually ported to psone -as impossible as this is- they would have used higher textures for the grass, and hyrule field itself would probalby have much more geometry then this.
@buzinaocara EXACTLY. You're the only person here who makes sense! N64 uses bilinear & trilinear filtering and mip mapping to blur textures, and simplistic low polygon counts usually for character models/environments. The low poly count is usually masked by N64's blurry textures and anti-aliasing, making it ideal for simplistic, cartoony games but no good when developers want high texture detail and complex environments. Zelda would have been built completely different for PS1.
The polygon counts are too high for a PS1 game, not to mention the fact that PS1 only had 2MB of RAM (vs. 4MB on N64 and 8MB w/ the expansion pak). The PS1 could never handle Hyrule field with all of the objects and enemies in it. On top of that, there would be loading times everywhere.
This really is not precise, because just because the "PS1 version" looks better, it does not make the N64 better graphically. Both consoles used different techniques in order to make their game. For example, While Mario 64 is all colourful and whatnot, it's so incredibly plain compared to the Spyro and Crash series.
The Nintendo 64 verson of Turok has a hidden cheat called "Quack Mode", which emulates what the game would look like running on a PSX. it was put in there by Iguana because they didn't think too highly of the PSX.
It turns off all filtering, turns off antialiasing, turns off almost all special effects except ones available on the PSX, reduces the complexity of the models, and textures, removes about half of the frames in the animations, and halves the framerate or so.
@retropirate1 -I don`t think PS2 could even exactly run it, even GameCube can just about made it bacause those consoles does not use cartridge for fast loading and does not have hardrive either.
PC and XBOX should be able to run Zelda Ocarina as well as N64, because they can load fast from hardrive and has loads of ram.
@retropirate1 -I don`t think PS2 could even exactly run it, even GameCube can just about made it bacause those consoles does not use cartridge for fast loading and does not have hardrive either.
PC and XBOX should be able to run Zelda Ocarina as well as N64, because they can load fast from hardrive and has loads of ram.
Discs have no meaning on the capability of the system to run the game. Whether there's loading or not, it still can run the game. There are problems with Majora's Mask on the GameCube because it's running an imperfected emulator. If the game was ported to native code, it would run perfect. The CPU in the GameCube is roughly 4 and a half times the speed, and several times the power. And it has many times the amount of RAM.
Does it require loading time? Yes. Does it run? Yes.
@Draknfyre -This is exactly what i was talking about. From cartridge, it is possible to load to the console`s RAM without delay. From disc, there will be load time when loading to the console`s RAM. Because of this, Zelda is not possible to may be even run on PS2. At least, it`s close, because, Zelda is 32 MB, so PS2 runs even out of RAM even with the additional loading time. Also, i was talking about running exactly like N64, -no loading time at all...
Bzzt, makes no difference. No offense, but you obviously have no idea how the technology works.
Load times mean nothing. You have a small delay while the game loads. Big deal. it then runs like normal.
And no games in the past twenty years, no matter the system, loads entirely into RAM at one time. You load sections up. You think it's loading Ganon while you are in the Great Deku Tree? Try again. Those black screens between areas are the loading times. It's small, but it's there.
@Draknfyre -Don`t put words into my mouth. All i was talking about was possibility to run Zelda AS WELL as on N64, with NO load time. And this is possible if whole game data is on powerfull systems hardrive & ram. Also those black screens would last longer if it would come from cd/dvd/blu-rau. Running game from Cartridge or Hardrive is faster for playability. -This is all i mean...
Yet here you are talking about how it's impossible due to the amount of RAM, ect.
A game today that is GB's in size runs on systems with 512MB of RAM. Entire games do not load up in RAM at once. Yet you were saying because Zelda is 32MB, and the PS2's memory was 32MB, it wouldn't be able to do it.
No one is "putting words in your mouth", you are saying them yourself.
Zelda would run as well on a PS2 as long as the emulator was fine. The only exception are load times.
@Draknfyre I never said "it is IMPOSSIBLE", but i think it would be really hard to do "WITHOUT loading times" on PS2, because RAM is so close, (it would be necessary to load at once on disc -system to avoid loading times during the game like Zelda) when there is no hardrive. This is all i said! Please, try to read my messages... All i was talking about was possibility to run N64 Zelda EXACTLY like N64 runs it, on PS2. Thats all...
The GameCube version is on a disc, and has loading times. Those loading times aren't so bad.
Of course a disc would be slower than a cartridge, but I think you over estimate the amount of data that Zelda has.
The PS2's DVD-ROM drive is 4X. That means it reads at 5300KB/sec. It could load the entire game (RAM permitting) in 7 seconds. Considering it wouldn't need to, would it have loading? Yes. Would those loading times be bad? No.
The initial release of Zelda 64 on the GameCube suffered from having an incomplete emulator. Majora's Mask was the worst of the two. It's sound emulation sucked. You can run a poorly-written emulator on a pc, and a game still run crappy. The RAM and loading have nothing to do with it.
The GameCube version was having to emulate the Nintendo 64. Copy every piece of hardware. And it was incomplete. If ported natively to the system, it would run fine.
That is actually pretty accurate, even down to the sharp, twisted textures and clipping issues that were prevalent on PS1! Very interesting idea, too! How did you achieve this effect?
Ocarina of Time could not have been done on ps1. Because the areas were so huge, there would have been alot of fog and pop-in on ps1, because N64 can load larger areas. The levels in Ocarina are simply too big to be on ps1.
what if you make one of donkey kong,banjo kazooie, goldeneye,and super smash bros. Please. i want to see how those games would have been look on the ps1.
This is why I never understand people alleging that the N64 graphics were "blurry"; anything 3D on the Playstation has always looked much more blurry to me.
Not just that, a PSX would not run the game "slow" but it would feel like the Z-depth buffer doesn't exists (Because, the PSX doesn't has a GPU like the 64 has :P), so it will be a mess of polygons with textures "arranging" themselves when moving, mostly because all the calculations were made by the CPU.
That's why 3D on the N64 feels so solid. Its because it has actual Depth info for each polygon and the power to process it.
You may be PlayStation fan and it`s OK, but there is NO WAY PlayStation one could run Zelda:OOT. Playstation was powerfull when released, but N64 simply has so much more MHZ and RAM... -Still nice video, thought...
It's just a graphical comparison showing what the game would look like without the 64's filtering capabilities. I'm well aware the PSX cannot run Zelda.
@kitsune0video if you think that i am wrong, search for PSX on google or even youtube. At least one of the choices will be for the real PSX, not the PSone
@TheWolfgabe Problem would be that you can simply do way too much interactive things on Zelda, like change night to day on your own, the scope of the game and how fast playability is, ect...
If all power is used from PSX, you can even almost get Shadowman for it, albeit with really heavy loading issues, thought. But Zelda would require more RAM and Cartridge format for PSX to even run at all...
@M1XART exactly cause the PS1's processor isn't as powerful and I do think it has less RAM so OOT would definetly be impossible even those the Playstation uses CDs
@TheShadowluigi64 Yes, i do think PSone is unable to run it even with inferior visuals.
Here is why: N64 is 64 bit, PSX is 32 bit. N64 has around 3 times the processor power more than PSX. N64 can have more than 4 times of RAM memory more than PSX. Cartridges load around million times faster than CD. And overall, Zelda actually uses the power of N64, so no PSX can run it. However, PSX is a good console also...
@M1XART actually u are talking about a ps1 right?cuz sony did release a system called PSX after the PS2 which was a DVR ,DVd player ,and game system..but failed miserebly becuz it would break down easily, so it see an american realease....
@M1XART The N64 actually had less RAM than the PS1 and Saturn. It had what... 1, 1.5MB? PS1/Saturn had 4MB, just like the DS and Sega CD. Only when you used the Expansion pak did the N64 have more RAM, which OOT did not use.
Okay so 4 to 8. Gotcha... And PS1 had... 2... wait, that's impossible. You need 4 to read a CD... Something's wrong here. Pretty sure the PS1 had more... But even worse was the Saturn with... 1? How...??!?
@TailsSena Yes, PS1 had 2 MB for graphics, but it also had additional ram for sound. On N64 developers would decide how much (what ratio) use for video or audio.
Yes please compare perfect dark or goldeneye =) and btw how do u do it?
frankytap 1 day ago
Did... .. I just read comments about Playstation and Nintendo that were constructive, and didn't turn immediately into a flame war??
That was the most amazing thing I've ever seen. :D
utzie12 1 week ago
Look at the edge of the river... Minecraft!
IgnisNetwork 1 week ago 2
I feel like the draw distance wouldn't be as good.
theZELGAMER 2 weeks ago
Good idea but nintendo wont allow it
magicianofdhs 3 weeks ago
@magicianofdhs Of course they wouldn't but he made the video like a "if this was to be."
Dogispro 2 hours ago
nice man
i want to see perfect dark and goldeneye 007 on a "playstation" home made version.
Can you make a video please?
spirit25he 3 weeks ago in playlist Autres vidéos de InTrepidGaming
This is NOT how Zelda would look on PS1. This shows what Zelda would look like when you tun off certain filters N64 used like bilinear filtering, mip mapping, and anti-aliasing. N64 games are built with developers realizing they will have to stretch low quality textures (due to N64's small texture cache) over polygons, then blur them to Hell and back. If built specifically for PS1, the game would have more detailed textures and more complex polygonal models/environments. And better audio.
Suplexmachine 1 month ago
@Suplexmachine
You are neglecting the wobbly polygons, additional loading times, jaggies and reduced draw distance. You act as if the PS1 would have no drawbacks for a game like OoT.
dunnono00 1 month ago
@dunnono00 Oh there would definitely be loading times, no way around that with CD format. Wobbly polygons (I assume you mean texture warping) is something developers came to grips with after awhile on PS1, but I would rather have little perspective correction issues when I'm too close to a wall rather than a wall constantly looking blurry. Jaggies suck but in turn you get to throw around more polygons at higher framerates. Even N64 had a lot of draw distance problems...one word, FOG.
Suplexmachine 1 month ago
@Suplexmachine
Yet the draw distance was definitely ahead of what the PS1 displayed, hence the awe that lingers in the memories of those taking their first steps around Peach's castle, or the Hylian fields. Cutting those environments in half, adding jaggies, fog, loading, etc, is that worth the tradeoff for more, but lower quality polygons? They work for some games, not so much for others. The tradeoffs can go either way.
dunnono00 1 month ago
@dunnono00 Usually, the only games that did a good job displaying large environments without fog on N64 were made by Rareware or Nintendo. Most other developers had to deal with the many bottlenecks of the N64 hardware. On PS1, cutting these environments in half as you say, would actually allow for even LESS fog and less loading points so the tradeoff ain't too shabby. Keeping a far draw distance would mean lower framerate, but that happened on N64 at times too. I see what you're saying tho
Suplexmachine 1 month ago
The N64 was a better looking system than the PS1 or Saturn (at least in real time graphics), just get over it, it's not a big deal its to be expected. The latest consoles in a generation to come out almost always have superior hardware
zzyzx0788 1 month ago
it's worth the try ..... this game was Amazing and still is
21KnownEnemies 1 month ago
I doubt this game would even run on a PS1. The N64 had much more powerful hardware. Majora's Mask definitely wouldn't run on the PS1. The biggest issue the N64 had was that it used cartridges- which limited the amount of texture detail and game length. If Nintendo went with discs, Square-Enix (and many other publishers/developers) wouldn't have migrated to the Playstation, and games would've looked even better.
tygamr 1 month ago
The thing is this game was not designed to play on a system without bilinear intepolated textures. If this was actually ported to psone -as impossible as this is- they would have used higher textures for the grass, and hyrule field itself would probalby have much more geometry then this.
buzinaocara 1 month ago
Comment removed
Suplexmachine 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@buzinaocara EXACTLY. You're the only person here who makes sense! N64 uses bilinear & trilinear filtering and mip mapping to blur textures, and simplistic low polygon counts usually for character models/environments. The low poly count is usually masked by N64's blurry textures and anti-aliasing, making it ideal for simplistic, cartoony games but no good when developers want high texture detail and complex environments. Zelda would have been built completely different for PS1.
Suplexmachine 1 month ago
desde cuano este juego mle aia en ps1
daniansar 1 month ago
same shit!
sakarias18 1 month ago
When you have it in 1080p and fullscreen, you can see that the dirt areas in the field are completely square on the ps1 version
ASongOfIceAndFire904 1 month ago in playlist Fler videoklipp från InTrepidGaming
PS1 was able to run the Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid games, why couldn't it run Zelda?
Eifler121 2 months ago
@Eifler121 That's because some people did not like the PS1 and started bashing it.
ultragarrison 1 month ago
The polygon counts are too high for a PS1 game, not to mention the fact that PS1 only had 2MB of RAM (vs. 4MB on N64 and 8MB w/ the expansion pak). The PS1 could never handle Hyrule field with all of the objects and enemies in it. On top of that, there would be loading times everywhere.
Supersmashbrojory 2 months ago
How to make this?????? :O
KikiGames1 2 months ago
Why is it what when nintendo games go to a ps console, the framerate drops? Example: Harvest Moon a wonderful life and Tales of Symphonia. Curious...
CoalarDrake 2 months ago
N64 is the best
ThuNDeRhapsodY 3 months ago
hm the playstation one is very playstationy.........
andyfritter1 3 months ago
who cares about playing shitty ass nintendo games...
MessageInBlood1 3 months ago
@MessageInBlood1 you cause you clicked on the video. Derp
MrMchief117 3 months ago
@MessageInBlood1 fuck you all you play is call of duty probably you dumb bitch
andyfritter1 3 months ago
This really is not precise, because just because the "PS1 version" looks better, it does not make the N64 better graphically. Both consoles used different techniques in order to make their game. For example, While Mario 64 is all colourful and whatnot, it's so incredibly plain compared to the Spyro and Crash series.
CrystalFissure 3 months ago
How have you done this? AMAZING! I would like to see more. How about Star Fox 64 or Perfect Dark?
DarkFenix48 3 months ago
it woul look worse you forgot the swimming textures
SuperDeluxe80 4 months ago
xD PS1 version looks like minecraft
nissengummihone 4 months ago
try conker bad fur day ? with that one i will just be... wow on the ps1
bobaneko 4 months ago
The Nintendo 64 verson of Turok has a hidden cheat called "Quack Mode", which emulates what the game would look like running on a PSX. it was put in there by Iguana because they didn't think too highly of the PSX.
It turns off all filtering, turns off antialiasing, turns off almost all special effects except ones available on the PSX, reduces the complexity of the models, and textures, removes about half of the frames in the animations, and halves the framerate or so.
It's funny to watch.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
do if conkers bad fur day would look on ps1
CODvideoPRODUCTIONS 5 months ago
How can you play this on ps2?
retropirate1 5 months ago
@retropirate1 -I don`t think PS2 could even exactly run it, even GameCube can just about made it bacause those consoles does not use cartridge for fast loading and does not have hardrive either.
PC and XBOX should be able to run Zelda Ocarina as well as N64, because they can load fast from hardrive and has loads of ram.
M1XART 5 months ago
@retropirate1 -I don`t think PS2 could even exactly run it, even GameCube can just about made it bacause those consoles does not use cartridge for fast loading and does not have hardrive either.
PC and XBOX should be able to run Zelda Ocarina as well as N64, because they can load fast from hardrive and has loads of ram.
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART
Discs have no meaning on the capability of the system to run the game. Whether there's loading or not, it still can run the game. There are problems with Majora's Mask on the GameCube because it's running an imperfected emulator. If the game was ported to native code, it would run perfect. The CPU in the GameCube is roughly 4 and a half times the speed, and several times the power. And it has many times the amount of RAM.
Does it require loading time? Yes. Does it run? Yes.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
@Draknfyre -This is exactly what i was talking about. From cartridge, it is possible to load to the console`s RAM without delay. From disc, there will be load time when loading to the console`s RAM. Because of this, Zelda is not possible to may be even run on PS2. At least, it`s close, because, Zelda is 32 MB, so PS2 runs even out of RAM even with the additional loading time. Also, i was talking about running exactly like N64, -no loading time at all...
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART
Bzzt, makes no difference. No offense, but you obviously have no idea how the technology works.
Load times mean nothing. You have a small delay while the game loads. Big deal. it then runs like normal.
And no games in the past twenty years, no matter the system, loads entirely into RAM at one time. You load sections up. You think it's loading Ganon while you are in the Great Deku Tree? Try again. Those black screens between areas are the loading times. It's small, but it's there.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
@Draknfyre -Don`t put words into my mouth. All i was talking about was possibility to run Zelda AS WELL as on N64, with NO load time. And this is possible if whole game data is on powerfull systems hardrive & ram. Also those black screens would last longer if it would come from cd/dvd/blu-rau. Running game from Cartridge or Hardrive is faster for playability. -This is all i mean...
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART
Yet here you are talking about how it's impossible due to the amount of RAM, ect.
A game today that is GB's in size runs on systems with 512MB of RAM. Entire games do not load up in RAM at once. Yet you were saying because Zelda is 32MB, and the PS2's memory was 32MB, it wouldn't be able to do it.
No one is "putting words in your mouth", you are saying them yourself.
Zelda would run as well on a PS2 as long as the emulator was fine. The only exception are load times.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
@Draknfyre I never said "it is IMPOSSIBLE", but i think it would be really hard to do "WITHOUT loading times" on PS2, because RAM is so close, (it would be necessary to load at once on disc -system to avoid loading times during the game like Zelda) when there is no hardrive. This is all i said! Please, try to read my messages... All i was talking about was possibility to run N64 Zelda EXACTLY like N64 runs it, on PS2. Thats all...
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART
You repeatedly said "impossible to run".
The GameCube version is on a disc, and has loading times. Those loading times aren't so bad.
Of course a disc would be slower than a cartridge, but I think you over estimate the amount of data that Zelda has.
The PS2's DVD-ROM drive is 4X. That means it reads at 5300KB/sec. It could load the entire game (RAM permitting) in 7 seconds. Considering it wouldn't need to, would it have loading? Yes. Would those loading times be bad? No.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
@Draknfyre -I would like to see my messages where i assured that it would be "impossible" to run on PS2:)
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART
(Continued from previous reply)
The initial release of Zelda 64 on the GameCube suffered from having an incomplete emulator. Majora's Mask was the worst of the two. It's sound emulation sucked. You can run a poorly-written emulator on a pc, and a game still run crappy. The RAM and loading have nothing to do with it.
The GameCube version was having to emulate the Nintendo 64. Copy every piece of hardware. And it was incomplete. If ported natively to the system, it would run fine.
Draknfyre 5 months ago
Omg I never knew u could play n64 games in playstation!
Firestar4342 5 months ago
@Firestar4342 uh... did hear about bleem (ended in 2001... but you can get it on EBAY)
SSCode09 5 months ago
More like Ocarina of Time for MS-DOS (I don't know why.. but it just made me think of MS-DOS C:)
1Koakuma1 6 months ago
That is actually pretty accurate, even down to the sharp, twisted textures and clipping issues that were prevalent on PS1! Very interesting idea, too! How did you achieve this effect?
KurosanNitebird 6 months ago
no, no. you guys don't get it. it's not that zelda COULDN'T be on ps1.
it's just that if you tried to put zelda in...zelda would be like FUCK NO!
I ain't touching that shit.
Nindrumdo 6 months ago
PS1 version looks like minecraft
waxford13 7 months ago
@waxford13 it really does, lol
slumpgamer 6 months ago
Ocarina of Time could not have been done on ps1. Because the areas were so huge, there would have been alot of fog and pop-in on ps1, because N64 can load larger areas. The levels in Ocarina are simply too big to be on ps1.
SomeFluffer64 7 months ago
How about Paper Mario 64 on PS1!
Chao772TheThird 7 months ago
you gotta do goldeneye
moynul123 7 months ago
Regardless of whether it could run it or not doesn't change the fact that it's a first party game.
hungryhungrymetroid 7 months ago
can u do xtreme g xg2
RyuHoly 8 months ago
The ps1 has always looked like a 32 bit system to me 0.o
Dylstew2 9 months ago
@Dylstew2 umm actually the ps1 is an 32 bit system.
fareedbakhit 2 months ago
what if you make one of donkey kong,banjo kazooie, goldeneye,and super smash bros. Please. i want to see how those games would have been look on the ps1.
TheGuillermo54 9 months ago
Comment removed
TheGuillermo54 9 months ago
it's impossible for ps1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
superfracchio 9 months ago 16
This is why I never understand people alleging that the N64 graphics were "blurry"; anything 3D on the Playstation has always looked much more blurry to me.
Good video. :)
7thHanyou 10 months ago
Not just that, a PSX would not run the game "slow" but it would feel like the Z-depth buffer doesn't exists (Because, the PSX doesn't has a GPU like the 64 has :P), so it will be a mess of polygons with textures "arranging" themselves when moving, mostly because all the calculations were made by the CPU.
That's why 3D on the N64 feels so solid. Its because it has actual Depth info for each polygon and the power to process it.
Elratauru 10 months ago
lets do it the OTHER way do Crash Bandicoot 2 for it
Spikestuff95 10 months ago
You may be PlayStation fan and it`s OK, but there is NO WAY PlayStation one could run Zelda:OOT. Playstation was powerfull when released, but N64 simply has so much more MHZ and RAM... -Still nice video, thought...
M1XART 1 year ago 22
@M1XART
It's just a graphical comparison showing what the game would look like without the 64's filtering capabilities. I'm well aware the PSX cannot run Zelda.
InTrepidGaming 11 months ago 24
@InTrepidGaming PSX could run it, but it would require far more loading.
HaloSpartanG13 8 months ago
@InTrepidGaming Could you do Kirby 64 on the PlayStation?
MarioAnimalCrossing 4 months ago
@InTrepidGaming Its a PS1, not a PSX. A PSX is a Sony branded PS2+DVR combo that was released in Japan.
TapedTogetherAcer 3 months ago
@TapedTogetherAcer WTF. PSX is the slim new model of the PS1. Its just a PS1 but smaller. It have nothing to do with PS2 lol
kitsune0video 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kitsune0video if you think that i am wrong, search for PSX on google or even youtube. At least one of the choices will be for the real PSX, not the PSone
TapedTogetherAcer 2 months ago
@kitsune0video PSX is not a Playstation 1, It is a Playstation 2 that also functions as a DVR. It is the first machine from sony to use the XMB menu.
77guacamole 2 months ago
@TapedTogetherAcer Plus, you're thinking DVD. PS2's were DVD compatible from the beginning. There's no name for a new version that runs DVD's.
Eifler121 2 months ago
@M1XART it could run it, if the game was split into five discs... and they reduced the texture size, and took out several lighting effects.
S0ryiu 10 months ago
@M1XART Ok, so you're a programmer?
horokeusensei 8 months ago
@horokeusensei No, more like a Desinger for these matters, but i do realize that PS1 would be out of memory on Hyrule Field...
PS1 is however, the most well power -used console ever, and it can barely, just about even run games like Shadowman.
M1XART 8 months ago
@M1XART yeah, but ps1 could use fog to handle hyrule field. It would generate less terrain at the same time.
horokeusensei 8 months ago
@M1XART Yeah OOT probably would too big for the Playstation
TheWolfgabe 5 months ago
@TheWolfgabe Problem would be that you can simply do way too much interactive things on Zelda, like change night to day on your own, the scope of the game and how fast playability is, ect...
If all power is used from PSX, you can even almost get Shadowman for it, albeit with really heavy loading issues, thought. But Zelda would require more RAM and Cartridge format for PSX to even run at all...
M1XART 5 months ago
@M1XART exactly cause the PS1's processor isn't as powerful and I do think it has less RAM so OOT would definetly be impossible even those the Playstation uses CDs
TheWolfgabe 5 months ago
@M1XART dude..really?N64games had cartragis,ya think it wouldn't work on a playstaition!
TheShadowluigi64 4 months ago
@TheShadowluigi64 Yes, i do think PSone is unable to run it even with inferior visuals.
Here is why: N64 is 64 bit, PSX is 32 bit. N64 has around 3 times the processor power more than PSX. N64 can have more than 4 times of RAM memory more than PSX. Cartridges load around million times faster than CD. And overall, Zelda actually uses the power of N64, so no PSX can run it. However, PSX is a good console also...
M1XART 4 months ago
@M1XART actually u are talking about a ps1 right?cuz sony did release a system called PSX after the PS2 which was a DVR ,DVd player ,and game system..but failed miserebly becuz it would break down easily, so it see an american realease....
TheShadowluigi64 4 months ago
@TheShadowluigi64 Yes, PSone was known many years as PSX by gamers...
M1XART 4 months ago
@M1XART Yess yes it wuz....
TheShadowluigi64 4 months ago
@M1XART The N64 actually had less RAM than the PS1 and Saturn. It had what... 1, 1.5MB? PS1/Saturn had 4MB, just like the DS and Sega CD. Only when you used the Expansion pak did the N64 have more RAM, which OOT did not use.
TailsSena 1 month ago
@TailsSena Without Expansion Pak N64 has 4.5 MB and with expansion pak it has 8.5 MB. Please read console spects before posting.
M1XART 1 month ago
@M1XART ...Wait a minute... I DID read it.
Okay so 4 to 8. Gotcha... And PS1 had... 2... wait, that's impossible. You need 4 to read a CD... Something's wrong here. Pretty sure the PS1 had more... But even worse was the Saturn with... 1? How...??!?
TailsSena 1 month ago
@TailsSena Yes, PS1 had 2 MB for graphics, but it also had additional ram for sound. On N64 developers would decide how much (what ratio) use for video or audio.
M1XART 1 month ago
@M1XART Gotcha'. That makes sense. So that's why the PS1 was the easiest to program for, I suppose?
TailsSena 1 month ago
@TailsSena
I would think developers preferred a unified memory architecture. The 360 uses this method, while the PS3 has it divided.
dunnono00 1 month ago
@M1XART
YES IT COULD, but graphics would be worse
OldClassicGamer 1 month ago
Wow I just came across this video and I love it. Awesome!
nickolaswarner 1 year ago
Wow not as big a difference as Super MArio 64! I thought Ocarina of Time would be even more distorted. Thasnk you!
Cass731 1 year ago