Are there any 3D games which graphics didn't age badly?

Yes, most of them.

/thread

>age
This board is quickly turning into the easiest board to troll.

File: CC 38-welcome12.jpg (54KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 640x480px

>>2934864

most later gen PS1 titles look okay to good. It's usually more an issue of resolution being stupid low

>>2934873
I don't get it

>>2934864
Panzer Dragoon, Jet grind radio, Monster rancher, Tekken 3, Spyro, Kirby 64, Conkers bad fur day, Banjo Kazooie, Majora's Mask. Probably more, but generally games with unique artstyles or that only had to render a limited playfield such as fighters.

File: 273278-crash-bandicoot-2-cortex-strikes-back-playstation-screenshot.jpg (45KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x480px

Crash Bandicoot 1 and 2.

Crash 3 is way milkier.

>>2934885

I do; it's always the same fucking material, and you morons fall for it every goddamn time. You think the OP wanted a meaningful debate? Fuck no! It's all just amusement, or the post would've been more than one fucking sentence. They've already got their popcorn ready for when one of you 2D>3D ALWAYS NO EXCEPTIONS mongs that I know damn well lurk this board finally wanders in here to sperg out and make the thread a self-sustaining shitshow of autism and various mental problems. 'Till then, they'll just keep the fire stoked low with inflammatory starter-fluid posts and the occasional bump.

>>2934894
don't respond, just report. I think it works fairly well on this board

>>2935508
How is the OP against any rules?

>>2935516
>You will not post any of the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames
>Contributors are encouraged to provide high-quality images and informative comments.
OP is trolling

>>2935524
Didn't even know that 3D vs 2D was an ongoing flamewar on /vr/. I was asking from a neutral standpoint

I guess I'll rephrase the question; Which 3D games holds up best today?

>>2934864
Resident Evil behind the Mask/Our Resident Evil 1.5 Prototype

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dalEz0WO9kQ

Our Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/loboto3?ty=h

>>2935508
>just report. I think it works fairly well on this board
You fucking wish.

>>2934881
what game is this

>>2935542
>Didn't even know that 3D vs 2D was an ongoing flamewar on /vr/.
Not necessarily.
What's worse is the usage of "age". It's quite well known that there's a vocal subset of /vr/ that will argue loudly and repeatedly how bits can't change, games can't age, etc. It's very predictable and used for trolling.
If you want to use "age" without starting a riot, you pretty much got to either avoid the word, or move it away from the game, somehow. I don't agree with the people I described above, but they're a thing on this board, and it's good to keep them in mind when posting.

File: Soul_Calibur_DC.jpg (101KB, 350x263px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 350x263px

>>2934864
I think Soul Calibur for the Dreamcast holds up better than most games in terms of both graphics and gameplay. Over 15 years later and the game still looks and plays fantastic.

>>2935548
Whoops forgot our patreon xD

https://www.patreon.com/loboto3?ty=h

>>2935582
you forgot to mention that both of them are also way uglier than their 2D incarnations

>>2935550
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=serge+luccia+greco

>>2935587
The 2d ones are the ugly ones, not the 3d

File: Mario 64 on actual N64.webm (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

Are we talking original hardware or does anything go? Sometimes the resolution can make a big difference.

Anyway, I think Mario 64 has aged perfectly fine graphically.

>>2934864
Mega Man Legends
Star Fox 64 still looks good because it's mostly blocks anyway.

>>2935542
Don't pay attention to the autism brigade. We know you aren't trolling.

File: indy500.webm (2MB, 320x124px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x124px

I'm not even kidding. I love the visuals on this game so much. When you know its age and platform, that just adds the technical marvel. But even without that, it's a very precise and consistent look.

>>2935542
>Which 3D games holds up best today?
It's still a stupid-ass question. If you like how a game looks, then it "holds up." If you don't like it, then it doesn't. It's not like some measurable thing. It's as stupid as asking "which games are unplayable today?"

Why don't you just ask "what are your favorite games" or "what do you think are the best-looking games" from this era instead?

>>2934869
No, none of them.

>>2935641
Why is the sound in that game so awful? It's nothing but a square wave with varying frequencies.

>>2935676
because you're not playing with the adlib sound. Also, its bleeper sound is massively superior to Accolade's Grand Prix

>>2935676
>>2935682
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpyMNz1wbN0
guess it is just a square wave. Never bothered me. It worked just fine.

>>2934864
I'd say most of the time the ones that tried to adhere to a style and worked with the limitations in mind are the ones who aged the best. Whenever they tried to be "realistic" they failed miserably, especially in the early attempts.

Conker's Bad Fur Day.

File: 52413-Tekken_3_(E)_(Alt)-2.jpg (57KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 640x480px

I think Tekken 3 still looks great, pic related.

>>2935641
True that. There's a modern remake on Android and it ruins all the experience of the original, huge disappointment.

>>2936394
>There's a modern remake on Android
Can't say if it is really a remake that much, because it's hard to invent a new original racing game about Indy 500.

>>2935563
DC isn't really "early 3D" anymore.

Quake. Though it's cheating, especially in how amazing it looks with the same assets and an upgraded renderer.

Unreal (though hardly "early") is probably the game that scaled with hardware best of all, and it still looks fucking cool if not modern.

And then basically every game with either a superb art direction or very good animations compensating for the (now) low definition 3d and textures.

What really kills it for many of them is excess bilinear+ filtering imho, I much prefer sharp pixels to a blurry, smudgy mess in most cases.

>>2935563
I was playing it a few days ago, it really does hold up fantastically. It's actually a bit faster than the newer games and the game looks great.

You stupid autistic fuckers create these controversies yourselves, OP's question was innocent

>>2934864
Tomb Raider 1 still has pretty impressive level design for an early 3D game. In comparison 2 featured many levels in modern locations that were still designed like an ancient location so it felt backward as fuck.

File: wipeout35.jpg (70KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 320x240px

Wipeout. The polygonal designs of the ships is SO simplistic that it's timeless.

Bloody Roar II
Alot of DC Games on VGA
Virtua Fighter 2
Daytona USA

>>2936559
But it somehow was "earlier" before?

>>2934864
>Are there any people on /vr/ who aren't underage badly?
Only a few

>>2936559
>>2936859
kek'd pretty damn hard.

>>2935563
Even the first soul calibre on ps1 looks and plays great

>>2936610

I liked how 2 did it. Opera House for example was deep into uncanny valley, and I love that.

>>2935616
I agree, emulators make N64 games look really bland, most of them look actually good when played on an actual N64.

>>2937275
Wasn't it called Soul Edge? To this day I've never played it, I don't think I've ever even seen a copy.

I kind of hate the new ones, 3 was the beginning of the end for me, lost the magic for me.

>>2937620
>3 was the beginning of the end for me, lost the magic for me.

What in the damn hell are you talking about? 3 was the second best one because it was 2 without any nonsense fuzzy guards. Lost the magic from what?

>>2937628
My personal taste, I'm not saying it's objectively bad I'm just saying I didn't enjoy it from that point.

>>2937641
I didn't realize that I was beholden to the hivemind for my own opinions outside of a situation where I have to admit that I'm wrong.

>>2937657
Asking me to save my opinion for an unpopular opinions thread isn't asking me to not share an opinion?

>>2935616
Holy fuck, that level is really low poly

>>2936812
did it really look that clean? I seem to remember a lot more blurry textures.

>>2935543
Shill somewhere else

Every single cell shaded game still looks great

>my favorite style

File: screen_2_big[1].jpg (275KB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1000x562px

>>2937961

File: slaphappy-9.png (65KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 320x240px

>>2937961

>>2937961
Except sonic shuffle.

>>2934893
The ruins levels were great. Fug. Sewer ones had best music tho

File: latest[1].jpg (70KB, 570x359px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 570x359px

>>2937973
The characters don't look that bad - it doesn't look like the background was cell shaded though

>>2936818
Wipeout 3 was my fucking jam

>>2937982
why have you stopped?

>>2937985
I don't have it anymore and I forgot about it. I have ePSXe but my game backlog is ridikalis right now

File: 4058_008Lock_1257496710[1].jpg (167KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 640x480px

>>2937972
I don't think that's cel shaded

>>2937980
>Sega actually ripped off Mario Partythis blatantly

They even have the same green exclamation point spaces.

>>2937961
They are great, but they were created in the borderline /vr/ time.
They are very great though.

>>2938014
>They are very great though.
How did I send this message unfinished?
I meant they look great even on Playstation, and too bad they were pretty late.

>>2938006
The game is awful, it's such a weirdly plain game for the dreamcast, this was a game that was launched near Jet Grind Radio, Samba De Amigo and space channel five for fucks sake.

>>2938014
Time Gal, Road Avenger, Space Ace, and Dragons Lair seem to be the type of retro games that led up to cell shading - though they aren't really in 3d

>>2938025
Cel shading is a very specific effect, that relies on having polygons to spare, and the ability to customize lighting computations (shaders, in some form). The PS has neither of these things. So you're unlikely to find cel shaded games on there. You will find games though going for a certain animated and not realistic style, which strongly resembles cel shading; and as usual, styles that don't aim to be realistic, stand the test of time best.

>>2938032
Parrapa the Rapper maybe?

File: dragons-lair[1].jpg (251KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1280x720px

>>2938032
I wish there were more animated games like this

Honestly, the more realistic a game tries to be the worse it ages

>even todays games will be laughed at in 10-20 years because of this

>>2938035
That right there is a good suggestion - one of the earlier animated looking games of Playstation

>>2938043
Fear effect as well.

File: drag18.jpg (9KB, 160x144px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 160x144px

>>2938039
Dragon's Lair, while pretty as fuck, is also shallow as fuck. Also, modern hardware made this approach obsolete, since modern shaders can practically replicate these visuals in realtime.

>>2938049
I agree - I just like the simple mechanics of that kind of game. A more modern version of that would probably be some of the Tell Tale games that are out now like a Wolf Among Us that are just simple story based games with no right or wrong

armored core series

>>2937865
The game's stuck to a low resolution. Unless you played it on a lowres crt monitor, it will look generally blurry.

>>2937670
I think that's what makes it look so good. The N64 will render a 6 sides box just as good as a PS4.

File: unreal_2gr.jpg (47KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x600px

>>2934864
Unreal didn't age badly.

I also want to rant about some bullshit that I am seeing a lot on /vr/, and other boards. First things first, if a thread is on-topic (even if controversial), you have no reason to report it. If you don't like a thread, yet feel compelled to post in it, use the sage function to avoid bumping it. You can also hide the thread, or use filters to eliminate recurring threads.

Second, I am also sick of people here using >>>/v/ as a scapegoat for everything. The only /v/ influence I see here is that Mario 64 rolling rocks thread. /v/ is a terrible board, I know that. If /v/ felt compelled to post here, even just the occasional thread, we would not be one of the slowest boards on the site. Everything I don't like is /v/. If that isn't bullshit enough you can always blame /b/ or even Reddit. Most of /vr/'s problems are /vr/'s problems. This includes autism about TVs/monitors, only being allowed to have 1-2 PC gaming threads up at once (one of them being a spinoff of a formerly recurring /g/ thread), and the "no Dreamcast allowed, read the rules not the sticky" autists. The reason I get mad about constant frivolous reporting is that after a while the mods/janitors can't deal with the sheer volume of reports and eventually cave to the pressure and start removing threads at the drop of a hat. The only troll threads worth reporting are the ones from people saying that retro games are shit, etc. If someone is attacking the board topic entirely (calling /lgbt/ degenerates, preaching gun control on /k/, going on /n/ telling folks to quit riding bikes and trains and get a car, you get the idea) without even trying to turn it into a discussion, they should probably get reported. If you are triggered by controversial topics, or people posting the incorrect OP pasta in a thread, then hide it and move on, or go to some place more carefully curated like Reddit or some vintage gaming forums.

>>2937995
What is it then you dumbass?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4S55SC5w9Y

>>2939443
the outlines are based on a common cel shading method, certainly. The lighting is static, no toon shader.
I'm surprised the outlines stay this stable, given the playstations tendency to wobbly vertices

>>2934864
Nope, I've always hated 3D polygon bullshit. Animation/FMVs should have been the norm.

>>2939481
does always include the present? Do you only play /vr/, or include present 2D games or what?

>>2935673
You're an idiot. Games can be very unplayable today, whereas at release they were lauded as being good games.

Look at the original Warcraft. The game is unplayable. The UI and entire control set up are completely dated and frustrating to use to anyone who has any experience with more conventional RTS controls.

The game suffers heavily for this.

>Why don't you just ask "what are your favorite games" or "what do you think are the best-looking games" from this era instead?

Because that's not the point of this discussion, imbecile.

File: Virtua_Racing_-_1995_-_Time_Warner_Interactive.jpg (128KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1440x1080px

Virtually racing still looks amazing. Early 3d looks better untextured imo

File: ps1 graphics.gif (2MB, 300x290px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x290px

>>2934864
If youre gonna ask a question like that, then why would you post a picture of a ps1 game? It makes no sense

From the top of my head
Still looks great:
Mario 64, StarFox 64, Bomberman 64, Original Tomb Raider


Looks like shit:
DK64, Buck Bumble

Turok would probably look decent, but that draw distance is ridiculous.

File: Klump_dk64.jpg (20KB, 300x218px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x218px

>>2940384
hah, even DK64 looks shitloads better than Tomb Raider 1 dude

>>2940164
Not him, but you're the idiot man.
Are you claiming some sort of biological evolutionary change in humans that has occurred that means they no longer find the original Warcraft appealing while they had loads of fun with it before? I hope you realize that most of this "unplayable today" or "aged" comes from the industry and magazines who obviously want people to buy the latest games.
Some people seriously have ZERO ability to think.

>>2935675
Mario 64 looks okay. If you find them off-putting you're being a bitch.

>>2940395
DK64 is and always has been a fantastic looking game. It looks fucking brilliant, especially compared to most of today's games. How good it looks is not the same as how advanced it is.
Full disclosure: I also just posted this >2940434, so I'm not trying to make out like I'm multiple people with this view.

>>2940434
Read the post you moron. I'm saying that the UI has dated because game design and development has put in so many quality of life improvements that it is unplayable to a person accustomed to modern gaming.

This can be a bad thing or a good thing depending on the game genre.

Games like Quake, Master of Orion 2 or Super Mario Bros 3 are so well made that they're basically timeless. There is minimal need to update them and they are still very playable.

>>2940440
>it is unplayable to a person accustomed to modern gaming
>good thing

Please give examples. Also, please restrain from stating modern = better.

>>2940454
Dragon Quest 1 NES

Worse than every version that came out after it due to unstreamlined UI. And let's not get started on how the Japanese version used passwords.

>>2940454
>Also, please restrain from stating modern = better
It's funny, because the statement you quoted boils down to "modern is not necessarily better"

>>2940454
I already gave you an example. Warcraft.

Even the second game has some critical improvements like multiple unit selection. The third game has tonnes of quality of life improvements like tab cycling of units within a squad, rally points, unit build queues etc.

>>2940440
Sure, there have been improvements made in a particular genres mechanics and controls, either in new IPs or sequels of the same game, but that still doesn't negate the potential fun you can have in an older game despite its flaws. If you could have fun with it back then you can have fun with it now if you tried. You need to have the context of a game in mind and the open mindedness to forgive its flaws as a product of its time.

There are even ways around a lot of these with mods like >>2940470 on DQ1 you can now emulate to use save states instead of using passwords, or speeding up the game to get around annoying UI. Even modern games have annoying parts about their UIs or controls that people overlook yet still have fun with.

>Games like Quake, Master of Orion 2 or Super Mario Bros 3
You can still remake these games and sell them because there will always be someone out there that doesn't like retro vidya at all and can't stand sub 1080p 60fps graphics. I've known plenty of people that don't touch these games because they think ALL of them have "aged badly". It is entirely a matter of taste and if you want to ignore good games because of graphics that are a product of their time then be my guest.

>>2940514
You do realize that I've known plenty of people that complain about how in Starcraft you can only select 12 units? "Quality of life improvements" are completely subjective.

This "games age badly" thing, you know where it's from right?

It's video game industry propaganda. They've systematically tried to brainwash gamers into hating the medium's past in a cynical effort to sell newer titles.

No other medium actively promotes shitting on its history as much as gaming.

>>2940520
>You do realize that I've known plenty of people that complain about how in Starcraft you can only select 12 units
Why would I realise this until you told me? 12 unit select in starcraft is constricting, but far more functional and playable, especially coupled with other QOL improvements, than anything in original warcraft.

>>2940527
What I meant was to some people 12 is too constricting, even compared to a game like Age of Empires where you could select up to 40. If you can deal with 12 you can deal with Warcraft.

>>2940525
I wonder if this was a thing when film first started, and then when it was established that sort of thing mellowed out. I hope that happens with gaming.

>>2940525
I just explain how Dragon Quest 1 NES doesn't hold up and you respond with stupid conspiracy theories.

No one told me DQ1 didn't hold up. I felt that way as soon as I played the SFC and GBC versions and saw that I didn't have to open a menu to walk up a flight of stairs.

>>2940518
>on DQ1 you can now emulate to use save states instead of using passwords
Or I can just emulate/buy the superior versions of the game.

>>2940470
>>2940514
I meant, examples that people not being aple to play certain games is a good thing.

>>2940820
An opinion often found on /vr/ is that older games had less handholding and required from the player to think, and develop a coherent mental model of the game world. People used to tutorialized amusement park games of the present will have a very hard time getting into these old games. Yet that's not perceived as an issue of the game being worse, or interfaces being inferior, but rather an indicator of the demands towards the player having deteriorated in the present.

>>2940842
>handholding

The difference between games today and games then is that the "handholding" came in the manual for the game. Nowadays, you don't need to fill a manual full of information like that when you can have the player do a hands-on tutorial.

>>2940435
n64 games usually aged horribly imho, when it comes to graphics.

if anything i enjoy wipeout64, from ones that didn't turn out that bad in the long run.

File: 1SYu3wo.png (302KB, 873x657px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 873x657px

>>2940868
The issue goes well beyond tutorials.

Pic's not /vr/, but illustrates the concept

>>2940518
>forgive its flaws as a product of its time.
>There are even ways around a lot of these with mods

No, you cannot have your cake and eat it. If you use heavy modding to make the game more palatable, you are automatically conceding that the game is much less fun to play without them. I can't play JRPGs from the SNES era, for example, without having a fast forward button on the emulator get through the random encounters because it's fucking tedious.

I love playing old games, but for certain games, no amount of open mindedness is going to make me have fun, because the UI or mechanics are so out dated. I have been spoilt as a consumer by advances in game design etc.

>if you want to ignore good games because of graphics that are a product of their time then be my guest.
I'm not talking about games being outdated because of graphics, don't misrepresent my argument.

>>2940531
>If you can deal with 12 you can deal with Warcraft.

Bullshit. SC had unit grouping and 12 unit control. Warcraft had 1 unit at a time and no unit grouping. This is on top of an absolutely fuckhuge pile of other quality of life improvements.

File: Warcraft-1.png (138KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 800x480px

>>2940904
Not disagreeing with your point at all, just a minor correction: Warcraft 1 had unit grouping, but it was obscure. Hold ctrl or something while selecting up to 4 units by clicking, no frame dragging

>>2940925
Ahh my mistake. That's a bit better but only marginally and still a rather inconvenient and frustrating way to play the game.

>>2940952
yeah, been there, done that. I think Dune 2 does it in a similar way. And 4 units is never enough. Warcraft is simple enough that you just build and rush. Where "rush" means sending a dozen or two dozen groups of 4 units each. Lots of wild clicking involved in not just micromanaging, but nanomanaging these poor guys.

>>2940963
> I think Dune 2 does it in a similar way.
There's no grouping in Dune 2, but you could select a unit and order him to move on the other unit, so there was a chain of units when the first unit was ordered to move.

>>2941087
actually, that's quite a nice solution to the grouping problem. Any idea how many units you could control like that at the same time?

File: bldyror2u.png (95KB, 512x480px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 512x480px

Bloody Roar 2 looks incredible. It's one of the few PS1 games that looks way better when emulated in 1080p

>>2941098
I don't remember precisely how many, I remember it wasn't infinite and kinda five or six units moved after the "head of the chain".
Also, I played Genesis version, maybe on PC it was possible to chain more units.