Was the framerate always this bad?

>>3803710
Yes. You're just used to games with better frame rates.
Banjo-Tooie's frame rate is even worse.

the N64 doesn't get worse overtime

But the framerate is pretty decent except for Rusty Bucket Bay

>but it's not an absolutely rock solid stable 30
If this was your point all along you can fuck right off

>>3803796
That isn't what I meant. The framedrops just seem much more noticable than I remember.

>>3803843
mandela effect or your memory is just shit

No, didn't you hear about it? Games actively get worse through a process know as aging™. It used to run at rock solid 60 and it was fucking amazing but time hasn't been kind with poor Banjo.

>>3803710
bk has decent framrate
bt is where it gets abnormally bad

it feels like bt was supposed to use the expansion pack but they had to rush the game out. dk64 runs a lot better than bt

>>3803869
It's unlikely the Expansion Pak would have made any difference. It doesn't make the console go faster, just gives it a bit more room. Conker sure as hell wasn't rushed and it didn't use it. What Tooie needed was just more optimization time.

>dk64 runs a lot better than bt
The graphics are also a lot less sophisticated.

>>3803869
More memory =/= faster memory.
Basically Nintendo cheaped out on the ram for the N64 to keep costs low. The expansion pack gives it 4mb but it takes just as long to swap in data. The only hope is to overclock your N64.

>>3803710
Yeah it was.

I had the same shock about a year ago when I bought an n64 after not having played one since the early 2000s. A lot of games are complete slideshows. I hate to say it, but most of those games I used to love are just not playable to me anymore. The graphics aren't a big deal, but low framerates are torturous.

>>3803913
Even though Nintendo cheaped out on the RAM in the N64, it still has (a bit) more memory bandwidth than all of PS1's RAM combined.

Unfortunately, as the N64 was targeting a much higher image quality as standard (necessitating more memory access), relatively speaking, the bandwidth was insufficient.

>>3803869
>dk64 runs a lot better than bt

DK doesn't utilize the expansion pack at all. It was only required because of a bug.

>>3803948
>DK doesn't utilize the expansion pack at all.
people need to stop repeating this mindless shit

rare said themselves they had two builds of DK64, one with expansion and one without

the one without crashed every so often, the one with didn't

so the game that got released was the build that required the expansion pak and actually used it, the fact that it wasn't buggy was an unintended bonus

>>3803951
[citation needed]

>>3803979
listen hear you little shit

they didn't just get the bug and say "hurrr I wonder if reprogramming the game with the expansion pak will fix it instead of just finding the source of the bug", no, they just took the build they already developed and decided it was the only copy of the game that could immediately be released

source is the conker commentary videos

>>3803932
All those (then) high-res textures cutting down the framerate and then shit on by that oily texture filtering.

>>3803951
So him saying "It was only required because of a bug." wasn't wrong then. Saying it didn't use it at all was probably exaggerated since we know why it was packaged with it.

>>3804254
Except the expansion pack is used for the lighting and particle effects.

>>3803913
Nintendo most certainly did not cheap out on the ram.
The RDRAM used had a very high bandwidth and clock speed for it's time, but the problem was that it had higher latency than it's competitiors.
This combined with the processors lack of DMA (direct memory access) slowed the system down somewhat.

The system shipped with 4mb of ram because by the time the expansion pack was released, the cost of RDRAM had come down, thus saving both consumers and Nintendo money.

Furthermore, 4mb was more than all the RAM the PS1 had in total(3.5mb), and the expansion pak was originally only meant to support hardware expansions.

>>3803710
What game is this?

>>3804315
Nintendo 64.... It even says on the box dumbo

Reminder that nobody gave a shit about framerate during 5th gen. It was all about GRAPHICS GRAPHIX GRAFIX

>>3804319
And now that we have the graphics, it's all about the framerate.

File: dumbo-happy.png (92KB, 600x454px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x454px

>>3804316
kek

>>3803796
>pretty decent
NOSTALGIA DETECTED

>>3804306
Nintendo most definitely did cheap out on the RAM. The whole console shares a single memory channel Even to this day, that is completely unprecedented. I can't think of another system which actually tried something as audaciously cheap as that.

It's true that RDRAM had great bandwidth for the time, but it was chosen not for it's bandwidth but it's very low integration cost. RDRAM only requires an 18 bit bus instead of the typical 64 bit bus you would use with SDRAM. Once again, this is just crazy unprecedented and remains so, a whole console sharing just a single 18 bit bus. Wow. The N64's memory subsystem would have literally cost mere dollars to manufacture.

In some ways it's a miracle the system ran as well as it did. You can thank the geniuses at SGI for somehow making it work.

dude I have been playing more n64 lately too and it's fucking chop city. I didn't remember goemon being so bad when i was a kid. Still a fun game but god damn I am pampered by 100+ fps now

You think that's bad? Wait until you play Tooie.
>chug a chuggin in a big wide open area with two enemies

>>3805297
You think THAT's bad? Wait until you play Chrono Cross
>chug a chugging on a JPEG background image

>>3803710
Take it from Star Fox 1, frame rate didn't fucking matter before 2000. (assuming you're rendering something in 3D)