What Do You Think of PS1 FPS Games?

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] well I was talking about computers in 1998/99. so if the PS1 can run Quake 2 with shortcomings like that, what made you think the Saturn couldnt? its got even more RAM in the VRAM department.Darkman2007

Actually the PS1 version looks like the PC version running in software mode, just that it has more lighting. Even a low-end 1998/99 PC could handle that. Infact if you had a solid PC with a 3dfx Voodoo graphics card back in the 90s you always got the best versions of multiplat games.

I don't say Saturn couldn't run Quake 2 but it would probably need a custom engine and some other sacrifices would have to be made.

I had a Pentium PC but a terrible graphics card (S3 Virge) so all 3D games ran like crap on my PC (except Duke 3D which ran fine). If I had a Voodoo card it would be better than all consoles at the time.

3DO and Jaguar would probably struggle to run Quake since they couldn't even run Doom very well.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Actually the PS1 version looks like the PC version running in software mode, just that it has more lighting. Even a low-end 1998/99 PC could handle that. Infact if you had a solid PC with a 3dfx Voodoo graphics card back in the 90s you always got the best versions of multiplat games.

I don't say Saturn couldn't run Quake 2 but it would probably need a custom engine and some other sacrifices would have to be made.

nameless12345

I had a Pentium PC but a terrible graphics card (S3 Virge) so all 3D games ran like crap on my PC (except Duke 3D which ran fine). If I had a Voodoo card it would be better than all consoles at the time.

3DO and Jaguar would probably struggle to run Quake since they couldn't even run Doom very well.

Hey thanks for all of the responses and ensuing discussion. I was away for the weekend so I didn't get a chance to keep up.

[QUOTE="SilverSignal"]

[QUOTE="TheRaiderNation"]

Unfortunately PS2 FPS gaems have not aged well at all.

Darkman2007

Don't you mean PS1?

I was just playing MoH last night after reading this thread. You can play it with both the analogue sticks so it's very comfortable and playing it on a much more modern screen with high res textures makes it look better that it used to. Sure it still looks pretty ugly but so what? It's still fun to play.Plus it has really good sound for a PS1 game.

I hear the same complaints leveled at Duke Nukem 3D , Quake , Quake 2 etc.

I have Quake and Duke 3D on the Saturn (also Quake 64), and Quake 2 on the PS1, all of them are perfectly playable games, they run smoothly, have great level design and great action.

I apologize for the typoes. I meant PS1 FPS games

I am mainly refering to the graphics of the PS1 FPS games, they look terrible by today's standards. The gameplay is solid, but it is tough to get past the ugly textures.

I never have been into FPS games every much, so I hardly played any of them until last generation. But I tried to play MOH a few days ago for the PS1 and I just could not get past the ugle textures, so I stopped.

Any other genre I am fine with below average graphics but solid gameplay. However, FPS games are the exception for me

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="SilverSignal"]

Don't you mean PS1?

I was just playing MoH last night after reading this thread. You can play it with both the analogue sticks so it's very comfortable and playing it on a much more modern screen with high res textures makes it look better that it used to. Sure it still looks pretty ugly but so what? It's still fun to play.Plus it has really good sound for a PS1 game.

TheRaiderNation

I hear the same complaints leveled at Duke Nukem 3D , Quake , Quake 2 etc.

I have Quake and Duke 3D on the Saturn (also Quake 64), and Quake 2 on the PS1, all of them are perfectly playable games, they run smoothly, have great level design and great action.

I apologize for the typoes. I meant PS1 FPS games

I am mainly refering to the graphics of the PS1 FPS games, they look terrible by today's standards. The gameplay is solid, but it is tough to get past the ugly textures.

I never have been into FPS games every much, so I hardly played any of them until last generation. But I tried to play MOH a few days ago for the PS1 and I just could not get past the ugle textures, so I stopped.

Any other genre I am fine with below average graphics but solid gameplay. However, FPS games are the exception for me

[QUOTE="TheRaiderNation"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

I hear the same complaints leveled at Duke Nukem 3D , Quake , Quake 2 etc.

I have Quake and Duke 3D on the Saturn (also Quake 64), and Quake 2 on the PS1, all of them are perfectly playable games, they run smoothly, have great level design and great action.

Darkman2007

I apologize for the typoes. I meant PS1 FPS games

I am mainly refering to the graphics of the PS1 FPS games, they look terrible by today's standards. The gameplay is solid, but it is tough to get past the ugly textures.

I never have been into FPS games every much, so I hardly played any of them until last generation. But I tried to play MOH a few days ago for the PS1 and I just could not get past the ugle textures, so I stopped.

Any other genre I am fine with below average graphics but solid gameplay. However, FPS games are the exception for me

I never played quake for the Saturn, just took a look at some gameplay videos online, all things considered, not bad. The textures and lightening def have that early Id FPS feel to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yu8d4e9sR8

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="TheRaiderNation"]

I apologize for the typoes. I meant PS1 FPS games

I am mainly refering to the graphics of the PS1 FPS games, they look terrible by today's standards. The gameplay is solid, but it is tough to get past the ugly textures.

I never have been into FPS games every much, so I hardly played any of them until last generation. But I tried to play MOH a few days ago for the PS1 and I just could not get past the ugle textures, so I stopped.

Any other genre I am fine with below average graphics but solid gameplay. However, FPS games are the exception for me

TheRaiderNation

I never played quake for the Saturn, just took a look at some gameplay videos online, all things considered, not bad. The textures and lightening def have that early Id FPS feel to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yu8d4e9sR8

Quake is impressive for the Saturn although I'd pick the PC version over it too. With mods it can look almost like a Xbox game or even better.

MoH for the PS1, however, feels like an old, 3rd rate PC shooter running in low-res software mode with the best thing about it being the dogs with machineguns (j/k :P ).

For example Goldeneye is blurry and choppy today but still retains the good level design and fun shooting it had.

Quake is impressive for the Saturn although I'd pick the PC version over it too. With mods it can look almost like a Xbox game or even better.

MoH for the PS1, however, feels like an old, 3rd rate PC shooter running in low-res software mode with the best thing about it being the dogs with machineguns (j/k :P ).

For example Goldeneye is blurry and choppy today but still retains the good level design and fun shooting it had.

nameless12345

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Quake is impressive for the Saturn although I'd pick the PC version over it too. With mods it can look almost like a Xbox game or even better.

MoH for the PS1, however, feels like an old, 3rd rate PC shooter running in low-res software mode with the best thing about it being the dogs with machineguns (j/k :P ).

For example Goldeneye is blurry and choppy today but still retains the good level design and fun shooting it had.

Darkman2007

Yeah, for the PS1 it did look good. But compared to PC shooters at the time it had nothing on them.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Quake is impressive for the Saturn although I'd pick the PC version over it too. With mods it can look almost like a Xbox game or even better.

MoH for the PS1, however, feels like an old, 3rd rate PC shooter running in low-res software mode with the best thing about it being the dogs with machineguns (j/k :P ).

For example Goldeneye is blurry and choppy today but still retains the good level design and fun shooting it had.

nameless12345

Yeah, for the PS1 it did look good. But compared to PC shooters at the time it had nothing on them.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] Quake Saturn was impressive for any console in 1997, MoH is newer but it looks good for its time too.Darkman2007

Yeah, for the PS1 it did look good. But compared to PC shooters at the time it had nothing on them.

Well like I said - for PS1 standards, it was a great shooter.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Yeah, for the PS1 it did look good. But compared to PC shooters at the time it had nothing on them.

nameless12345

Well like I said - for PS1 standards, it was a great shooter.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] well youre dealing with technology from late 1994 , and even then it wasn't top of the line compared to some arcade games. Quake 2 still looked good, and Im surprised they managed split screen multiplayer on it, something Quake on the Saturn didn't have.Darkman2007

Well like I said - for PS1 standards, it was a great shooter.

The graphics were one downside but PS1 FPSes were also more limited than PC ones. In the 90s the PC wiped the floor with the consoles in the FPS genre. Even Goldeneye and Perfect Dark would have heavy competition on the PC.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well like I said - for PS1 standards, it was a great shooter.

nameless12345

The graphics were one downside but PS1 FPSes were also more limited than PC ones. In the 90s the PC wiped the floor with the consoles in the FPS genre. Even Goldeneye and Perfect Dark would have heavy competition on the PC.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] the only issue with the PS1 really , is the graphical glitches like clipping, warping and seaming which didn't happen anywhere near as much on the N64 or even Saturn . surely you noticed them being more apparent on the PS1 then on the Saturn and N64.Darkman2007

The graphics were one downside but PS1 FPSes were also more limited than PC ones. In the 90s the PC wiped the floor with the consoles in the FPS genre. Even Goldeneye and Perfect Dark would have heavy competition on the PC.

Yeah, but in 3rd person or racing games it wasn't so apparent. It's no secret anymore that the PS1 was actually the weakest of the "three big" but it's debatable which had the best graphics. MGS probably wouldn't be possible on the Saturn and it would have washed out textures on the N64.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

The graphics were one downside but PS1 FPSes were also more limited than PC ones. In the 90s the PC wiped the floor with the consoles in the FPS genre. Even Goldeneye and Perfect Dark would have heavy competition on the PC.

nameless12345

Yeah, but in 3rd person or racing games it wasn't so apparent. It's no secret anymore that the PS1 was actually the weakest of the "three big" but it's debatable which had the best graphics. MGS probably wouldn't be possible on the Saturn and it would have washed out textures on the N64.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] the visuals werent bad, they were just full of glitches, some games more then others, but seaming and clipping in particular were the most common, even in the most technically proficient games like MGSDarkman2007

Yeah, but in 3rd person or racing games it wasn't so apparent. It's no secret anymore that the PS1 was actually the weakest of the "three big" but it's debatable which had the best graphics. MGS probably wouldn't be possible on the Saturn and it would have washed out textures on the N64.

Well to tell the truth all PS1 3D games have horrible warping textures. But I now see why some people think it had the best graphics. The reason for that is that it had the fastest 3D graphics. The Saturn had a good poly count but couldn't display some of the effects PS1 could while N64, although more than twice stronger than PS1, had blurry and often slow graphics with a lot of fog (that fog effect was later removed when devs mastered the hardware).

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Yeah, but in 3rd person or racing games it wasn't so apparent. It's no secret anymore that the PS1 was actually the weakest of the "three big" but it's debatable which had the best graphics. MGS probably wouldn't be possible on the Saturn and it would have washed out textures on the N64.

nameless12345

Well to tell the truth all PS1 3D games have horrible warping textures. But I now see why some people think it had the best graphics. The reason for that is that it had the fastest 3D graphics. The Saturn had a good poly count but couldn't display some of the effects PS1 could while N64, although more than twice stronger than PS1, had blurry and often slow graphics with a lot of fog (that fog effect was later removed when devs mastered the hardware).

[QUOTE="mattykovax"]Personally I feel the only game at the time that was good was goldeneye on the 64 and that is horrible by todays standards. the big issue for me though is not graphics or crappy ports. even by the time most XBOX devolpers had figured out the interface for controllers most the PS2 FPS games still controlled like crap. I dont think I would play anything before PS3 For FPS on a sony system.alienlegion

I don't quite understand the Xbox comment. PS2 FPS had horrible controls? Could you elaborate on that? I have a number of FPS games for the PS2, as well as the Armored Core games and some other 3PS and I never thought they were hard to control. Heck, I even beat Nine Breaker using the old shoulder button set up from the PS1 era. I've never had any issues with the analogue sticks.

[QUOTE="alienlegion"]

[QUOTE="mattykovax"]Personally I feel the only game at the time that was good was goldeneye on the 64 and that is horrible by todays standards. the big issue for me though is not graphics or crappy ports. even by the time most XBOX devolpers had figured out the interface for controllers most the PS2 FPS games still controlled like crap. I dont think I would play anything before PS3 For FPS on a sony system.mattykovax

I don't quite understand the Xbox comment. PS2 FPS had horrible controls? Could you elaborate on that? I have a number of FPS games for the PS2, as well as the Armored Core games and some other 3PS and I never thought they were hard to control. Heck, I even beat Nine Breaker using the old shoulder button set up from the PS1 era. I've never had any issues with the analogue sticks.

I admit the 360 controller is VERY comfy, but I have issues with the thin top shoulder buttons, and I actually prefer the symettrical layout of the analogue sticks on the Sony controller. If I had to chose it would be tough, especially since the PS3 bottom triggers are now floating and aren't scooped to allow finger grip. They also aren;t as durable now when you throw them in a blind rage.:twisted:

I disagree with you, though, that PS2 games didn't control well, and I don;t think MS did anything that revolutionized the controls. They just built off of Sony's controller, which was a smart move.

I think there's no real reason to get a PS1 FPS. FPS is one genre that has gotten better through the years whereas this is definitely not the case with other genres, like JRPGS.

[QUOTE="mattykovax"][QUOTE="alienlegion"]

I don't quite understand the Xbox comment. PS2 FPS had horrible controls? Could you elaborate on that? I have a number of FPS games for the PS2, as well as the Armored Core games and some other 3PS and I never thought they were hard to control. Heck, I even beat Nine Breaker using the old shoulder button set up from the PS1 era. I've never had any issues with the analogue sticks.

alienlegion

I admit the 360 controller is VERY comfy, but I have issues with the thin top shoulder buttons, and I actually prefer the symettrical layout of the analogue sticks on the Sony controller. If I had to chose it would be tough, especially since the PS3 bottom triggers are now floating and aren't scooped to allow finger grip. They also aren;t as durable now when you throw them in a blind rage.:twisted:

I disagree with you, though, that PS2 games didn't control well, and I don;t think MS did anything that revolutionized the controls. They just built off of Sony's controller, which was a smart move.

I don't think they hold up today at all. The only good Fps during the PS1 era were on the N64.DavidianMH

[QUOTE="DavidianMH"]I don't think they hold up today at all. The only good Fps during the PS1 era were on the N64.Darkman2007

He probably ment exclusives. And in this case Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were the best (although they're choppy and floaty now).

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="DavidianMH"]I don't think they hold up today at all. The only good Fps during the PS1 era were on the N64.nameless12345

He probably ment exclusives. And in this case Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were the best (although they're choppy and floaty now).

not as good as n64s sorry even quake 2 on n64 was better, still is ,

and man oh man when i played dn totel meltdown which by the way is actually dn 3d/64 , i was disappointed not only in the darkenss of the levels compared to n64,

but the controls , the controls although better then the genesis game, or was it saturn i forgot which it was for but , ya the controlso n the ps1 version was so bad , they put the weapon selection in the wrong spot-- could have used n64 controls or similar , but no they put it so far out of whack i just couldnt play it

and moh was ok but ya after your done with it you kind of dont have a reason to go back

then theres the 007 games dont make me go into detail on these, because compared to n64s again , they just dont quite stack up ,

the visuals are poor , the lack of multiplayer is somthinbg to be concerned about the lack of anything on ps1 in the genre just dont offer much

not as good as n64s sorry even quake 2 on n64 was better, still is ,

and man oh man when i played dn totel meltdown which by the way is actually dn 3d/64 , i was disappointed not only in the darkenss of the levels compared to n64,

but the controls , the controls although better then the genesis game, or was it saturn i forgot which it was for but , ya the controlso n the ps1 version was so bad , they put the weapon selection in the wrong spot-- could have used n64 controls or similar , but no they put it so far out of whack i just couldnt play it

and moh was ok but ya after your done with it you kind of dont have a reason to go back

then theres the 007 games dont make me go into detail on these, because compared to n64s again , they just dont quite stack up ,

the visuals are poor , the lack of multiplayer is somthinbg to be concerned about the lack of anything on ps1 in the genre just dont offer much

mariokart64fan

unless of course you would want to elaborate and show some evidence.

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

not as good as n64s sorry even quake 2 on n64 was better, still is ,

and man oh man when i played dn totel meltdown which by the way is actually dn 3d/64 , i was disappointed not only in the darkenss of the levels compared to n64,

but the controls , the controls although better then the genesis game, or was it saturn i forgot which it was for but , ya the controlso n the ps1 version was so bad , they put the weapon selection in the wrong spot-- could have used n64 controls or similar , but no they put it so far out of whack i just couldnt play it

and moh was ok but ya after your done with it you kind of dont have a reason to go back

then theres the 007 games dont make me go into detail on these, because compared to n64s again , they just dont quite stack up ,

the visuals are poor , the lack of multiplayer is somthinbg to be concerned about the lack of anything on ps1 in the genre just dont offer much

Darkman2007

Huh? Neither were better on Saturn, but both were better on Saturn? What?!

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

not as good as n64s sorry even quake 2 on n64 was better, still is ,

and man oh man when i played dn totel meltdown which by the way is actually dn 3d/64 , i was disappointed not only in the darkenss of the levels compared to n64,

but the controls , the controls although better then the genesis game, or was it saturn i forgot which it was for but , ya the controlso n the ps1 version was so bad , they put the weapon selection in the wrong spot-- could have used n64 controls or similar , but no they put it so far out of whack i just couldnt play it

and moh was ok but ya after your done with it you kind of dont have a reason to go back

then theres the 007 games dont make me go into detail on these, because compared to n64s again , they just dont quite stack up ,

the visuals are poor , the lack of multiplayer is somthinbg to be concerned about the lack of anything on ps1 in the genre just dont offer much

Emerald_Warrior

Huh? Neither were better on Saturn, but both were better on Saturn? What?!

grammer mistake on my part. fixed it, thanks

what Im saying is , Quake on the Saturn is better then its N64 counterpart in most ways, Duke 64 is also inferior to its Saturn counterpart,, though to be fair, its a very good conversion too

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] quake was not better on the Saturn , neither was Duke Nukem, both were better on the Saturn, even Quake 2 is debatable. unless of course you would want to elaborate and show some evidence.Darkman2007

Huh? Neither were better on Saturn, but both were better on Saturn? What?!

grammer mistake on my part. fixed it, thanks

what Im saying is , Quake on the Saturn is better then its N64 counterpart in most ways, Duke 64 is also inferior to its Saturn counterpart,, though to be fair, its a very good conversion too

Saturn Quake has better texture and architecture detail but isn't as fast and has weird moving enemies/worse control with D-pad while Duke 64 has worse texture detail and is slightly censored but has new effects and a four player multi-player.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

Huh? Neither were better on Saturn, but both were better on Saturn? What?!

nameless12345

grammer mistake on my part. fixed it, thanks

what Im saying is , Quake on the Saturn is better then its N64 counterpart in most ways, Duke 64 is also inferior to its Saturn counterpart,, though to be fair, its a very good conversion too

Saturn Quake has better texture and architecture detail but isn't as fast and has weird moving enemies/worse control with D-pad while Duke 64 has worse texture detail and is slightly censored but has new effects and a four player multi-player.

also , that special effects arguement is also somewhat wrong in that while the N64 certainly has some nice special effects which the Saturn version does not have, the Saturn version also has special effects that are in themselves ,very nice.

just 2 examples from each game

in this room , the lighting also flickers

coloured lighting on Saturn Quake.

there are also effects which are not even on the N64 (from memory) , like lighting when you or an enemy fire a gun in Quake

now , I would say the N64 still has better special effects, but the Saturn versions certainly do well in that field too.

I actually have both Duke Saturn/N64 , and Quake Saturn/N64 , and while it is true that Saturn Quake has no multiplayer, Quake 64's multiplayer has frame rate issues sadly, though its still fun.

Duke Saturn doesn't have local multiplayer, but the US version actually supports the Netlink , which means that it supports online gameplay (well , its direct dial, but in 1997, that was online), and would still work since its not based on any server.

regarding the PS1 version of Duke 3D (Quake was never made for the PS1) , in terms of content, it has the least missing in terms of content from the PC , but sadly its also weakest on the technical aspect of things.

the PS1 version looks more pixelated than the other versions, and has some pretty annoying frame rate issues, while Duke 64 and Saturn both run smoothly.

the last problem with Duke64 is the music, or lack of it, during gameplay (there is music during the main menu, thats about it) , while Saturn Quake has music during gameplay.

now obviously thats because of the cartridge vs CD issue, but its still an issue, and it does take away from the atmosphere of the game , along with the censorship in the game

an example of the censorship is found on the 2nd level of episode 1 , where in all the other versions, you had a bar, which on the N64 was replaced with a kitchen

there is also on the same level a certain club , which on the N64 got turned into a parking lot.

another example is the magazine shop , on the Saturn , its the same as the PC

on the N64 , it got turned into a gun shop for some odd reason

also the Saturn version looks different because it uses a real 3D engine, no other official version uses that

the one thing that lets the Saturn version down , is that because of the 3D engine, some things had to be changed.

if youre familiar with the PC version , you will notice that some areas were either changed, reduced in size, or taken out altogehter.

its the reason why some of the big fans of Duke 3D dislike the Saturn version .

Quake on Saturn was good at the time, now I can't sit through that low res jaggie fest.covertgamer78

seeing as how you're comparing the duken nukem games I thought you should see this

an internet reviewer is giving short reviews on every duke nukem game ever made including the console ports

seeing as how you're comparing the duken nukem games I thought you should see this

an internet reviewer is giving short reviews on every duke nukem game ever made including the console ports

ohthemanatee

if you want a comparison of the PS1 and Saturn versions here it is

http://uk.gamespot.com/users/Darkman2007/video_player?id=d3Flw2Ot5bMPvD_a

well, the PC version would beat any console version with most games, at least on a visual level/Darkman2007

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]well, the PC version would beat any console version with most games, at least on a visual level/covertgamer78

if you were to ask me for the best FPS on the PS1 I would say Quake 2 , its very good, and is also a very impressive game for what its running on.Darkman2007

I find Final Doom better. Quake 2 may be impressive for the console and have extra lighting but it has nothing on the PC version (except that extra lighting).

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]if you were to ask me for the best FPS on the PS1 I would say Quake 2 , its very good, and is also a very impressive game for what its running on.nameless12345

I find Final Doom better. Quake 2 may be impressive for the console and have extra lighting but it has nothing on the PC version (except that extra lighting).

When the PS1 was around people still called FPS Doom clones. I always considered games like Descent, G-Police, Colony Wars, Beltlogger 9 and Space Griffon FPS games, or variants on Doom clones.

Space shooters trace their lineage back further, but alot of those old games were on rails, and others were space trader games that weren't built around shooting only.

Anyway I'm referring to all of these games when I say FPS. Too late to revise the thread title, but I'd like to hear more in put on games like the one's mentioned above.

[QUOTE="covertgamer78"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"]well, the PC version would beat any console version with most games, at least on a visual level/Darkman2007

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="covertgamer78"]This thread is about PS1 shooters or the console versions. That is what everyone is analyzing.covertgamer78

When the PS1 was around people still called FPS Doom clones. I always considered games like Descent, G-Police, Colony Wars, Beltlogger 9 and Space Griffon FPS games, or variants on Doom clones.

Space shooters trace their lineage back further, but alot of those old games were on rails, and others were space trader games that weren't built around shooting only.

Anyway I'm referring to all of these games when I say FPS. Too late to revise the thread title, but I'd like to hear more in put on games like the one's mentioned above.

alienlegion

you can trace space shooter games back to Elite (1984) and that game offered an open world to explore, much like GTA or RPG's

and this was all 8 years before Doom