Current Events > PS1 dominating the N64 feels like a Mandela Effect

(+) Yeah! (+)

Seems like I knew more people with 64s. The kids who had a Playstation, usually owned both.

Playstation was out first, so maybe it had a head start though. Somehow, I don't remember hearing about it until around the same time the 64 came out, but it was 1994.

That just anecdotal. All the kids I knew had ps1 except 1 and he was convinced to get ps1 too.

I think the big difference is how people interacted with N64 vs PS1. N64 had fewer sales, but it's built in 4 player and a bunch of wildly popular, culturally significant multi-player games gave it a cultural footprint that outsized its sales.

You only needed a friend or two in your friend group for everyone to play Smash Bros, Goldeneye, or Mario Kart. Then you throw in a few of the genre-defining games like OoT and around 64 and the N64 suddenly feels much bigger than its sales would indicate.

PS1 had more sales, it had more games, but it never had the same communal experience that the N64 did. And when one looks back on their memories many remember the multi-player hang-outs with their friends more than a single player game.

It's probably just a case of kids getting what ever console their friends had.

Compsognathus posted...

I think the big difference is how people interacted with N64 vs PS1. N64 had fewer sales, but it's built in 4 player and a bunch of wildly popular, culturally significant multi-player games gave it a cultural footprint that outsized its sales.

You only needed a friend or two in your friend group for everyone to play Smash Bros, Goldeneye, or Mario Kart. Then you throw in a few of the genre-defining games like OoT and around 64 and the N64 suddenly feels much bigger than its sales would indicate.

PS1 had more sales, it had more games, but it never had the same communal experience that the N64 did. And when one looks back on their memories many remember the multi-player hang-outs with their friends more than a single player game.

Yep, this is it. People remember those huge mutiplayer games, then they remember Mario 64 and Zelda 64 and Goldeneye. Everybody had them.

Thing is, that's all there was, lol. The thing only had a few hundred games and the classics that come to mind immediately is pretty much all there were. With PSX, there were thousands of games and hundreds of classics, and you'd have gamers who love the console for entirely different reasons.

N64 had better, higher-quality games. There weren't many to choose from, however, and virtually no RPGs.

The PS1 was basically an RPG machine. It was the only genre where the insane load times were semi-acceptable ( they weren't acceptable ). Nearly all PS1 games are unplayable today. N64 games are still fine.

It's also worth noting that the PS1 domination in America was probably the least pronounced. PS1 outsold the N64 2-1 in the US compared to 3-1 globally. Still dominate, but not to the same degree.

This is not the Mandela effect lol

Just want to add that the PS1 was for much longer than the N64.
The N64 was released in 1996 (and in Europe as late as 1997). By then, the PS1 had established itself as the market leader for well over two years, whereas the Sega Saturn was in its death throes.
The N64 fell into a rapid decline at the time of the Gamecube's launch in 2002. In contrast, the PS1 was still seeing new games released for it when the PS2 was already being superceded by the brand-new PS3 in circa 2007.
In other words, the N64's effective lifespan was five years. That's incredibly short.

pfh1001 posted...

Exactly. I was about 17 when the PS1 launched & everyone roughly my age got the PS1 because it had a huge & awesome library. The N64 had a few big 1st party games but pretty much nothing else.

Out of all my friends & acquaintances, there were dozens of people who had Playstations & I only knew 1 person that had an N64.

Conker's Bad Fur Day
Ogre Battle 64
Harvest Moon 64
GoldenEye 007
Perfect Dark
Banjo-Kazooie
Star Wars Rogue Squadron
WWF No Mercy
Episode 1 Racer
Space Station SIlicon Valley
et al

everyone I knew growing up had an N64 (born in 1989)

thought everyone was a Nintendo fan until the PS2 rolled around then it seemed like everyone switched

Maeiv posted...

everyone I knew growing up had an N64 (born in 1989)

thought everyone was a Nintendo fan until the PS2 rolled around then it seemed like everyone switched

I've always been a Nintendo fan. Didn't really become a PS fan until Ratchet & Clank A Crack In Time came out, though I did have a PS1 and PS2 before then, but only a few games for them.

I got into RPGs in tht late 90s and a lot of rental stores were selling off their SNES games so I got a number of em this way. I enjoyed the N64 but it's lack of games outside first party and the price tag difference eventually led me to getting a psone in 99. Until then I was solidly Nintendo only. Owning both systems was great for the time.

TyVulpine posted...

Conker's Bad Fur Day
Ogre Battle 64
Harvest Moon 64
GoldenEye 007
Perfect Dark
Banjo-Kazooie
Star Wars Rogue Squadron
WWF No Mercy
Episode 1 Racer
Space Station SIlicon Valley
et al

Rare was pretty much a 1st party developer
And Space Station Silicon Valley was released on the PS1 as Evo's Space Adventures.

Foppe posted...

Space Station Silicon Valley was released on the PS1 as Evo's Space Adventures.

Wait what

The N64 was a necessary evil. It fumbled in the shadow of the PS an had an awkward controller, but it gracefully escorted many beloved franchises into the 3D realm, setting the stage for future success.

Will_VIIII posted...

Wait what

Only in Europe.
And with some missing levels.
And worse framerate.
But they did manage to fix that 100% glitch.

I can believe it. I had both and so did most of my friends. But I played my PS1 so much more. So many great games.

Also a memory I have kind of cements my feeling on the debate.

I had a sleep over with a good friend of mine and we each rented a game. He had a PS so he rented some Independence Day game. I had a 64 so I rented Star Fox. Both pretty similar as far as core gameplay and multiplayer VS dog fighting.

Anyway, you have this ID game that's pretty slick, "mature", and graphically advanced. Then you have SF with it's cartoony characters and corny dialog. We had fun with both but obviously only one of those is memorable and worth replaying time and again.

HudGard posted...

Also a memory I have kind of cements my feeling on the debate.

I had a sleep over with a good friend of mine and we each rented a game. He had a PS so he rented some Independence Day game. I had a 64 so I rented Star Fox. Both pretty similar as far as core gameplay and multiplayer VS dog fighting.

Anyway, you have this ID game that's pretty slick, "mature", and graphically advanced. Then you have SF with it's cartoony characters and corny dialog. We had fun with both but obviously only one of those is memorable and worth replaying time and again.

That is amusing as Katina on SF64 is a homage to ID4.....

Because of the diverse catalog of games is why PS1 was better overall.

N64 was only good for 1 or 2 Mario games, goldeneye, and WCW vs nWo revenge.

bulletproofvita posted...

Over it's lifespan the PSOne had 3,061 titles to choose from.
The N64 had only 393.

who buys that many games though?

say you were a spoiled kid and got 5 games
per month through 5 years. 5 x 12 = 60

all you need is 60 good games throughout the consoles life span.

the n64s issue is it had some drought periods without good games and it was lacking in the fighting game and rpg genres

It is probably cause you were a kid. PS was more popular with older teens and adults.

Was ID4 a good game?

Every kid who gamed in my school seemed to have N64. I had a playstation too, but that was in like 1999. Everyone played Mario Kart and Smash and the wrestling g games in those days.

Another weird thing was that I didnt know very many people who had PS2s. Ive probably played less than 10 hours of PS2 in my life, none of my friends had one. Somehow, OG Xbox was king in my childhood. Everyone had Xbox Live, Halo was always crazy with everyone playing after school.

gamestunner posted...

Because of the diverse catalog of games is why PS1 was better overall.

N64 was only good for 1 or 2 Mario games, goldeneye, and WCW vs nWo revenge.

Quality over quantity.

Psone's lifespan was nearly a decade too. Multiplatform games from the 16 bit generation and the PS2 generation were finding their way on it

gamestunner posted...

Because of the diverse catalog of games is why PS1 was better overall.

N64 was only good for 1 or 2 Mario games, goldeneye, and WCW vs nWo revenge.

the n64 was known for so many groundbreaking, super impressive and fun games that became iconic.

mario 64
banjo kazooie
zelda oot
goldeneye
zelda mm
perfect dark
banjo threeie
mario kart
diddy king racing
paper Mario
mario party
smash bros
star fox 64
turok
turok 2

and as far as racing goes cruisn usa did look much better than Daytona and ridge racer

TyVulpine posted...

Quality over quantity.

Sure eye of beholder I suppose.

This statement is always said when something underperforms.

I listed a couple games that were worth a damn and those are the only games that were at the time imo. Quality I guess. But I can list more quality PS1 games over the ones I listed.

MrAndersonWb posted...

the n64 was known for so many groundbreaking, super impressive and fun games that became iconic.

mario 64
banjo kazooie
zelda oot
goldeneye
zelda mm
perfect dark
banjo threeie
mario kart
diddy king racing
paper Mario
mario party
smash bros
star fox 64
turok
turok 2

and as far as racing goes cruisn usa did look much better than Daytona and ridge racer

These only games I cared for. Everyone has differing opinions on what they think is good. If you liked all those games, that's cool, but I didn't care for them.

MrAndersonWb posted...

the n64 was known for so many groundbreaking, super impressive and fun games that became iconic.

mario 64
banjo kazooie
zelda oot
goldeneye
zelda mm
perfect dark
banjo threeie
mario kart
diddy king racing
paper Mario
mario party
smash bros
star fox 64
turok
turok 2

and as far as racing goes cruisn usa did look much better than Daytona and ridge racer

Yeah, this. PS1 definitely had a much, much larger library, but N64 had way more than just 4 good games.

Unknown5uspect posted...

https://youtu.be/GeOSWLGKuaE

This one gets it

For me it was mostly older folks who had PS1's

If you were a kid you either owned an N64 or were constantly over at someone's house who did

As a kid back in the day both me and a close friend had both the N64 and PS1.

I don't really recall what other kids at my school had tbh.

MrAndersonWb posted...

say you were a spoiled kid and got 5 games
per month through 5 years. 5 x 12 = 60

all you need is 60 good games throughout the consoles life span.

That would be 300 games over the course of 5 years. Close to every single one. Have fun with all those licensed poop games lol.

Lost_All_Senses posted...

That would be 300 games over the course of 5 years. Close to every single one. Have fun with all those licensed poop games lol.

did most people actually buy 5 games per month when they were kids, though?

I knew more people with PS1s.

My dad went with the N64 because he had a friend who had a ps1 and my dad thought it was too slow.

uwnim posted...

My dad went with the N64 because he had a friend who had a ps1 and my dad thought it was too slow.

While the PS1 was technically the "Weakest" of it's generation in terms of hardware.

It's the Software Library that makes up for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_of_video_game_consoles

Go ahead, compare the PS1 against all it's competitors.

The PS1 hardware was WEAK SAUCE in comparison to it's rivals of the day.

But it's the Quality of Software / Games that carried it.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

While the PS1 was technically the "Weakest" of it's generation in terms of hardware.

It's the Software Library that makes up for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_of_video_game_consoles

Go ahead, compare the PS1 against all it's competitors.

The PS1 hardware was WEAK SAUCE in comparison to it's rivals of the day.

But it's the Quality of Software / Games that carried it.

the n64 hardware was such an enigma.

it was basically a full generation ahead of the ps1 and Saturn on paper. But it wasnt quite that leap in practice

MrAndersonWb posted...

did most people actually buy 5 games per month when they were kids, though?

Neh. I had an N64 and ps1 and never even realized there were that many less games than ps1.

I wouldn't say it's quality over quantity tho, because that implies ps1 can't compete in quality, which is dead wrong. To address the people saying that.

I had both. I had the N64 first then got a PS1.

Me and my friends were 10 and all gravitated towards the N64. I remember visiting my cousin who he and his friends were all 15 and ALL of them had a PS1 and laughed when I mentioned I had an N64. They mentioned it was a console for babies. After playing the games they had (I remember Resident Evil especially) I ended up agreeing and hounded my mom for a PS1 after.

Ye, imagine being so full of it that you think that the PS1 somehow lost to the N64 on the quality on its top games.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

The PS1 hardware was WEAK SAUCE in comparison to it's rivals of the day.

The winner of basically every generation is the weakest. Beyond the Wii U you can basically find the winner by just finding the one with the worst specs or vice-versa.

ellis123 posted...

Ye, imagine being so full of it that you think that the PS1 somehow lost to the N64 on the quality on its top games.

The winner of basically every generation is the weakest. Beyond the Wii U you can basically find the winner by just finding the one with the worst specs or vice-versa.

not sure. Specs wise:

nes > SG-1000
(the SMS was a weird in between)

SNES > Genesis

ps1 > Saturn when it came to 3D

ps2 > Dreamcast

MrAndersonWb posted...

the n64 hardware was such an enigma.

it was basically a full generation ahead of the ps1 and Saturn on paper. But it wasnt quite that leap in practice

While it was more powerful on the paper, it was mainly two things that prevented it from showing its full power.
Cartridges and a complex system.
Cartridges were both a curse and a blessing. You had limited storage compared to a CD, and adding more storage was costly. A CD will always give you the same storage space for a small cost of a few cents, and using multiple CDs is still cheaper than the cheapest cartridge. The blessing is that cartridges got a faster access to the hardware, it was so fast so some developers used it to stream data directly to the CPU instead of storing it in the RAM. It had too little RAM to handle some of the games. A CD reader is extremely slow compared to cartridges.
The hardware was extremely complex and was badly documented, Sega did the same mistake with the Saturn.
The N64 hardware used custom microcode to give access to the power.
The default "Fast3D" microcode, which some developers claimed was poorly profiled for use in games, generates more than 100,000 high accuracy polygons per second. This microcode is optimized more for accuracy than for speed, and performance suffered. Nintendo's "Turbo3D" microcode allowed 500,000600,000 normal accuracy polygons per second, but due to the graphical degradation, they decided to hide their microcodes. They only shared them a handful of times.
Some developers, like Factor 5, wrote their own microcode, which is why their games are some of the best looking N64 games.

Foppe posted...

While it was more powerful on the paper, it was mainly two things that prevented it from showing its full power.
Cartridges and a complex system.
Cartridges were both a curse and a blessing. You had limited storage compared to a CD, and adding more storage was costly. A CD will always give you the same storage space for a small cost of a few cents, and using multiple CDs is still cheaper than the cheapest cartridge. The blessing is that cartridges got a faster access to the hardware, it was so fast so some developers used it to stream data directly to the CPU instead of storing it in the RAM. It had too little RAM to handle some of the games. A CD reader is extremely slow compared to cartridges.
The hardware was extremely complex and was badly documented, Sega did the same mistake with the Saturn.
The N64 hardware used custom microcode to give access to the power.
The default "Fast3D" microcode, which some developers claimed was poorly profiled for use in games, generates more than 100,000 high accuracy polygons per second. This microcode is optimized more for accuracy than for speed, and performance suffered. Nintendo's "Turbo3D" microcode allowed 500,000600,000 normal accuracy polygons per second, but due to the graphical degradation, they decided to hide their microcodes. They only shared them a handful of times.
Some developers, like Factor 5, wrote their own microcode, which is why their games are some of the best looking N64 games.

@foppe thats an amazing breakdown thanks a lot man

I wonder what degradation turbo3d caused

MrAndersonWb posted...

SNES > Genesis

Genesis had a stronger CPU, higher base resolution, and stronger layering. It also had 3D compatibility without an add-on.

MrAndersonWb posted...

ps1 > Saturn when it came to 3D

I'm more talking overall.

MrAndersonWb posted...

ps2 > Dreamcast

The Dreamcast supported graphics compression while the PS2 only did Raw. That meant that the difference in stats didn't end up working in the PS2's favor.

ellis123 posted...

Genesis had a stronger CPU, higher base resolution, and stronger layering. It also had 3D compatibility without an add-on.

I'm more talking overall.

The Dreamcast supported graphics compression while the PS2 only did Raw. That meant that the difference in stats didn't end up working in the PS2's favor.

you are pointing out at specific things, but overall SNES >genesis easily.

more colors, more sprites, mode 7, better sound.

look at mk1 and sf2 in both systems. Even thought vectorman and x-perts also used pre rendered graphics they dont look like the DKC games for a reason.

the ps2 was also overall superior to the dc