• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

is it "more graphics" or is it "better graphics"?

A

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
i would say it is "more graphics" since they have to be quantified to objectively qualify them and "better graphics" have to come from more graphics if you want to be objective.

just like the genesis rendered more audio because greater greater dynamic range could be outputted by the genesis than by the super nes... the genesis could render more audio per channel because flac rips of genesis music (via line out from a model with good circuitry) have higher bit rates than flac rips of dracula x's music recorded via line out from a super nes to a sound blaster.
 
Last edited:
graph·ics
ˈgrafiks
noun
1.
the products of the graphic arts, esp. commercial design or illustration.
2.
the use of diagrams in calculation and design.

So, more would mean there are more in number and better would mean the current ones are improved.

*posting in another silly Anarchist420 thread!
 
If you replace "graphics" with "threads", the choice would seem to be the former.

But before I get flagged with trolling, I'll add that two things of the same quantity can be compared - increasing that amount is not required to be objective. Otherwise I have no friggin' idea what you just said.
 
anyway, i am concluding that the super nes does not objectively render better graphics in most of its games than the genesis in most of its games, because some people may favor higher resolution regardless of how much the other parts of the big picture are worth.

and of course, double shader precision can give games objectively better graphics than single precision can.
 
Anarchist420 said:
anyway, i am concluding that the super nes does not objectively render better graphics in most of its games than the genesis in most of its games, because some people may favor higher resolution regardless of how much the other parts of the big picture are worth.
Click to expand...

Right, so:

Displays 25% more pixels on the screen = objectively better
Has 64 times the color precision in defining those pixel values = subjective difference

Your logic is breathtaking.
 
Exophase said:
Right, so: Displays 25% more pixels on the screen = objectively better Has 64 times the color precision in defining those pixel values = subjective difference Your logic is breathtaking.
Click to expand...
i dont believe i said that.

64 bit precision objectively gives better graphics than 32 bit precision all other things constant is what i meant to say.

most of what i say is inaccurate and i cant express with much precision.
 
i usually go by "more better graphics".

like i think ryse has more better graphics than killzone, even though it's being rendered at a lower resolution.

hope this helps!
 
You can only have more of something objectively measurable. You can have more pixels, higher color depth, etc. You can have a better image quality too (less aliasing, less artifacts, etc.). "Better graphics" implies something subjective, it mixes in art which is heavily coupled with computer graphics and games.

Saying game X looks better than Y means very little, unless they are both realistically modeling the real world like a racing sim.
 
I think that you can go with either, depending on the scenario. Raising polygon counts and/or going up a resolution, you could say "more graphics." If two games are running on similar settings and hardware, but one looks better, you could say "better graphics."
 
You can have higher levels of tessellation, and more depth, more polygons, more light sources.

You can have better textures, better character models, better animations, better lighting.
Even though there may be less light sources it can be more accurate, therefore better.

It's all depending on the context. I only use more when I'm talking about the number of something. More foliage, more objects on screen, more reflections, more polygons on the objects and characters etc.
 
Wait, Genesis audio better than SNES? Stop doing drugs man.

8 channel 16 PCM sampler vs FM synth. There's no contest there.

Just listen to Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter side by side on Genesis vs SNES. One sounds similar to the arcade. The other sounds like its 1985 and had to have new custom music made completely different from the arcade tailored to FM synth because the arcade soundtrack couldn't be done on a FM modulator and could only be done right on Genesis as redbook audio on Sega CD.

The only time the Genesis sounded subjectively better was stylized 1980s techno tunes purposely designed with the retro gritty grainy FM synth sound in mind.

Of all the things SNES brought to the table , the sound was far ahead of its time. The first full on PCM only sampler capable of semi realistic almost CD redbook quality soundtracks at a time everyone else still used FM modulators and function generators for music.

Also not getting into the crap sound and noise problems in nearly all Genesis revisions besides the first "High Definition Graphics" model due to cheap preamp/mixer components.

Final Fantasy III (VI) soundtrack /discussion
 
Last edited:
exdeath said:
Wait, Genesis audio better than SNES? Stop doing drugs man. 8 channel 16 PCM sampler vs FM synth. There's no contest there.
Click to expand...
they're different🙂
exdeath said:
Just listen to Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter side by side on Genesis vs SNES. One sounds similar to the arcade. The other sounds like its 1985 and had to have new custom music made completely different from the arcade tailored to FM synth because the arcade soundtrack couldn't be done on a FM modulator and could only be done right on Genesis as redbook audio on Sega CD.
Click to expand...
the genesis version of mortal kombat sounded pretty terrible and the genesis voices on street fighter 2 special championship edition sounded awful, but the music on the latter was closer to the arcade.
exdeath said:
Of all the things SNES brought to the table , the sound was far ahead of its time. The first full on PCM only sampler capable of semi realistic almost CD redbook quality soundtracks at a time everyone else still used FM modulators and function generators for music.
Click to expand...
i heard that the amiga used PCM. and the super nes wasnt very close to CDDA quality imo. not trying to argue or anything, we just have different opinions.🙂

then just because something sounds more realistic doesnt mean it sounds better to everyone.
exdeath said:
The only time the Genesis sounded subjectively better was stylized 1980s techno tunes purposely designed with the retro gritty grainy FM synth sound in mind.
Click to expand...
the music in streets of rage 1,2, and 3 do seem to have more dynamic range than final fight which also was known for good music. super nes music no doubt has more instruments and the voices are clearer, but it also sounds somewhat flatter while games that use the Sega Saturn's SCSP for music (rather than CDDA) also sound quite a bit better than music in super nes titles, as there is more "punch" generated by the SCSP. so then the SCSP actually was a superior implementation of something nintendo started (assuming it's not true that the amiga used pcm; i dont know as i have never even heard amiga music) and didnt implement that well... nintendo also started the idea of the control stick if i am not mistaken, but the n64 had a pisspoor implementation of it compared to the dual shock and the gamecube.

anyway, i dont have a whole lot of appreciation for super realistic music when it comes to video games (the n64 was considered a step back in audio from the super nes yet i liked the music generated by the former more than the latter), but that's probably just me.
 
exdeath said:
Of all the things SNES brought to the table , the sound was far ahead of its time. The first full on PCM only sampler capable of semi realistic almost CD redbook quality soundtracks at a time everyone else still used FM modulators and function generators for music.
Click to expand...

First if you ignore Amiga doing it like 5 years earlier, anyway. SNES's was much more expansive, but Amiga still counted as "full on PCM only sampler."
 
Exophase said:
First if you ignore Amiga doing it like 5 years earlier, anyway. SNES's was much more expansive, but Amiga still counted as "full on PCM only sampler."
Click to expand...

First in a game console. Consoles are always behind PCs and professional electronics.

SNES was pretty much the first time on a home game console that sounds were actual sounds and not beeps and bloops and FM function generators. Instruments sounded like instruments, not synthetic approximations of their frequency spectra using multiple square wave channels.

Prior to that, even on Genesis, everything video game was "bleep bloop crrsssssshhhhh". Genesis and even NES did have a single PCM channels, but as an aside, not a primary means, and were crude and limited and often unused. (NES Ninja Turtles "Cowabunga!" speech) They were just a raw PCM channel that lacked the sampler and wave table functions (eg pitch shifting, mixing, polyphony, etc). They could only stream raw PCM from the cartridge and couldn't really function as voices for music production. This wasn't used outside of simple voices due to storage constraints. NES used it mostly exclusively for more accurate explosion and snare drum samples than the noise and triangle channels could provide.

Not counting PCs, professional audio gear, and pre recorded CD audio.

BTW I have a non TMSS model 1 "High Definition Graphics" Genesis on a Sega CD model 1 tray loader that I prize for it's audio quality. 😉 Sometimes I put on Sonic 1 on Green Hill Zone and crank it up on the Klipsch 4.1 setup I use for my retro gaming. Sounds awesome.
 
Last edited:
Technically PC-Engine did wavetable before SNES (on a console). Only the voices were very small (32-sample) and low bit-depth (5-bits). But the mechanism was the same. It did elevate it to something a bit different than PSG beeps and bloops or FM synth, although definitely nothing like SNES.
 
Exophase said:
Technically PC-Engine did wavetable before SNES (on a console). Only the voices were very small (32-sample) and low bit-depth (5-bits). But the mechanism was the same. It did elevate it to something a bit different than PSG beeps and bloops or FM synth, although definitely nothing like SNES.
Click to expand...

Yeah wasn't sure about Turbo Grafx, I just discounted it because it was the first CD system and could do redbook audio anyway.
 
exdeath said:
Yeah wasn't sure about Turbo Grafx, I just discounted it because it was the first CD system and could do redbook audio anyway.
Click to expand...

I hate to keep hitting you with nitpicks, especially if you knew them anyway, but in case you didn't - PC-Engine CD was an add-on. Like Sega CD. It came out like a year later. Plenty of games were made for the card system instead of the CDs. I had the TG16 as a kid but never had the CD add-on or the combined system they eventually released.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top