THE BORE

General => Video Game Bored => Topic started by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:09:00 AM

Title: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:09:00 AM
I haven't played this since I was a kid. Why is the camera so terrible?

DS version > this shit
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 10, 2009, 10:10:18 AM
Might as well ask why Doom doesn't let you look around with the mouse.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 10, 2009, 10:11:29 AM
uh isn't the ds version worse considering you have to touch the touch screen everytime you want to move the camera?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Rman on December 10, 2009, 10:12:20 AM
Game was fantastic at release.  It hasn't aged well, though.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:13:13 AM
This game is worse than I remember. Shit game.

uh isn't the ds version worse considering you have to touch the touch screen everytime you want to move the camera?

No.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:21:33 AM
I am slowly going through old Nintendo 64 titles I used to like a lot.

Mario 64  :-X
Conker  :-X
Diddy Kong Racing  :-X
Mischief Makers  :-\


I'd even prefer playing Sin and Punishment on Wii due to the controls :-X

Might as well ask why Doom doesn't let you look around with the mouse.

Himuro annihilated.

SM64 is perfection, man. Perfection. I play it yearly and find no flaws in it.

Not annihilated. It's the truth. How people can still tolerate it, I don't understand.

How is SM64 perfect, Borys?

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:27:19 AM
Mario 64 is challenging?

Is the camera perfect?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 10, 2009, 10:38:34 AM
waitwaitwaitwait there is a bigger problem in this thread
YOU DON'T DISS MISCHIEF MAKER
GREATEST TREASURE GAME EVER MADE
GREATEST!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 10, 2009, 10:39:27 AM
I was gonna bust out my old N64 and play a few games, but I can't find an A/V cable for it. How could I not have an A/V cable for N64?!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:45:02 AM
waitwaitwaitwait there is a bigger problem in this thread
YOU DON'T DISS MISCHIEF MAKER
GREATEST TREASURE GAME EVER MADE
GREATEST!


:teehee

(http://gamefreaks.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/gunstar_heroes_gen_screenshot1jpg.gif)

(http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/gv3.jpg)

You can control it. I don't see the problem?

It's shit.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 10:48:09 AM
Might as well ask why Doom doesn't let you look around with the mouse.

No it isn't. Don't be ridiculous. People don't say WOW DOOM IS NO INNOVATIVE, YOU CAN'T LOOK AROUND WITH THE MOUSE. No, they don't. But people DO say MARIO 64 IS BEST GAME EVER, IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERFECT when the camera makes playing the game a total chore.

Does the wii version fix the camera any?

Also, I find the stupid ass "revisit the same stage 99 times"  game "design" even more offensive now than I did then.

At this point I'll be surprised if I even remotely like Galaxy, because it's obvious 3d Mario is the complete opposite of what I consider a good platformer.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: cool breeze on December 10, 2009, 10:49:26 AM
iirc the camera in the DS version is only better because it doesn't move in notches.  The N64 camera was ridiculous, because it was jump around when you hit the C button, and sometimes it would fucking jump and then jump back for an arbitrary reason.  Still an awesome game.

and Galaxy is different and much better than Mario 64.  Most of the game has a pulled back locked camera that always works.  There is a lot more emphasis on platforming rather than pseudo-adventure game stuff.  Sunshine is the one that got worse.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 10, 2009, 10:49:27 AM
Wow, it's almost like games made over 10 years ago at the infancy of the 3D era don't age well or something, I mean who would have thought.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 10, 2009, 10:56:04 AM
Wow, it's almost like games made over 10 years ago at the infancy of the 3D era don't age well or something, I mean who would have thought.

But they do, this is typical Himuro stupid-talk.

Super Mario 64 is impeccable. Camera never bothered me, not once.

No, the game has definitely aged.  But!  Himu is also overreacting and being a tardmonkey.  His mom probably found his Dawkins books or something and is gonna have a Jesus intervention or something for him and this is his way of dealing with it.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 10, 2009, 11:09:21 AM
wtf
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 10, 2009, 11:37:14 AM
Might as well ask why Doom doesn't let you look around with the mouse.
But people DO say MARIO 64 IS BEST GAME EVER, IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERFECT when the camera makes playing the game a total chore.

Most of the people that say that played it extensively back when it first came out. It's not PERFECT and I doubt any beside hardcore ntards would say otherwise, but it is quite amazing and was even more so 13 years ago.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 10, 2009, 11:47:02 AM
I am slowly going through old Nintendo 64 titles I used to like a lot.

Mario 64  :-X
Conker  :-X
Diddy Kong Racing  :-X
Mischief Makers  :-\


I'd even prefer playing Sin and Punishment on Wii due to the controls :-X

Co-sign, N64 is absolute unplayable these days.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 12:07:40 PM

Wow, it's almost like games made over 10 years ago at the infancy of the 3D era don't age well or something, I mean who would have thought.

I don't believe in the concept of "aging" in games. The game is the same as it was when it came out in 1996.

Also, my problem has very little to do with early 3d games. I love a lot of early 3d games.

But Mario 64 is  :yuck

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 10, 2009, 12:09:32 PM
Games most definitely do age. We just didn't know any better back then, or someone else built on it and made it irrelevant
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 12:09:59 PM
What are some good N64 games that don't have Zelda on it?

Is Wave Race still good? This is shaping up to be the worst console ever. It seems my nostalgia gave it leeway when I said I think it's better than Gamepube. Boy oh boy.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 10, 2009, 12:14:28 PM
What are some good N64 games that don't have Zelda on it?

Try Hybrid Heaven. I never played it before until not long ago (since I picked it up cheap) and it really reminded me of pre-Vagrant Story.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 10, 2009, 12:16:33 PM
I don't believe in the concept of "aging" in games. The game is the same as it was when it came out in 1996.

Also, my problem has very little to do with early 3d games. I love a lot of early 3d games.

But Mario 64 is  :yuck

Your making a lot of stupid posts in this thread.

Of course games age. Technology improves. Design improves. Any game that pushes the barrier suffers the slings and arrows of pushing the barrier. The games you love now in 20 years (actually much less) will be looked upon as incredibly anachronistic.

There are "classic" games that focus purely on game concept that tend to stand the test of time but those tend to be relatively simple affairs or purely time based arcade action type of stuff (or some strategy titles which have universal boardgame style design)
 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: iconoclast on December 10, 2009, 12:24:58 PM
What are some good N64 games that don't have Zelda on it?

Paper Mario

I would say Banjo Kazooie and Tooie, but since it basically controls like Mario 64... well...

PS. I liked Mario 64 waaaaaay more than Galaxy. I thought Galaxy was pretty boring to be honest, but I played Mario 64 for years.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Sho Nuff on December 10, 2009, 12:34:23 PM
I always thought Nintendo was lame but Mario 64 was so good it made me pee myself a little
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 12:49:30 PM
I don't believe in the concept of "aging" in games. The game is the same as it was when it came out in 1996.

Also, my problem has very little to do with early 3d games. I love a lot of early 3d games.

But Mario 64 is  :yuck

Your making a lot of stupid posts in this thread.

Of course games age. Technology improves. Design improves. Any game that pushes the barrier suffers the slings and arrows of pushing the barrier. The games you love now in 20 years (actually much less) will be looked upon as incredibly anachronistic.

There are "classic" games that focus purely on game concept that tend to stand the test of time but those tend to be relatively simple affairs or purely time based arcade action type of stuff (or some strategy titles which have universal boardgame style design)
 

You misunderstand me. I'm of the opinion that games do not age, but our standards change. The games are the same. It's not like it's wine, which changes its flavor through the years. Games don't change, we just have different (ie higher) standards.

"_________ didn't age well" is typically synonymous with "the graphics suck". I hate such petty arguments. I am talking about the game design. How can game design age? It's either good or bad game design in my eyes. I also could care less about graphics.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 12:50:37 PM
You like & dislike the weirdest games Himuro. Sometimes you have good taste, sometimes you are total miss. SM64 is universally accepted as THE 3D platformer.

No wonder I tend to hate 3d platformers.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 10, 2009, 12:53:31 PM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8ht4AZ7sg[/youtube]

Definitely the comparison I think of!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 10, 2009, 12:57:10 PM

"_________ didn't age well" is typically synonymous with "the graphics suck". I hate such petty arguments. I am talking about the game design. How can game design age? It's either good or bad game design in my eyes. I also could care less about graphics.

Game design can most definitely age! A great example is replaying Dragon Quest 1 over Phantasy Star 4
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 12:57:20 PM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8ht4AZ7sg[/youtube]

Definitely the comparison I think of!
:lol :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 10, 2009, 12:57:42 PM
You misunderstand me. I'm of the opinion that games do not age, but our standards change. The games are the same. It's not like it's wine, which changes its flavor through the years. Games don't change, we just have different (ie higher) standards.

"_________ didn't age well" is typically synonymous with "the graphics suck". I hate such petty arguments. I am talking about the game design. How can game design age? It's either good or bad game design in my eyes. I also could care less about graphics.

My problem is that you are stating the obvious but treating it like Moses came down from the mountain with the truth. We all know Mario 64 had problematic camera controls. We knew it back then.

Quote
Next Generation Magazine praised many aspects of the game: musical score, graphics, lack of loading times, and the scale of the game. Though they commented that the game is less accessible than previous Mario titles, citing the camera's occasional, erratic movements and lack of optimal angle as frustrating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_64

It was amazing and revolutionary because it was such a big step in 3-D game design.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:00:32 PM

"_________ didn't age well" is typically synonymous with "the graphics suck". I hate such petty arguments. I am talking about the game design. How can game design age? It's either good or bad game design in my eyes. I also could care less about graphics.

Game design can most definitely age! A great example is replaying Dragon Quest 1 over Phantasy Star 4

To me I don't think of it like that. I think "Well, this game came out in 1986/7 or some shit. So that's okay." and appreciate for what it is. I just look past things like not being able to have party members in DQ1. Because DQ1, despite its antiquated game design ideas, it still pretty fun to play! "Oh, you have only one party member and you tend to fight only one fight monster at a time? That's neat!" is my thinking, not "this game has aged". No shit! It's old!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:02:25 PM

It was amazing and revolutionary because it was such a big step in 3-D game design.

I can respect what it did for the industry, but does that mean I have to like it? It also did BAD things for the industry. Collectathon! Get x amount of stars to continue the game! We're sorry, we don't have enough levels to compensate for a full sized game. How 'bout you do the same level 8-10 times with little variation?

Sure is revolutionary and fun.

 ::)

Citizen Kane did a lot for cinema. Doesn't take away from the fact the movie is boring as fuck.

I'd rather play Crash 2 than this garbage.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 10, 2009, 01:04:04 PM
I'd rather play Crash 2 than this garbage.

And with that I'm out.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:04:25 PM
You misunderstand me. I'm of the opinion that games do not age, but our standards change. The games are the same. It's not like it's wine, which changes its flavor through the years. Games don't change, we just have different (ie higher) standards.

"_________ didn't age well" is typically synonymous with "the graphics suck". I hate such petty arguments. I am talking about the game design. How can game design age? It's either good or bad game design in my eyes. I also could care less about graphics.

My problem is that you are stating the obvious but treating it like Moses came down from the mountain with the truth. We all know Mario 64 had problematic camera controls. We knew it back then.

You act like that is my only problem with this game.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 10, 2009, 01:05:11 PM
i don't get why people complain about the star system,you play the same level but your road is often time different so why it's a problem?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Flannel Boy on December 10, 2009, 01:06:03 PM
Himuro the Heretic
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:06:15 PM
Crash Bandicoot 2 was fucking AWESOME.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:07:58 PM
i don't get why people complain about the star system,you play the same level but your road is often time different so why it's a problem?


It's all about structure preference. Instead of repeating the same level 8-10 times, or even 2-3 to fulfill the base requirement for that floor, I'd rather play a whole new level, without a hub, in a completely linear fashion.

The star system adds nothing to the games except excess repetition.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bebpo on December 10, 2009, 01:16:12 PM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8ht4AZ7sg[/youtube]

Definitely the comparison I think of!

Saturn graphics > High End PC's  :o

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 10, 2009, 01:19:22 PM
PCs just recently were able to pull off decent Saturn emulation. :smug
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Barry Egan on December 10, 2009, 02:17:46 PM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8ht4AZ7sg[/youtube]

Definitely the comparison I think of!

I like how this video starts with an already ludicrous premise and then spends the last 30 seconds yelling at sega for no reason.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Oblivion on December 10, 2009, 03:10:17 PM
SM64's still great. Only problems I have with it are the camera and the relatively tiny levels.

And even though I prefer SMG, SM64's physics are waaaaay more fun.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 10, 2009, 03:14:30 PM
I finally located an A/V cable and hooked back in for some blurry N64 action! Of all the games I went back and replayed for a bit of those games Super Mario 64, Mischief Makers, Blast Corps, and F-Zero X still hold up pretty well.

I really don't know how I played first-person shooters on the N64 like Perfect Dark and Goldeney, the controls are just awful.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 10, 2009, 03:23:28 PM
I really don't know how I played first-person shooters on the N64 like Perfect Dark and Goldeney, the controls are just awful.
You just get used to it. It took me a bit to feel comfortable with the AWFUL N64 controller but after a while Goldeneye became second nature again.

I can still play other games just fine, but my expert Golden Eye skills [honed over a 100+ hours of multiplayer madness] have, unfortunately, become quite tarnished over the years.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: AdmiralViscen on December 11, 2009, 07:24:38 AM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8ht4AZ7sg[/youtube]

Definitely the comparison I think of!

I like how this video starts with an already ludicrous premise and then spends the last 30 seconds yelling at sega for no reason.

I like how he calls RE1 the pinnacle of PS1 gaming and the second best game out there, when it was also on Saturn.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Cravis on December 11, 2009, 08:20:54 AM
I played Banjo and Kazooie before Super Mario 64 so I greatly prefer that one. I've never finished Mario 64.  :P
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 11, 2009, 12:16:38 PM
iirc himuro didnt play sm64 until the 2000's
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 11, 2009, 12:24:31 PM
Mystical Ninja starring Goemon has one of the best soundtracks on the N64. The game was decent and funny too. Play that instead, Himuro.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 11, 2009, 12:48:32 PM
i got sm64 with my n64 on that christmas

i even got to play a bit of the first level before we went to the family gathering

my childhood game >
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2009, 01:12:02 PM
iirc himuro didnt play sm64 until the 2000's

I played a bit when it came out. I didn't have a Nintendo 64 at the time.

Pretty unimpressive at the time too, aside from the graphics and physics. Wasn't fun to play, so we played Panzer Dragoon and Nights instead.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 11, 2009, 01:16:08 PM
eww sega games  :yuck
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 11, 2009, 01:18:29 PM
yeah what you just said blows my mind so im just gonna bail
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 11, 2009, 01:33:50 PM
NIGHTS

> laughing girl .jpg
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Purple Filth on December 11, 2009, 01:40:49 PM
game is garbage the first time i played it

game is garbage now after playing it again

 :yuck
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2009, 02:19:44 PM
eww sega games  :yuck

Expected from someone who likes Mario 64. Panzer Dragoon is probably too tough for you.

You guys can complain Nintendo has traded their gaming chops for accessibility, but the truth is that they've always done it. Pretty graphics, great physics and controls, accessible (re: neutered) gameplay.

:bow Sega :bow2

And yeah, Demi. I can't get into Nights anymore.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Brehvolution on December 11, 2009, 02:40:56 PM
http://music.todaysbigthing.com/2009/11/20
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 11, 2009, 03:02:17 PM
Expected from someone who likes Mario 64. Panzer Dragoon is probably too tough for you.

youve got to be kidding, did you get all 120 stars and blast your way to the top of the castle?

didnt think so.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 11, 2009, 03:33:14 PM
Himumu  :(

Have you played Galaxy yet?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 11, 2009, 04:45:24 PM
So, never?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 11, 2009, 04:47:28 PM
hating on the wii is so 2008
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 11, 2009, 05:16:45 PM
I like how this video starts with an already ludicrous premise and then spends the last 30 seconds yelling at sega for no reason.

You guys haven't seen the Flights Of Fantasy/NAVGTR stuff, have you?  It gets worse.   :lol  The narrator guy seems to find platformers to be the pinnacle of gaming, and proclaims that "no one ever buys games for multiplayer."  So to him, every game is a single player affair, to be judged on the quality of its "ending ceremony."  Only he spoils the endings in almost every review. 

They also generally admit to barely playing through any of the games they are reviewing, being unable to get through the beginnings of games even on the easiest settings, and admit to cheating, saying that you cannot play through titles without doing so.

Check it out for some laughs.  http://www.navgtr.org/library.html

The Buster Bros, Alpha 2, Tomb Raider II, Goldeneye, Toy Story, and Mario Kart videos are must-sees.  :rofl

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhmeJXu5-d8[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5-zAljF4B0[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw4YfxlGD_Y[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQUws4pNhNE[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIvSmFpkmMU[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h42TTsAHIks[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Va1eASVTRdo[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4i6QoWONLQ[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6C0ehWCMps[/youtube]
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: EmCeeGrammar on December 11, 2009, 05:55:03 PM
This whole board is a cesspool of contrarians.
We need a smh emoticon by now.
smh
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 11, 2009, 06:26:57 PM
The fuck it is.  Even some of the most adamant Nintendo haters here love Galaxy.  Just fucking borrow a Wii for it, you're missing one of the best platformers of at least the last two gens.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: AdmiralViscen on December 11, 2009, 07:47:45 PM
Mario Galaxy is the only 3D Mario to be better than most 2D Marios.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bebpo on December 11, 2009, 08:03:15 PM
I never beat Mario 64.  I got a 64 when OoT came out and until then I just played Mario 64 occasionally at a friends.  I bought it on DS and played a bunch but lost interest and I bought it on VC (why????) and didn't play it much.

I think it's great and has really good platforming and I love the level design and music.  But for trying to play it today the pacing with the multiple stars per level just wears me out and I never finish it.  Galaxy was the same star system but for some reason the pacing felt pretty good.  I think it just had more variety, more interesting different objectives.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Don Flamenco on December 11, 2009, 08:04:30 PM
I am thoroughly confused by this whole Navigatr thing, but the gaming in the clinton years vids are so awesome :lol   The Tomb Raider one is particularly good.  Lara should develop breast cancer, wat?! 

Looking through other vids and write-ups on their site, it all looks very Tim and Eric.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: OptimoPeach on December 11, 2009, 10:02:09 PM
This whole board is a cesspool of contrarians.
We need a smh emoticon by now.
smh
wat
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: iconoclast on December 11, 2009, 10:03:19 PM
Himuro is the worst fucking chink on this forum.

 :o racist!





spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kidding, obviously.
[close]
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2009, 10:46:51 PM
Himuro is the worst fucking chink on this forum.

:lol

This post doesn't even make sense.

Go sniff a line of coke, cigarillo.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2009, 10:50:28 PM
The fuck it is.  Even some of the most adamant Nintendo haters here love Galaxy.  Just fucking borrow a Wii for it, you're missing one of the best platformers of at least the last two gens.

I am going to borrow my friend's wii over Christmas and I will play it.

Not expecting much.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: originalz on December 11, 2009, 11:05:04 PM
I love how most of those Clinton videos end up with him rambling about irrelevant things at some point.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Purple Filth on December 11, 2009, 11:06:45 PM
Honestly Galaxy is the only reason i haven't put mario games to the point of irrelevance since i haven't played it yet.

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 11, 2009, 11:20:57 PM
I am thoroughly confused by this whole Navigatr thing, but the gaming in the clinton years vids are so awesome :lol   The Tomb Raider one is particularly good.  Lara should develop breast cancer, wat?! 

Looking through other vids and write-ups on their site, it all looks very Tim and Eric.

The Gaming In The Clinton Years stuff would not have been anywhere near as funny had they intentionally meant for it to be like that.   :lol

I love how most of those Clinton videos end up with him rambling about irrelevant things at some point.

Yes, and how he starts talking about other games during reviews, like talking about Street Fighter knock-off action figures during the Toy Story review.  Gaming A.D.D. at its finest. 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 11, 2009, 11:39:18 PM
This thread would be a lot more awesome if it were about Superman 64.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Don Flamenco on December 11, 2009, 11:46:32 PM
I am thoroughly confused by this whole Navigatr thing, but the gaming in the clinton years vids are so awesome :lol   The Tomb Raider one is particularly good.  Lara should develop breast cancer, wat?! 

Looking through other vids and write-ups on their site, it all looks very Tim and Eric.

The Gaming In The Clinton Years stuff would not have been anywhere near as funny had they intentionally meant for it to be like that.   :lol


I can't really tell, to be honest.  (then again, I haven't really looked into it.)   Everything on the site so poorly written that it seems intentional, but that one paragraph says it's from actual gaming reviews from the 90s and that the narrator guy is just reading them. 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: iconoclast on December 11, 2009, 11:47:24 PM
This thread would be a lot more awesome if it were about Superman 64.

I bought that day one for $65 at KB Toys.

 :'(
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: MCD on December 11, 2009, 11:51:03 PM
:lol
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Don Flamenco on December 11, 2009, 11:54:10 PM
This thread would be a lot more awesome if it were about Superman 64.

I bought that day one for $65 at KB Toys.

 :'(


ouch. 

if it makes you feel any better, I bought Max Payne 2 (ps2), XIII (ps2), and BG+E (ps2) all on day 1...which were all great games, but they were like $10 a couple weeks later

and I wasted a birthday gift on fucking Bubsy.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 12, 2009, 12:09:42 AM
I paid $60 for Star Ocean 4.  :-\
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: MCD on December 12, 2009, 12:16:08 AM
shut up rumbler

shut up  :(
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: iconoclast on December 12, 2009, 12:31:02 AM
ouch. 

if it makes you feel any better, I bought Max Payne 2 (ps2), XIII (ps2), and BG+E (ps2) all on day 1...which were all great games, but they were like $10 a couple weeks later

and I wasted a birthday gift on fucking Bubsy.

I payed $60 on day one for Infinite Undiscovery, which was hardly a great game, and that too was like $10 in no time.

I also payed $60 for Star Ocean 4. And I'll be paying $60 for End of Eternity too. Third time's the charm?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Rman on December 12, 2009, 01:06:28 AM
What's the story behind Gaming in the Clinton Years? 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: OptimoPeach on December 12, 2009, 01:40:45 AM
I like how this video starts with an already ludicrous premise and then spends the last 30 seconds yelling at sega for no reason.

You guys haven't seen the Flights Of Fantasy/NAVGTR stuff, have you?  It gets worse.   :lol  The narrator guy seems to find platformers to be the pinnacle of gaming, and proclaims that "no one ever buys games for multiplayer."  So to him, every game is a single player affair, to be judged on the quality of its "ending ceremony."  Only he spoils the endings in almost every review. 

They also generally admit to barely playing through any of the games they are reviewing, being unable to get through the beginnings of games even on the easiest settings, and admit to cheating, saying that you cannot play through titles without doing so.
The class of nerd that narrator belongs to is a prime example of why eugenics should be an accepted practice.

The fuck it is.  Even some of the most adamant Nintendo haters here love Galaxy.  Just fucking borrow a Wii for it, you're missing one of the best platformers of at least the last two gens.

I am going to borrow my friend's wii over Christmas and I will play it.

Not expecting much.
Between this and your enmity toward Super Mario RPG I'm starting to think you just have a vendetta against any non-2D platformer game in the series. Seriously, who hates Super Mario RPG?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 12, 2009, 01:53:21 AM
*raises hand*

Game sucks.  Paper Mario games are muuuuuuch better.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: OptimoPeach on December 12, 2009, 02:02:54 AM
The Paper Mario stuff is superior in just about every way (except for Super Paper Mario, let's just pretend that disappointing piece of shit doesn't exist), but I dunno how anyone can straight up hate SMRPG if they're a fan of its successors
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 12, 2009, 02:12:31 AM
Paper Mario 64 > TTYD
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 12, 2009, 02:43:29 AM
^That too.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: etiolate on December 12, 2009, 04:43:28 AM

It was amazing and revolutionary because it was such a big step in 3-D game design.

I can respect what it did for the industry, but does that mean I have to like it? It also did BAD things for the industry. Collectathon! Get x amount of stars to continue the game! We're sorry, we don't have enough levels to compensate for a full sized game. How 'bout you do the same level 8-10 times with little variation?

Sure is revolutionary and fun.

 ::)

Citizen Kane did a lot for cinema. Doesn't take away from the fact the movie is boring as fuck.

I'd rather play Crash 2 than this garbage.


This is why I don't get into gaming conversations in public space. You can't really discuss aesthetics with the idiocracy.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 12, 2009, 04:51:49 AM
This is why I don't get into gaming conversations in public space. You can't really discuss aesthetics with the idiocracy.
Are you sure that it's not because you're a shameful Wii fan?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: EmCeeGrammar on December 12, 2009, 04:58:26 AM
Super Mario RPG is trash. 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: etiolate on December 12, 2009, 05:01:49 AM
This is why I don't get into gaming conversations in public space. You can't really discuss aesthetics with the idiocracy.
Are you sure that it's not because you're a shameful Wii fan?

It is because I can quantify my observations and critiques when most can only offer sophomoric opinion.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 12, 2009, 05:36:37 AM
super mario rpg is awesome
it has a giant tucan as a villian! what more do you want???
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 12, 2009, 05:51:55 AM
This is why I don't get into gaming conversations in public space. You can't really discuss aesthetics with the idiocracy.
Are you sure that it's not because you're a shameful Wii fan?

It is because I can quantify my observations and critiques when most can only offer sophomoric opinion.
:lol
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Olivia Wilde Homo on December 12, 2009, 09:23:34 AM
I like Super Mario 64.

Like most, it and the N64 launch was a pretty formative event in my childhood.  IMO, this was the first 3D game that looked good, not the PlayStation and Saturn 3D games at the time, which was very crude 3D.  I had a lot of fun playing the game and was sad to see it finish so soon since it is a pretty easy game.  The collectathon stuff made perfect sense in 1996 and it required you to poke around every nook and cranny of the level to get the stars.  A shame that it wound up getting used as a cheap time lengthener (not a real word) by several other games down the road, including Super Mario Sunshine.

I liked Super Mario 64 DS.  I completed the game using the D-Pad.  A lot of the new levels were pretty good.  The game could get frustratingly hard at some moments because of the precise movements you sometimes needed to make.  Nevertheless I pulled through, it is possible.

Crash 2 was the pinnacle of the Crash series but I thought Mario 64 was a lot better game.  Still very good though.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: EmCeeGrammar on December 12, 2009, 09:37:03 AM
super mario rpg is awesome
it has a giant tucan as a villian! what more do you want???

An rpg is still an rpg no matter what mascot is attached to it.  TRASH.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Don Flamenco on December 12, 2009, 09:48:12 AM
i'm hooked to gitcy
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Olivia Wilde Homo on December 12, 2009, 10:20:34 AM
Did you get to 2V, the highest point in the level?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: tiesto on December 12, 2009, 10:24:13 AM
I never had any nostalgia for Super Mario 64, by the time it came out I was already fully entrenched in the Sony camp. Apart from playing a few levels here and there at friends' houses, it wasn't till the DS port that I actually played through the game. And honestly, I don't like the way Mario moves, how he can't turn on a dime (he'll move a bit north before turning east or west), and how easy it is to slide off hills to your death. The camera sucks too, and I don't particularly care for doing the same level over and over again. Galaxy was a million times better, and I even had more fun with Sunshine (at least, the "FLUDD-less" stages).
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 12:45:59 PM
Himuro is the worst fucking chink on this forum.

:lol

This post doesn't even make sense.

Go sniff a line of coke, cigarillo.

Go cut up some more garlic and eat more noodles.

:lol

What is wrong with you? Where did this chink shit come from? Are you distinguished mentally-challenged?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 01:04:44 PM

Between this and your enmity toward Super Mario RPG I'm starting to think you just have a vendetta against any non-2D platformer game in the series. Seriously, who hates Super Mario RPG?

I'll be honest.

Outside SMB1, 3, and YI...I was never a big Mario fan. Today, I only really *love* YI. I can play that on any day. Oh, and SMB2j. SMB1, 3, and World are good....for nostalgia. But my main complaint about Mario games has never gone away over the years: too many levels, quantity over quality;etc. They are good patformers, but not my ideal platformer. Me, I think a platformer really only needs 8-12 levels. Mario games have like...80 plus. So you can probably get a picture as to why I find them boring. I thought YI was a great mix of this: not too long, not too short.

I'm not big on Miyamoto's games for the most part, period. His idea of game design is the complete opposite of my idea of good game design. His stuff occasionally makes me get a hard on (Zelda series is the only Nintendo franchise I have a deep affection for). For someone like me who grew up with tight, arcade game experiences, especially on consoles...Miyamoto's games never really clicked me much. I respect him as a game developer/designer, but his games are on one end of the spectrum...and then you have Sega. I'd always prefer playing Shinobi 3 or something than Mario.

That said, I'm not completely against Nintendo games. I tend to prefer the games that Miyamoto had little (or small) input on. I'm particularly partial to Gunpei Yokoi and Sakamoto (Super Metroid, Metroid Zero Mission, Famicom Detective Club, Wario Ware), Aonuma (Majora's fucking Mask). I think Ocarina of Time is Miyamoto's greatest game, though, and I don't think anyone will ever take that away from him and I want to suck his cock for it but THOSE guys make (or made) Nintendo games I liked. Miyamoto, however, seems to make games that...try to appeal to a wider audience. That's fine, but I think that the games lose something because of this and I feel as he gets older, this is starting to become and more apparent. His idea on what makes a good Zelda now, is the complete opposite of mine.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 01:11:40 PM
And yeah, Super Mario RPG is garbage.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: ToxicAdam on December 12, 2009, 01:57:23 PM
I've been playing through Mario Sunshine the past week and it's vastly underrated. I hated it when I played it in 2004, but now I am about 80% of the way through and think it easily surpasses 64 and most other 2D Mario's I have played recently.

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 02:02:38 PM
I've been playing through Mario Sunshine the past week and it's vastly underrated. I hated it when I played it in 2004, but now I am about 80% of the way through and think it easily surpasses 64 and most other 2D Mario's I have played recently.



Truth.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: MoxManiac on December 12, 2009, 03:33:10 PM
SM64 is one of those games that seemed amazing back then but when you go back to it now it's a pile of shit.

Galaxy is great, though.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 12, 2009, 03:54:50 PM
I am thoroughly confused by this whole Navigatr thing, but the gaming in the clinton years vids are so awesome :lol   The Tomb Raider one is particularly good.  Lara should develop breast cancer, wat?! 

Looking through other vids and write-ups on their site, it all looks very Tim and Eric.

The Gaming In The Clinton Years stuff would not have been anywhere near as funny had they intentionally meant for it to be like that.   :lol


I can't really tell, to be honest.  (then again, I haven't really looked into it.)   Everything on the site so poorly written that it seems intentional, but that one paragraph says it's from actual gaming reviews from the 90s and that the narrator guy is just reading them. 

It's real...NAVGTR apparently got the rights to these shows or something, but it's not from them.  It's footage from some dumb show that aired on TV in the 90s.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 12, 2009, 04:35:12 PM
I've been playing through Mario Sunshine the past week and it's vastly underrated. I hated it when I played it in 2004, but now I am about 80% of the way through and think it easily surpasses 64 and most other 2D Mario's I have played recently.
Yeah, I actually played Sunshine from beginning to end unlike Mario 64. I don't understand why I wasn't able to do the same with Galaxy. I can tell that it's better than the other 3D Mario games, but I still got bored with it less than halfway through.

I don't see how anyone can still like Mario 64 today. It can't be for any reason other than nostalgia.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 12, 2009, 05:32:00 PM
SM64 is one of those games that seemed amazing back then but when you go back to it now it's a pile of shit.

No, it isn't.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Van Cruncheon on December 12, 2009, 06:00:14 PM
it was pretty trash when it came out, too, if you were over the age of 13
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 12, 2009, 06:02:55 PM
it was pretty trash when it came out, too, if you were over the age of 13

Weren't you about 70 when it came out?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 12, 2009, 06:13:15 PM
god, this thread just makes me sad
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bebpo on December 12, 2009, 06:31:53 PM
I've never played a bad Mario platformer.

fact.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: MyNameIsMethodis on December 12, 2009, 06:35:29 PM
Why were N64 games so fucking expensive? IIRC they were what, $70?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bebpo on December 12, 2009, 06:43:21 PM
Why were SNES games so expensive?  I paid $70+ for FF3 & CT.

carts  :'(
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 12, 2009, 06:43:50 PM
Why were N64 games so fucking expensive? IIRC they were what, $70?

$60. PS1 games at the time were only $40.  :-\
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: cool breeze on December 12, 2009, 06:44:01 PM
Mario 64 was $80 at Toys R Us back when I got it.

Captain Skyhawk (NES game) was like $60+.  I remember buying that and Tecmo Super bowl ($50) at Woolworth.  Games are so much cheaper now :rock
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 12, 2009, 07:08:47 PM
I worked retail back in those days.  Typically Playstation and Saturn games were $49.99; $54.99-$59.99 at rip-off stores.  N64 games ranged from $59.99 to $79.99, and were typically priced around $70 at release. 

My store also imported games.  Some of the price-gouging was INSANE back then.  When Mario Kart 64 came out in Japan, game-starved N64 players flocked to our shop to buy it...at $200.  This was because it came with some "limited edition" controller that was black and grey.  It was distinguished mentally-challenged.  You couldn't even talk people out of buying the game...absolutely crazy.  The same thing used to happen with Super Saiyan level-shit Dragonball GT, which sold out in droves.  Even the store owner would say "It's true.  The game is garbage.  My employees are telling you this in front of me, but I don't care because it sells out anyway."  And people would buy it, bring it back and sell it back to us, and we'd then sell the game used for a profit.

Why were SNES games so expensive?  I paid $70+ for FF3 & CT.

carts  :'(

I still remember seeing FF3 and CT for $99.99 at Toys R Us.  And Virtua Racing was $99.99 at a lot of stores, too.

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Tristam on December 12, 2009, 09:31:14 PM

The part I really don't get is that you like SMB2j, Himu.  How?  Why?  It's fucking terrible. 

Weeaboo cred?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 09:36:15 PM
I paid $95 for Final Fantasy III and $115 for Chrono Trigger.  I think Phantasy Star IV cost me $100?  Something like that.

Though I'm not a big fan of Mario 64 at all, I find myself unable to understand pretty much everything Himuro is saying about Mario platformers.  Yoshi's Island has 64 levels (48 mandatory), Super Mario World has 78 (about 15 mandatory), Super Mario Bros 3 has about 80 levels (12 mandatory)... I mean, I get they have a bunch of levels, but even without warping you don't have to do a lot of those levels, so if you find them boring, don't play them.  I certainly don't think quality was sacrificed, though stage length is shorter probably because of the high number.

The part I really don't get is that you like SMB2j, Himu.  How?  Why?  It's fucking terrible. 

That's the thing. I don't think those levels are necessary. I just don't see the point. If the levels are so boring I want to skip them and warp, isn't that a negative? To me that says,"We concede these levels are shit, so we'll give you the option to skip them." Good game design!

And the only reason I partially like SMB2j is one reason: the challenge. I respect that.

Look at those numbers, that's distinguished mentally-challenged. 64 levels, 78 levels, 80 levels? Why is any of that necessary and in what does that not prove that Mario games are quantity over quality? A platformer needs 20 levels MAX.  Over 80 levels, half of which are probably 30 second levels with easy as shit difficulty does not scream good game design to me. Give me 11-12 levels all of which tight as balls game design and maybe I'll wank over a Mario title.

But no, Nintendo fans will complain the game is "too short".   :yuck ::)
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 12, 2009, 09:46:11 PM
Christ Himumu, because its fucking fun?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 09:48:05 PM
The definition of fun is subjective.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: AdmiralViscen on December 12, 2009, 10:12:30 PM
Why the fuck wouldn't I want more shit.

And just because you choose to skip them doesn't mean that they are throwaway levels.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 12, 2009, 10:30:55 PM
I'm of the opinion that 12 tight levels > 80 levels, many of which are mediocre.

So a game can have 80 levels, allow you skip most of the game, and not have throwaway levels?

Question: has anyone here beaten Kid Chameleon? :lol
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: cool breeze on December 13, 2009, 01:05:59 AM
I don't know what's going on, but my favorite levels of Mario 3, which is my favorite Mario and probably 2D platformer, can be entirely skipped to finish the game.  Even the things SMB3 is known for like the Tanooki suit and shoe aren't aren't within the levels needed to finish the game.  Hell, to even finish the game in those levels you would need to know where to find the secrets.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 04:10:47 AM
I don't know what's going on, but my favorite levels of Mario 3, which is my favorite Mario and probably 2D platformer, can be entirely skipped to finish the game.  Even the things SMB3 is known for like the Tanooki suit and shoe aren't aren't within the levels needed to finish the game.  Hell, to even finish the game in those levels you would need to know where to find the secrets.

You play all those levels in Mario games because they're actually fun to play through.  Anyone can warp to the end to beat the game if they want to.  The game appeals to everyone that way.  All the 2D Marios of that era are fantastic games that got copied like fucking crazy, but were never topped.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Oblivion on December 13, 2009, 06:41:43 AM
I don't see how anyone can still like Mario 64 today. It can't be for any reason other than nostalgia.

:piss black people :piss2

it was pretty trash when it came out, too, if you were over the age of 13

:piss old people :piss2
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: GilloD on December 13, 2009, 07:42:46 AM
C Button.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: AdmiralViscen on December 13, 2009, 08:49:31 AM
I'm of the opinion that 12 tight levels > 80 levels, many of which are mediocre.

So a game can have 80 levels, allow you skip most of the game, and not have throwaway levels?


News flash: SMB3 is an amazing game, top to bottom.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 12:17:23 PM
That is why I say Mario is not my type of platformer. I'd rather play Sonic 3 and Knuckles, Rocket Knight Adventures or a Megaman game.

Mario games don't have bad level design, they have level design that does not suit my tastes. I have said before that I respect Mario games but they are just not my cup of tea.

The reason I love Yoshi's Island so much is because it's almost almost anti-Mario. Very few branching paths with longer, tighter levels.

And no, I think Kid Chameleon is ass. I used to like it as a kid, but alas, nostalgia. I was just asking because I wanted to know how many levels are actually good in it because I never beat it as a kid.

My argument isn't even an argument. I'm not arguing anything, I'm only saying I don't really dig Mario and this is a response to Yola who stated he thinks I have a vendetta against anything non-3d Mario when the reality is that...I don't really like Mario games period, beyond nostalgia, a few games (YI, Sunshine) aside.

I'm of the opinion that 12 tight levels > 80 levels, many of which are mediocre.

So a game can have 80 levels, allow you skip most of the game, and not have throwaway levels?


News flash: SMB3 is an amazing game, top to bottom.

Maybe when I was a kid.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Beezy on December 13, 2009, 01:22:18 PM
Mirror's Edge is the definitive 3D platformer. :tomato
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 02:05:09 PM
Jak 2 is mine. :tomato

I am replaying Sonic 3 and Knuckles. :bow Lean, mean game design. Stomps all over every Mario. :bow2
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 13, 2009, 02:59:31 PM
Sonic games are like the epitome of shit level design.  :yuck
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 04:11:57 PM
Sonic games are like the epitome of shit level design.  :yuck

Not Sonic 1 or Sonic 3 and Knuckles.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bebpo on December 13, 2009, 04:19:05 PM
Wait, Sonic 2 is now bad?

THANKS FOR DESTROYING MY CHILDHOOD MEMORIES GUYS
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Oblivion on December 13, 2009, 04:20:40 PM
I liked Sonic 3 and Ku-nuckles.  :-[
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 04:21:44 PM
Sonic games are all pretty bad looking back on them.  The 2D Mario games however, OMG.  Comparing them to Kid Chameleon is pretty bad, Himu.

I didn't compare them to Kid Chameleon. Kid Chameleon sucks. 2d Mario is decent.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Rman on December 13, 2009, 04:26:26 PM
How's the DS version of SM64?  Did they add significant content?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 04:27:37 PM
Yes. It allows you to play as uhhh Mario, Yoshi, Luigi and I think Wario?

DS version is better than N64 version due to control and camera and bonus content.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 13, 2009, 04:50:02 PM
The control is absolutely worse on the DS version, Himu, wtf are you smoking?

I'll just chime in and say I love Sonic and Knuckles.  But most of the Sonic level design is just wretched.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: cool breeze on December 13, 2009, 04:56:24 PM
yeah, controls in Mario 64 DS suck balls.  Options are the unplayable touch screen controls or D-Pad as walk while holding down B to run.  Camera is better, but even with that you need to use the touch screen to move it left/right.

New content are a few new levels with new bosses, multiplayer, and it is generally a remix of N64 since the characters all play slightly differently and parts are changed up where you need certain characters at certain points.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: twerd on December 13, 2009, 05:15:13 PM
itt himu loses his mind.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 05:16:56 PM
Controls are fine. Man up. Learn to play.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: MCD on December 13, 2009, 05:19:32 PM
umm no, ds controls suck balls.

i got all stars on mario 64 + yoshi therefore i am right.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 05:21:03 PM
Oh yeah?!?!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Barry Egan on December 13, 2009, 05:32:35 PM
why do they let me skip levels in Mario!?! shit game design.

*Flips on Sonic, holds right on d-pad, watches some jumble of platforms flit past the screen*
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 05:56:51 PM
why do they let me skip levels in Mario!?! shit game design.

*Flips on Sonic, holds right on d-pad, watches some jumble of platforms flit past the screen*

I actually hate that type of Sonic game.

why are sonic games so fast??

*flips on Mario, beats 30 second ADD level, touts as best platformer ever*

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 13, 2009, 06:19:26 PM
If it helps, NSMB Wii's levels take about 3-5 minutes to beat.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 06:36:37 PM
Oh for real? How many levels are there?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 06:45:59 PM
All the Sonic games are too similar to one another.  The NES and SNES Marios had a lot more variety.  I still like the original Sonic the best, and never got into any of the others that much.

And yes, Mario 64 DS's controls are garbage.  "HEY LET'S PORT A GAME MADE WITH AN ANALOG CONTROLLER IN MIND TO A SYSTEM WITHOUT ONE!" :hyper

You know what was awesome?  Jumping Flash.  Take the crappy dungeon sections and that game is pretty goddamned perfect for me.  Also Beezy right, Mirror's Edge>>>3d Mario

Absolutely.  We had a similar thread to this one a few months back.  Jumping Flash! kicks the shit out of Mario 64, and Mirror's Edge is the best 3D platform game that's been released since then. 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 06:49:13 PM
Mirror's Edge is indeed better than Mario 64, but when your barometer for quality is that low, it's not that hard to top.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 06:50:38 PM
Mirror's Edge is indeed better than Mario 64, but when your barometer for quality is that low, it's not that hard to top.

Says the guy who thinks Mario 64 DS is awesome.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 06:52:17 PM
Can you read at all? Mario 64 sucks period. But if you're going to choose a version to play, go with the ds version.

[youtube=560,345]ZVDgQapUkjA[/youtube]

:bow
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 13, 2009, 06:57:45 PM
you suck period

YOU
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:02:17 PM
How 'bout that good game design, Drewsy. Collecting red coins sure is my idea of fun!

[youtube=560,345]govtQIGQtDk[/youtube]

:smug

What a great platformer :drake
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:05:13 PM
1 minute long add levels:

Nintendo Seal of Quality

:smug
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:09:34 PM
Can you read at all? Mario 64 sucks period. But if you're going to choose a version to play, go with the ds version.

[youtube=560,345]ZVDgQapUkjA[/youtube]

:bow

I wouldn't want to play either version.  But you're still fucking el nutso supremo for saying the DS version is better.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:11:50 PM
Collectathons  :yuck

Hated it with Donkey Kong Country, didn't even bother playing most of the games that followed it.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:13:21 PM
Neither version is satisfactory tbh. The camera in the n64 version drives me batshit insane to the point where I'm willing to give the ds version kudos. Then again, I haven't played it since it came out on ds.

Collectathons  :yuck

Hated it with Donkey Kong Country, didn't even bother playing most of the games that followed it.

 :yuck :yuck :yuck :-X :-X :-X

DKC

I'm with ya man.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:15:40 PM
DKC was amazing for a couple of days.  Then I got over the graphics and never played it again.

Kosma, you missed out on the good RARE, pre-DKC. 
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:16:00 PM
DKC1 sucks.

DKC2 is pretty solid though.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:18:06 PM
No.  DKC is garbage.  Any of them.

The best Kong was Donkey Kong '94 on the Gameboy.  Awesome, awesome platform/puzzle game.  Shitted all over DKC.

Killer Instinct and Killer Instinct 2 were better than Mortal Kombat, but all of those games blow stool in comparison to the Capcom and SNK fighters of the day.   People just liked the stupid gore.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:19:52 PM
DKC2 was pretty decent as a platformer, though.

But I prefer original DK to any DK any day of the week.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:21:34 PM
Kosma, those games were fun back then, but I'm telling you...DK '94.  It's the best GB platform game ever made. 

:bow (http://thegreatgeekmanual.com/images/geekhistory/june/donkey-kong.jpg) :bow2

Totally worth playing even now.  Play it on an emulator with a Super Gameboy setting, for added color and extra sound samples.

DKC2 was pretty decent as a platformer, though.

No.  Collectathons suck.  But RARE did good with Conker.  And Jumping Flash! had it perfect.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:22:24 PM
Wario Land was awesome.

I haven't played it since I was a kid, but if I remember correctly, it didn't have 30 second - 1 minute long levels and 100 levels for the sake of it.

Nice, lean game. Replayed it many times.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:25:09 PM
omfg yes The castle

I played the shit out of that game.

(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/5709/453203-warioland_supermarioland3_overworld_super.png)

(http://www.mariomayhem.com/consoles/gameboy/wario_land1.png)

:rock

DKC2 was pretty decent as a platformer, though.

No.  Collectathons suck.  But RARE did good with Conker.

They do. When I judging a platformer, though. I am guaging solely on the platforming; not secret shit like the Mario fans say is so important, or the amount of levels in a game, or whatever the fuck. If the game has collecting but still has some decent platforming I'm able to look past it. But you're right, I wouldn't want to pop in DKC1-3 on purpose.

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:27:15 PM
The thing about the (good) Mario platformers is that all those levels are actually fun to play through.  LOL, NES Marios suck but DKC2 was good.   :lol ::)
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 13, 2009, 07:29:55 PM
omfg yes The castle

I played the shit out of that game.

(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/5709/453203-warioland_supermarioland3_overworld_super.png)

(http://www.mariomayhem.com/consoles/gameboy/wario_land1.png)

:rock


well there is a little good in you!
...very little but still better than nothing

lyte - have you tried mario vs donkey kong? it gets pretty close to dk 94
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:30:46 PM
The thing about the (good) Mario platformers is that all those levels are actually fun to play through.  LOL, NES Marios suck but DKC2 was good.   :lol ::)

I didn't say NES Mario sucks. They're definitely better than DKC2.

But they're still not preferable over other (better) platformers.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:31:55 PM
well there is a little good in you!
...very little but still better than nothing

If I replayed it today, I'd probably take a dump on it just like every other game from my childhood, though.

There are very few games I loved as a child and still love today.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 13, 2009, 07:32:30 PM
The thing about the (good) Mario platformers is that all those levels are actually fun to play through.  LOL, NES Marios suck but DKC2 was good.   :lol ::)

I didn't say NES Mario sucks. They're definitely better than DKC2.

But they're still not preferable over other (better) platformers.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnope~!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 13, 2009, 07:37:05 PM
Himu, to answer your question, there's about 60 levels in NSMBW, I believe.  More with the unlockable final world.

Mirror's Edge is rad, but come on dudes, Galaxy > all.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:37:37 PM
Yyyyyyyep!

Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 13, 2009, 07:38:29 PM
Himu, to answer your question, there's about 60 levels in NSMBW, I believe.  More with the unlockable final world.

That's a pretty decent number. About the same length as YI then?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 13, 2009, 07:48:51 PM
Mmm...yeah I'd say so.  It took me about three or four sittings to beat the game.  I haven't even touched the unlockable levels yet.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: AdmiralViscen on December 13, 2009, 08:48:54 PM
The thing about the (good) Mario platformers is that all those levels are actually fun to play through.  LOL, NES Marios suck but DKC2 was good.   :lol ::)

I didn't say NES Mario sucks. They're definitely better than DKC2.

But they're still not preferable over other (better) platformers.

List all of them
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: OptimoPeach on December 13, 2009, 10:39:11 PM
DKC2 was pretty decent as a platformer, though.

No.  Collectathons suck.  But RARE did good with Conker.  And Jumping Flash! had it perfect.
How can you classify the DKC series as collectathon when all the collection shit is ancillary?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 14, 2009, 03:14:19 AM
The thing about the (good) Mario platformers is that all those levels are actually fun to play through.  LOL, NES Marios suck but DKC2 was good.   :lol ::)

I didn't say NES Mario sucks. They're definitely better than DKC2.

But they're still not preferable over other (better) platformers.

List all of them

2d:

Megaman 1-3, 5, 6
Megaman X1,X2,X4,X5,X8
Megaman Zero 2-4
Rocket Knight Adventures
Sonic 1, Sonic 3 and Knuckles
Yoshi's Island
Castlevania III, Castlevania IV, Rondo of Blood, Bloodlines
Ristar
Gunstar Heroes
Bionic Commando
Rayman, Rayman 3
Dynamite Headdy
Silhouette Mirage
Ninja Five-O
Klonoa games for gba
Wario Land 1 and 4
Kirby's Dreamland, Dreamland 3, Kirby's Canvas Curse
Umihara Kawase
Prince of Persia
Drill Dozer
Ghosts 'n Goblnis, Ghouls n Ghosts, Ultimate Ghosts 'n Goblins


3d:

Jumping Flash! 1 and 2
Tomb Raider
Crash Bandicoot 2
Jak 1 and 2
Ape Escape 1 and 2
Jet Grind Radio
Jet Set Radio Future
Mirror's Edge
Klonoa
Heart of Darkness
Tomba 1 and 2
Abe's Odysee, Abe's Exodus
Spyro the Dragon
Rayman 2
Donkey Kong Jungle Beat
Chibi Robo

For me, when it comes to platformers, Mario games are decent. But they're scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to AAA platformers. I'd rather play something else.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: iconoclast on December 14, 2009, 03:20:58 AM
Am I the only one who thought Kirby Canvas Curse was awful?
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 14, 2009, 03:33:38 AM
No
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 14, 2009, 01:28:30 PM
jesus himuro, I give up.

a) you listed shit that aren't even platformers
b) you listed fucking SPYRO

you just suck all around
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: drew on December 14, 2009, 01:36:13 PM
most if not all of your favorite 3d platformers were after sm64 came out, just admit it mommy and daddy didnt get you an n64 for christmas so youre trying to convince yourself that you didnt miss anything
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 14, 2009, 01:47:55 PM
jesus himuro, I give up.

a) you listed shit that aren't even platformers
b) you listed fucking SPYRO

you just suck all around

He also listed 2D (or "2.5D") games as 3D.   :lol
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 14, 2009, 02:39:19 PM
jesus himuro, I give up.

a) you listed shit that aren't even platformers
b) you listed fucking SPYRO

you just suck all around

He also listed 2D (or "2.5D") games as 3D.   :lol

Like Klonoa? Yeah, my bad on that part. I also listed Gustar Heroes as a platformer. Whoops.

Spyro the Dragon, the original, WAS better than Mario 64.

For me, when it comes to platformers, Mario games are decent. But they're scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to AAA platformers. I'd rather play something else.

But they're scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to AAA platformers.

scraping the bottom of the barrel

(http://i45.tinypic.com/azdtut.jpg)

:smug

most if not all of your favorite 3d platformers were after sm64 came out, just admit it mommy and daddy didnt get you an n64 for christmas so youre trying to convince yourself that you didnt miss anything

I don't need to convince myself of anything. Bzzt. Wrong!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 14, 2009, 03:01:34 PM
Chibi Robo over Super Mario 64? CHIBI ROBO? Dude, now I know you're just trolling.

And Abe's Odyssey/Exodus and Heart of Darkness aren't 3D, they're 2D platformers with prerendered backgrounds. Like Donkey Kong Country.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 14, 2009, 03:05:42 PM
It was late! Sorry!

What's wrong with Chibi Robo? At least it's more creative than "get these red coins in this boring level" ???
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 14, 2009, 03:06:49 PM
What's wrong with Chibi Robo is that it's not fucking fun.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 14, 2009, 03:07:19 PM
I didnt think people actually played that game... you sure you didnt just pick it out of a hat
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 14, 2009, 03:10:36 PM
8)
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 14, 2009, 03:11:13 PM
At least it's more creative than "get these red coins in this boring level" ???

You might have a point if that's all that there was to Super Mario 64.

By the way, I popped in my copy of Super Mario 64 and burned through seven stars. It felt good, man.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 14, 2009, 03:16:32 PM
What's wrong with Chibi Robo is that it's not fucking fun.
Quote from: Genghis Cohen
Chibi Robo was fucking awful.  :lol
FUCK NO!
himuro comparison is distinguished mentally-challenged because chibi robo has nothing to do with platforming but chibi robo itself is one of the best game i ever played! how the heck you can't like a game like that is beyond me
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 14, 2009, 03:19:20 PM
Because it sucks
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: magus on December 14, 2009, 03:22:34 PM
 >:(
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 14, 2009, 03:27:15 PM
lol. I own it Magus. I'll put it in one of these day.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 14, 2009, 03:30:53 PM
Klonoa
Heart of Darkness
Tomba 1
Abe's Odysee
Abe's Exodus

These are 3D games?   :lol

For me, when it comes to platformers, Mario games are decent. But they're scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to AAA platformers. I'd rather play something else.

Chibi Robo over Super Mario 64? CHIBI ROBO? Dude, now I know you're just trolling.

And fucking SPYRO?  :rofl

Nothing more needs to be said.  Himowned.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 14, 2009, 04:56:25 PM
I haven't played this since I was a kid. Why is the camera so terrible?

DS version > this shit

At this point I'll be surprised if I even remotely like Galaxy, because it's obvious 3d Mario is the complete opposite of what I consider a good platformer.



I don't believe in the concept of "aging" in games. The game is the same as it was when it came out in 1996.

Also, my problem has very little to do with early 3d games. I love a lot of early 3d games.

But Mario 64 is  :yuck




I'd rather play Crash 2 than this garbage.


iirc himuro didnt play sm64 until the 2000's

I played a bit when it came out. I didn't have a Nintendo 64 at the time.

Pretty unimpressive at the time too, aside from the graphics and physics. Wasn't fun to play, so we played Panzer Dragoon and Nights instead.

SMB1, 3, and World are good....for nostalgia. But my main complaint about Mario games has never gone away over the years: too many levels, quantity over quality;etc.

That's the thing. I don't think those levels are necessary. I just don't see the point. If the levels are so boring I want to skip them and warp, isn't that a negative? To me that says,"We concede these levels are shit, so we'll give you the option to skip them." Good game design!

And the only reason I partially like SMB2j is one reason: the challenge. I respect that.

Look at those numbers, that's distinguished mentally-challenged. 64 levels, 78 levels, 80 levels? Why is any of that necessary and in what does that not prove that Mario games are quantity over quality? A platformer needs 20 levels MAX.  Over 80 levels, half of which are probably 30 second levels with easy as shit difficulty does not scream good game design to me. Give me 11-12 levels all of which tight as balls game design and maybe I'll wank over a Mario title.

But no, Nintendo fans will complain the game is "too short".   :yuck ::)

That is why I say Mario is not my type of platformer. I'd rather play Sonic 3 and Knuckles, Rocket Knight Adventures or a Megaman game.

Sonic 3 and Knuckles...stomps all over every Mario.

Yes. It allows you to play as uhhh Mario, Yoshi, Luigi and I think Wario?

DS version is better than N64 version due to control and camera and bonus content.

DKC2 was pretty decent as a platformer, though.


3d:

Klonoa
Heart of Darkness
Tomba 1
Abe's Odysee
Abe's Exodus


Spyro the Dragon, the original, WAS better than Mario 64.

...

Revoke Himumu's gamer license now.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: TakingBackSunday on December 14, 2009, 05:01:13 PM
Good christ, what type of dumbfuck pills did he take
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 14, 2009, 05:03:45 PM
wwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: cool breeze on December 14, 2009, 05:33:02 PM
Spyro 1 sucks
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Bildi on December 14, 2009, 05:42:19 PM
:lol

WTF Himu.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Arbys Roast Beef Sandwich on December 14, 2009, 05:43:49 PM
:lol

Himu's having a bad day (week? month?)
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: originalz on December 15, 2009, 06:59:35 AM
I lost many days to Kid Chameleon back in the day...not that great of a game but I have fond memories of it and sometimes run through it once in awhile on an emulator.

I actually made it to the final level several times...I think it was called The Final Marathon, and it was very, very, very hard.  KC is a pretty damn hard game as it is, but the final level takes it to a whole new level, they really didn't want you beating it.  I think I could make it there with lots of lives and continues remaining and use every single last one up trying to beat that bastard of a level, holy shit was it unfair.  Didn't beat the game until I got a Game Genie.  Apparently there's also a warp in the first level which takes your right to the final boss but I wouldn't learn about it until like 10 years later.

There were also certain routes you could take which would lead you to very difficult levels, some of them I could never beat so I would have to plan my route out to avoid them.  If I made a mistake and took the wrong path, well, better luck next play session!

Anyone remember "Bug" for the Saturn?  I thought that game was so awesome back in the day because the perspective changed at certain points, it was the best 3D we had before SM64 came out!  Looking back, good god was that a bad game.
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Himu on December 15, 2009, 08:27:04 AM
:bow This thread :bow2

Get all the reactions I want! :bow2

Like putty in my hands :bow2

:bow Trash talk nostalgia fan favorite + say B-game is better than mario + ??? = profit :bow2

No reason to post at EB anymore! My work is done!
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: demi on December 15, 2009, 08:57:34 AM
Ok, bye. Again
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 15, 2009, 10:11:47 AM
The only thing worse than bad taste is trying to play off your bad taste as a "social experiment".
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: OptimoPeach on December 15, 2009, 10:15:59 AM
:bow This thread :bow2

Get all the reactions I want! :bow2

Like putty in my hands :bow2

:bow Trash talk nostalgia fan favorite + say B-game is better than mario + ??? = profit :bow2

No reason to post at EB anymore! My work is done!
I knew you liked SMRPG
Title: Re: Super Mario 64
Post by: bork on December 15, 2009, 03:04:08 PM
:bow This thread :bow2

Get all the reactions I want! :bow2

Like putty in my hands :bow2

:bow Trash talk nostalgia fan favorite + say B-game is better than mario + ??? = profit :bow2

No reason to post at EB anymore! My work is done!

You can't even lie :lol

:rofl