So I tried this game out after watching some of our favorite autist's parallel universe videos.
How on earth can people say it's superior to Sunshine? The controls are clunky as hell.
>>339907574
>clunky
how the fuck? i mean its not sunshine tight but its still good
>>339907574
If by clunky you mean anything other than "harder to master with a higher skill ceiling", then the answer is "because you are a retard".
>>339907574
>Uh muh nostalgia
>Uh im intelectual cos i like old gaems!
That's why people thinks this piece of crap it's better than Sunshine.
Only the atmosphere of Sunshine it's enough to surpass every single aspect of Super Mario 64.
>>339909286
So you're a shallow ignorant moron with zero understanding of game design, and all you need to be pleased is some sunny visuals. Gotcha.
>>339909718
Why don't you tell us how exactly 64 has better "game design" than sunshine instead of throwing around mean words?
That is, if you're able to do that instead of just using buzzwords you have no concept of.
>>339909860
The burden of proof rests with you, retard. But don't bother. This discussion has been had a million times and you always get thoroughly BTFO.
I don't think the game has aged that well for new players honestly. But the reason the game is so famous is because it established and popularized so many conventions of early 3d gaming for consoles, which was the first exposure a lot of people had to 3d gaming
>>339907574I thought the Galaxy games were great but I found SM64 just ok
>>339907574
>Clunky
There's that word again.
>>339907574
Nostalgia Goggles.
I replayed it recently after getting an N64 again.
Shit feels gross.
>>339911587
What would you like him to say instead anon?
That the controls are "weird" but then you'd say "Anon, maybe it's just you"
>>339907574
>clunky
aka: I sucked at it.
Try watching a speedrun and saying they're clunky. It was just really difficult to master.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SVLIRthpNc
>>339907574
>controls are clunky
they are not?
or do you think they are clunky because the character you're controlling has some weight to him? Is that supposed to be a bad thing in a platformer where it is about mastering the platforming?
>>339909860
sunshine automatically loses because it has arrows that show you the way to your star
that alone shows that the leveldesign is trash, because without those arrows the game fails at showing you were to go through leveldesign
>>339907574
No idea. I found it meh at the time. Level design was awesome and the concepts like jumping into paintings for the worlds was cool.
But Mario 3 was a game of fast movement and secrets and Mario World was full of exploration. Mario 64, Mario moved like he was going threw sludge and exploration was moving the camera at every annoying angle.
It was neat for its time and did the 3D jump better than many, but when people give N64 the excuse of pioneering 3D they forget it had been done plenty before. Fuck me Quake was out when Goldeneye was.
>>339911857
He could describe his own lack of handling ability, rather than using a word that dumps the fault on the game.
>>339909286
pachinko
blue coins
i'm a chuckster
>>339912008
>>339912008
Neo nintendoers dont want to figure out the games they are playing
They want all games to be mediocre garbage you drop 10 mins after you play
>>339912251
Or
hear me out Anon
The controls are actually garbage.
>>339912608
In what way?
>>339912514
Fuck off with "Neo".
You're not some sort of "oldfag".
Stop pretending like you are or can be.
>>339912608
Better than casual trash past sunshine
>>339912608
>Mario 64
>garbage controls
it's the easiest game on the planet
>>339912659
Sluggish windup time. The game is balanced around it so it functions, but it feels like Mario is a clockwork device. Felt weird compared to fast running in the past.
>>339907574
I'll explain why people think it's better than Sunshine. BUT FIRST...
>>339912691
Neo nintendoers are the worst they do not want fun in their games. If you do not agree you are a neo nintendoer and i have no remorse for you
>>339912659
Moving around with the stuck hurt like a motherfucker, the camera moving on it's own and getting stuck on walls, and then when you actually wanted to move it with the C buttons it wouldn't stay where you wanted it. For their time they were "okay" controls, but nowadays, not at all to me.
>>339907574
>autist
Shoot yourself in the head while you're at it.
>>339912774
No the easiest game on the planet is every nintendo game past 2004.
>>339907574
Are you playing the DS version? It's the better version.
>>339912823
its an n64 game what did you expect? its like youre comparing a college art majors work to the mona lisa. yeah its awkward but thats how they made do and its still one of the GOATS
>>339912823
You know what? I'll give you that one. The start up time could be a tad faster. However, I don't think that's enough to make the controls garbage. Acceleration has always been important to Mario's mechanics, even in 2D. If Mario ramps up too quickly, then he ends up feeling too light. So I'd say that's an aspect that could be tweaked for the better.
>>339912859
>If you do not agree, you are X
No, thank you.
The ones I've noticed that DON'T want fun in Nintendo games are older fans who don't realize the games difficulties have stayed the same while they got older. They actually feel (unironically) entitled to Nintendo continuing to cater to their generation instead of doing what they do best. You know, MAKING GAMES FOR KIDS.
>>339912989
No it is not
Only people who said that did not play the game when it first came out
>>339912907
>Moving around with the stuck hurt like a motherfucker
Huh? I never heard that one before. I have to disagree. There was nothing painful with running with the N64 stick. Maybe you just have weak thumbs??
As for the camera, no one would dispute that the camera was poor. However, that is not typically what people mean when they say "controls". People are usually talking about Mario's movement. If you're skilled enough, you can work around the camera. Which honestly, if you've been playing enough 3D platformers to the point where your opinion matters, then you should have the skill to maneuver despite the camera.
Repeating levels over and over again is annoying, but at least the game makes course changes/sends you to different parts.
>>339913008
I played it when it was fairly new myself.
And why wouldn't I expect more out of it. Part of the big deal of Super Mario Bros. was how smooth it played since it didn't render every time you advanced forward. Nintendo's first console was a big deal for its smooth ability play.
Other 3D games in the same year had smoother movement.
I mean it functions, its just OP isn't wrong. It is clunky. Still fun, but shit played like a car missing a gear.
>>339913057
Funny thing they make games for 40 year adults who want to play for 30 minutes and be done forever.
Kids want fun to be challenged to explore to have new exciting worlds they want to come home and be challenged till they go to sleep then talk about the game when they get to school.
You should say they are making games designed for 40 year olds while looking like kids games
You want to know how much fun nes and snes games were to kids
They still play them to this day but they are adults.
Now thsts good game design.
Make nintendo great again bring difficulty and fun and reward to games again
Neo nintendoers are libertarian cucks
>>339913440
Here, I'll copy paste something you may have missed.
You should read a little harder.
>The ones I've noticed that DON'T want fun in Nintendo games are older fans who don't realize the games difficulties have stayed the same while they got older
and I'll add this too:
>and got better at games
>>339914119
But neo nintendo games are so dumbed down that games are not fun.
I mean if that style was working then the wii u would be the top selling console.
They need to become golden age nintendo again and make games fun.
Don't give me garbage about older people just got better at games when games have been made so easy they are bad. You have a whole new generation that has no interest in games because the fun is gone.
A good game that has one aspect of golden era nintendo is minecraft it focuses on exploring the world around you.
>>339914119
Have fun playing 3/10 games anon
>>339907826
>>339909024
>>339911587
>>339911926
>>339912008
>Mario goes forward for a bit when you press back on the analog stick if you aren't completly still
>common framerate drops
>wrestling with the camera to get it to face anything other than it's pre-programmed path
>not clunky
>muh speedruns
when did Mario 64 start getting it's dick sucked so hard around here
>>339914659
When newfags realised that it's conceptually and mechanically brilliant
To be fair I think sunshine controls clunky as fuck and it's very slow paced
>>339914659
>Mario goes forward for a bit when you press back on the analog stick if you aren't completly still
Hm? Are you describing inertia? Something every good movement system has?
>common framerate drops
That's not controls.
>wrestling with the camera to get it to face anything other than it's pre-programmed path
That's not controls.
>>339914865
>when did Mario 64 start getting it's dick sucked so hard around here
>When newfags realised that it's conceptually and mechanically brilliant
No, when it became fashionable to shit on Mario 64 for (you)s. Gullible people like me have started jumping in to defend the game.
>>339915056
I'm a super huge fan of SM64, but if you knew what inertia is then you would not make this post. If the game had inertia then Mario would move together with any moving platform he stands on. The game does not have inertia, Mario just needs a moment to turn around.
Like dude I love the game, I played through it in one sitting and got all 120 Power Stars once, but please learn some physics.
>>339915056
>Hm? Are you describing inertia? Something every good movement system has?
back as in mario is supposed to go back, but he actually WALKS forward for a bit.
>framerate and camera doesn't affect how the character controls
ok
>>339915230
Inertia is faked in videogames. I don't know if you're aware of this, but video games don't actually have universal laws of physics. This means that sometimes physics are inconsistently used. Mario does have his own inertia when he's running, it takes him a second to stop sometimes.
>>339915424
Unless button presses are tied to framerate, no those things don't affect how the character controls.
>>339915552
>Unless button presses are tied to framerate
Which they are. Even if they didn't, How does a shit framerate and a camera facing the wrong direction not put a hamper on how the character controls.
You know, if you are able to control the camera, it counts as part of the controls right?
let's have a look at super mario 64's competition
>>339915689
>Which they are
Uh...actually they don't. Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time don't have input linked to the framerate. They always read input and internally render at 60 fps, but only draw every second and third frame respectively.
This is because the RDP 3D drawing chip in the N64 is the slowest part of the system and has to be given extra time to complete its work. Hence input has been decoupled from what RDP is doing.
>>339915689
>Which they are.
I need proof.
>How does a shit framerate and a camera facing the wrong direction not put a hamper on how the character controls.
The framerate is never so bad that you don't have time to react. And besides, the game doesn't really lose frames when it's stressed, it slows down.
The camera, you might be able to argue. It is kind of annoying when you're trying to set up a jump, and then the camera shifts suddenly. But at the same time, it's rarely a problem, and if you're not a casual, then you should be able to platform through that.
>>339915056
>>wrestling with the camera to get it to face anything other than it's pre-programmed path
>That's not controls.
>not controls
At least i'll never be this stupid
>>339916143
Arguing the controls are bad because of the camera, is like arguing a car controls bad because it's foggy outside.
>>339916257
Wow that's really retarded. He's specifically talking about having trouble controlling the camera in a way that allows him to look at what he wants to look at.
>>339911587
How about stiff?
>>339916360
In that case, see >>339913274
>>339916257
>/v/ in charge of analogies
/v/ has really gone down the shitter, I can't believe people are unironically implying SM64 has aged poorly and has mediocre controls. Stop being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian.
>>339916559
That post just says "I don't care if the camera sucks git gud". The camera still sucks, but since you have SM64's dick so far down in your throat you can't concede shit. Just because someone can work with wonky controls doesn't make those controls good.
>>339916559
If you can control the camera its part of the controls, what is so hard to understand about this.
Even then it's a shit argument.
>It doesn't matter if the camera is shit git gud
>>339916669
Saying mario 64 has aged poorly is nowhere remotely close to contrarian
>>339916738
Saying "the camera is poor" isn't a concession? I see someone has a raging hate boner over there. Nothing will be satisfactory to you, unless I say the game's controls are shit overall. Which I won't. A bad camera does not bad controls make. Sorry. But controls and camera are two different concepts.
>>339916753
Camera is not part of controls. Camera is camera. Controls are controls.
>>339916954
But you control the camera.
>>339916954
>controlling the camera isn't part of the controls
ok
>Saying "the camera is poor" isn't a concession? I see someone has a raging hate boner over there. Nothing will be satisfactory to you, unless I say the game's controls are shit overall
Or you can just admit the camera controls are shit without trying to deflect it by telling people to git gud
>>339917071
And the camera controls are bad. But the camera controls aren't Mario's controls.
>>339917071
>Or you can just admit the camera controls are shit without trying to deflect it by telling people to git gud
Nah. It's one's lack of skill that is causes people to say illogical things like "the controls are bad because the camera is bad".
>>339917373
Meant to reply to >>339917115
>>339907826
And your mom is still good, but she's still not as tight as your sister.
how can you hate this game
it's impossible
>>339917373
>>339917450
So you're still deflecting then, way to prove me wrong.
Anyone else feel weird about the jump to 3D coins with Super Mario Sunshine and on? When I play SM64, it feels nice to collect the coins but in Super Mario Sunshine and the other 3D Marios it feels weird and vaguely unsatisfying. I've felt this for a long time.
>>339917662
Refusing to follower your terms isn't deflecting.
>>339917789
You're right, it's denial because you think "git gud" is enough to deflect any criticism.
But that's wrong, you fucking retard.
Super Mario 64 is designed well and holds up after 20 years.
>>339918194
On the whole I think the game is designed well but there are a fair number of instances where I had to question what they were thinking when they designed some of the levels. Tiny Huge Island was an interesting gimmick (even if it wasn't original) but both the tiny and huge versions of the island are designed awfully and are extremely annoying to get around.
>>339917584
How were you supposed to know that you had to throw him on the bombs?
>>339918748
You sound like sephirothsword57
>>339907574
>Not a single person failed to bite this bait
Hat's off to you OP, you did good.
