Remember nintendo's arrogance during nintendo 64's release?

[JSoup]

Says the guy with a Mario avatar.

Felt that coming. XD

Yes, I am a Mario fan, but I'm not blinded by it. I dislike many Mario titles: Paper Mario, Super Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart Double Dash, most Mario Party games, Mario Pinball GBA, most educational titles... They could replace Super Mario 64 with Hello fucking Kitty and it would still be a good game. I respect the people who say it's not their cup of tea, but to call it a piece 'o shit is laughable, if not insulting.

I know what you mean. The Mario sports games aren't the best ever, by far, they are fun and I tend to get a bit heated when people write them off as terrible without even playing them first. Mario Sluggers will kick your ass and rape your mother with it's difficulty, but damn if it isn't a fun game.

[Malon_Forever]

Yes, I am a Mario fan, but I'm not blinded by it. I dislike many Mario titles: Paper Mario, Super Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart Double Dash, most Mario Party games, Mario Pinball GBA, most educational titles... They could replace Super Mario 64 with Hello fucking Kitty and it would still be a good game. I respect the people who say it's not their cup of tea, but to call it a piece 'o shit is laughable, if not insulting.

I never understood the hate for Sunshine. One of my favorite platformers.

[Richter Belmount]

I never understood the hate for Sunshine. One of my favorite platformers.

Just alot of accusation from people saying it was to hard.

[kupomogli]

Just alot of accusation from people saying it was to hard.

That's it, Richter. You're banned from having sex. Just kidding. I just happened to think of that one thread after reading your post.

[Richter Belmount]

That's it, Richter. You're banned from having sex. Just kidding. I just happened to think of that one thread after reading your post.

No i think everyone here should be ashamed of themselves after taking this topic seriously including you. Really 10 pages? .

[Zing]

Just alot of accusation from people saying it was to hard.

Actually, my complaints for the game (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131424) involve overly sensitive controls, the randomly placed blue coin collect-a-thon, and the total lack of direction in the design. Like I said in the above thread, it feels like the game was worked on by a bunch of interns, each working on a different part of the game.

Mario 64? Yes, it was the best game until Mario Galaxy. It has nothing to do with being a "Mario fan", unless you mean that in the most general terms instead of saying "a platformer fan".

[Aussie2B]

I was talking only talking about N64 when you brought up Playstation out of nowhere. So yeah, it sure seemed like you were out to making one system look better or worse than another.

Given the topic title, the discussion was on the launch of the N64. You said the launch sucked because it only had 2 games. My argument was that the launch of the N64 was comparable to others of its generation because the Saturn only launched with 3 and the PlayStation had 10 games that aren't remotely as highly regarded as Super Mario 64, both back then and now, and aren't continued to be frequently played in this day and age like Super Mario 64, which can make the N64 launch considered very good for those who feel quality is greater than quantity. End of story.

This is ignoring that the other, feebler, side of your argument was that, because you personally don't like Super Mario 64, you (and others in this topic) have attempted to invalidate its place in history and the opinions of those who enjoy it by suggesting that all the fans and press are/were Nintendo fanboys, Mario fanboys, blinded by hype, and/or skewed by limited options. I'd like to think that most DP members frown upon this kind of disrespect shown for others, but so many people get away with it because it's such a subtle form of trolling.

I also think that the average DP member is old enough, with enough access to a wide variety of games, and open enough to games of all eras to be able to simply assess a game for what it is and come to a pure, honest opinion of if they like it or not, with no need to skew their feelings for any reason. Maybe the haters will never accept it, but there ARE people who just plain like Super Mario 64 because they find it a highly enjoyable game to play, outside world and its impact be damned. I mean, I previously brought up Final Fantasy VII as a PlayStation game that is highly respected and frequently played, yet I actually dislike the game myself. I'll never understand its immense popularity, but I would also never deny its status or the right for others to love it. I could theoretically come up with a similar slew of reasons as to why people have been misled into loving it (and I'm sure there are some, just as with Super Mario 64), but I accept that there are plenty of people that have simply played the game and enjoyed it for what it is.

[Baloo]

Given the topic title, the discussion was on the launch of the N64. You said the launch sucked because it only had 2 games. My argument was that the launch of the N64 was comparable to others of its generation because the Saturn only launched with 3 and the PlayStation had 10 games that aren't remotely as highly regarded as Super Mario 64, both back then and now, and aren't continued to be frequently played in this day and age like Super Mario 64, which can make the N64 launch considered very good for those who feel quality is greater than quantity. End of story.

This is ignoring that the other, feebler, side of your argument was that, because you personally don't like Super Mario 64, you (and others in this topic) have attempted to invalidate its place in history and the opinions of those who enjoy it by suggesting that all the fans and press are/were Nintendo fanboys, Mario fanboys, blinded by hype, and/or skewed by limited options. I'd like to think that most DP members frown upon this kind of disrespect shown for others, but so many people get away with it because it's such a subtle form of trolling.

I also think that the average DP member is old enough, with enough access to a wide variety of games, and open enough to games of all eras to be able to simply assess a game for what it is and come to a pure, honest opinion of if they like it or not, with no need to skew their feelings for any reason. Maybe the haters will never accept it, but there ARE people who just plain like Super Mario 64 because they find it a highly enjoyable game to play, outside world and its impact be damned. I mean, I previously brought up Final Fantasy VII as a PlayStation game that is highly respected and frequently played, yet I actually dislike the game myself. I'll never understand its immense popularity, but I would also never deny its status or the right for others to love it. I could theoretically come up with a similar slew of reasons as to why people have been misled into loving it (and I'm sure there are some, just as with Super Mario 64), but I accept that there are plenty of people that have simply played the game and enjoyed it for what it is.

Here's what it really boils down to. We can all argue who had the best launch titles for whatever system, but what's the point of arguing if these titles aren't played anymore? Let's take a look:

Saturn: Virtua Fighter, Panzer Dragoon, Daytona USA

Playstation: Battle Area Toshiniden, ESPN Extreme Games, Kileak, NBA Jam T.E, Rayman, Raiden Project, Ridge Racer, Street Fighter: The Movie, Total Eclipse Turbo

N64: Pilotwings 64, Super Mario 64

By today's standards, which has the best launch titles? Arguably N64. The Playstation may have the most titles, but I can see only about 3 games on there even worth playing (Raiden Project, Rayman, NBA Jam T.E), and like Aussie2B said, they don't hold a candle to Super Mario 64. Even the Saturn's launch is fairly respectable and better than the Playstation's :/. Virtua Fighter may have sucked, but Daytona USA and Panzer Dragoon are still hella fun 15 years later. What's the point of arguing who had the best launch titles back then when the games have aged horribly now?

[todesengel]

No i think everyone here should be ashamed of themselves after taking this topic seriously including you. Really 10 pages? Your shitting me

And the majority of those 10 pages are people bitching about Mario 64. Christ it seems like if you say anything negative about that damn game people get there tits in a twist. I am loving every minute of this though, it's been highly amusing.

[frogofdeath]

The Playstation may have the most titles, but I can see only about 3 games on there even worth playing (Raiden Project, Rayman, NBA Jam T.E)

Ummmm, you're forgetting Street Fighter: The Movie. Best movie game ever! And vise versa.

[tom]

Ummmm, you're forgetting Street Fighter: The Movie. Best movie game ever! And vise versa.

yeah, but that's still three more worth playing than on N64

[todesengel]

Ummmm, you're forgetting Street Fighter: The Movie. Best movie game ever! And vise versa.

I always thought that I was the only person who liked that game.

[tom]

I always thought that I was the only person who liked that game.

Hey you're right, love that game, KYLIE MINOGUE ROCKS !!!!

[j_factor]

Given the topic title, the discussion was on the launch of the N64. You said the launch sucked because it only had 2 games. My argument was that the launch of the N64 was comparable to others of its generation because the Saturn only launched with 3 and the PlayStation had 10 games that aren't remotely as highly regarded as Super Mario 64, both back then and now, and aren't continued to be frequently played in this day and age like Super Mario 64, which can make the N64 launch considered very good for those who feel quality is greater than quantity. End of story.

That's a bit of a red herring, though. If someone complains about the quality of 2D fighters on Playstation, I would never respond with "but N64 was worse!" and then list all the 2D fighters available for N64 and talk about how much they suck. (Unless of course the conversation was already about Playstation versus N64.) Likewise, my opinion of the N64 launch is not dependent on the Playstation launch. But hey, since we're talking about it now...

Playstation was the first system to have a real "launch" in the way that we think of launches today (at least in North America). By most standards it was neither great nor particularly successful. But it was the first time that a "launch" was a real thing, and it was the first time that particular thought was put into having a real "launch lineup". It is the template that most systems since have followed. Sony wanted a launch lineup that covered a variety of genres. They enlisted third parties to help them do it, in the process building solid relationships with them.

Nintendo apparently didn't feel the need to copy Sony's launch concept. They released the system when it was ready to go, along with the couple of games that were done. They didn't care so much about a launch lineup, and they didn't allow third parties in at all. (Nintendo imposed some harsh conditions on the developers of Shadows of the Empire.) However, the N64 was much more successful, mostly because Super Mario 64 was so well received (also partly because it came a year later). But the N64 launch was not a good thing for the system in the long run. Street Fighter: The Movie may be a lame game, but Playstation had Capcom on board and Nintendo 64 didn't.*

I still feel that variety is important, and buying a new system based on just one game is not something I would ever do or recommend. In fact I have always acquired at least four games to start with, with any new system I bought. I also still think that if you look at the period from launch to Christmas, Playstation looks much better than N64, and in fact has more good/notable games in that period than N64 has total releases.

I had a friend who got an N64 at launch. He loved Super Mario 64, but after he completed it (and Pilotwings), he was twiddling his thumbs. I remember he would spend his time "playing" Super Mario 64 by wandering aimlessly around the castle and climbing trees. I asked him "how are you not bored?" and he responded, "who says I'm not bored?"

This is ignoring that the other, feebler, side of your argument was that, because you personally don't like Super Mario 64, you (and others in this topic) have attempted to invalidate its place in history and the opinions of those who enjoy it by suggesting that all the fans and press are/were Nintendo fanboys, Mario fanboys, blinded by hype, and/or skewed by limited options. I'd like to think that most DP members frown upon this kind of disrespect shown for others, but so many people get away with it because it's such a subtle form of trolling.

Please show me where I used the word "fanboy" or said anything along those lines.

I did say that the circumstances of Super Mario 64's release had a lot to do with the level of praise it got. I stand by that comment, which presupposes, rather than invalidates, its place in history. I also think this is true about quite a few games, not just Mario 64, but Mario 64 was the topic at hand.

I also think that the average DP member is old enough, with enough access to a wide variety of games, and open enough to games of all eras to be able to simply assess a game for what it is and come to a pure, honest opinion of if they like it or not, with no need to skew their feelings for any reason. Maybe the haters will never accept it, but there ARE people who just plain like Super Mario 64 because they find it a highly enjoyable game to play, outside world and its impact be damned.

Of course.

I mean, I previously brought up Final Fantasy VII as a PlayStation game that is highly respected and frequently played, yet I actually dislike the game myself. I'll never understand its immense popularity, but I would also never deny its status or the right for others to love it. I could theoretically come up with a similar slew of reasons as to why people have been misled into loving it (and I'm sure there are some, just as with Super Mario 64), but I accept that there are plenty of people that have simply played the game and enjoyed it for what it is.

I like Final Fantasy VII, but it is also a frequent target of bashing. I accept that not everyone likes it, and not everyone has to like it. I further accept that people who dislike it may have legitimate complaints about the game, beyond it simply being 'not their cup of tea'. I do not begrudge anyone expressing their disdain for it.

---
* - Some people tend to think of Capcom as having a love affair with the Saturn, but it's not really true. Saturn simply did better on a technical level with many arcade ports; almost all of them were on PSX too, and they did they best they could, Saturn was just better suited for them. Capcom only ever had three games exclusive to the Saturn: Night Warriors, which was a split with PSX getting the original Darkstalkers exclusive, Dungeons & Dragons Collection, which was a bit of an afterthought, and Final Fight Revenge, which does not count. Every Capcom console game of the era, apart from these three, was on PSX; they released several PSX exclusives, and some others came out on PSX first.

[kupomogli]

Given the topic title, the discussion was on the launch of the N64. You said the launch sucked because it only had 2 games. My argument was that the launch of the N64 was comparable to others of its generation because the Saturn only launched with 3 and the PlayStation had 10 games that aren't remotely as highly regarded as Super Mario 64

You're defending Super Mario 64 by saying it's a good game because most of the launch titles on the PSX sucked. While the PSX had pretty much Raiden Project as the only good launch exclusive, it doesn't mean that Super Mario 64 was a good game.

The N64 came out a year and a half after the PSX. Arguing that Nintendo had two releases at launch because it's Mario 64 is pretty much showing their arrogance. It's basically saying "Mario 64 is better than whatever the PSX had from launch until now and Mario fans will eat it up."

Air Combat and King's Field(2 in Japan) came out in 1995. Good near launch titles. I no longer own Air Combat because at the time I had no job and would trade games for others. I do still own King's Field and do still play it, though instead of owning the long box version which I used to, I own the jewel case version which I prefer.

Die Hard Trilogy, and Crash Bandicoot are great games that came out in 1996 before the N64(Crash coming almost at the same time,) while Blood Omen Legacy of Kain, King's Field 2, Disruptor, Suikoden, and Twisted Metal 2 are great games that came out the same year, but shortly after the N64.

How about we just compare Crash Bandicoot and Mario 64. The better of the two games is Crash Bandicoot in my opinion. Instead of the collect-a-thon ridiculous small stages of Super Mario 64, Crash Bandicoot is actually a platformer. You progress through stages rather than staying in the same stage until you collect all the stars.

So there's that. You can have Crash Bandicoot and have a large choice of different games for the PSX, or at the very same time, you can choose between..... Super Mario 64 and Pilot Wings. Coming out the same year in 1996 had Mario Kart 64, Mortal Kombat Trilogy(although also on PSX with a better controller,) and Star Wars Shadow of the Empire. Compared to the PSX at the time there were just much better games and more variety.

Though the Nintendo 64 does have some very good games. Castlevania, Castlevania Legacy of Darkness, Forsaken 64(this was better than the PSX version,) Ogre Battle 64, Duke Nukem 64, Goldeneye 007, Smash Bros, Mischief Makers, WCW vs NWO, WCW Revenge, WWF Wrestlemania 2000, WWF No Mercy, Star Fox 64, Zelda OoT, and Jet Force Gemini. Other games that came out for the system that were good, Resident Evil 2, Mega Man 64, and Nightmare Creatures, I've already owned on the PSX for awhile so they really too late.

While the games I listed are good, most of them are only good for the real reason to put a lot of time into the N64. By far the best multiplayer system available at the time. Probably the most played games with friends during that time for the N64 was either Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, or the wrestling games. What else is there really for single player though? Zelda, Castlevania, LoD, Mischief Makers, Ogre Battle, Star Wars, and Star Fox 64.

If you were to use mathematics to solve whether Mario 64 was the best N64 game you'd come up with (100/11) = x, where x is the percentage that Mario 64 could possibly be the best N64 games, if by chance you think it's one of the best(we'd add in other factors but let's make it basic.) Seven good single player games for the system, not counting ports. We'll add Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and WWF No Mercy(best wrestling game,) as party titles/single player bringing it up to 10. If you happen to think Super Mario 64 is better than average, then you really have, in my opinion only of course, 11 games to compare as "the best." If you were to only own an N64, then obviously you are going to love one of the small amount of good games you owned, and obviously one of them would probably be Mario that you owned because hey, who doesn't like Mario? You really have to think of how many people would purchase a Nintendo system and not purchase a Mario game(very few.) In the end, due to N64 games being overpriced and not everyone having bottomless funding, we'll say out of good games, most people would own two, and using the theory that Mario 64 is "good" we'll say that there's a 50% chance most Nintendo fanboys who owned only an N64 thought Mario 64 was the best. All based on assumption, but how far from the truth are we? The world may never know.

(Hopefully everyone is aware this last paragraph was a joke.)

[Leo_A]

Pilotwings 64 and Super Mario 64 are two excellent games. So arrogant or not, it was a pretty nice launch from my standpoint.

[kedawa]

Pilotwings 64 was a bit of a let down.
Mario 64 was revolutionary at the time. I can see how it could sell systems.

[Icarus Moonsight]

The thing that just eats at me about this kind of crap (and bloated specs) is that it I actually had to have conversations with people who thought all of it was true.

Yeah, know what you mean.

No i think everyone here should be ashamed of themselves after taking this topic seriously including you. Really 10 pages? .

Sorry, couldn't find a picture of a burning pyramid of N64s...

[Aussie2B]

5 paragraphs

Again I say: End of story. Everything I said in that paragraph was logical and factual, regardless of if someone loves or hates Super Mario 64, so there was no logical argument or reason to produce five paragraphs over it.

The only additional thing that I forgot to include was that, given that the N64 launch is, at the very least, comparable to others of the time, it's perfectly fair for someone to say that they ALL suck if they so desire, so maybe that point will placate your misgivings here. If someone does feel that way, though, there's little sense in bringing up only one in particular as sucking because that's misleading. It suggests that the one being mentioned is lesser than others. Any time in life when we say something is great or bad it implies a comparison, otherwise those assessments are meaningless. I mean, if someone dislikes video games in general, they're not going to say "I hate Sega". If they did, anyone would assume that there are other video games that they DO like, while having something against Sega in particular.

Please show me where I used the word "fanboy" or said anything along those lines.

You didn't. Hence why I said "others". You pulled the latter two, suggesting that those who like Super Mario 64 feel that way because they were blinded by the hype or came to their opinion based on the limited options. You can try to backpedal now and say you agree with my points about respecting other people's opinions, but at the time, you were not presenting an argument with any exceptions.

[tomaitheous]

j_factor 1 ; Aussie2B 0