Quote Originally Posted by j_factor View Post
Show me some, then.
That's just a silly cop-out internet-style comeback. I explained to you the types of people that have liked Super Mario 64 without buying it at launch. It's ridiculous to request that someone tracks down a bunch of people to post in a topic just to prove a single logical point that will never be believed by someone who refuses to believe. I bet even if I fulfilled this absurd request you would then say that they're made-up alternate accounts or that the people are lying or something equally ridiculous.

But given the basic fact that the N64 has existed for nearly 15 years, it's only logical that many people have discovered it since Sept. 96. And most of those people still do indeed like Super Mario 64 because negative comments on it are in the minority. You do the research if you feel it necessary. I'm sure there are countless topics right here on Digital Press with people talking about getting a N64 for the first time over the past decade and still enjoying SM64.

This is exactly what I'm talking about -- people talk about it as a good tech demo or a novel innovation more than they talk about it as an actual game. I give it credit for its achievements, but that doesn't make it actually good.
That's just ridiculous to me. Tech demo? Novel? If you want to talk about Pilotwings 64 like that, I could understand, but SM64 is all about its gameplay before graphics or anything else. It's loaded with action, puzzles, secrets, etc. When people praise SM64, it's because they like PLAYING it, not just looking at it. If someone doesn't like the gameplay, more power to them, but implying that it doesn't have gameplay at all is going to get scoffs from most people.

You said it would've been fine by you if it had one game at launch.
And it was. I only bought one, and it kept me happy for a good long while (and through replays as well). That doesn't at all suggest that I wasn't planning on buying more games later on.

Just Wave Race, really. The others are a good example of what I was talking about with N64 games being overrated due to the lack of other games available. Shadows of the Empire is dreck, but many N64 owners convinced themselves it was good.
And stuff like Descent and Destruction Derby aren't dreck? If you think games like those are great (especially if you think they're better than SM64), then I just don't know what to say.

The rate of releases was good enough if everybody all plays the same games. There's a dearth of options. With N64, if you didn't like Mario 64, you were kind of screwed. There was no one Playstation game that everyone had to like, to appreciate the system.
I would argue that someone who doesn't like SM64 probably shouldn't be buying a N64 period. That means you probably would also not appreciate the Banjo games, Conker, Donkey Kong 64, Kirby 64, Rayman 2, Rocket, and so many of the N64's best games. No system is perfect for everybody, even the PlayStation included. I mean, if someone was really looking for 3D platformers, then the PlayStation was pretty crappy. Crash and Spyro are about the most notable ones on the system, and they don't compare to the offerings of Nintendo and Rare (plus they came along after Super Mario 64). I think most people would also agree that a fan of console FPS games was better off with a N64 as well. And if someone likes 2D fighters, I think they're screwed with both the N64 and PlayStation because most of the ones on PlayStation are butchered.

But limited options aside, the pre-Christmas releases for N64 did cover platformers, flight sims, racing, fighting, sports, and action/adventure, so it's not like there wasn't a fair amount of genre representation. That's not to say every game was a shining example of its genre, but that was certainly the case with PlayStation as well. I think much of those early popular PlayStation games were only popular because there wasn't anything better. As a result, they've justly been forgotten, as is the case with the N64's Cruis'n USA for example, but games like Super Mario 64 and Wave Race 64 are still loved and played because they're genuinely good games (in most people's eyes, at least). Hype isn't eternal. It can only hide a sub-par game for so long.

None of those games was played by every Playstation owner, because they had a good number of options.
I don't think that's a fair argument at this point in time. Those PlayStation games were popular sellers, many were available for cheap as Greatest Hits later on, they're extremely cheap now and easily accessible by collectors. Most PlayStation collectors have at least a couple of those in their collections, and they'll get tried out for 30 minutes and then get shelved. They'd rather be playing genuinely good PlayStation games that are still enjoyable and highly regarded to this day like Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII. Super Mario 64 is in their company, not junk like the first Twisted Metal.

Anyway, this is getting dangerously close to a system argument, which I don't think any of us want or need. I personally love the 32/64-bit generation in general. I can even appreciate the PC-FX, with its paltry 60-some games and its complete lack of many genres.