• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Anyone else think Starfox 64 is not nearly as good as Starfox original?

B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
HELL YES @ OP

StarFox >>> StarFox 64.

I've really grown to appreciate 64 over the years, but when it was first released... no contest. StarFox 64 was a saturday morning cartoon with happy marching band music and cute, fully voiced animal heroes.... StarFox was a serious space adventure set to orchestral/techno, that just happened to star animals in a strange juxtaposition.

And it's actually a shooter... the open areas of StarFox 64 were something we craved at the time... but it made for a less tight action game than the original.

StarFox SNES is best!
 
R

Ranger X

Member
BocoDragon said:
HELL YES @ OP

StarFox >>> StarFox 64.

I've really grown to appreciate 64 over the years, but when it was first released... no contest. StarFox 64 was a saturday morning cartoon with happy marching band music and cute, fully voiced animal heroes.... StarFox was a serious space adventure set to orchestral/techno, that just happened to star animals in a strange juxtaposition.

And it's actually a shooter... the open areas of StarFox 64 were something we craved at the time... but it made for a less tight action game than the original.

StarFox SNES is best!
Click to expand...


I think it is just that Starfox SNES graphics are so basic that they are open to be interpreted differently in each people's imagination. Because they leave so much to the imagination you could "feel" Starfox SNES was serious. And me, I thought Starfox 64 had retain that cartoonish feel I had on the SNES...

.
 
D

dimb

Bjergsen is the greatest midlane in the world
Yes, without the rich gravitas of serious deep space Star Fox just isn't Star Fox.
 
mango drank

mango drank

Member
In my opinion? They're way, way too different to choose a "favorite." And this is coming from a hardcore fan of the original, who didn't play 64 nearly as much.

To be honest, though, I definitely prefer the overall feel of 64 more. The original SNES version was kind of a downer. 64 was more kiddy, but if I could go back in time and give my eight-year-old self the 64 version to play instead, I'd do it. I think that's why there's much more support for the 64 version than the original here: the SNES version rubbed most people the wrong way, but the 64 version was so campy, bubbly, and colorful, you couldn't help but feel good during play and afterwards. So, my theory is that the preference for the 64 version is based on the difference in emotional weight between the two games. The original game was darker and moodier than the sequel.

Observations about subtle differences between the two to support my point:
- The vast majority of music in the original was in the minor key, and had heavy military undertones/themes. I don't remember the 64 music quite as well, but I remember the music being more chirpy and upbeat.
- The sound effects in the original were harsher. The sound of your Arwing taking heavy damage was this insane crunching noise. I'd always feel TERRIBLE when I heard that as a young kid, and I'd be traumatized for a second or two. Hell, even now. And the music and sound effects when you died made it feel like a grave thing had just happened. Contrast this stuff to 64's effects: softer, less grave. As I recall, the music when you die can aptly be described as silly. Basically: "no big deal, try again, kid! *thumbs up*"
- The focus on dodging things in the original was brought up in the OP. Good point, but it supports my theory. This really adds to the challenge of the game, and makes you feel vulnerable at all times.
- The voices in the original version are these weird bassy gibberish noises. In 64, your squad's voices are higher-pitched, they talk to you more often, and they actually speak English. Your squad basically keeps you company throughout your mission.
- A number of the bosses in 64 talk to you and taunt you. In the original, you're fighting these silent, bizarre bosses. Unknowable alien weirdos.
- Art-wise, the original was dark and gloomy, on the whole. The 64 version was bright and colorful.

And so on. I'm sure I could think of more examples if I tried. My point is that the original was heavier on people. 64 was light and fun. I played the everliving crap out of the original when I was little, the polygons were absolutely amazing to me back then (I'd never seen anything like that), the music WAS cool (I actually now remember my first five minutes or so of playing, with my family around me, me making comments about how mindblowing it was ... sniff). But, to be perfectly honest, months after that, I don't know if I'd call most of that time "fun." I was basically on edge the whole time while playing. And whenever I'd finish a playthrough, I'd think, "Man, I don't feel so good. That was kind of a bummer."

I envy the younger kids, the 64 generation, who experienced SF64 first.
 
H

Hero of Legend

Member
big_z said:
if we ever get a true sequel to the series i really hope nintendo scraps the shit that was done to the story post SF64. peppy>krystal.
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what Nintendo should do; do what you said, but ALSO, make Dinosaur Planet its own epic adventure series as it was originally intended, hell Retro could very well do that marvelously... but after DKCR of course. :D
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Ranger X said:
I think it is just that Starfox SNES graphics are so basic that they are open to be interpreted differently in each people's imagination. Because they leave so much to the imagination you could "feel" Starfox SNES was serious. And me, I thought Starfox 64 had retain that cartoonish feel I had on the SNES...

.
Click to expand...
I'll grant that's possible.

But also consider this: StarFox was actually developed by an outside studio Argonaut Software. I believe that they designed the meat of the game as a hardcore shooter, and whatever plan Nintendo had for the story and theme of the game could only be mere icing on top. The core of the game was hardcore... the identity of a kid-friendly character action game was not woven into the fabric of the game itself. The character bits, when they appeared, were so un-voiced and minimal that they didn't overshadow the feeling of a rather serious sci-fi game.

By the time it came to StarFox 64, which was developed internally at Nintendo, the concept of the cute animals were probably considered quite core to the game concept, and so Miyamoto did his "Nintendo 64-era" thing and moved them into a full on cartoon presentation.

I actually don't mind 64's characterization... but the main thing is that the music was now so happy-go-lucky instead of serious/cool. I didn't like that change.

It's like going from Gradius to Banjo-Kazooie.
 
L

Log4Girlz

Member
I never re-played a game as much as Star Fox 64. I only hope the control is a perfect replica and it launches with the 3DS. I'm..so...fucking...buying it.


Also, wasn't starfox 2 almost done before they canned it? Anyone know if it was ever finished and released as an easter egg or something?
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
brohmbel said:
In my opinion? They're way, way too different to choose a "favorite." And this is coming from a hardcore fan of the original, who didn't play 64 nearly as much.

To be honest, though, I definitely prefer the overall feel of 64 more. The original SNES version was kind of a downer. 64 was more kiddy, but if I could go back in time and give my eight-year-old self the 64 version to play instead, I'd do it. I think that's why there's much more support for the 64 version than the original here: the SNES version rubbed most people the wrong way, but the 64 version was so campy, bubbly, and colorful, you couldn't help but feel good during play and afterwards. So, my theory is that the preference for the 64 version is based on the difference in emotional weight between the two games. The original game was darker and moodier than the sequel.

Observations about subtle differences between the two to support my point:
- The vast majority of music in the original was in the minor key, and had heavy military undertones/themes. I don't remember the 64 music quite as well, but I remember the music being more chirpy and upbeat.
- The sound effects in the original were harsher. The sound of your Arwing taking heavy damage was this insane crunching noise. I'd always feel TERRIBLE when I heard that as a young kid, and I'd be traumatized for a second or two. Hell, even now. And the music and sound effects when you died made it feel like a grave thing had just happened. Contrast this stuff to 64's effects: softer, less grave. As I recall, the music when you die can aptly be described as silly. Basically: "no big deal, try again, kid! *thumbs up*"
- The focus on dodging things in the original was brought up in the OP. Good point, but it supports my theory. This really adds to the challenge of the game, and makes you feel vulnerable at all times.
- The voices in the original version are these weird bassy gibberish noises. In 64, your squad's voices are higher-pitched, they talk to you more often, and they actually speak English. Your squad basically keeps you company throughout your mission.
- A number of the bosses in 64 talk to you and taunt you. In the original, you're fighting these silent, bizarre bosses. Unknowable alien weirdos.
- Art-wise, the original was dark and gloomy, on the whole. The 64 version was bright and colorful.

And so on. I'm sure I could think of more examples if I tried. My point is that the original was heavier on people. 64 was light and fun. I played the everliving crap out of the original when I was little, the polygons were absolutely amazing to me back then (I'd never seen anything like that), the music WAS cool (I actually now remember my first five minutes or so of playing, with my family around me, me making comments about how mindblowing it was ... sniff). But, to be perfectly honest, months after that, I don't know if I'd call most of that time "fun." I was basically on edge the whole time while playing. And whenever I'd finish a playthrough, I'd think, "Man, I don't feel so good. That was kind of a bummer."

I envy the younger kids, the 64 generation, who experienced SF64 first.
Click to expand...
You actually nailed many of the "emotional" differences between the game.... The difference for me is that I prefer the SNES version's emotions any day of the week.

I don't wish I had a different childhood... getting a pseudo-hardcore shooter from Nintendo in those days was awesome. And dear god, the sound and music. It still sounds powerful and surreal to this day (while almost everything on N64 sounds like an old MIDI file).
 
A

Annoying Old Party Man

Member
This argument is fucking stupid.

Starfox SNES was the first game i ever owned. It was incredible :).
I owned the import Star Fox 64, and that was the first game to use the now standard rumble pack, EVER. The feeling of rumble + Star Fox was AMAZING.

Conclusion: both games are incredible, it's no accident that it's considered one of the best Nintendo franchises with only two "major" games in it's collection.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Annoying Old Party Man said:
This argument is fucking stupid.

Starfox SNES was the first game i ever owned. It was incredible :).
I owned the import Star Fox 64, and that was the first game to use the now standard rumble pack, EVER. The feeling of rumble + Star Fox was AMAZING.

Conclusion: both games are incredible, it's no accident that it's considered one of the best Nintendo franchises with only two "major" games in it's collection.
Click to expand...
One thing for me is that I've owned a used StarFox64 cart for over a decade... but I still don't have a rumble pack. I really am getting half the experience huh? :lol

I remember using it back in 1997 though... it was incredible at the time!
 
S

Sohter.Nura

Member
Star Fox original doesn't hold a candle to SF64. I played both of them (first on the SNES, and then on the N64) and while the SNES version has its charms, the N64 has much better gameplay and is more addicting.
 
mango drank

mango drank

Member
I should mention that, from an objective standpoint, from a gameplay standpoint, the original game is probably better. I absolutely agree.

My point was that people are remembering these games through their childhood emotions, and SF64 probably made them feel better than the original. Which is why all the love.

They're both good games, though. Again, it's hard to take a side.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
brohmbel said:
I should mention that, from an objective standpoint, from a gameplay standpoint, the original game is probably better. I absolutely agree.

My point was that people are remembering these games through their childhood emotions, and SF64 probably made them feel better than the original. Which is why all the love.

They're both good games, though. Again, it's hard to take a side.
Click to expand...
I'll take my childhood memories of playing a hardcore sci-fi shooter over my childhood memories of playing a kiddy adventure shooter any day of the week :lol

Of course.. I was the kid who'd rather watch Aliens than Power Rangers.
 
A

Annoying Old Party Man

Member
brohmbel said:
I should mention that, from an objective standpoint, from a gameplay standpoint, the original game is probably better. I absolutely agree.

My point was that people are remembering these games through their childhood emotions, and SF64 probably made them feel better than the original. Which is why all the love.

They're both good games, though. Again, it's hard to take a side.
Click to expand...


No, the gameplay in the original Star Fox game is not better. It's not better even if you compare it to their perspective times (that is, how good was the gameplay when each game was released).

Star Fox 64 had amazing gameplay at it's time, smooth analogue control, an awesome lock on system, a smart power up system, etc.

And I'm trying to be objective here - my parents bought me a Super Nintendo because i had a feet surgery at the summer of 1995 and i could not move my feet during the whole summer, so Star Fox is where my childhood memories lie, but I feel that both games excelled in every factor, in their respective time.


-edit- The only thing that Star Fox 64 missed in comparison to Star Fox (apart from an inferior ost) is those stuffed falco and co dolls. I thought that was awesome, like something from a stop motion animation show :lol , the 64 renders sucked in comparison.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Green Mamba said:
Star Fox has not aged well.

At all.

Especially compared to Star Fox 64.
Click to expand...
Huh.. Couldn't disagree more. I remember being blown away how much it held up when I bought a new cart in 2007.

Yeah it's primitive 3D. But you know at this point, so is SF64.. And at least the SNES version's simplicity sells me on it.

Gameplay + sound-wise.. Yeah. It holds up great.
 
S

Sohter.Nura

Member
brohmbel said:
I should mention that, from an objective standpoint, from a gameplay standpoint, the original game is probably better. I absolutely agree.

My point was that people are remembering these games through their childhood emotions, and SF64 probably made them feel better than the original. Which is why all the love.

They're both good games, though. Again, it's hard to take a side.
Click to expand...

Really? Cause in the gameplay department, to me Star Fox 64 excelled the prequel in every department: Smoother controls, lock-on system, more enemy variety, better bosses, better high-scoring game, and if you wanted to not use the lock-on system, there was an easter egg for hardcore high-scorers. Also it had a kick-ass 4 team multiplayer and tons of replay value.

I can't see how Star Fox is a better game. I played both them at their time of release and even though I loved both, Star Fox 64 is just better in every possible way D:
 
M

Myriadis

Member
Played Starfox,quitted after the first level.I couldn't get into it.And I tried three times.But I could understand why it was loved back then.

Played Starfox 2 and finished the whole game on beginner (tried expert and died pretty quickly),liked it,although the graphics still give me headaches.I especially loved running through the bases.

Played Starfox 64 and loved it.Nearly got all medals,there's only one missing.Graphics are finally good and I like the combo system.I actually prefer the music from SF64-I really don't like the music quality of the SNES chip,sounds too muffled for me.

Played Starfox Adventures and liked it.Not the usual game,but I love Zelda and it is a good Zelda clone.Fox was never that badass for me before.
 
S

Stealth

Member
The problem people will have when comparing these two classics is that the limitations of the Super FX chip turn Star Fox into a game that does not hold up nearly as well as its 64-bit successor. Also, the two games exist in separate "universes" -- the plot of Star Fox 64 is largely a rewrite of the original game's, which caused a bit of a furor among the series's fans all the way back in 1997. Add to that the fact that Star Fox 2 for the SNES was essentially shelved in favor of creating a new Nintendo 64 version and it's easy to see why people who were old enough to play the original get so annoyed by newer fans who may have entered the series with SF64 or, worse, Adventures and Assault. For a series so repeatedly shat upon by Nintendo, a re-release of Star Fox 64 for the 3DS actually came as a genuine shock to me, and yet it makes perfect sense. It's irritating, though, because Nintendo did make a tech demo of the original Star Fox running on the Game Boy advance, and yet never followed through with it.

Anyway, I would have to say that each game has unique strengths. Starfox has the iconic music, the beautiful puppet and model designs from the manual and promotional materials, and is undoubtedly the most challenging game in the entire series. SF64 has the brilliantly campy voice acting, superb controls, and the introduction of all-range combat -- a takeaway from Starfox 2, like the Star Wolf team and Landmaster (based on a walking Arwing). I don't think it's wrong to say one or the other is better -- it's simply a matter of what you played first or what made the greater impression at the time.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Stealth said:
The problem people will have when comparing these two classics is that the limitations of the Super FX chip turn Star Fox into a game that does not hold up nearly as well as its 64-bit successor. Also, the two games exist in separate "universes" -- the plot of Star Fox 64 is largely a rewrite of the original game's, which caused a bit of a furor among the series's fans all the way back in 1997. Add to that the fact that Star Fox 2 for the SNES was essentially shelved in favor of creating a new Nintendo 64 version and it's easy to see why people who were old enough to play the original get so annoyed by newer fans who may have entered the series with SF64 or, worse, Adventures and Assault. For a series so repeatedly shat upon by Nintendo, a re-release of Star Fox 64 for the 3DS actually came as a genuine shock to me, and yet it makes perfect sense. It's irritating, though, because Nintendo did make a tech demo of the original Star Fox running on the Game Boy advance, and yet never followed through with it.

Anyway, I would have to say that each game has unique strengths. Starfox has the iconic music, the beautiful puppet and model designs from the manual and promotional materials, and is undoubtedly the most challenging game in the entire series. SF64 has the brilliantly campy voice acting, superb controls, and the introduction of all-range combat -- a takeaway from Starfox 2, like the Star Wolf team and Landmaster (based on a walking Arwing). I don't think it's wrong to say one or the other is better -- it's simply a matter of what you played first or what made the greater impression at the time.
Click to expand...
^ that's better. A "teach the controversy" perspective is much more enlightening than the usual "obviously... Game X is much better!" hyperbole.

SNES version is obviously best!
 
N

Nuclear Muffin

Banned
SF64 to SF SNES: "You're good... BUT I'M BETTER!!!"


BocoDragon said:
I'll grant that's possible.

But also consider this: StarFox was actually developed by an outside studio Argonaut Software. I believe that they designed the meat of the game as a hardcore shooter, and whatever plan Nintendo had for the story and theme of the game could only be mere icing on top. The core of the game was hardcore... the identity of a kid-friendly character action game was not woven into the fabric of the game itself. The character bits, when they appeared, were so un-voiced and minimal that they didn't overshadow the feeling of a rather serious sci-fi game.

By the time it came to StarFox 64, which was developed internally at Nintendo, the concept of the cute animals were probably considered quite core to the game concept, and so Miyamoto did his "Nintendo 64-era" thing and moved them into a full on cartoon presentation.

I actually don't mind 64's characterization... but the main thing is that the music was now so happy-go-lucky instead of serious/cool. I didn't like that change.

It's like going from Gradius to Banjo-Kazooie.
Click to expand...

Argonaut just did the programming for Starfox SNES. The game design was 100% Nintendo. And I wouldn't really call SF64's music happy go lucky at all. It doesn't have that same mysterious quality but it still gets pretty moody (especially on Aquas, Zoness and Venom)
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Just throwing this out there: StarFox 2, not actually that good. I finally played through the rom about a month ago.. Underwhelming.

The music and graphics are wonderful, in the style of the original game.. (I also love the cyborg look Andross has). But the entire game is based on "free range mode"... Really simple levels too. I don't even remember one legitimate corridor level.

I guess that might have been interesting pre-N64?

I can see why they cancelled it. It really was no big loss. The wierd thing is.. I can't find a single negative opinion against it on the net. Either I'm crazy, or the few people who bother to play an unreleased game rom tended to think it was some lost treasure just because it never saw release.
 
S

Stealth

Member
BocoDragon said:
Just throwing this out there: StarFox 2, not actually that good. I finally played through the rom about a month ago.. Underwhelming.

The music and graphics are wonderful, in the style of the original game.. (I also love the cyborg look Andross has). But the entire game is based on "free range mode"... Really simple levels too. I don't even remember one legitimate corridor level.

I guess that might have been interesting pre-N64?

I can see why they cancelled it. It really was no big loss. The wierd thing is.. I can't find a single negative opinion against it on the net. Either I'm crazy, or the few people who bother to play an unreleased game rom tended to think it was some lost treasure just because it never saw release.
Click to expand...

A lot of the gameplay ideas of SF2 were rehashed in Q Games's Star Fox Command: time limits, attacking missiles, a semi-turn-based movement system, creating your own path, a strong focus on all-range combat, etc. Which should have been a good thing, had the strategy elements of the game actually been challenging. I've still got gripes with Dylan Cuthbert about this, because he stated that Command was intended as a refresh of the series, to bring it back to its roots, when in reality the multiple endings and weak campaign were anything but refreshing. I honestly wonder how much of this was so as to not upset the Post-Adventures rise of Krystal lovers and how much was simply due to Q Games misjudging what made the franchise so great.
 
W

Why would you do that?

Member
Hmm. I would have to agree that the controls, graphics, and frame rate in 64 are much better. However, because I played the original first, I'm already used to and okay with the controls and such in the original.

Also, Starfox 2 is a technically impressive and cinematic game with awesome elements and a better Star Wolf theme than Starfox 64 (oh no he di'int!), but it isn't something I'd really want to play a lot.
 
T

thechristoph

Sir!
Love Star Fox 64 so much. I wish it had a mode where it would just throw levels at you in random order. Fuck, I wish every level-based game had that. Do it.
 
J

jeremy1456

Junior Member
Has anyone who chooses the original over 64 actually played the original in the last decade?

It just doesn't hold up. At all. SF64 does.

The soundtrack is pure gold on the original game though.
 
Pimpbaa

Pimpbaa

Member
Soundtrack is much much better in the original Starfox. Same could be said of a lot of SNES games and N64 sequels. Did nintendo lose a really good composer during that time?
 
W

Why For?

Banned
64 way better.

Pretty much every major series Nintendo has was better on the 64 now that I think about it.

Smash Bros.
Starfox
Zelda
Mario Kart
Banjo (heh)

Mario 64 is arguably the exception, with Galaxy probably being better than Mario 64.
 
C

Cipherr

Member
Err, nah SF64 was the better game. The original was fun, but was really just another fun game, SF64 made the franchise something I came to adore though, shame they betrayed that mistrust with every abortion of a starfox game since.

Segata Sanshiro said:
I actually have an even more controversial opinion about the series.

I like StarFox Command more than 64, too :p
Click to expand...


Oh sweet jesus WHAT? There is no way. And yes I unspoilered that because it offended me so much.
 
S

Sir Ilpalazzo

Member
64 is an awesome, classic game, but I think it wouldn't compare to the first game at all if you were to make the original game look and control like the 64 game. That's really all it has over the first one.
 
Sapiens

Sapiens

Member
Pimpbaa said:
Soundtrack is much much better in the original Starfox. Same could be said of a lot of SNES games and N64 sequels. Did nintendo lose a really good composer during that time?
Click to expand...


Yeah, the lost Ken Kutaragi! :lol

In all serioussness, the original Star Fox does have certain things over the 64 Sequel. Namely, the amazing music.

But both games have their strengths and weaknesses.

Both are excellent.

I don't think Nintendo are too keen on revisiting the original simply because they had little to do with the design. Argonaut took care of the design and programming while Nintendo handled most of the creative sutff - this is according to Jez San of Argonaut.

Starfox 64 is Nintendo's baby though.
 
J

Jazzem

Member
I just played through Star Fox 2 for the first time...interesting game to say the least. It did get repetitive at times, but the action was chunky and fun. It was really short on Normal, I wonder how it fares on the higher difficulties...
 
L

LSauchelli

Member
I think 64 does more things better than the original. But the 3D remake should probably improve on the 'failings' of the 64 version. Perhaps multiple modes + the best music of the series? I really don't think that Star Fox 64 3DS is going to be the same as the 64 version.
 
S

Shikamaru Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Argonaut took care of the design and programming while Nintendo handled most of the creative sutff - this is according to Jez San of Argonaut.
Click to expand...

Argonaut just did the programming. But even then, Cuthbert was working in-side Nintendo's office not in Argonauts office. All the design was done by Nintendo. Look at the director, map designer, musican and polygon modeler.. all EAD guys.

Thats why Reed and Goddard stayed at EAD .. thats why Cuthbert almost stayed at EAD before deciding to work else but still living permanently in Kyoto. Nintendo and Kyoto never gave Argonaut back their programmers.
 
Sapiens

Sapiens

Member
Shikamaru Ninja said:
Argonaut just did the programming. But even then, Cuthbert was working in-side Nintendo's office not in Argonauts office. All the design was done by Nintendo. Look at the director, map designer, musican and polygon modeler.. all EAD guys.

Thats why Reed and Goddard stayed at EAD .. thats why Cuthbert almost stayed at EAD before deciding to work else but still living permanently in Kyoto. Nintendo and Kyoto never gave Argonaut back their programmers.
Click to expand...


Shit, really? That's a fucking smooth aquisition by Nintendo.

I remember reading an interview with Jez San years ago wear he mentioned his team took care of most everything except for the creative (which I assumed was inserting furries). Thanks for clarifying!

Sapiens
 
V

viewtiful_dru

Member
Why For? said:
64 way better.

Pretty much every major series Nintendo has was better on the 64 now that I think about it.

Smash Bros. no, Melee was better
Starfox maybe
Zelda maybe
Mario Kart no, DS was better
Banjo (heh) definitely

Mario 64 is arguably the exception, with Galaxy probably being better than Mario 64.
definitely
Click to expand...

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Starfox EX, an extensive romhack of the SNES 1993 classic, has dropped today
21
3K
Alexios replied
Solar Ash - one of the best 3D platformers of all time
LTTP
25
2K
diffusionx replied
Stellar Blade Trophy List Revealed
Community
11
1K
Aenima replied
Stellar Blade | Preview Thread
Opinion Event Hype 3 4 5 6 7
315
24K
Toots replied
RLTTP: Banjo-Kazooie Grunty’s Revenge
RTTP
3
401
Gaiff replied
Top Bottom