Support NeoGAF

Amir0x · Nov 1, 2010

redbarchetta said:

there now you get it. People take this forum too seriously. I always say 'factually superior' to rile up those who are too entrenched to formulate compelling arguments, thus hopefully drawing them out to elaborate more and have some fun things to discuss.

People like to complain about this from time to time, but it really does work. You don't know how many times I've seen someone really go off on a tangent about why they love something for that little push alone

manueldelalas · Nov 2, 2010

Chatin said:
Asking the player to go stand in five places in the level does not denote secrets, even if they tried to call it that. The game never required any exploration, and it was always obvious what you had to do. The "exploration" you think was possible in Super Mario 64 was just an illusion of 3D gaming. You can go check out that corner of the map, and call it exploring, but there isn't anything there...

And bullshit again.
Remember the star "shoot into the wild blue"?, or the stars on Hazy maze cave? (no exploration? ha!), etc. It was never obvious what to do; they gave you little hints, but you had to explore the stage and find out what the hint is referring to.

So please, go back, play the game again, or don't come to this thread at all, you have been talking absolute nonsense here and I think you are just trolling.

Chatin · Nov 2, 2010

redbarchetta said:
That was but one of myriad things I listed. Do you not consider the rest as secrets? Why?

I even noted other secrets similar to your cited "flight cap" level--why do those not fit?

I suspect you thought this made sense when you wrote it. Care to elaborate?

Stuff like the change in speed or water level depending on how you entered those levels was cute, but doesn't denote exploration. I would concede on the "hidden" levels if they weren't more obvious than the paintings. Looking up into the sunlight was the only bit you might miss. All the 1 Ups and coins you mention, I don't remember being hidden, or requiring acrobatics, but feel free to post an example to prove me wrong.

On the illusion created by 3D: I'm saying that just because there is a third dimension, and another direction to run, doesn't mean there is anything to explore, but it felt like exploration at the time, because we hadn't been dealing with it in that capacity.

redbarchetta · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
there now you get it. People take this forum too seriously. I always say 'factually superior' to rile up those who are too entrenched to formulate compelling arguments, thus hopefully drawing them out to elaborate more and have some fun things to discuss.

Totally agree with this. But it's difficult to tell when something's joshing, or is intending to be taken literally. I do however think you could accomplish the same result without coming across as seemingly obtuse, as it did result in a mild derailing in this case.

At any rate, you reminded me of something I I still really need to do: Play Super Meat Boy. :lol

TestOfTide · Nov 2, 2010

redbarchetta said:
That is the closest equivalent, actually (imo). It was under-utilized, granted, and wasn't as well conceived nor implemented to the same fun effect. The next closest equivalent was the Bee suit, which merely felt like a means to an end. Direct comparisons aside, the Wing Cap is my favorite power-up in any Mario game, offering an unprecedented level of freedom and fun (for me) in the series.

Wing Cap: Nearly the same thing as the SMW cape, but in 3D.
Telekinetic Mario: Can fly anywhere throughout the level, can stop in place and just float, and can pull in objects with the spin move.

Invisble Cap: Can walk through walls
Boo: phases through walls, have to avoid light, can float continuously

Metal Mario: Invincible, can walk underwater
(no galaxy equivalent)

Ice Mario: Water is now treated like ice, which means a lot more in Galaxy because the game treats Ice as more than just low-friction ground like in 64.

Invincibility Star: Mario becomes invincible and can move very quickly and fluently. (3D version of NSMB's star)

64 has gliding, Galaxy has everything else.

manueldelalas · Nov 2, 2010

Chatin said:
Well I certainly hope they didn't give hints because every star was blatantly obvious .

I don't need some irate teenager telling me I never played Super Mario 64.

Oh I see we've begun with the insults. I'm 25, so you are wrong (again).

And stars weren't obvious, well OK, for me they weren't and I enjoyed the game very much because of that. I'm impressed by your intelligence in games because you have the ability to understand everything.

But should I advice you to change your hobby? Because gaming must be really tedious to you, I mean, everything is just so obvious it must be really boring.

redbarchetta · Nov 2, 2010

Chatin said:
Stuff like the change in speed or water level depending on how you entered those levels was cute, but doesn't denote exploration. .

I thought we were talking about secrets? That is the word you used earlier...

Chatin said:
I would concede on the "hidden" levels if they weren't more obvious than the paintings. Looking up into the sunlight was the only bit you might miss. .

I don't think the holes weren't entirely obvious, particularly since only one led to a secret level.

Chatin said:
All the 1 Ups and coins you mention, I don't remember being hidden, or requiring acrobatics, but feel free to post an example to prove me wrong.

The first level has a 1-up hidden inside some pushed; one is in a tree outside the castle. There's several more like this. As for blue coins, there's a hidden ridge in Cool Cool Mountain that conceals several Blue Coins.

Chatin said:
On the illusion created by 3D: I'm saying that just because there is a third dimension, and another direction to run, doesn't mean there is anything to explore, but it felt like exploration at the time, because we hadn't been dealing with it in that capacity

It's certainly true we didn't deal with it at the time, which made it all the more powerful. I don't believe it negates the explorative elements though, which are authentic.

Always-honest · Nov 2, 2010

RustyNails said:
Mario needs to die. Enough.

Guessing you meant Sonic...

apana · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
there now you get it. People take this forum too seriously. I always say 'factually superior' to rile up those who are too entrenched to formulate compelling arguments, thus hopefully drawing them out to elaborate more and have some fun things to discuss.

People like to complain about this from time to time, but it really does work. You don't know how many times I've seen someone really go off on a tangent about why they love something for that little push alone

But that doesnt explain why you called Mario 64 a shitty and archaic game.

Anasui Kishibe · Nov 2, 2010

RustyNails said:
Mario needs to die. Enough.

for a moment I thought I was reading some ps3forums bullshit

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

apana said:
But that doesnt explain why you called Mario 64 a shitty and archaic game.

That's just because it actually is. Cheer up though, we all like something that is outdated.

BruceLeeRoy · Nov 2, 2010

I have to say SMG is pure platforming genius and by far the best Mario when it come to that. However, (mind you this might have a huge amount to do with my age at the time) it doesn't come even remotely close to having the effect on me that SM64 did. I remember not being able to sleep waking up and just playing playing playing...Falling asleep waking up just playing and playing and playing. I remember audibly gasping the first time I threw Bowser at a bomb or how ingenious the controls felt when I was surfing on a turtle. Now a lot of that like I said probably has to do with:

-It having unbelievable next level graphics
-The first truly perfect 3D camera
-Flawless control of Mario

SMG is definitely a thousand times better as a game but it doesn't have the magic that SM64 did.

Good lord I remember just booting that ish up and seeing Mario's giant 3D head and almost fainting.

Amir0x said:
That's just because it actually is. Cheer up though, we all like something that is outdated.

You very well could be right on which is why I don't want to play it again. I would rather the memories stay.

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

BruceLeeRoy said:
I have to say SMG is pure platforming genius and by far the best Mario when it come to that. However, (mind you this might have a huge amount to do with my age at the time) it doesn't come even remotely close to having the effect on me that SM64 did. I remember not being able to sleep waking up and just playing playing playing...Falling asleep waking up just playing and playing and playing. I remember audibly gasping the first time I threw Bowser at a bomb or how ingenious the controls felt when I was surfing on a turtle. Now a lot of that like I said probably has to do with:

-It having unbelievable next level graphics
-The first truly perfect 3D camera
-Flawless control of Mario

SMG is definitely a thousand times better as a game but it doesn't have the magic that SM64 did.

Good lord I remember just booting that ish up and seeing Mario's giant 3D head and almost fainting.

that's not 'magic.' that's just nostalgia.

I felt the EXACT same way when Mario 64 came out. I fucking could not believe my eyes at Blockbuster on the kiosk (remember when Blockbuster had kiosks!? :lol).

But man, it does not hold up well at all. The so-called "perfect camera" is the first place your memory is betraying you.

Rafaelcsa · Nov 2, 2010

Chris1964 said:
Since when Metroid is one of Nintendo's 3 main franchises? Reactions to Galaxy 1/2 are far from insane and definetely not representative of this thread.

Well, I guess you have a point if you say Pokémon is their third main franchise. I've never been into it, so I tend to forget about it... In my mind, Metroid or Smash Bros are much more important franchises, but still, point granted.

I know that it's just this thread that seems to have brought out the Galaxy haters and that most of GAF actually loves the games, which makes me happy.

The insanity in this one thread is huge, though.

apana · Nov 2, 2010

Rafaelcsa said:
Well, I guess you have a point if you say Pokémon is their third main franchise. I've never been into it, so I tend to forget about it...

I know that it's just this thread that seems to have brought out the Galaxy haters and that most of GAF loves the games, which makes me happy.

The insanity in this one thread is huge, though.

I think there was only one person who said they actually disliked the galaxy games. Preferring another Mario game does not make us haters, and smh at all this "insanity" bullshit.

BruceLeeRoy · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
that's not 'magic.' that's just nostalgia.

I felt the EXACT same way when Mario 64 came out. I fucking could not believe my eyes at Blockbuster on the kiosk (remember when Blockbuster had kiosks!? :lol).

But man, it does not hold up well at all. The so-called "perfect camera" is the first place your memory is betraying you.

:lol Oh man I remember going to Toys R Us and just gawking at it.
Like I said I think that a lot of those memories probably won't hold up. I was hoping to feel that same thing with SMG which probably was a ridiculous expectation so when I didn't I couldn't help but feel slightly disappointed.

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

BruceLeeRoy said:
:lol Oh man I remember going to Toys R Us and just gawking at it.
Like I said I think that a lot of those memories probably won't hold up. I was hoping to feel that same thing with SMG which probably was a ridiculous expectation so when I didn't I couldn't help but feel slightly disappointed.

Protip for life, BruceLeeRoy: You'll never feel the same way about anything again as you did when you were young

Sucks doesn't it? That's why I drink a lot.

BruceLeeRoy · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
Protip for life, BruceLeeRoy: You'll never feel the same way about anything again as you did when you were young

Sucks doesn't it? That's why I drink a lot.

:lol :lol So true.

Always-honest · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
Protip for life, BruceLeeRoy: You'll never feel the same way about anything again as you did when you were young

Sucks doesn't it? That's why I drink a lot.

:lol well, cheers & ad fundum to that.

apana · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
I didn't even say anything about Mario 64 in my comment.

Galaxy's level design is factually superior to Mario 64, however.

Well yeah but we dont know what Nintendo could produce with a modern Mario 64 type game. It could be something even more amazing. Also its hard to compare because they are trying to achieve different goals in the two games. The levels are going to be designed with different things in mind.

imthemaid · Nov 2, 2010

open level design, shmopen level design
linear shminear
secrets shmecrets
obvious shmobvious
factual shmactual
subjective, shmubsy3d
moveable shmamera? shmoveable camera
shemi-moveable? semi-shmoveable!
mario 64, shmario 64
mario galaxy, shmario galaxy

art flow

TestOfTide · Nov 2, 2010

apana said:
Well yeah but we dont know what Nintendo could produce with a modern Mario 64 type game. It could be something even more amazing. Also its hard to compare because they are trying to achieve different goals in the two games. The levels are going to be designed with different things in mind.

If it had galaxy's use of less 1 dimensional gravity, but used SM64 & sunshine's open world set-up, would you cal it a Galaxy game or a sequel to 64?

Like, if you had levels that were each literally hundreds of planetoids that you could hop from one to the other without the use of star-springs and there was no distinct path, would you classify it as Galaxy 3 or something else?

apana · Nov 2, 2010

imthemaid said:
open level design, shmopen level design
linear shminear
secrets shmecrets
obvious shmobvious
factual shmactual
subjective, shmubsy3d
moveable shmamera? shmoveable camera
shemi-moveable? semi-shmoveable!
mario 64, shmario 64
mario galaxy, shmario galaxy

art flow

I thought I was dreaming for a second when I saw this post. I really had to pinch myself, what the hell are you talking about? :lol Someone please inform me.

blizzardjesus · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
But man, it does not hold up well at all. The so-called "perfect camera" is the first place your memory is betraying you.

Mario 64's camera is boner inducing.

LordAzrael · Nov 2, 2010

PetriP-TNT said:
Maybe a Jak & Daxter (1 and 1 only) type of Mario could work. Travel through Mushroom Kingdom and fuck shit up! Zelda meets Jak & Daxter meets Super Mario 3. Endless possibilities

Still worthy to quote.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

I'd be willing to bet a lot of money, that those people preferring Galaxy would prefer M64 if the order was reversed.
Some people just completely seem to lack insight into their own mental mechanisms. They continuously think that the last thing that made them happy is automatically the greatest in that category. The same people saying LotR trilogy is their generations StarWars when it obviously doesn't even hold a candle to the original trilogy.
It's going to be fun to see the reactions if Nintendo releases a Mario game with free roaming and free camera and maybe even Pepsi Free.
"Bububu... this was always the way it was meant to be".

TestOfTide said:
So you got used the the crappy mario 64 camera where players had to constantly go in and out of first person or change the camera just so that they could get a sense of depth and distance. I'm sure you see it as a positive the numerous times that I needed to tweek the camera because the game didn't realize I would rather see something besides the wall I am near or if I wanted to walk on a long, thin walkway and the game.

Meanwhile, the rest of use enjoyed the camera in SMG that almost always gave the best viewpoint. If you were on a small or medium planetoid, it was birds-eye so that you could perfectly figure out your jumps. If you were circling around a tower, it circled around the tower so that it wasn't a nightmare to make perfectly perpendicular walljumps. And even more important was that no matter what direction was "up" in terms of gravity, you could always follow the simple rule of "move the analog stick in the direction you want mario to" and it worked. Galaxy's camera managed to do things in different types of gravity that 64 struggled to do even in one universal constant of gravity.

But you know what, even when the camera angles weren't optimal, you still had the option to change the camera in the more open area parts and even at the very least look in first person. The more closed areas already gave you the optimal camera angle.

Name one time in Galaxy where the game was a pain to play because of camera angles that you couldn't change.

Sorry, I don't keep a diary when playing a game but I remember on several occasions being very vexed by the camera not being able to swing around for some arbitrary nontechnical reason. If not for any other reason than that it would be nice to be able see and admire all of the level from a given point.
There were several occasions of having to jump into the camera, crossing my fingers. Never so in 64.

I could ask you the same thing. Was there ever anywhere in 64 where your progress was truly impeded by the completely free moving camera.
I never ever understood why people took it as a personal insult that they had to adjust the camera. It's part of the game FFS! You have to turn your head in real life too. It's only the slightest flick of your thumb.

Having to design the levels around the camera to such a degree as in Galaxy is simply not good game design. The camera dictates how the game should look and not the other way around.

apana · Nov 2, 2010

TestOfTide said:
If it had galaxy's use of less 1 dimensional gravity, but used SM64 & sunshine's open world set-up, would you cal it a Galaxy game or a sequel to 64?

Like, if you had levels that were each literally hundreds of planetoids that you could hop from one to the other without the use of star-springs and there was no distinct path, would you classify it as Galaxy 3 or something else?

Does it matter what we would classify it as? That sort of hybrid would actually be pretty interesting. There were a few moments in Galaxy 1 where you couldnt perfectly classify the stages as fitting into the Mario 64 formula or the new linear formula. Honestly though I would like to keep these two gameplay styles in separate worlds but within the same game.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
Protip for life, BruceLeeRoy: You'll never feel the same way about anything again as you did when you were young

Sucks doesn't it? That's why I drink a lot.

That's simply not true. You are just not looking hard enough. Sure you are more critical. But my experience is that most of the stuff that really grabbed you as a kid still holds up. And new stuff of similar quality will still have the same effect.

manueldelalas · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
That's simply not true. You are just not looking hard enough. Sure you are more critical. But my experience is that most of the stuff that really grabbed you as a kid still holds up. And new stuff of similar quality will still have the same effect.

Don't bother to have this discussion with Amir0x. He has his tastes, you have yours; he can't play past games because of the graphics, and that's perfectly acceptable.

Myriadis · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
I could ask you the same thing. Was there ever anywhere in 64 where your progress was truly impeded by the completely free moving camera.
I never ever understood why people took it as a personal insult that they had to adjust the camera. It's part of the game FFS! You have to turn your head in real life too. It's only the slightest flick of your thumb.

Yes,in my last playthrough last year I had also problems with the camera.And yes,I am also moving the camera manually-I'm used to moving cameras in Videogames (often just for fun),so moving it manually feels natural to me.However,I noticed that the camera is rotating very slow,and it happened that Mario was indeed jumping towards the camera.Not only that,sometimes I couldn't move the camera manually,it made the "movement"-sound but it shaked a little bit before it returned to the previous position.Oh,and Super Mario Sunshine had the best camera imo,as it was really free,thanks to the C-Stick (it still was far way from perfect).

And it seems that you're somewhat blinded by Nostalgia.It was obvious when you said that the Throwback Galaxy was inferior to Whomp's Fortress,"missing everthing that made the orginal great".Hello?They are almost identical,the SMG version even added two areas to the level.Not to forget the camera thing mentioned above.

As I said before,I love adventure-platformers and therefore I slightly prefer SM64 over Galaxy,but I love them both.Is it so hard to love two slightly similar games in the same franchise?That's just like Wind Waker and Twilight Princess,DKCR and SMBWii or Rolling Stones and The Beatles.Sheesh.I don't care if the next Mario game will be a linear,action-based platformer or a explorable,adventure-based one.I will play it and it will be amazing and fun.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

manueldelalas said:
Don't bother to have this discussion with Amir0x. He has his tastes, you have yours; he can't play past games because of the graphics, and that's perfectly acceptable.

No it isn't. Look, I know that laconic terse style is his image on here, (probably living out some fantasy) so I'll let him have that. But that doesn't make it ok to impose cynicism and halfbacked conjecture as "objective fact" (whatever that is) on a civil discussion.

zigg · Nov 2, 2010

blizzardjesus said:
Mario 64's camera is boner inducing.

I'll just take a note that you have some really strange fetishes.

Squeak said:
I could ask you the same thing. Was there ever anywhere in 64 where your progress was truly impeded by the completely free moving camera.

You weren't asking me, but abso-fucking-lutely yes.

Squeak said:
Having to design the levels around the camera to such a degree as in Galaxy is simply not good game design. The camera dictates how the game should look and not the other way around.

That didn't happen at all, but what did happenthe camera was lovingly and exactingly placed right where it needed to be so that you could, you know, jump on thingsis absolutely good game design. What you want is good looking-at-things design, which I will certainly grant you 64 was a breakthrough at.

EDIT: Just to backpedal a little because I'm sure not everyone knows where I stand: I enjoyed 64, and still enjoy it. But yeah, significant parts of it do not hold up well. SMG was a huge advance for 3D Mario and something I can to this day say I have no real problems with. At least until the next game blows it away again, I guess

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

Myriadis said:
Yes,in my last playthrough last year I had also problems with the camera.And yes,I am also moving the camera manually-I'm used to moving cameras in Videogames (often just for fun),so moving it manually feels natural to me.However,I noticed that the camera is rotating very slow,and it happened that Mario was indeed jumping towards the camera.Not only that,sometimes I couldn't move the camera manually,it made the "movement"-sound but it shaked a little bit before it returned to the previous position.

It's much better than the camera disappearing into geometry and it is the exception.
It is slow at times but I think that fits the playstyle pretty well.

Oh,and Super Mario Sunshine had the best camera imo,as it was really free,thanks to the C-Stick (it still was far way from perfect).

The best console camera ever is the Wind Waker camera. Takes everything that was good from the Mario and Zelda cams an melds them into one.
The ultimate camera though would be one that works like the Globe in the Weather Channel. Where your character is the center of the globe (and of course the globe is absent ;-) )

And it seems that you're somewhat blinded by Nostalgia.It was obvious when you said that the Throwback Galaxy was inferior to Whomp's Fortress,"missing everthing that made the orginal great".Hello?They are almost identical,the SMG version even added two areas to the level.Not to forget the camera thing mentioned above.

Where is the plank? Where is the owl? Where is the tower? Where is the grab ability? Where is the good music? etc.
Still, in it's borked incarnation it still has so much more fun an exploration than 95% of the rest of the Galaxy games, that it brings a tear to your eyes.

As I said before,I love adventure-platformers and therefore I slightly prefer SM64 over Galaxy,but I love them both.Is it so hard to love two slightly similar games in the same franchise?That's just like Wind Waker and Twilight Princess,DKCR and SMBWii or Rolling Stones and The Beatles.Sheesh.I don't care if the next Mario game will be a linear,action-based platformer or a explorable,adventure-based one.I will play it and it will be amazing and fun.

Of those examples you mention I know clearly which one I would prefer. Try to be more critical in you choices. Life is to short for recreational things you don't fully enjoy or get mental benefit from. Life is to short for mediocrity. Even if it's mixed with the occasional sparkle of brilliant. Go to the source.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

zigg said:
I'll just take a note that you have some really strange fetishes.

You weren't asking me, but abso-fucking-lutely yes.

Look, noone is saying the camera is perfect, no such thing exists. That would amount to mind reading. But it still is among the five best cameras ever created for a 3rd person console game.

That didn't happen at all, but what did happenthe camera was lovingly and exactingly placed right where it needed to be so that you could, you know, jump on thingsis absolutely good game design. What you want is good looking-at-things design, which I will certainly grant you 64 was a breakthrough at.

It was placed so it framed the platforms (semi) perfectly, and those platforms were placed there because that's what the camera would be able to see.
That is a very restricted and stilted way to design levels.
Let the plays Zoom and rotate to his hearts content FFS! And make that easy to do.

EDIT: Just to backpedal a little because I'm sure not everyone knows where I stand: I enjoyed 64, and still enjoy it. But yeah, significant parts of it do not hold up well. SMG was a huge advance for 3D Mario and something I can to this day say I have no real problems with. At least until the next game blows it away again, I guess

Please tell us what those parts are?

Kozak · Nov 2, 2010

I honestly think theres no use predicting what is to become of Mario in the next instalment.

Whatever it is it will be something we completely did not expect and will define another generation for Nintendo.

InsaneZero · Nov 2, 2010

A good camera would not have you closely staring at Mario's back whenever you need to do a wall jump on the icy terrain of death in Cool Cool Mountain or at Mario's front whenever you need to do any kind of long jump in enclosed space.

A good platformer camera would actually let you see where you're jumping at. A great platformer camera would allow you to properly gauge the distance between your current location and your destination. A perfect platformer camera would do all this without you actually messing around with it. Super Mario 64's camera absolutely pales in comparison to Galaxy's in this regard.

The Technomancer · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money, that those people preferring Galaxy would prefer M64 if the order was reversed.
Some people just completely seem to lack insight into their own mental mechanisms. They continuously think that the last thing that made them happy is automatically the greatest in that category. The same people saying LotR trilogy is their generations StarWars when it obviously doesn't even hold a candle to the original trilogy.
It's going to be fun to see the reactions if Nintendo releases a Mario game with free roaming and free camera and maybe even Pepsi Free.
"Bububu... this was always the way it was meant to be".

I played one level of 64 when I was like, ten, and a few levels of Sunshine a few years later. I didn't really get into (non-emulated) console gaming until the Wii, and having now played through SM64 I can safely say that I found Galaxy's level design to be tighter, more fun, and less "run around aimlessly bouncing around".

Boogiepop · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
It was placed so it framed the platforms (semi) perfectly, and those platforms were placed there because that's what the camera would be able to see.
That is a very restricted and stilted way to design levels.
Let the plays Zoom and rotate to his hearts content FFS! And make that easy to do.
Please tell us what those parts are?

I'm sorry, but are you REALLY trying to say that the camera placement ever effected level design in Galaxy? Really? You mean the camera that was handplaced to match the level design clearly in some way affected the level design? That makes absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

The_Technomancer said:
I played one level of 64 when I was like, ten, and a few levels of Sunshine a few years later. I didn't really get into (non-emulated) console gaming until the Wii, and having now played through SM64 I can safely say that I found Galaxy's level design to be tighter, more fun, and less "run around aimlessly bouncing around".

It's only aimless if you make it so.

Mank said:
I'm sorry, but are you REALLY trying to say that the camera placement ever effected level design in Galaxy? Really? You mean the camera that was handplaced to match the level design clearly in some way affected the level design? That makes absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever.

The very fact that it is scripted/handplaced to the degree it is (64 also had pick-up splines that guided the camera) pretty much implies that the levels was also composed to accommodate this approach.
Look at the Galaxy levels, almost none of them have things sticking up the ground at random or stuff moving dynamically with regards to Mario. There are no buildings or mazes. Is that really the kind of environments we want as a stable in Mario games?

InsaneZero said:
A good camera would not have you closely staring at Mario's back whenever you need to do a wall jump on the icy terrain of death in Cool Cool Mountain or at Mario's front whenever you need to do any kind of long jump in enclosed space.

A good platformer camera would actually let you see where you're jumping at. A great platformer camera would allow you to properly gauge the distance between your current location and your destination. A perfect platformer camera would do all this without you actually messing around with it. Super Mario 64's camera absolutely pales in comparison to Galaxy's in this regard.

The camera in Galaxy is far from perfect, even though the cameras and levels are so heavily scripted and planned around taking control of where the player is looking away from them.
Of course a camera in a freeform open game is going to run into a few more problems. But, not with the dreadful implications for gameplay and loss of feeling of freedom scripted environments and cameras have.

apana · Nov 2, 2010

I didnt really think much about the camera in either game. I ran into some problems with both 64 and Galaxy occasionally.

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
That's simply not true. You are just not looking hard enough. Sure you are more critical. But my experience is that most of the stuff that really grabbed you as a kid still holds up. And new stuff of similar quality will still have the same effect.

I like very few things from the old days I enjoyed as a kid. I've moved on, games have moved on, my standards have evolved. Games are superior today in every conceivable way. Newer stuff absolutely never can impact someone the same way as it was as a kid - i'm pretty sure it's not even scientifically possible. As a kid, your mental outlook is completely different. You obviously have a million different factors that cause the type of experiences you have as a child to be undeniably distinct from experiences you have as an adult. It's called growing up.

You may say "this is definitely better than something I played when I was eight", but that FEELING you had is never re-creatable. You're never going to be ten again, with no responsibilities in the world, every new game a novelty and experience unlike any other. The sense of wonder that goes along with being a kid, which the best of us still manage to hold onto in some more rational sense as we age, is simply not possible at the same level in adulthood.

I'm not even sure how you'd formulate an argument against this truth. This actually IS a fact. Experiences as a kid is distinct from experiences as adults.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
I like very few things from the old days I enjoyed as a kid. I've moved on, games have moved on, my standards have evolved. Games are superior today in every conceivable way. Newer stuff absolutely never can impact someone the same way as it was as a kid - i'm pretty sure it's not even scientifically possible. As a kid, your mental outlook is completely different. You obviously have a million different factors that cause the type of experiences you have as a child to be undeniably distinct from experiences you have as an adult. It's called growing up.

You may say "this is definitely better than something I played when I was eight", but that FEELING you had is never re-creatable. You're never going to be ten again, with no responsibilities in the world, every new game a novelty and experience unlike any other. The sense of wonder that goes along with being a kid, which the best of us still manage to hold onto in some more rational sense as we age, is simply not possible at the same level in adulthood.

I'm not even sure how you'd formulate an argument against this truth. This actually IS a fact. Experiences as a kid is distinct from experiences as adults.

Humans evolve more like trees than clouds. There will forever be a core that is partly made up by your genes and partly by your experiences through life.
Of course you are not the same throughout life. But things that truly touched the inner core of your being are likely to still be good.
Some things will fall by the wayside, because they only dazzled you with effects of the hour. But great things that appeal to all the faculties, never get obsolete.
The sense of wonder, as you call it, is something that is solely up to you. You have to be intelligent and open enough to see it. Not let yourself be blinded by immediate needs, and everyday stress.
I can get absolutely the same buzz by discovering something new and great as I did when I was eight. Only now I have a more complete puzzle to fit the piece into.

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
Humans evolve more like trees than clouds. There will forever be a core that is partly made up by your genes and partly by your experiences through life.
Of course you are not the same throughout life. But things that truly touched the inner core of your being are likely to still be good.
Some things will fall by the wayside, because they only dazzled you with effects of the hour. But great things that appeal to all the faculties, never get obsolete.
The sense of wonder, as you call it, is something that is solely up to you. You have to be intelligent and open enough to see it. Not let yourself be blinded by immediate needs, and everyday stress.
I can get absolutely get the same buzz by discovering something new and great as I did when I was eight. Only now I have a more complete puzzle to fit the piece into.

Well I'm glad you think the feeling is the same. It's not, of course - that's impossible. But it's good that you feel that way. Not everyone likes to drink, after all.

MYE · Nov 2, 2010

RustyNails said:
Mario needs to die. Enough.

what the fuck

MYE · Nov 2, 2010

Squeak said:
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money, that those people preferring Galaxy would prefer M64 if the order was reversed.
Some people just completely seem to lack insight into their own mental mechanisms. They continuously think that the last thing that made them happy is automatically the greatest in that category. The same people saying LotR trilogy is their generations StarWars when it obviously doesn't even hold a candle to the original trilogy.

:lol :lol :lol

FoxSpirit · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
Well I'm glad you think the feeling is the same. It's not, of course - that's impossible. But it's good that you feel that way. Not everyone likes to drink, after all.

Don't you know the saying "That makes me feel like xx again?" In that very moment, someone had an experience like in the past.
Last time I felt that was with Contra 4, not full blown "takes me back" but it did a lot. Weird experience now that I think about it. Feels like I completely enjoyed the time with that game.

Amir0x · Nov 2, 2010

FoxSpirit said:
Don't you know the saying "That makes me feel like xx again?" In that very moment, someone had an experience like in the past.
Last time I felt that was with Contra 4, not full blown "takes me back" but it did a lot. Weird experience now that I think about it. Feels like I completely enjoyed the time with that game.

It's a saying, I've said it before but it's never literal. I've always just meant 'man this game is fucking amazing.' No game can make me feel like a kid again because I'm a fucking grown ass man. The type of environment and the child-like, responsibility-free mind cannot be replicated in an adult who has normal mental functions. It's just simply impossible.

One may feel a sense of strong nostalgia, even certain experiences might recall them to a different time, but it's never the -same- experience.

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
Well I'm glad you think the feeling is the same. It's not, of course - that's impossible. But it's good that you feel that way. Not everyone likes to drink, after all.

Of course it's not the exact same feeling, perhaps better in a way, because now I know where it leads and what I can do to get more. It the same feeling, as in falling in love is the same, and frustration is the same. It's that kind of happy, curious buzz the drive people to find out more.

MYE said:
:lol :lol :lol

Yeah :lol :lol :lol *_*
I thought you left a page ago?

Squeak · Nov 2, 2010

Amir0x said:
It's a saying, I've said it before but it's never literal. I've always just meant 'man this game is fucking amazing.' No game can make me feel like a kid again because I'm a fucking grown ass man. The type of environment and the child-like, responsibility-free mind cannot be replicated in an adult who has normal mental functions. It's just simply impossible.

One may feel a sense of strong nostalgia, even certain experiences might recall them to a different time, but it's never the -same- experience.

If you didn't have any responsibilities as a child (which I find hard to believe), you are just remembering a time in your life when you had nothing to better to do than play games all day. That doesn't have anything to do with being a child, only your dissatisfaction with your current life. You might as well be 50 and be looking back at your 30's where everything was swell and no worries.

Rafaelcsa · Nov 3, 2010

Squeak, I find it fascinating that you think Mario's game design should be closer to Zelda than to the 2D Marios. Up till I first played Galaxy 1, the Mario experience to me used to be SMB3. I played M64 to death, but it never was as fun to me as 2D Mario was, SMB3 especially. Main reasons being: levels have too few proper platforming compared to 2D Mario and I've never liked how Mario controls in M64; he's too heavy (I feel the same about SMB1, by the way). Galaxy 1 and 2, on the other hand, took SMB3 style of levels, adapted to 3D and doused an absurd amount of delicious crazyness on top of it. They're my perfect Mario games, focused around what truly matters in Mario games to me: fucking awesome platforming.

M64 feels truly archaic and outdated to me (and I'm not one to feel this way often about old games... hell, I fucking love the first Metroid and I played it for the first time this year). I like the more linear levels like Rainbow Ride or the Bowser levels, because they actually feel like Mario. But stuff like Dire, Dire Docks or the sand level? Sooo boring.

I mean, this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0215X7THco

feels more like 2D Mario than this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5VpLHsaH_g

?

Notice that I'm not necessarily trying to argue with you if Galaxy is better or not than M64. I could have chosen a much better galaxy than Space Junk for the example above. I just chose a random early level from Galaxy to contrast against an early level from M64. Which one feels more like this type of stuff? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0GS9y1siB4&feature=related

Sorry for the ramble, but I found it interesting that you think exploration is the main value behind the 2D Marios, instead of straight platforming. I'd like you to elaborate on that.

Personally, I obviously think that Mario should be about platforming before all else, but, on the other hand, I'm not necessarily against Nintendo branching out and giving some new dimensions to the series. I just think they can do much better than in M64 and Sunshine when trying to focus on exploration (as evidenced by games like A Link To The Past or Metroid Prime).

Support NeoGAF

What Is The Future of 3D Mario?

Banned

Time Traveler

Member

Banned

Banned

Time Traveler

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Time Traveler

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

card-carrying scientician

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Junior Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads