• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Super Mario 64 - Gamespot review

beelzebozo said:
replying to an attempt at compiling sound logic with a picture of a justin timberlake album does not qualify as funny or witty--it only confirms that you should stick to the off-topic forum, where having real knowledge about any one topic is not requisite.
Click to expand...

Funny because I said almost that exact same thing to you when you posted a link to that topic I did in the Off Topic while attempting to try to be funny, but you weren't. Nor was I trying to be funny, borgue routinly goes through Nintendo rants now.

The fact is that Gamespot is reviewing this game as it is now, and I completely agree.
 
Christopher said:
Funny because I said almost that exact same thing to you when you posted a link to that topic I did in the Off Topic while attempting to try to be funny, but you weren't. Nor was I trying to be funny, borgue routinly goes through Nintendo rants now.

The fact is that Gamespot is reviewing this game as it is now, and I completely agree.
Click to expand...

see, but a rant is not by definition incorrect. you may perceive his comments about nintendo as misguided, but what he says is routinely backed up by real logic, and he spends time constructing arguments for what he thinks.

this, in stark contrast to your method: justin timberlake album covers.
which is completely flaccid as far as the discourse of debate is concerned.
 
This is patently absurd. Well, it was a nice run.

*deletes Gamespot from Bookmarks*

Edit: I mean what the hell. Why are we re-reviewing the classics? Why are we pissing on the classics with suppar scores? Have they just gone frakking insane? You don't have to review the VC stuff, they're old games! You've already reviewed them! The scores are still on your website!

Re-Edit: Aaaaaand look who wrote it. I'm not going to scream obscenities or grab a voodoo doll and stab it yelling "Die Gerstmann die!!!" but I really couldn't care less about Gerstmann's opinion on anything.
 
I'm not sure why everyone thinks re-reviewing these games is a bad idea. If you know you love the game, don't read the review. For people who haven't played these games before and are paying money for them, I can't see why a review shouldn't look at these games from a modern point of view. Saying, "they're classic games" isn't enough for most people.

Not all games hold up as well as others, so new reviews are well worth it imo. GameSpot probably doesn't use GAF as its primary audience for reviews.
 
xemumanic said:
WTF is wrong with you people? Don't you get that this isn't a review of Mario 64, but of how well it comes through on VC. And according to the review, its got some technical snags. Hence an 8.0. Maybe I'm over-exxagerating when I say this, but its akin to being mad that the 2600 port of Pac-Man got (or should) have gotten a 1/10. Its not the game, but the port/emulation, and thats not up to snuff.

What if Gamespot gives SMB 3 on VC a 9/10 because the audio isnt emulated properly? You have no idea how anal people are over these things.........actually I thought you guys always were, which is why I don't understand why you don't understand this.

Put simply, its not Super Mario 64 theyare giving an 8.0, but the port/emulation as it is on the Wii's VC.
Click to expand...


Then how about instead of classifying it as a "review," simply write up a buyer's guide? List the problems with the emulation, and how the games stand up to the test of time. But "reviewing" them and slapping arbitrary numbers on classic titles is a ridiculous idea.

It's one thing when it's being specifically ported and set aside for individual release, like Sonic the Hedgehog Genesis for the GBA (which does deserve all the critical abuse it can get). It's another to rate games on the Virtual Console as if they're new productions or even different port work. They're not; it's simply another method of distributing the old games. The format they use to play it back may have problems, as you noted, and that should be pointed out, and there should be some consideration or suggestion as to whether or not these games are worth revisiting or playing for the first time with today's audiences. But to give them a critical review and slap a brand new, often unfair, score on them... if Super Mario 64 couldn't rank above an 8, how the hell is anything else going to fare better, save for one or two they'll randomly pick as "timeless hidden gems no one played"? It's arbitrary and ridiculous. The basics could be well-handled by a buyer's guide with short blurbs for each title.
 
Christopher said:
The fact is that Gamespot is reviewing this game as it is now, and I completely agree.
Click to expand...
ok, let's talk about it as it is now

1) has as good as or better controls than every other 3d platformer currently out? check.
2) has better level design than almost every other 3d platformer currently out? check.
3) has the accessibility yet intense difficulty to make a game easy to pickup and hard to master? check.
4) aside from the technical limitations of its original system, style has a great art direction and clean graphics? check.

really, as it is now this game is STILL one of the best platformers out there. At the very minimum on today's scale this game deserves at least a 9.0, if not higher. anyone who says otherwise is either looking for an argument or just stupid.

Oldschoolgamer said:
Why are we surprised here? Look at what he gave the update on DS...
Click to expand...
The DS update is a little trickier. Half of what made the game great were its insanely responsive controls. With that gone on the DS, part of what made the game great in the first place was gone also. On the graphics side we also lost some filtering and AA'ing. However on the VC were are seeing an exact port with the same controls.
 
OH HOW DARE THEY REVIEW OLD GAMES ON THE VC.

They're exactly the same as their old counterpart! I don't need to know if there was any emulation flaws or just how well the games translate to my controller. Old games are timeless and they never get crappy, just like the Mortal Kombat series. (And I bring this up because all that review did was mock how old and broken Mario 64 was.)

And they did it because they are an evil organization funded by Microsoft to destroy Nintendo games (because that review totally bashes the gameplay of Mario 64) and get extra hits by making Nintendo fans cry because the game didn't score a 9 or 10.
 
pong2.jpg


3.5 - While offering a lot of replay value, Pong suffers from overly simplistic game play, no online multi-player and an exceedingly low poly count.
 
Now i wanna see how much gamespot is going to give super mario world,That game is still considered being the pinacle of 2d plattform gaming. Plus how well the score of new super mario bros compares to that one.
 
If the hardware isn't improving game performance then I see no real big reason why they should even bother with reviews on these.

Mario 64 was revolutionary for it's time, but now although it's still an open world and the player can go anywhere and do anything, it's like why ? It just doesn't leave me feeling like I want to explorer everything like I did when it was new and fresh.

8 is a bit high IMO, but I don't think these games should be re-reviewed unless improved.
 
Unless something has actually changed why the hell are games re-reviewed? Its totally retarded. There are enough new games to review, quit reviewing old games geez.
 
Vangellis said:
Unless something has actually changed why the hell are games re-reviewed?
Click to expand...
this is kind of what I was saying. The DS version changed a bit (especially on the level of control). But unless there are problems with the emulation or things were changed in the game, there should be no reason to "revisit" a game with an entirely new review. If so, why don't we just go an re-review every game for the heck of it. I mean I can still buy FFVII greatest hits for the PSOne on store shelves. Shouldn't today's gamers know how that compares to today's crop of RPGs?
 
If any GS editors read GAF:

I hope you know you guys are now the laughingstock of the gaming community.
Click to expand...

I used to like Gamespot, and thought that they were better than the other big sites -- IGN, 1up, Gamespy... but they've degraded over time (and the others have not improved), and now I'd say that I don't trust any of the four at all, sadly... while some reviews are decent at each one, others are so far off that you can't do anything but discount the site... and when it happens over and over again, as has happened at 1up and Gamespot particularly recently, it definitely says something...


As for reviewing the VC games, though, I don't see anything wrong with it. It's a re-release, essentially, and don't each release of each multiplatform title get a separate review? Yes, of course they do. So they should be reviewing these games... but they're just doing it so badly that they destroy the whole point of the thing in the implementation.
 
I don't get why people are getting so worked up.

If you've played the game before on a previous format - you don't need to read a re-review - you already know the game, how it works and will already have formed an opinion.

However, if you haven't played or read about a VC game before - read it, you'll want to know how it plays and similarly how it stacks up in todays climate. I mean, some games that were 'great' in their day, won't be so 'great' to a new player today.

I think it's rather inoffensive to review VC games. Campcon collections, Sega collections and the multiple Atari collections get reviewed. I don't see much difference, if it's a 'new' release, review it if you so wish!
 
Krowley said:
If i can just switch a setting in the wii and ask it to render 4:3, then i don't mind. I just got a toshiba hdtv through a curious bit of luck (didn't really want one, but i'll take it for sure) and i'm not really clear on how to work everything on it yet... it seems to automaticly adjust, so that if I put 16:9 through it, i get wide screen, but if i send in 4:3, it shows 4:3... I absolutley hate stretching of any kind but if it's adjustable then it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
It always renders it at 4:3. I don't know, though, that there's even a way for a 480p game system to communicate to a TV what ratio the content should be. My set doesn't automatically adjust, but luckily it's as easy as hitting a Left or Right arrow on the remote to flip through the various ratio modes.

Panajev2001a said:
Edit: uhm, is that why you reduced horizontal resolution to 480 ? I did not notice that when I quickly read your post.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean the game would be 480x480 within a true frame of 640x480, or something near those. Mockup using a PC emulator. Top, as is currently output. Bottom, as would be output to automatically adjust for 16:9 stretch.
20061121marioratio.jpg
 
The more I think of it now, the more I side with GS.

If their reviews don't factor in price, 8.0 is the right score, in today's contexts.

I mean, look at Zelda:TP. It could be better than OoT. If you played both at the same time, I'm sure there are those who would say that "With the Wii's controls, TP is simply better than OoT.

But do the scores reflect it? No. Because the scores are also a sign of the times and how gaming has progressed.

Ie. I'd rate NHL '98 as a 8/10. But playing it now, after playing so many better hockey games after, I'd rate it a 6/10.

I do understand the concept of timeless gameplay. But sometimes new games totally eclipse older ones.
 
Fight for Freeform said:
The more I think of it now, the more I side with GS.

If their reviews don't factor in price, 8.0 is the right score, in today's contexts.

I mean, look at Zelda:TP. It could be better than OoT. If you played both at the same time, I'm sure there are those who would say that "With the Wii's controls, TP is simply better than OoT.

But do the scores reflect it? No. Because the scores are also a sign of the times and how gaming has progressed.

Ie. I'd rate NHL '98 as a 8/10. But playing it now, after playing so many better hockey games after, I'd rate it a 6/10.

I do understand the concept of timeless gameplay. But sometimes new games totally eclipse older ones.
Click to expand...

Yeah, so name me just one 3D-Jump'n'Run (No Genre-Mixes) which is better than Mario 64..
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
It always renders it at 4:3. I don't know, though, that there's even a way for a 480p game system to communicate to a TV what ratio the content should be. My set doesn't automatically adjust, but luckily it's as easy as hitting a Left or Right arrow on the remote to flip through the various ratio modes.


Yeah, I mean the game would be 480x480 within a true frame of 640x480, or something near those. Mockup using a PC emulator. Top, as is currently output. Bottom, as would be output to automatically adjust for 16:9 stretch.
Click to expand...
just for the record, my tv knows when the xbox 360 is outputting 480p in 4:3 and when it's doing it in 16:9 and it does automatically flip while watching a dvd that has widescreen main film or menus and 4:3 extras (it's very easy to test since you can see where the guide springs up from).
 
plagiarize said:
just for the record, my tv knows when the xbox 360 is outputting 480p in 4:3 and when it's doing it in 16:9 and it does automatically flip while watching a dvd that has widescreen main film or menus and 4:3 extras (it's very easy to test since you can see where the guide springs up from).
Click to expand...
Ahh, thanks.
 
Kulock said:
Then how about instead of classifying it as a "review," simply write up a buyer's guide? List the problems with the emulation, and how the games stand up to the test of time. But "reviewing" them and slapping arbitrary numbers on classic titles is a ridiculous idea.

It's one thing when it's being specifically ported and set aside for individual release, like Sonic the Hedgehog Genesis for the GBA (which does deserve all the critical abuse it can get). It's another to rate games on the Virtual Console as if they're new productions or even different port work. They're not; it's simply another method of distributing the old games. The format they use to play it back may have problems, as you noted, and that should be pointed out, and there should be some consideration or suggestion as to whether or not these games are worth revisiting or playing for the first time with today's audiences. But to give them a critical review and slap a brand new, often unfair, score on them... if Super Mario 64 couldn't rank above an 8, how the hell is anything else going to fare better, save for one or two they'll randomly pick as "timeless hidden gems no one played"? It's arbitrary and ridiculous. The basics could be well-handled by a buyer's guide with short blurbs for each title.
Click to expand...

Nail, meet head. I agree completely. Good articulation.

The game has already been reviewed. A search on GS will yield the original score. Theres absolutely no sense in slapping a 2nd number on it. IT HASNT BEEN PORTED. ITS THE SAME ****ING GAME.
 
nincompoop said:
Personally, I feel an 8.0 is too high for Mario 64 given that it set the platforming genre back for years with its wretched camera. A lot of the level designs are also pretty bland and the game completely lacked the challenge that helped make its predecessors and many of its peers so great. But that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Mario 64 is responsible for bringing platforming into full 3D when developers were still doing 2.5D. I think the Bowser levels still have some of the most challenging and rewarding platforming in the genre. And the camera is still better than more recent platformers like Sonic Adventures.

The problem with Mario 64 is that not only has nearly everyone already played the game, they've played many games that capitalize on the formula that Mario 64 made successful.
 
Fight for Freeform said:
The more I think of it now, the more I side with GS.

If their reviews don't factor in price, 8.0 is the right score, in today's contexts.

I mean, look at Zelda:TP. It could be better than OoT. If you played both at the same time, I'm sure there are those who would say that "With the Wii's controls, TP is simply better than OoT.

But do the scores reflect it? No. Because the scores are also a sign of the times and how gaming has progressed.

Ie. I'd rate NHL '98 as a 8/10. But playing it now, after playing so many better hockey games after, I'd rate it a 6/10.

I do understand the concept of timeless gameplay. But sometimes new games totally eclipse older ones.
Click to expand...

I watched Casablanca the other day. WTF, it was black and white, and didn't even take advantage of my Dolby 5.1 sound system. This is simply unacceptable for a movie, I give it a 2/10.
 
Campster said:
I watched Casablanca the other day. WTF, it was black and white, and didn't even take advantage of my Dolby 5.1 sound system. This is simply unacceptable for a movie, I give it a 2/10.
Click to expand...

That is actually how some websites review DVDs, and it's a legit way of doing it.

VVV What does a product in it's original form have to do with a Wii emulation of Mario 64?
 
Odrion said:
That is actually how some websites review DVDs, and it's a legit way of doing it.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how presenting a work in its original form actively detracts from it.
 
SapientWolf said:
Mario 64 is responsible for bringing platforming into full 3D when developers were still doing 2.5D. I think the Bowser levels still have some of the most challenging and rewarding platforming in the genre. And the camera is still better than more recent platformers like Sonic Adventures.

The problem with Mario 64 is that not only has nearly everyone already played the game, they've played many games that capitalize on the formula that Mario 64 made successful.
Click to expand...

Exactly. An 8.0 to me says, "others have take your formula, improved upon it, taking it to new heights, but you still hold pretty well in light of that."
 
God, GS is becoming so damn worthless now.

The only thing that would need to be mentioned is if there are any problems with emulation. Other than that, there is no ****ing need to review it again. If they do that, they may as well review every PS1/N64/NES/SNES/Genesis etc. game ever all over again too.
 
Bufbaf said:
Yeah, so name me just one 3D-Jump'n'Run (No Genre-Mixes) which is better than Mario 64..
Click to expand...

Bonjo and Katooie

IMO Rayman on the Dreamcast was a better 3D platformer.

Campster said:
I watched Casablanca the other day. WTF, it was black and white, and didn't even take advantage of my Dolby 5.1 sound system. This is simply unacceptable for a movie, I give it a 2/10.
Click to expand...

Forget graphics, focus on gameplay and in this case, story. Some older movies don't hold up to today's standards, even though they were considered classics back in the day. I remember a DVD re-release for an older popular movie where people said the exact same thing. I think it was Space Oddyssy (sp) 2001 or something like that.
 
beelzebozo said:
replying to an attempt at compiling sound logic with a picture of a justin timberlake album does not qualify as funny or witty--it only confirms that you should stick to the off-topic forum, where having real knowledge about any one topic is not requisite.
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa whoa, let's not bring the OT into this.
 
Are they ****ing stupid?? Go and take classic games for download, and then re-review em?? Sonic the Hedgehog, Altered Beast, F-zero. Gamespot's a disgrace to videogame critics. Morons.
 
Fight for Freeform said:
Bonjo and Katooie

IMO Rayman on the Dreamcast was a better 3D platformer.



Forget graphics, focus on gameplay and in this case, story. Some older movies don't hold up to today's standards, even though they were considered classics back in the day. I remember a DVD re-release for an older popular movie where people said the exact same thing. I think it was Space Oddyssy (sp) 2001 or something like that.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol

I said wow.
 
Fight for Freeform said:
Forget graphics, focus on gameplay and in this case, story. Some older movies don't hold up to today's standards, even though they were considered classics back in the day. I remember a DVD re-release for an older popular movie where people said the exact same thing. I think it was Space Oddyssy (sp) 2001 or something like that.
Click to expand...

kyon02021mvtd1.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Super Mario 64 Remake 2.0 RELEASE
Trailer Indie 
17
869
kevboard replied
  • Poll
What game is better? Super Mario 3D World or Super Mario Wonder?
35
209
Osthyvel replied
The Super Mario Galaxy Movie reviews are in... and not great
7 8 9 10 11
540
3K
ResurrectedContrarian replied
Dr. Mario 64 recomp is here
20
816
IbizaPocholo replied
Mario 64 online coop cross-platform PS2<>N64
1
181
Bark replied
Top Bottom