/vr/ - Retro Games

I've heard complaints about the camera.

How would you improve that, exactly?

>>3312484
No one really has, so it's still up for debate.

>>3312489
>obviously NES fanboy
>on a thread about SM64

I remember that page, your scene sucks, it had some funny things but I guess nowadays it'd be seen as not very original.

>>3312497
It was pretty amusing for the time, I mean that pic is in my /vr/ folder at any rate.

>>3312487

To be honest the mere concept of the 3D platformer is one that can't escape the camera complaint. Sure there are some games where the camera is especially bad, but how many are there where it's exceptionally good? The Mario 64 formula still finds use with only slight improvement.

>>3312489

MovieBob?

>>3312483
Maybe it will be topped by the time you reach two decades.

>>3312483
I agree. True sequel when??

>>3312642
I agree. Maybe the only way of getting rid of the camera issue is by making it fixed like in Crash Bandicoot. However, even though I like that game, there's nothing better than having the freedom of moving in any direction you feel like, even if that implies not having perfect control over the camera.

>>3316282
sup

>>3316841
Garbage

>>3317157
At least Sunshine's camera wasn't atrocious.

>>3317157
quite the compelling argument

>>3317172
It's a troll game. Miyamoto promised us Mario 128 ("128 Marios") and instead we got the fucking blinding luma splish splash show. Game becomes unplayable once your star collection gets too high. Just a white blur like Han Solo sees after carbonite blindness.

>>3317201
Uhhh, Mario 128 was just a tech demo. And I'm glad we got Sunshine instead.

>>3317201
You do know that after a while you can get sun glasses in game to dim the colors right?

>>3316841
Man I remember I couldn't wait to play this after loving Mario 64 previously. I thought it would be a new and improved 3D Mario, better graphics and more cool things to do.

Well it looks like a unique game and looks fun to play around in but for some reason I was incredibly disappointed when this first came out. I expected Mario 64 part 2 too much I guess, since I never owned an N64. Just played my cousins system a hell of a lot.

I have to give Sunshine another shot

>>3317273
Give Sunshine another shot, it's one of the goofiest Mario games but it's great. And there are some courses where the FLUDD is taken away that feel like very hard Mario64-style platforming

*ahem*

>>3312484
>>3312642
>>3316836
>>3317165

>camera problems
git gud, I got used to the camera in like 5 minutes when I was 13 years old you fucking scrubs

untopped, OP is right

and fuck Sunshine. I'd rather play Mario is Missing or Super Mario Land than fucking Sunshine.

>>3317325
takes 0 minutes to get used to sunshine's camera because it's superior :^)

>>3317328

I couldn't make it past 0 minutes playing that awful game

>>3312484
The biggest problem is that Z is supposed to center up and it doesn't. Really annoying that sometimes when you hit Z to center and it does that BS 'twitch-and-reset' move. If they had a true force POV the camera would be infinitely better

Obviously SM64 was a legendary trailblazer of a game, but I liked Super Mario Star Road more. Obviously it wasn't as innovative, but it's more difficult and has extremely interesting 3D modeling in it. If you haven't played it yet, you need to seriously re-examine your life

>>3316841
>the first boss wears a fucking diaper
Well, if that's your thing...

Also the unskippable intro that goes on for almost ten fucking minutes.

And Bowser being a vacationing single dad. What the fuck.

Now, the game does have its good parts - the Fludd-less courses in particular, though Fludd's mechanics aren't half bad, either, though overall, the platforming never quite matches M64's - but let's not pretend it's an improvement over Mario 64.

It only appeals to speedrunners, people who grew up with the game and turboautists tho.

I like Prince of Persia Sands of Time more. Gives you more skills to traverse the environments along with not needing to collect items and continually revisit levels and instead has the player figure out how to approach each room utilizing all the skills they have.

>>3317287
Yep, the Secrets are the best part of Sunshine.

>>3317746
>Gives you more skills to traverse the environments
You sure about that?

Great game for its time, but camera is fucked

>>3318146
>but camera is fucked
it's fine. people are just too retarded to use it properly. every time i watch someone play the game i get mad because they're too retarded to figure out the camera.

>>3317325
youre fucked in the head

>>3312483
Two decades and its still overrated.

>>3319574
Two decades and you are now just barely out of diapers.

>>3312483

>a platform game where you barely do any platforming

At least it's better than the collectathons that would plague the system later on.

>>3317674
>>3317786
>>3317287
The whole game should have been comprised of Fludd-less levels. Most people seem to feel this way, and I remember saying it back when I played the game for the first time.

Kind of funny that the Fludd was the big, distinguishing new feature for this game, and the best parts of the game are the ones where you didn't have it.

>>3317302
This.

Not sure why this isn't getting more attention, but BK was basically the next step in the evolution from Mario64.

In b4 "hurr collect-athon"

>>3316841
Would've been better without the water spray thing.

>>3317302
Better level design
Better art design
Better music design
Better gameplay design
Better design design

>>3312483
I'm going to be honest. I didn't like SM64. Didn't feel like a Mario game at all.

While not being perfect games, I kinda prefer 3DLand/3DWorld. They felt like sequels to the 2D games, IMO.

>>3317794
meanwhile in SoT, players have that dynamic level of movement, without having to have replayed the same level dozens of times to memorize it, using basic controls without speedrunner tricks that the dev never intended, and can actually see in the direction they're moving in because the camera isn't shit on a stick.

>>3319729
>In b4 "hurr collect-athon"
But it is.
Don't get me wrong, it's still breddy gud.

>>3320201
Oh yeah, it definitely is.

What I don't understand, however, is why that has become a pejorative term for the series. In a 3D, open-world platforming games, having things to collect encourages the player to fully explore the levels and go places they might not otherwise go. It's a good thing.

Sure, it can be taken a bit to the extreme, like in Donkey Kong 64, but the same could be said of all gameplay mechanics. Even a good idea can become tired if you overuse it. I don't think Kazooie or Tooie ever take the collecting quite as far as they did with DK64

>>3320184
You're right there, SoT definitely has a very a low skill ceiling and is piss easy to be good at, no question.

>>3320184
>meanwhile in SoT, players have that dynamic level of movement, without having to have replayed the same level dozens of times to memorize it,
You're right there, SoT definitely has a very a low skill ceiling and is piss easy to be good at, no question.
>speedrunner tricks that the dev never intended
Which moves in that webm did the devs not intentionally add to the game, exactly?
>and can actually see in the direction they're moving in because the camera isn't shit on a stick.
I don't mind the camera in SM64, I know how it works and it does whatever I tell it to. But fair enough, I guess.

But Galaxy 2 exists.

>>3316841
NOT RETRO

Just kidding. SMS has more in common with retro games than it does with anything released after it.

>>3320293
Super Mario 64 is for people who like good gameplay.

Super Mario Galaxy is for people who like being dazzled by bullshit.

>>3320314
>Super Mario 64 is for people who like good gameplay.
>Super Mario Galaxy is for people who like being dazzled by bullshit.
Nostalgia much? The camera in Super Mario 64 is garbage. That other, non-retro game, has much tighter gameplay.

>>3320328
What does nostalgia have to do with anything? I've played through all of the games recently and none of them when I was a kid.
>The camera in Super Mario 64 is garbage.
Only if you're a genuine retarded person. It's always funny to watch someone play Super Mario 64 and struggle to grasp the most basic shit about how the game works. It's both frustrating and amusing at the same time.

>>3320314
Super Mario 64 is for people who like exploring and collecting things like a terminal autist.

Super Mario Galaxy is for people who like real platformers.

>>3320345
>Super Mario 64 is for people who like exploring and collecting things like a terminal autist.
>Super Mario Galaxy is for people who like real platformers.
Imagine being this delusional.

>>3320351
You tell me. Mario 64 is a platformer game where you barely do any platforming. If you like it so much but hate Galaxy then you don't like platformers, plain and simple.

>>3320340
>Only if you're a genuine retarded person
We know how to use the camera in a 3D platformer, numb nuts. Ratchet & Clank, Jak and Daxter, etc. all have similar camera controls. We know how to zoom in, zoom out, and rotate in either direction.

You're missing the point. The problem is the camera in Super Mario 64 is riddled with flaws. Knowing how to use the camera isn't the problem. It's when the camera fails to work properly, keep up with the player, and show a good angle of what's happening on screen that makes it shit.

I've collected all 120 stars several times. It's really sad I have to rely on "tricks" to get the camera to act the way I want it. Or even use maneuvers and tactics I shouldn't have to, in order to avoid having to deal with it as much.

Super Mario 64 is still a good game. But if you say the camera isn't without problems, the only one who looks retarded, and who refuses to accept the game has flaws, is you.

>>3320353
>Mario 64 is a platformer game where you barely do any platforming.
Again, this belief is shrouded in delusion. There are plenty of options for platforming, and the platforming actually gives you room for skill and player expression, unlike Galaxy where you're forced to do everything exactly the way you're pidgeonholed into.

>>3320363
>It's when the camera fails to work properly, keep up with the player, and show a good angle of what's happening on screen that makes it shit.
If you struggle with these things, knowing how to use the camera is absolutely the problem.
>It's really sad I have to rely on "tricks" to get the camera to act the way I want it.
You don't have to rely on any tricks, you just have to understand how the camera functions. A stunningly large number of people struggle with this, which is clearly why the formula was changed, but that doesn't mean the camera was bad. It just means that most people are bad at video games.
>But if you say the camera isn't without problems, the only one who looks retarded, and who refuses to accept the game has flaws, is you.
I'll admit it has some flaws. Bowser throws were a stupid mechanic, and the music and sound effects were also mostly pretty bad.

>>3320373
>and the platforming actually gives you room for skill and player expression
So what? That's another issue with the game. Platformers work better in a fixed path because they can present you with real challenges. You can go down the stairs while doing a handstand, that doesn't mean it wouln't be better and more efficient to just use you legs. The challenges in 64 aren't really related to the """""""""""""platforming""""""""""""".

>>3320390
>Platformers work better in a fixed path because they can present you with real challenges.
And you define a challenge as something the developers tell you to do, rather than something you create for yourself.

Which of these types of challenges you prefer is entirely subjective. I prefer freerunning. You prefer a gauntlet.

Oh boy I love platforming, just look at all the platforming in this Galaxy stage, what a great platformer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pQr3kpWQl8

>>3320378
>You don't have to rely on any tricks, you just have to understand how the camera functions
Then tell us. Explain to us how it works.

>>3320413
Which part of the game are you struggling with? I can make a quick video with a demonstration of the camera.

>>3320418
>Which part of the game are you struggling with?
See. This is what I don't get. Why is the camera situational? Are you implying there are different camera techniques you must use depending on what part of the game you are playing? You don't have to do that in Jak and Daxter, or Ratchet & Clank.

>>3320407
it's cute that people in this thread are defending Galaxy as a real platformer when both games are absolutely riddled with gimmicky, non-platforming nonsense like this.

>>3320421
>Are you implying there are different camera techniques you must use depending on what part of the game you are playing?
Yes, you must move the camera in different ways in order to achieve specific camera angles. There is no rotational camera in a video game that doesn't exist for this purpose.

>>3320427
>you must move the camera in different ways in order to achieve specific camera angles
Well, duh. The problem is that doesn't always help in Super Mario 64. Sometimes it does, but a lot of times it does not.

>>3320407
>>3320423
Cherrypicking is inmature and you should feel bad for it. 3/4 of the Galaxy games are obstacle courses a la M64 Bowser Levels, with the last 1/4 being shitty wiimote minigames just like that one.

>>3320404
>And you define a challenge as something the developers tell you to do, rather than something you create for yourself.
You can spend hours and hours to go down the stairs the fanciest way possible, that doesn't mean the stairs are the greatest thing since slice bread because they only happen to be there. You could have the same level of fun with any other kind of autistic obssesion.

>>3320404

>And you define a challenge as something the developers tell you to do, rather than something you create for yourself.

I don't see how this relates to the SM64 vs newer Mario games argument. You can just as easily create your own challenge in Super Mario 3D Land by speedrunning the levels, avoiding powerups, collecting every coin, avoiding every coin, etc. There's still plenty of room for self-imposed challenges even in linear platformers.

>>3320438
>You could have the same level of fun with any other kind of autistic obssesion.
Except that's not true. The freedom/depth in movement in tandem with the level design is why Super Mario 64 is so specifically good for this type of challenge. You could quite literally not have this type of autistic fun with Galaxy because of how shallow and stiff the movement mechanics are, and how narrow and closed off the stages are.

>>3320445
>There's still plenty of room for self-imposed challenges even in linear platformers.
Sure, but they're nowhere near as versatile, nowhere near as technical, and nowhere near as freeing. Being able to create a self imposed challenge in every game doesn't mean that every game is good for creating self imposed challenges.

For a good freerunning challenge, you need wide open spaces with plenty intertwined obstacles. You also need extremely deep and versatile movement tech. Sunshine was okay for these things, but 64 remains the best.

>>3312483

95% of /vr/ was still pooping in their diapers when this was released.

>Fact

>>3320468
>For a good freerunning challenge, you need wide open spaces with plenty intertwined obstacles. You also need extremely deep and versatile movement tech. Sunshine was okay for these things, but 64 remains the best.

That's not really true at all, otherwise you're saying the DKC games, SMB games, and most other highly acclaimed 2D platformers are shit because they aren't free-roaming 3D. You just need to get off your high horse and realize games can be good in their own ways without being SM64.

>>3320474
Kinda sad. They'll never know how mind blowing the jump from 2D to 3D games was.

>>3320478
>That's not really true at all, otherwise you're saying the DKC games, SMB games, and most other highly acclaimed 2D platformers are shit because they aren't free-roaming 3D
When did I say that games that don't meet this criteria are shit?

Now you're just putting words in my mouth.

>>3320474
explains all the galaxy faggots.

>>3320482

oh, nevermind, I was just under the assumption that you were on the same side as these retards calling Mario Galaxy a bad game >>3320314 >>3320486

>>3320501
I do agree with >>3320314 in some respect. The game is largely style without substance. It's very pretty to look at and has better music than any other game in the series, but the gameplay is very shallow and there is no challenge to be had, self imposed or not.

That's not to say it isn't a good game. It's definitely worth playing through once or twice.

I have the DS remake of this game - is it worth getting the original on Virtual Console or something? Because I probably will anyway.

Galaxy 2 is much better than Galaxy 1.

>>3320657
>is it worth getting the original on Virtual Console or something?
It plays best on N64, but if that's not an option, VC is okay as long as it's Wii VC, and not Wii U VC. Wii U VC has absurd input lag.

The DS version was trash, and more or less a tech demo for the DS hardware. They watered down the moveset and physics laughably, nerfed every character to force you to switch between them to perform tasks that Mario could do alone in the original, added 30 mostly completely uninteresting additional stars. In addition to this they lowered down the resolution and it looks like a PS1 game with jittery ass textures.

Mario64: You collect things and fight same boss three times

>>3320665
Would getting the Wii VC version on the Wii U work, or would it be best to use an actual Wii?
Am I asking too many questions?

>>3320378
>and the music and sound effects were also mostly pretty bad.

Fuck off with this delusion

>>3320345
Except you're wrong you dumb faggot 6th gen baby. No one gives a fuck that you are too retarded to do simple platforming in a platforming game. Go get your pacifier child.

>>3320684
Super Mario Bros. You collect things and fight the same boss 8 different times.,

>>3316841
Hating this game is a stupid 4chan meme. It's not bad at all. Mario 64 is just so fucking good and simple that most else pales in comparison.

>>3320689
The vWii version should be fine, but you might as well use Not64 at that rate.

>>3320689
It would be best to use an actual Wii.

>>3320786
>dumb faggot 6th gen baby
Sorry to burst your bubble but I 'm probably older than you.

I grew up with the 2D games and didn't really enjoy a 3D Mario until thet got rid of the retarded collectathon style.

>simple platforming
Exactly, simple platforming. Open levels don't work for real platforming challenges so they turned Mario into an Adventure Game with some jumping here and there, but jumping wasn't the core mechanic. You can have fun freeruning it and making your own objectives like >>3320468 and I actually agree with his point, but the only real old fashioned platforming was in the Bowser levels.

>the only real old fashioned platforming was in the Bowser levels.
Interestingly enough, Super Mario 64's movement mechanics make those stages better than anything in Galaxy as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd816VgvaFo

>>3321321
>the only real old fashioned platforming was in the Bowser levels.
Interestingly enough, Super Mario 64's movement mechanics make those stages far more interesting than anything in Galaxy as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd816VgvaFo

Banjo-Kazooie is the only game that tops Mario 64

>>3321321
>with some jumping here and there
I want whatever you're smoking. Must be some good shit.

>>3312483
Yeah, it's hard to make a shittier game than that.

>>3321507
0/10

>>3321512
You replied so it's successful bait in the end

>>3321321
>Open levels don't work for real platforming challenges so they turned Mario into an Adventure Game with some jumping here and there, but jumping wasn't the core mechanic.

I don't even know what the hell you're talking about here. It sounds like you never even played Mario 64. Jumping is an extremely important mechanic in most levels, and one of the things most people love about it is doing those crazy jumps. I still love that backflip he does when you jump 3 times

Plenty of platforming and not all of it is necessarily simple. Also how the fuck did "collectathon" become a term? Who cares? Most games are "collectathons"

>bad camera
>poor controls
>hasn't been topped
This is why /vr/ should be pre-1995 only. Keep all the nugamer kids on /v/ with their garbage.

>>3321783
>poor controls
I'm sorry to hear that, cerebral palsy is a terrible affliction.

Playing Super Mario 64 on an emulator with a 360 controller was amazing.

Pretty much confirmed to me any issues SM64 has aren't controls, but the controller itself.

Regardless, picking "sides" is stupid. Pretty much any given first party Mario title will be an amazing game, except for some of the "New new new new ultra new Super Mario Wii U" games that started getting stale after the second installment. Even those are good games, just very stale across the set.

>>3321801
>any issues SM64 has aren't controls, but the controller itself.
except the best SM64 players in the world most often use official N64 controllers and cite it as being more precise than any alternative. so no, the problem isn't with the controls, nor is it with the controller, assuming your controller isn't worn the fuck out.

>>3321806
here's some controller cam gameplay if you're skeptical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziJY9mdSOPg

>>3316841
the feeling when you are finally able to put on sunglasses for Mario.

>>3320373

But then you can say that about any game.

>>3323319
No, you absolutely can't. Many games are extremely awful for this sort of thing, such as Super Mario Galaxy.

Super Mario 64 gives you level of freedom in skill based movement depth that no other game does quite as well. Not only this, but the stages are designed spectacularly for this style of play.

>>3316841
It would be a playable game if they showed you how many blue coins are sill missing in each level.

>>3323319
No, you absolutely can't. Most games are terrible for this sort of thing. Super Mario Galaxy, for example, is terrible and gives you no freedom. The movement mechanics are shallow, and the stages give you few options for traversal.

Super Mario 64 gives you level of freedom in skill based movement depth that no other game does quite as well. Not only this, but the stages are designed spectacularly for this style of play.

>>3317695
I didn't grow up with Mario 64 and I love that game

>>3323319
No, you absolutely can't. Most games are terrible for this sort of thing. Super Mario Galaxy, for example, is terrible for it. You have no real freedom. The movement mechanics are stiff, shallow, and the stages give you very few options for traversal.

Super Mario 64 gives you level of freedom in skill based movement depth that no other game does quite as well. Not only this, but the stages are designed spectacularly for this style of play.

>>3323319
No, you absolutely can't. Most games are terrible for this sort of thing. Super Mario Galaxy, for example, is terrible for it. You have no real freedom. The movement mechanics are stiff, shallow and piss easy to be good at. The stages give you very few options for traversal.

Super Mario 64 gives you level of freedom in skill based movement depth that no other game does quite as well. Not only this, but the stages are designed spectacularly for this style of play.

>>3312483
I loved Mario growing up. SMB3 is still one of my favorite games of all time. However I never got to play this game. After reading some of the comments in this thread, I think I'm going to shell out the cash for an n64 and this title.

who cares about mario 64/sunshine/galaxy? paper mario is the super game anyway