Topic: Steven Kent: "Nintendo is like a wonderful old friend who has a drinking problem."

[IceCold]

The original will always be better in my heart, but SM64DS really isn't that bad..

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Oh, I almost forgot...

Quote
SM64DS...the game itself is superior to the original. The graphics are better

No it isn't, and no they aren't. Sm64DS is to SM64 what the Psycho remake is to Psycho. Every horrible, uninspired addition is as out-of-place as a voice that's suddenly cracked into a higher octave. Every "improved" texture is like an unsightly pimple on a once clean face. Every control configuration is as awkward as a first kiss. Maybe the DS thought what he was doing back in 2004 was cool, but now that he's past that awkard stage and has blossomed into the mature (and undeniably sexy) handheld that he is today, he can see how much of what he did back then was unfortunate.

I think this is alittle harsh.  Actually if SM64DS had an easier to use control system then it would be harold by most as the better game.  The additional characters are fun.  Specially Luigi and Yoshi, and the additional few levels fit very well in the world of Mario 64, and were fun additions.  

In fact, when the virtual console is made, I would love the ability to download SM64DS with more traditional controls.  It probably won't happen, but I would buy it instantly if it came available.

That would be cool Spak, I am holding out some hope that maybe Nintendo will make SM64DS for VC with traditional controls because it is superior to the original in every other aspect.  Then again I am not the kind of fan who complains about changes made to classics (I am one of the few supporters of Lucas changing Star Wars especially since it is his VISION not ours) since I don't see anything wrong with fixing what is now broken or outdated. The new additions to Mario 64 DS felt right at home and I don't really think you can make a legit argument besides the controls as to why Mario 64 for N64 is "better" since 64 DS has everything M64 had and more.
 

[Smoke39]

I'm with Wandering, SM64DS is definitely not superior to the original.
I'm also one of those guys who thought NSB completely lacked the charm of the old Mario games.

[Artimus]

How can you people not see that the graphics are better? The models are far more detailed and they far better match what Mario looks like (especially Bowser). The textures are superior, the effects are superior. The Star Wars reference would be cute if we were ten years old and liked making comparisons that made no sense.

Do you not find sand gets in your ears when you spend so much time with your head in it?

[Smoke39]

There are more polygons.  I don't care.  I'm not talking about the graphics when I say SM64DS is inferior.

[wandering]

Quote
I am one of the few supporters of Lucas changing Star Wars especially since it is his VISION not ours

The Lucas of today has about as much in common with the Lucas of 30 years ago as Darth Vader has in common with Anakin Skywalker.

Quote
I'm also one of those guys who thought NSB completely lacked the charm of the old Mario games.

I don't hate New Super Mario Bros. (or its phantasmagorical imagery) the way I hate Mario 64*4, but I agree it isn't as magical as the classics.

Quote
How can you people not see that the graphics are better? The models are far more detailed and they far better match what Mario looks like (especially Bowser). The textures are superior, the effects are superior. The Star Wars reference would be cute if we were ten years old and liked making comparisons that made no sense.

Do you not find sand gets in your ears when you spend so much time with your head in it?

The Star Wars refernce makes perfect sense (I think it does, anyway. It's hard to be sure of anything when you're ten years old and have your head in the sand!) The models were updated to make mario and friends look like they do in the modern games, in the same way that Star Wars was updated to make the original trilogy better fit with the newer prequel trilogy. Except in the case of Mario, instead of changing things here and there, the apperances of the main characters were completely destroyed. Lucas would have to digitally alter James Earl Jones's voice to be more like Hayden Christensen's to make a change that bad.

As for the textures being superior....eh. I prefer the solid colored grass.

Quote
Wandering, in your Iwata quote is he talking about otaku culture?
I just kinda wondering where the hell he is coming from.
Most gamers I know don't give a f$#& about what non gamers think of them.

Imagine the following scene at Thanksgiving. Two aunts are talking. One asks the other if the other's daughters play any videogames. The other shakes her head and responds "No, they aren't allowed that....kind of thing." As one of her daughters is staring blankly at Spongebob (heaven forbid they actually engaged in any activity that required thinking.)

I'd like to see an end to that kind of stupidity, personally.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering

Quote
I am one of the few supporters of Lucas changing Star Wars especially since it is his VISION not ours

The Lucas of today has about as much in common with the Lucas of 30 years ago as Darth Vader has in common with Anakin Skywalker.

Quote
I'm also one of those guys who thought NSB completely lacked the charm of the old Mario games.

I don't hate New Super Mario Bros. (or its phantasmagorical imagery) the way I hate Mario 64*4, but I agree it isn't as magical as the classics.

You are probaly right about Lucas but I support any individual behind creative works to change or update them as they see fit. Not only that but I LIKED the changes made to it, and I find discussions like "Who shot first" to be ridiculous. IN regards to NSMB I have to agree it isn't as magical as the others but I think that is largely because Miyamoto wasn't very involved with it.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering

The Star Wars refernce makes perfect sense (I think it does, anyway. It's hard to be sure of anything when you're ten years old and have your head in the sand!) The models were updated to make mario and friends look like they do in the modern games, in the same way that Star Wars was updated to make the original trilogy better fit with the newer prequel trilogy. Except in the case of Mario, instead of changing things here and there, the apperances of the main characters were completely destroyed. Lucas would have to digitally alter James Earl Jones's voice to be more like Hayden Christensen's to make a change that bad.

Do you really not see the obvious difference? Mario 64 DS isn't Mario 64. It's not a direct re-release. It's more closely connected with, say, an Extended Edition DVD (Lord of the Rings, for example) than Star Wars. When Lucas changes Star Wars, he changes Star Wars. All future releases are changed, he says the original no longer exists. Even when he finally releases the original it's a crappy version as an "extra" on the DVD. He doesn't call it Star Wars Redux, it's still called Star Wars. Super Mario 64 DS and Super Mario 64 are two different games, and Nintendo says so. When they release it on the Wii's Virtual Console they'll be releasing Super Mario 64. The DS version is a separate port, a new game. At no point has Nintendo said "This is now Super Mario 64." What they say is "Here's a DS version of Super Mario 64!" Notice the word version. It's not a replacement, it's a separate entity. Super Mario 64 =/= Super Mario 64 DS.

Smoke, but I'm not saying SM64 is inferior. I said in every post I've made that were it not for the controls, the DS version would be better. The DS version itself is superior, but the controls are inferior, making it worse. If both games had equal controls then the DS version would be better. Mainly because it's merely an expanded version of the same game, not because it changes things and improves them. It adds quality stuff, it doesn't fix old things (there's nothing to fix).

[wandering]

I will admit that my Psycho remake comparison was more apt (although Lord Lucas will be allowing people to view the original trilogy on dvd soon.)

My contention is that Mario 64 DS would be a worse game than Mario 64 even if the control scheme didn't suck. It doesn't matter that they simply added stuff without taking anything away. The extended edition of Return of the King didn't take away anything apart from an extra hour of my time, but the film is still a lot worse than the original.

From the perspective of someone who's already played the game, they may enjoy the additions. From the perspective of someone who hasn't already played the game, the underlying game may be so great that they enjoy the game anyway. BUT, if you took two people, and gave one person Mario 64 DS with a good control scheme, and one person Mario 64, and neither one of them had ever played the game before, I think the person who was given the original would say they liked the game more than the person who was given the remake.

[Smoke39]

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Smoke, but I'm not saying SM64 is inferior. I said in every post I've made that were it not for the controls, the DS version would be better. The DS version itself is superior, but the controls are inferior, making it worse. If both games had equal controls then the DS version would be better. Mainly because it's merely an expanded version of the same game, not because it changes things and improves them. It adds quality stuff, it doesn't fix old things (there's nothing to fix).

Controls asside, I still don't think the DS version would be better.  Imo, all the new stuff either adds absolutely nothing (eg, the lame multiplayer and minigames), or detracts from the game (eg, having to go switch to the right character to get through new obstacles lodged into the levels).  To me it's like they took the original and muddied it up just to make things different.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
My contention is that Mario 64 DS would be a worse game than Mario 64 even if the control scheme didn't suck. It doesn't matter that they simply added stuff without taking anything away. The extended edition of Return of the King didn't take away anything apart from an extra hour of my time, but the film is still a lot worse than the original.

But most people don't feel that way about ROTK. I would say the ROTK: EE benefits the least from being extended, but the first two films are immensely superior in their long formats. And the opening of ROTK is definitely superior, as is the confrontation at the gate. Overall the LOTR: EE is much better than the originals, which were great.

Eh, this argument is tiresome. Obviously different people feel differently about SM64: DS, but I think judging by the reviews we can draw the conclusion that it's a well done port hurt by its controls?

[Smoke39]

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Eh, this argument is tiresome. Obviously different people feel differently about SM64: DS, but I think judging by the reviews we can draw the conclusion that it's a well done port hurt by its controls?

If I write a review saying that the game's kinda lame will it become absolute truth?

[Kairon]

I'm fine with Lucas' prequel, and in fact on repeat viewing I appreciate it more and more.

BUT, as soon as something comes out, it's final. He can release an updated re-mastered special edition, and that's cool, BUT the original release will still be the definitive version. After all, a delayed game can eventually become good, but a solo-shot-first movie will remain that way forever.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Strell]

I know.

They totally took Mario 64 DS and took out all the guns and made Luigi shoot first.

What the hell is up with that?

I didn't need Bowser to explode in a fury of blue vapor rings when I killed him.  Why in the hell did they add that?

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
I will admit that my Psycho remake comparison was more apt (although Lord Lucas will be allowing people to view the original trilogy on dvd soon.)

That set has been out for awhile now...

Anyway, I will add my vote as another in favor of the DS version over the original in every respect except the controls. I especially liked the increased roster size, and found the game fun to go around in as the other characters to spice things up (although it could be argued that Luigi made a lot of the game much easier than it was).

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
From the perspective of someone who's already played the game, they may enjoy the additions. From the perspective of someone who hasn't already played the game, the underlying game may be so great that they enjoy the game anyway. BUT, if you took two people, and gave one person Mario 64 DS with a good control scheme, and one person Mario 64, and neither one of them had ever played the game before, I think the person who was given the original would say they liked the game more than the person who was given the remake.

Why? I don't really understand that. It's an amazing game anyway you slice it, but I don't see any of the additions messing with someone's enjoyment of the game for the first time they play through it.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I'm fine with Lucas' prequel, and in fact on repeat viewing I appreciate it more and more.

BUT, as soon as something comes out, it's final. He can release an updated re-mastered special edition, and that's cool, BUT the original release will still be the definitive version. After all, a delayed game can eventually become good, but a solo-shot-first movie will remain that way forever.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Well we definately disagree there I think that whatever the creator of the original decides they want to do should be the definitive version since it is their creation. I hold the same opinion towards authors who decided to update or revise their novels, since it is their creation whatever they are creating should be the true version, the only time this would not be the case is if someone else was doing the updating.

[The Traveller]

[Arbok]

I think The Traveller pretty much summed this all up...

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok
I think The Traveller pretty much summed this all up...

You are right it was so condensed and to the point, you cannot argue with the Traveller's point!

[The Traveller]

lol whoops..I was actually going to say something, then I decided not too. I didnt realise I hit the quick reply button. :S

Anyway, saying Mario 64 DS is any less of a good game than Mario 64 is kinda stupid. If Mario 64 had been released as the DS version from the start back in 96, would it still have been as ground breaking? Yes definitely! Its just that people seem to hate the controls in the DS version..I finished the game with the thumb strap, it worked well after about 20 mins of getting used to it. Also the 64 version was the one people played first so it has that nostalgic charm.

(Btw I didnt just edit my blank post, because I didnt want to destroy the original vison.)

[Spak-Spang]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
I will admit that my Psycho remake comparison was more apt (although Lord Lucas will be allowing people to view the original trilogy on dvd soon.)

My contention is that Mario 64 DS would be a worse game than Mario 64 even if the control scheme didn't suck. It doesn't matter that they simply added stuff without taking anything away. The extended edition of Return of the King didn't take away anything apart from an extra hour of my time, but the film is still a lot worse than the original.

From the perspective of someone who's already played the game, they may enjoy the additions. From the perspective of someone who hasn't already played the game, the underlying game may be so great that they enjoy the game anyway. BUT, if you took two people, and gave one person Mario 64 DS with a good control scheme, and one person Mario 64, and neither one of them had ever played the game before, I think the person who was given the original would say they liked the game more than the person who was given the remake.

I really don't get this.

So you are saying that someone who has played neither game is going to choose the version of the game with less graphical flair, fewer characters to play as, and fewer levels and challenge to explore.  Not to mention drop the aspect of multiplayer battles, which if you had better control would be amazing.

The only thing the Original Mario 64 has on the DS game is that its the original AND you got to start out the game as Mario.  You can argue that the games additional characters hurt the feel of the game, and such...but guess what you can play the game strictly as Mario one you unlock him.  

The truth is if controls weren't an issue Super Mario 64DS would be a perfect extention of the original title, keeping everything we loved about the original title and adding new elements we can love equally well.  

[Ceric]

I didn't like Mario 64 and I like Mario 64: DS for the most part.  I got farther in that game then the original which I didn't like.  Mainly it was a control issue with Mario 64 (That and no Flower Power.)  So yeah.  Thats my thoughts.

[Galford]

The reason I brough up fighters in general was the Wii remote is not very accomadating to them.
A fan favorite here Smash Bros, is apperantly using either the GC remote or the classic remote.

http://www.planetgamecube.com/previewArt.cfm?artid=11798

While the Wii remote has some innovative features, is throws a way a lot of standard features
that many games use.  It's been brought up by only a few people, but I think the Wii remote
is not very friendly to certain genres.

[couchmonkey]

Galford is right, the Wii remote is not very friendly to certain types of games.  That's why the classic controller exists.  Just like arcade controllers exist for people who really want that authentic fighting game feel.  And Joysticks exist for people who won't play flight sims any other way.  And instruments exist for music games.  And that huge-arse control console exists for Xbox fans that want a more immersive Mech game.

However, the argument from Nintendo's end is that this is going to become the new standard, just like the NES pad replaced Joysticks 20 years ago, and analog practically replaced the d-pad 10 years ago.

Is Nintendo right?  Maybe, maybe not.  Many previews have surprisingly praised the controller in Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, in spite of the fact that it's a very traditional style of game.  Racing games, Rayman, and Madden have also all gotten good previews.  FPS's are having trouble, but IGN's last Metroid Prime 3 preview was really positive - maybe it doesn't beat a keyboard and a mouse, but if it can beat old-fashioned controllers, that's a start.  If one or two genres fall by the wayside but it provides a better experience overall (and especially for "non" games) then it won't matter except to some hardcores...who, once again, can buy the classic controller.  

[Stimutacs Addict]

LETS AT LEAST AGREE ON ONE THING:

the wii controller+nunchuk will make Mech games so so so much cooler and less expensive!

especially when you enter a battle form (hold Z and B triggers and your mech will wrap two hands around a big friggin sword) and start swinging like a robot with hoof and mouth