Support NeoGAF

[Chronospherics]

Ugly, with a bad camera.

The platforming is pretty good, but I prefer the newer instalments, Galaxy, Sunshine, etc.

 

[Afrocious]

Damn I made this thread 3 years ago lol

 

[anotherVegan]

It's definitely a classic, has genius-level stage design. Controls are great. Physics are fantastic. Though I played it recently. The camera doesn't always go where I want it to go. And when navigating small platforms and I want Mario to turn slightly, sometimes he will walk in a circle instead of just turning, sending me to my death. This can be trouble, especially in levels like Rainbow Ride.

Though it's still a blast to play.

 

[Tarin02543]

A remaster for the Switch would be cool.

 

[wild wild rice]

I hope we get some locations as moody as Jolly Roger Bay in Odyssey.

 

[Succinct Verbosity]

In terms of 3D games of that era, it's probably one of the games that has stood the test of time the most.

 

[Bluehound]

Still a great game to go back to once in a while. I loved how you could go and get stars mostly in any order. Too bad camera has a very limited movement in some parts so you can't always see where you are going.

 

[daTRUballin]

You're right. Super Mario 64 is a platforming game with adventure game elements and Banjo-Kazooie is an adventure game with platforming elements - they're very similar to one another, but both have different intentions to their design.

But at the core of their design, large hub worlds with multiple objectives is still at the basis of their experience - you go into a large open level, you complete a task to get a token, there's usually more than one task to complete.

The inbetween is where the difference is - Super Mario 64 asks you to use your core set of abilities to solve challenges the majority of the time, which is where people are celebrating it's allowance for experimentation and high level play. Banjo-Kazooie on the other hand usually has objectives tied either to using special abilities or just for paying attention to the environment.

Best example are their final levels - Click Clock Woods and Tick Tock Clock. Both have a similar vertical design, and both have a central gimmick that relates to time - in Mario, it's having obstacles speed up or slow down depending how you enter the level, while in Banjo it's a level that shifts through different seasons, with objectives and obstacles rearranged depending.

Where as climbing up Tick Tock Clock is part of the fun of that game, Click Clock Woods is more in the vain of an adventure game where you go between different seasons to effect one another.

The reason I mention this is that - having replayed both these games recently - returning to Banjo-Kazooie was nowhere near as satisfying as I had already completed these objectives before, whereas with Super Mario 64 there was ground to improve and be more risky which was way more enjoyable.

Different strokes for different folks I guess

Reading through all that you just wrote, I guess I understand how someone would prefer Mario 64's style of gameplay to Banjo's. It's just that I'm not really sure it's a good idea to compare the two games directly since they're completely different platformers/adventure games. But I can definitely still see how one can enjoy Mario 64 more. They're both great games though.

Btw, isn't Rainbow Ride the last level of Mario 64 and not Tick Tock Clock?

 

[uocooper]

I've had my Mario 64 cartridge in a bag for the past 20 years and recently acquired an N64 thanks to the generosity of a friend. I was amazed that the game still worked and had my saves intact. After starting a new game from scratch and getting 108 stars I was in awe of how well it's held up and how much fun it still is to play. There aren't many games I'd call a masterpiece but this is more than deserving of the term.

 

[PSqueak]

They sort of already dipped their toes in this idea already;

Seeing a pretty direct translation of Thwomps Fortress over to Galaxy 2 kind of puts into perspective just how poor it looks - too much hard brick and concrete. It'd be good if they could be a little more liberal in how they bring it over - add some more detail and character where nessecary without affecting the shape of the environments.

This image reminds me of the only thing that shows the games age: In contrast to modern 3D gaming you realize most of the levels were actually tiny, whomp's fortress was the smallest tho.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

This image reminds me of the only thing that shows the games age: In contrast to modern 3D gaming you realize most of the levels were actually tiny, whomp's fortress was the smallest tho.

Yup. It's a win for good game-conscious design though - every metre of space in these worlds feels like it has worth, kind of like if you think about a level like Bunker 2 in GoldenEye 007. Tonnes of choice and routes in how to tackle that level and complete its objectives, and you can spend ages absorbed in playing it, but its tiny by modern standards.

 

[hotcyder]

Yup. It's a win for good game-conscious design though - every metre of space in these worlds feels like it has worth, kind of like if you think about a level like Bunker 2 in GoldenEye 007. Tonnes of choice and routes in how to tackle that level and complete its objectives, and you can spend ages absorbed in playing it, but its tiny by modern standards.

It's the only thing I miss about this restrictive nature. Games after Super Mario 64 ended up getting larger - to the point where you have entire islands or cities recreated in 3D space, and objectives can be drawn across the whole map.

But unlike SM64 or even Banjo-Kazooie - there's nothing interesting in the inbetween. You wouldn't get out of your car in GTA to go through a forest path to the side of a highway because you saw something interesting, or try in go in every shop to see what's inside - the games don't encourage you to make the most of their large worlds, other then the spectacle of "wow, these worlds are huge"

It's a shame that Yooka-Laylee didn't really get this either because those levels are huge but the time between starting the level and finding an objective, or even completing that, is massive - and there's so much barren space between them.

So yeah, more small, snowglobe levels please. Hopefully anyone who's my age and making unity games inspired by Banjo-Kazooie/SM64 will keep that in mind.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

It's the only thing I miss about this restrictive nature. Games after Super Mario 64 ended up getting larger - to the point where you have entire islands or cities recreated in 3D space, and objectives can be drawn across the whole map.

But unlike SM64 or even Banjo-Kazooie - there's nothing interesting in the inbetween. You wouldn't get out of your car in GTA to go through a forest path to the side of a highway because you saw something interesting, or try in go in every shop to see what's inside - the games don't encourage you to make the most of their large worlds, other then the spectacle of "wow, these worlds are huge"

It's a shame that Yooka-Laylee didn't really get this either because those levels are huge but the time between starting the level and finding an objective, or even completing that, is massive - and there's so much barren space between them.

So yeah, more small, snowglobe levels please. Hopefully anyone who's my age and making unity games inspired by Banjo-Kazooie/SM64 will keep that in mind.

Yup. I also find that waypoint/quest markers and high-detail minimaps are often used as crutches for poorly designed game worlds as far their ability to naturally engage the player in exploration, discovery and natural navigation.

Gravity Rush 2 was disappointing to me because of how little depth there was to its massive world. It felt more like it was there just to create the feeling of scope, but as a game it had comparatively little depth, especially compared with other open world games like GTA, BotW and so on.

But the world design itself was lacking too - since the game would always send you off in some direction of the map with a waypoint. Even a simple quest that'd ask you to fetch some items would rely on eventless waypoint travelling to some part of the map or some unknown NPC in some part of the map. A lot of the core game is rather dull, to be honest, and there's a sense that the developers thought that having a reward, or a bit of story, or an interesting boss at the end of it would somehow excuse it.

Edit: I just came across this piece written about the game's open world platforming. The majority of the argument appears to come from the author being wowed by the scale and scope of the worlds, while the rest basically admits the game relies heavily on collecting trinkets across the game world to encourage the player to explore every nook and cranny.

 

[The Real Napsta]

18 years later, still the best launch title ever made.

Halo CE

 

[SonicKnights]

Super Mario 64 does not hold up very well nowadays, especially in the wake of Super Mario Sunshine, which is the greatest Mario game ever by a good margin.