The Nintendo 64 had Mario 64... Nuff said.

  • 52 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by SonyNintendoFan (527 posts) -
Who cares if PS1 got FF7? Those games were overrated anyways, Mario 64 was more revolutionary. Who agrees?
#2 Posted by WitIsWisdom (3809 posts) -

I'm glad you liked Mario 64, although I may be in the minority, that is my least favorite Mario game ever made minus 2 and SMW2. So, although I respect your opinion I for one do not think that Mario 64 was one of the best 64 games although I just had this arguement a couple days ago on this same forum. The 64 did have some great games, but that doesnt necessarily make them any "better" than someone elses favorite games on the PS.

My favorite N64 games were, Goldeneye 007, Pefect Dark, Conkers Bad Fur Day, Turok 2, Kobe Bryany Courtside, and a couple others that were some of my favorite games still to this day. So although the 64 had a couple games that were argueably better games overall, a handful of games still does not beat the greatness of a library over 6 times its size.

Foe every 1 good game on the N64 there were 3 on the PS.

#3 Posted by LittleMac19 (1638 posts) -
Mario is my favorite franchise, but I'm sorry a launch title isn't enough to make the N64 better than the PS1 in the terms of it's sheer number of quality titles. Even Zelda OOT couldn't keep the N64 afloat vs the PS1.
#4 Posted by achilles614 (4864 posts) -
I play more n64 games than ps1 games these days, all I liked on PS was crash and FF.
#5 Posted by Shenmue_Jehuty (5207 posts) -

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

#6 Posted by Megavideogamer (5466 posts) -

This was the last time Nintendo launched with a Mario game. Until this years Wii U. Having Mario at launch was a key part of the N64 sucess.

#7 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

Shenmue_Jehuty
I noticed the helmet in your profile pic is a bit scratched in the membrane area. Might want to fix that for future posts :P But no, is FF7 the only game on the PSX you are comparing to? Mario 64 is a launch game, and that launch game pretty much floated the N64 by itself with some pillars of help from GE, OOT, Banjo Etc. That however does not mean anything at all about its quality. One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system, not even a piece of a system, i can't think of one add-on game that would make me buy Sega CD for example by itself. If a game has that much impression on you someone was let out the cellar.
#8 Posted by Pixel-Perfect (5778 posts) -

PS1 has Final Fantasy VII and IX. 'Nuff said. Xat-chew.gif

#9 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16843 posts) -

It also Had OoT AND MM... Plus a lot of other games.

#10 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

Dj-Dampleaf

One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system

SM64 was deff. a system seller, especially from the launch games.

SM64, GE007, OoT, Banjo and Pokemon Stadium were all system sellers.

Much like Crash, FFVII, MGS, Tekken, Gran Turismo and even Tomb Raider and Resi Evil were system sellers too.

#11 Posted by Shenmue_Jehuty (5207 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

Dj-Dampleaf

I noticed the helmet in your profile pic is a bit scratched in the membrane area. Might want to fix that for future posts :P But no, is FF7 the only game on the PSX you are comparing to? Mario 64 is a launch game, and that launch game pretty much floated the N64 by itself with some pillars of help from GE, OOT, Banjo Etc. That however does not mean anything at all about its quality. One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system, not even a piece of a system, i can't think of one add-on game that would make me buy Sega CD for example by itself. If a game has that much impression on you someone was let out the cellar.

It's a Kanji character, not scratches:(

#12 Posted by 1PMrFister (3134 posts) -

I'd say "nice blog," but this would also make for a terrible blog post.

#13 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

nameless12345

One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system

SM64 was deff. a system seller, especially from the launch games.

SM64, GE007, OoT, Banjo and Pokemon Stadium were all system sellers.

Much like Crash, FFVII, MGS, Tekken, Gran Turismo and even Tomb Raider and Resi Evil were system sellers too.

There's a difference between system sellers and buying a whole console for one game and it scares me you think they are the same thing.
#14 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

Shenmue_Jehuty

I noticed the helmet in your profile pic is a bit scratched in the membrane area. Might want to fix that for future posts :P But no, is FF7 the only game on the PSX you are comparing to? Mario 64 is a launch game, and that launch game pretty much floated the N64 by itself with some pillars of help from GE, OOT, Banjo Etc. That however does not mean anything at all about its quality. One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system, not even a piece of a system, i can't think of one add-on game that would make me buy Sega CD for example by itself. If a game has that much impression on you someone was let out the cellar.

It's a Kanji character, not scratches:(

What is a kanji? Do you look at my avatar and sig and expect me to no such non-american things? I am running for president of United Microsoft States I have no time for foreign policy, just look at Mitt Romney he got away with it. :P BTW, don't forget to vote for me. To be serious, and yes I was serious about voting for me :) but also i am serious about not knowing this kanji. Anime tv show perhaps?
#15 Posted by dragonfly110 (27071 posts) -

I won't discount the PS, I was deeply in love with Crash, Spyro, FF and some others but the N64 games always just had such a special feeling to me, hell it's still my favorite system released to date.

#16 Posted by MLBknights58 (5015 posts) -

The PS1 had some of the greatest and highly acclaimed RPG series on it, along with a bunch of great platformers such as Spyro and Crash; while these are not on the level of quality of Mario IMO quantity of quality beats quality in small numbers as far as I'm concerned. The N64 had some damn good games on it, but I think the Playstation had more.

#17 Posted by WitIsWisdom (3809 posts) -

The PS1 had some of the greatest and highly acclaimed RPG series on it, along with a bunch of great platformers such as Spyro and Crash; while these are not on the level of quality of Mario IMO quantity of quality beats quality in small numbers as far as I'm concerned. The N64 had some damn good games on it, but I think the Playstation had more.

MLBknights58

Exactly, I feel the same way. Great is Great but more greatness is even greater... lol

#18 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"]One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire systemDj-Dampleaf

SM64 was deff. a system seller, especially from the launch games.

SM64, GE007, OoT, Banjo and Pokemon Stadium were all system sellers.

Much like Crash, FFVII, MGS, Tekken, Gran Turismo and even Tomb Raider and Resi Evil were system sellers too.

There's a difference between system sellers and buying a whole console for one game and it scares me you think they are the same thing.

Um, it is the same thing. System seller, as in they "sell" you the "system" because you really want to play that particular game, hence the name system seller. Many people bought an N64 to play Super Mario 64 or Zelda OOT, they're system sellers. The same way many people bought a PS1 to play Final Fantasy VII or Metal Gear Solid.

#19 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

SM64 was deff. a system seller, especially from the launch games.

SM64, GE007, OoT, Banjo and Pokemon Stadium were all system sellers.

Much like Crash, FFVII, MGS, Tekken, Gran Turismo and even Tomb Raider and Resi Evil were system sellers too.

Emerald_Warrior

There's a difference between system sellers and buying a whole console for one game and it scares me you think they are the same thing.

Um, it is the same thing. System seller, as in they "sell" you the "system" because you really want to play that particular game, hence the name system seller. Many people bought an N64 to play Super Mario 64 or Zelda OOT, they're system sellers. The same way many people bought a PS1 to play Final Fantasy VII or Metal Gear Solid.

Most people use System Sellers as an excuse to BUY the system and get other games for it which is why you here about people buying "This game with this game" on old magazines and such. Nobody except a small few would be fine with just one game. Just one.
#20 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

Oh, I see what you're saying, now. But I doubt many people at all buy a system and just one game without ever buying another game. Well unless you bought a crappy system like the Xavix Port or Mattel Hyperscan.

#21 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

Oh, I see what you're saying, now. But I doubt many people at all buy a system and just one game without ever buying another game. Well unless you bought a crappy system like the Xavix Port or Mattel Hyperscan.

Emerald_Warrior
Wouldn't cal the hyperscan crappy since it's game are considered good, more like failed system. But there are people that think like that as uncommon as it may be. While usually people exaggerate and say they only need the game, they are usually not serious, but some really do only buy that Gex, or Final Fantasy X, or Tempest 200, or Tetris(GB) and that's all they have interest in. Actually for portables of old it seems more common.
#22 Posted by WitIsWisdom (3809 posts) -

I see both of your points and I think you guys are disagreeing about different things. I really dont think either of you mean that they buy the console just for one game with no intentions of ever buying another game for the entire time the console still has games being made for it. Your arguements are similar though that a system seller is a system seller. I dont think I know of anybody that ever bought a console just for one game overall though.... (however I know of a few people who bought a console for a single game AFTER the console stopped producing games, but not new especially near launch)

For example I bought a PS3 for Assassins Creed, but I didnt like it at first... however, I loved my PS3 and got different games I DID like after I got that game. SO yeah, it was a "system seller" of sorts, but I would have bought the console eventually either way... so.

Anyways, I really like the Assassins Creed series now, I was just really into online gameplay at the time, so I didnt give the first one a fair chance until a year or two after it released. I actually went back to give it another chance because of how awesome I remember it looking and thinking to myself "yeah the PS3 is going to rock!" Well, that and the fact that I dont like playing games out of rotation... and I bought 2 and still had not gotten to the first. Then I bought Brotherhood and still had not played 2, I got halfway through 2 when I got revealations.... lol.. anyways, off topic end/ :P

** edited because ** your conversation already beat me to the punch... lol

#23 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

I see both of your points and I think you guys are disagreeing about different things. I really dont think either of you mean that they buy the console just for one game with no intentions of ever buying another game for the entire time the console still has games being made for it. Your arguements are similar though that a system seller is a system seller. I dont think I know of anybody that ever bought a console just for one game overall though.... (however I know of a few people who bought a console for a single game AFTER the console stopped producing games, but not new especially near launch)

For example I bought a PS3 for Assassins Creed, but I didnt like it at first... however, I loved my PS3 and got different games I DID like after I got that game. SO yeah, it was a "system seller" of sorts, but I would have bought the console eventually either way... so.

Anyways, I really like the Assassins Creed series now, I was just really into online gameplay at the time, so I didnt give the first one a fair chance until a year or two after it released. I actually went back to give it another chance because of how awesome I remember it looking and thinking to myself "yeah the PS3 is going to rock!" Well, that and the fact that I dont like playing games out of rotation... and I bought 2 and still had not gotten to the first. Then I bought Brotherhood and still had not played 2, I got halfway through 2 when I got revealations.... lol.. anyways, off topic end/ :P

WitIsWisdom
So did you ever beat the first?
#24 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

Oh, I see what you're saying, now. But I doubt many people at all buy a system and just one game without ever buying another game. Well unless you bought a crappy system like the Xavix Port or Mattel Hyperscan.

Dj-Dampleaf

Wouldn't cal the hyperscan crappy since it's game are considered good, more like failed system.

Have you played one? It's glitchy as hell and barely works as it's intended to. And the game library is tiny. I don't know the exact number, I could Google it ,but what's the point? I know you can count the game libary on your fingers.

#25 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

Oh, I see what you're saying, now. But I doubt many people at all buy a system and just one game without ever buying another game. Well unless you bought a crappy system like the Xavix Port or Mattel Hyperscan.

Emerald_Warrior

Wouldn't cal the hyperscan crappy since it's game are considered good, more like failed system.

Have you played one? It's glitchy as hell and barely works as it's intended to. And the game library is tiny. I don't know the exact number, I could Google it ,but what's the point? I know you can count the game libary on your fingers.

I think there was 8, but I only usually saw the same 5 sold and was only interested in 2. It has hardware issues with the scanner, but the games play well, but the console is not reliable, and not exactly, polished. Like it feels like and looks like some plastic thrown together and seems like it may explode or break into tiny little pieces. Also, the games were way overpriced when they started the experiment. It was a neat idea though, think that's were Skylanders came from.
#26 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

Oh, I see what you're saying, now. But I doubt many people at all buy a system and just one game without ever buying another game. Well unless you bought a crappy system like the Xavix Port or Mattel Hyperscan.

Emerald_Warrior

Wouldn't cal the hyperscan crappy since it's game are considered good, more like failed system.

Have you played one? It's glitchy as hell and barely works as it's intended to. And the game library is tiny. I don't know the exact number, I could Google it ,but what's the point? I know you can count the game libary on your fingers.

not to mention it was 16 bits in the 21st century. Those visuals.
#27 Posted by WitIsWisdom (3809 posts) -

[QUOTE="WitIsWisdom"]

I see both of your points and I think you guys are disagreeing about different things. I really dont think either of you mean that they buy the console just for one game with no intentions of ever buying another game for the entire time the console still has games being made for it. Your arguements are similar though that a system seller is a system seller. I dont think I know of anybody that ever bought a console just for one game overall though.... (however I know of a few people who bought a console for a single game AFTER the console stopped producing games, but not new especially near launch)

For example I bought a PS3 for Assassins Creed, but I didnt like it at first... however, I loved my PS3 and got different games I DID like after I got that game. SO yeah, it was a "system seller" of sorts, but I would have bought the console eventually either way... so.

Anyways, I really like the Assassins Creed series now, I was just really into online gameplay at the time, so I didnt give the first one a fair chance until a year or two after it released. I actually went back to give it another chance because of how awesome I remember it looking and thinking to myself "yeah the PS3 is going to rock!" Well, that and the fact that I dont like playing games out of rotation... and I bought 2 and still had not gotten to the first. Then I bought Brotherhood and still had not played 2, I got halfway through 2 when I got revealations.... lol.. anyways, off topic end/ :P

Dj-Dampleaf

So did you ever beat the first?

Yes, now I have beaten the first 3. 1, 2, and Brotherhood. I am currently playing through Revealations now, but I also just got the World of Wrcraft expansion that I swore I wouldnt buy, and I am still playing NBA 2k12 and now 2K13 is out... lol

I am also playing through Final Fantasy on the origins collection, and also just got the God of War saga for PS3...

Im also only about halfway through Warriors Orochi III....

My problem lies with the fact I have way too many games I am playing right now. Add that with two young kids, and full time college, and I might beat Revealations a year from the time I pick up Assassins Creed 3 (which I have pre ordered... sigh...)

I have also gotten away from playing a ton of online shooters, but I have Medal of Honor preordered, and it looks awesome.

Sometimes there just arent enough hours in a day :P and other times I wish I could just cut some out... lmao

#28 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="WitIsWisdom"]

I see both of your points and I think you guys are disagreeing about different things. I really dont think either of you mean that they buy the console just for one game with no intentions of ever buying another game for the entire time the console still has games being made for it. Your arguements are similar though that a system seller is a system seller. I dont think I know of anybody that ever bought a console just for one game overall though.... (however I know of a few people who bought a console for a single game AFTER the console stopped producing games, but not new especially near launch)

For example I bought a PS3 for Assassins Creed, but I didnt like it at first... however, I loved my PS3 and got different games I DID like after I got that game. SO yeah, it was a "system seller" of sorts, but I would have bought the console eventually either way... so.

Anyways, I really like the Assassins Creed series now, I was just really into online gameplay at the time, so I didnt give the first one a fair chance until a year or two after it released. I actually went back to give it another chance because of how awesome I remember it looking and thinking to myself "yeah the PS3 is going to rock!" Well, that and the fact that I dont like playing games out of rotation... and I bought 2 and still had not gotten to the first. Then I bought Brotherhood and still had not played 2, I got halfway through 2 when I got revealations.... lol.. anyways, off topic end/ :P

WitIsWisdom

So did you ever beat the first?

Yes, now I have beaten the first 3. 1, 2, and Brotherhood. I am currently playing through Revealations now, but I also just got the World of Wrcraft expansion that I swore I wouldnt buy, and I am still playing NBA 2k12 and now 2K13 is out... lol

I am also playing through Final Fantasy on the origins collection, and also just got the God of War saga for PS3...

Im also only about halfway through Warriors Orochi III....

My problem lies with the fact I have way too many games I am playing right now. Add that with two young kids, and full time college, and I might beat Revealations a year from the time I pick up Assassins Creed 3 (which I have pre ordered... sigh...)

I have also gotten away from playing a ton of online shooters, but I have Medal of Honor preordered, and it looks awesome.

Sometimes there just arent enough hours in a day :P and other times I wish I could just cut some out... lmao

Not supposed to have kids till after you finish college lol. Wait, isn't MOH already out? It came out like 2 years ago or is this a new one? I liked the last one although DICE battlefielded it a bit.
#29 Posted by WitIsWisdom (3809 posts) -

You really need to check out the new Medal of Honor game that is coming out. It's called MoH Warfighter and it looks absolutely bad ass. I was looking forward to the last MoH which wound up being average at best... However, Warfighter looks like a game that could bring me back to shooters after a year or two break. I was dissapointed with both BF3, MW3, the newest Ghost Recon, and the last Flashpoint game.... so I am dying for a great shooter. I am truly a SOCOM fan, but SOCOM 4 wasnt very great, and Confrontation is full of cheater now... It's too bad that Zipper closed their doors not too long ago... I really hope that another company picks up the SOCOM series and a game like Confrontation II or SOCOM 5 can still be made. I would even take a SOCOM I, II, or III remastered HD game that recieves support as either a dlc only or a cheaper disc based game.

Anyways though, back on our off topic discussion, (since I got off topic on being off topic... heh) Warfighter looks really great! If you have a PS3 get it when it releases and hit me up my user name on PS3 is the same as it is here. Wit Is Wisdom all together like WitIsWisdom. Most people call me W i l t or Witless or anything but Wit on these forums.... lol

My clan VOW (Veterans of War United) are the only ones who call me Wit, and even some of them mess around with me about how often people butcher it.

http://www.vowunited.com/

their is actually a funny story behind my username.

#30 Posted by almasdeathchild (9517 posts) -

Who cares if PS1 got FF7? Those games were overrated anyways, Mario 64 was more revolutionary. Who agrees?SonyNintendoFan
oh the irony

#31 Posted by WhySoLimp (135 posts) -

Who cares if PS1 got FF7? Those games were overrated anyways, Mario 64 was more revolutionary. Who agrees?SonyNintendoFan

All 3D Mario games are overrated... The 2D ones are where it's at.

#32 Posted by JustPlainLucas (74432 posts) -
Actually, Nintendo SHOULD care. FFVII was one of the reasons why the PSX slaughtered Nintendo in sales and yanked the market out from under their nose... Wait, SonyNintendoFan? Why do YOU even care? You like both companies!
#33 Posted by JustPlainLucas (74432 posts) -

All 3D Mario games are overrated... The 2D ones are where it's at.

WhySoLimp
Not the Galaxies. The Galaxies are superb, and I place them right under Super Mario Bros. 3.
#34 Posted by Yangire (8795 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

While I agree that Mario 64 is an incredible game, FFVII is in no way overrated. It's one of those highly acclaimed games that deserves all the hype and cred it receives.

Shenmue_Jehuty

I noticed the helmet in your profile pic is a bit scratched in the membrane area. Might want to fix that for future posts :P But no, is FF7 the only game on the PSX you are comparing to? Mario 64 is a launch game, and that launch game pretty much floated the N64 by itself with some pillars of help from GE, OOT, Banjo Etc. That however does not mean anything at all about its quality. One game is not that good that you would buy a whole entire system, not even a piece of a system, i can't think of one add-on game that would make me buy Sega CD for example by itself. If a game has that much impression on you someone was let out the cellar.

It's a Kanji character, not scratches:(

I haven't seen any Kanji that looks like that.

#35 Posted by mariokart64fan (19535 posts) -

i took one look at those jaggy psx graphics and said who the hell came out of the basment with this crap haah and went back happily playing snes , and n64 lol ,

#36 Posted by lazyathew (3748 posts) -

[QUOTE="SonyNintendoFan"]Who cares if PS1 got FF7? Those games were overrated anyways, Mario 64 was more revolutionary. Who agrees?WhySoLimp

All 3D Mario games are overrated... The 2D ones are where it's at.

I agree. Except for 3D land. But that's because it uses the same style of gameplay as the 2D games. Except it's in 3D, lol.

Mario 64 is still awesome though. And so is Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. But on the other hand PS has Final Fantasy, Parasite Eve, and Resident Evil. I really can't decide which I like better.

#37 Posted by campzor (34932 posts) -
ps1 had ape escape...nuff said
#38 Posted by Supertornado (67 posts) -

I prefer 30 sports cars (N64) over 100 city cars (PS1).

Quality over Quantity any day.

#39 Posted by Heirren (17713 posts) -
Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly.
#40 Posted by lazyathew (3748 posts) -

Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Heirren
What makes you say Final Fantasy doesn't feel like a game? I mean sure, it is more well known for story telling then anything else, but what about the parts between the cinamatics? It's definitly a game, and in some cases, a pretty challenging one as well.

#41 Posted by Heirren (17713 posts) -

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. lazyathew

What makes you say Final Fantasy doesn't feel like a game? I mean sure, it is more well known for story telling then anything else, but what about the parts between the cinamatics? It's definitly a game, and in some cases, a pretty challenging one as well.

It just feels like it requires no dexterity or hand-eye coordination. It is still a game, but Mario 64 is just infinitely superior in its design.
#42 Posted by lazyathew (3748 posts) -

[QUOTE="lazyathew"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Heirren

What makes you say Final Fantasy doesn't feel like a game? I mean sure, it is more well known for story telling then anything else, but what about the parts between the cinamatics? It's definitly a game, and in some cases, a pretty challenging one as well.

It just feels like it requires no dexterity or hand-eye coordination. It is still a game, but Mario 64 is just infinitely superior in its design.

I see. Well yeah, that just means it's a different kind of game. Focuses more on strategy then action or platforming. That's like saying Chess isn't a game, lol.

But yeah, I love strategy games and RPG's though. Which is why I enjoy Final Fantasy far more then Mario. They are all games, just different kinds, and it's all a matter of preference.

#43 Posted by Heirren (17713 posts) -

[QUOTE="Heirren"][QUOTE="lazyathew"]What makes you say Final Fantasy doesn't feel like a game? I mean sure, it is more well known for story telling then anything else, but what about the parts between the cinamatics? It's definitly a game, and in some cases, a pretty challenging one as well.

lazyathew

It just feels like it requires no dexterity or hand-eye coordination. It is still a game, but Mario 64 is just infinitely superior in its design.

I see. Well yeah, that just means it's a different kind of game. Focuses more on strategy then action or platforming. That's like saying Chess isn't a game, lol.

But yeah, I love strategy games and RPG's though. Which is why I enjoy Final Fantasy far more then Mario. They are all games, just different kinds, and it's all a matter of preference.

Right, but IMO Final Fantasy feels like less of a game than the prior generation RPGs. There wasn't much choice--in fact it isn't much different from FF13, only the hallway is wavy one. It gets praise because of the cinematics and length, at the time. I remember buying it and being disappointed almost immediately--it even controls poorly--contact with the pre rendered backgrounds was just bad. In an RPG, where story takes a center stage, it takes me out of the game when you consistently stick to the land you are exploring. Or, I shouldn't even say "exploring" because there wasn't much of that.
#44 Posted by lazyathew (3748 posts) -

[QUOTE="lazyathew"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"] It just feels like it requires no dexterity or hand-eye coordination. It is still a game, but Mario 64 is just infinitely superior in its design. Heirren

I see. Well yeah, that just means it's a different kind of game. Focuses more on strategy then action or platforming. That's like saying Chess isn't a game, lol.

But yeah, I love strategy games and RPG's though. Which is why I enjoy Final Fantasy far more then Mario. They are all games, just different kinds, and it's all a matter of preference.

Right, but IMO Final Fantasy feels like less of a game than the prior generation RPGs. There wasn't much choice--in fact it isn't much different from FF13, only the hallway is wavy one. It gets praise because of the cinematics and length, at the time. I remember buying it and being disappointed almost immediately--it even controls poorly--contact with the pre rendered backgrounds was just bad. In an RPG, where story takes a center stage, it takes me out of the game when you consistently stick to the land you are exploring. Or, I shouldn't even say "exploring" because there wasn't much of that.

I admit the controls in Final Fantasy VII were pretty bad. I didn't find it took from the experiance too much however, since while exploring, there was little punishment. (You couldn't die by walking off an edge or something, is what I mean) But it definitly got annoying sometimes in battle, depending on the view of the screen, it's hard to see who the arrow is pointing at, and therefor I may target the wrong character with phoenix down or something. But I didn't find this happening too often. I like FF VII, it is definitly not my favorite FF, but I enjoyed it a lot.

#45 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Heirren

But all the hype was warranted. FF7 really broke a lot of new ground in cinematic storytelling and CGI animation. It was definetly a game-changer. It's not like today when a new COD comes out and is hyped to all hell and it's practically the same game as the one before it. FF was an innovative masterpiece.

#46 Posted by Heirren (17713 posts) -

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Emerald_Warrior

But all the hype was warranted. FF7 really broke a lot of new ground in cinematic storytelling and CGI animation. It was definetly a game-changer. It's not like today when a new COD comes out and is hyped to all hell and it's practically the same game as the one before it. FF was an innovative masterpiece.

Cinematics were around. What was new was how it would gracefully shift from in game to cutscenes, most of the time. If you call it a game changer, then it goes along with whati often say on this forum, thatFF7 was the start of the downfall of the series and many other RPGs. And like I said earlier, contact and directional controls just felt really sloppy. There are times where you may be pushing UP to walk to the next screen, and then all of a sudden there is a poor angle change and in order to move the character in a continuous direction you've got to change dpad direction. IMO that is poor game design.
#47 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (677 posts) -

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Emerald_Warrior

But all the hype was warranted. FF7 really broke a lot of new ground in cinematic storytelling and CGI animation. It was definetly a game-changer. It's not like today when a new COD comes out and is hyped to all hell and it's practically the same game as the one before it. FF was an innovative masterpiece.

There was as much ground breaking in FF7 as there was with M64 and that was breaking a small rock, the gorund has no cracks in it. Aso way too much praise on the CGI, way too much. People do that constantly. Also what did FF7 Inovate? Final Fantasy 6? Yeah then ok. that's about as far as innovation is concerned.
#48 Posted by bowserjr123 (1624 posts) -

I didn't have an original Playstation back in the day so I've recently started getting into some of its games, so I can't make a fair comparison (I've only played Castlevania SotN and started Final Fantasy IX).

Looking back on the N64, its library was more quality than quantity and it seems like the PS had a lot more AAA titles. While Mario 64 was my favorite game on the N64, it's definitely shouldn't be the only reason why it's better than the PS and enough to buy the system for that one game.

#49 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"]Final Fantasy was on a hype train. I remember, because I was on it. IMO it doesn't feel like much of a game at all, and shouldn't really be compared to Mario 64 in the first place. ...Mario 64 was a revolution though. I remember Toys R Us--the premier game retailer back them--having massive floor space dedicated to e game, which would fill with people constantly. Dj-Dampleaf

But all the hype was warranted. FF7 really broke a lot of new ground in cinematic storytelling and CGI animation. It was definetly a game-changer. It's not like today when a new COD comes out and is hyped to all hell and it's practically the same game as the one before it. FF was an innovative masterpiece.

There was as much ground breaking in FF7 as there was with M64 and that was breaking a small rock, the gorund has no cracks in it. Aso way too much praise on the CGI, way too much. People do that constantly. Also what did FF7 Inovate? Final Fantasy 6? Yeah then ok. that's about as far as innovation is concerned.

It's as if you guys weren't around back then. The significance and impact BOTH games had was HUGE!

FFVII for just the sheer scope of and size of the story and the game. And you never saw visuals like that before FFVII. Yeah, they were around. But this game really proved that video games can be just as awe-inspiring as your favorite movie when the story and the cutscenes are done as well as Squaresoft did on that game. Chrono Trigger and FFVI could be argued to have just as good of a story. But they didn't have the high-quality cutscenes, cd-quality music, and the portrayal of emotion conveyed on the screen as FFVII did. There's a reason that it sold so many copies and it's STILL praised to this day, and many games after FFVII copied it's formula.

Mario 64 is just as innovative because it blew the doors wide open for open-world 3D games. They were around before Mario 64, but they were either not quite fully realized or 3D in more confined spaces or areas, like the original GTA games or Tomb Raider. Mario 64 showed the public what a fully-realized 3D world could be, and how much fun it could be to explore that world. And it, like FFVII, sold a ton of copies, has been copied by other games, and is still praised to this day.

#50 Posted by Heirren (17713 posts) -

[QUOTE="Dj-Dampleaf"][QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

But all the hype was warranted. FF7 really broke a lot of new ground in cinematic storytelling and CGI animation. It was definetly a game-changer. It's not like today when a new COD comes out and is hyped to all hell and it's practically the same game as the one before it. FF was an innovative masterpiece.

Emerald_Warrior

There was as much ground breaking in FF7 as there was with M64 and that was breaking a small rock, the gorund has no cracks in it. Aso way too much praise on the CGI, way too much. People do that constantly. Also what did FF7 Inovate? Final Fantasy 6? Yeah then ok. that's about as far as innovation is concerned.

It's as if you guys weren't around back then. The significance and impact BOTH games had was HUGE!

FFVII for just the sheer scope of and size of the story and the game. And you never saw visuals like that before FFVII. Yeah, they were around. But this game really proved that video games can be just as awe-inspiring as your favorite movie when the story and the cutscenes are done as well as Squaresoft did on that game. Chrono Trigger and FFVI could be argued to have just as good of a story. But they didn't have the high-quality cutscenes, cd-quality music, and the portrayal of emotion conveyed on the screen as FFVII did. There's a reason that it sold so many copies and it's STILL praised to this day, and many games after FFVII copied it's formula.

Mario 64 is just as innovative because it blew the doors wide open for open-world 3D games. They were around before Mario 64, but they were either not quite fully realized or 3D in more confined spaces or areas, like the original GTA games or Tomb Raider. Mario 64 showed the public what a fully-realized 3D world could be, and how much fun it could be to explore that world. And it, like FFVII, sold a ton of copies, has been copied by other games, and is still praised to this day.

I disagree. Metal Gear was the cinematic storytelling impact game, and NOT FF7. The hype around FF7 was its length and cgi, which were mostly the sole aspect of the game shown in ads. The length aspect of a game was something that started around the time Chrono Trigger was released. Mario 64 took the gaming world by storm. FF7 was simply a Zelda calibur release for psx, in the sense that everybody knew it was coming, and we're excited to see what the experience on new hardware would bring.