64 vs sunshine vs galaxy

Oddly enough I've only played Sunshine.

SO...Sunshine for me I guess.

sunshine was too mundane.

galaxy was too linear.

64 was just right.

jack_michael

[QUOTE="_Pinbot_"]HURF DURF I NEVER PLAYED THE GAME DERPShinobishyguy

translanted it for the public

lolz..

i mean you can say that it was alittle to linear for your liking, or that the camera angles were to zoomed out or far away or that the hub was a little messy, and could have been done better, but thats pretty much it, those are like the only complaints you are aloud to have against galaxy without being a total fanboy

[QUOTE="jack_michael"]

sunshine was too mundane.

galaxy was too linear.

64 was just right.

VendettaRed07

This just in...so where the old 2d mario's. They were just trying to capture that old school feel.

Fact of the matter is if galaxy was released in 64's place people would be hailing that as the better game.

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"][QUOTE="jack_michael"]

sunshine was too mundane.

galaxy was too linear.

64 was just right.

Shinobishyguy

This just in...so where the old 2d mario's.

Fact of the matter is if galaxy was released in 64's place people would be hailing that as the better game.

yea thats true, but i just wish that it was more like 64 or sunshine how you had more of an ability to explore the worlds, i felt like in galaxy, you were always hoping on one small planet to another planet, which is fine, cause you would once in a while get the bigger levels yeah, but i just liked it in sm64 or sunshine that you could explore and run around the levels a little more without feeling forced down a pathway

SMG > SM64 > SMS

All fantastic games, though.

BioShockOwnz

sunshine wasn't that great, alright but not that great

SMG > SM64 > SMS

All fantastic games, though.

BioShockOwnz

Mario Galaxy is definately my favourite of the 3-d Marios. It has the best level designs of the bunch and I have never encountered a camera flaw once. I thought that was impossible for 3D platformers! It's the most flawless game experience I have ever played. I do preffer both Pikmin games and Smash Brawl over it, but Galaxy has the least amount of flaws. Currently I'm doing coin runs in Galaxy. I can't stop playing it after getting all 242 stars!

P.S. since others are doing it, my favourite 2D "Mario" is Yoshi's Island. Excellent level design and high level of dificulty especially trying to get 100 points in each level. I'm still trying to 100% this game to this day!

smg, while 64 was sweet i don't see my self playing it again, which in smg's case i do.polishkid99

unlocking Luigi > yoshi giving you 1up's

64.

The game was absolutely stunning for its time, and I have had great fun playing it again and again and again.

1. 64

2. Galaxy

3. Sunshine (such a dissapointment IMO)

Right now 64 > SMG > Sunshine.

I have a feeling that after repeated playthroughs it will be SMG > 64 > Sunshine.

If you choose 64 over SMG, you either:

A) have never played Galaxy

B) Hate the Wii and all of its games

'Nuff said.

If you choose SMG over 64, you either:

A) have never played 64

B) Hate the 64 and all of its games

'Nuff said.

princeofshapeir

Go figure really.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

If you choose SMG over 64, you either:

A) have never played 64

B) Hate the 64 and all of its games

'Nuff said.

skrat_01

Go figure really.

Having beaten 64 to death and done everything that's possible in the game, then doing the same for Galaxy, I can assure you that Galaxy is much better.

Why? Because Nintendo didn't wuss out this time and let's you play as Weegee.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

If you choose SMG over 64, you either:

A) have never played 64

B) Hate the 64 and all of its games

'Nuff said.

princeofshapeir

Go figure really.

Having beaten 64 to death and done everything that's possible in the game, then doing the same for Galaxy, I can assure you that Galaxy is much better.

Why? Because Nintendo didn't wuss out this time and let's you play as Weegee.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

If you choose SMG over 64, you either:

A) have never played 64

B) Hate the 64 and all of its games

'Nuff said.

skrat_01

Go figure really.

Having beaten 64 to death and done everything that's possible in the game, then doing the same for Galaxy, I can assure you that Galaxy is much better.

Why? Because Nintendo didn't wuss out this time and let's you play as Weegee.

Well, if you play 64 after playing Galaxy you will agree 64 sucks in comparison.

That's how I judge which is better: based on how they play today, not way back when, when making a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.

Well, if you play 64 after playing Galaxy you will agree 64 sucks in comparison.

That's how I judge which is better: based on how they play today, not way back when, when making a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.

princeofshapeir

2. And I judge what is a better game, and factor in the time of its release and development, which obviously impacted on the game, and those that stood alongside it at the time.

3. If you cant comprehend why the game was groundbreaking for its time, nor how much influence it had, mockingly thinking during its period "a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.", then clearly you dont appreciate how progressive and innovative the game was.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

If you choose SMG over 64, you either:

A) have never played 64

B) Hate the 64 and all of its games

'Nuff said.

princeofshapeir

Go figure really.

Having beaten 64 to death and done everything that's possible in the game, then doing the same for Galaxy, I can assure you that Galaxy is much better.

Why? Because Nintendo didn't wuss out this time and let's you play as Weegee.

Well, if you play 64 after playing Galaxy you will agree 64 sucks in comparison.

That's how I judge which is better: based on how they play today, not way back when, when making a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.

And hopping from planet to planet is? Sonic Adventures 2 levels Meteor Heard & Mad Space say no.

And hopping from planet to planet is? Sonic Adventures 2 levels Meteor Heard & Mad Space say no.

InfinityMugen

I didn't call Galaxy revolutionary. It's just a damn good game and in terms of overall greatness, it beats M64.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

Well, if you play 64 after playing Galaxy you will agree 64 sucks in comparison.

That's how I judge which is better: based on how they play today, not way back when, when making a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.

skrat_01

2. And I judge what is a better game, and factor in the time of its release and development, which obviously impacted on the game, and those that stood alongside it at the time.

3. If you cant comprehend why the game was groundbreaking for its time, nor how much influence it had, mockingly thinking during its period "a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.", then clearly you dont appreciate how progressive and innovative the game was.

I could care less about what people thought about back then about a game. Standards are different now and times change. Taking your time machine back to the past to judge a game is stupid and pointless.

It's understandable that M64 was a revolution back then, and I understand why: It was one of the earliest 3D games to be so massive, well-designed, and flat-out fun. However, Galaxy improves on M64 in every way possible. I don't care if it's revolutionary or not: It's just a better game overall.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

Well, if you play 64 after playing Galaxy you will agree 64 sucks in comparison.

That's how I judge which is better: based on how they play today, not way back when, when making a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.

princeofshapeir

2. And I judge what is a better game, and factor in the time of its release and development, which obviously impacted on the game, and those that stood alongside it at the time.

3. If you cant comprehend why the game was groundbreaking for its time, nor how much influence it had, mockingly thinking during its period "a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.", then clearly you dont appreciate how progressive and innovative the game was.

I could care less about what people thought about back then about a game. Standards are different now and times change. Taking your time machine back to the past to judge a game is stupid and pointless.

It's understandable that M64 was a revolution back then, and I understand why: It was one of the earliest 3D games to be so massive, well-designed, and flat-out fun. However, Galaxy improves on M64 in every way possible. I don't care if it's revolutionary or not: It's just a better game overall.

When you are looking at a game that is over 12 years old, to one that isnt even a year old obviously you are going to take age into account :|

Galaxy

SMG>>>SM64>>>>>>Sunshine

To be honest though I never spent much time with Sunshine. It was one of the games in the hospital I was in for a week so I spent some time with it. I still play SM64 today (the DS version) and SMG is my most favorite game this generation.

Super Mario Galaxy is my personal favorite

Galaxy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>64 > sunshine
Super Mario 64 is garbage as far as I'm concerned. Wasn't great then, still isn't great now.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]1. Disagree M64 still is a good game even by nowadays standards. Evenso that the game was ported for the DS's launch..... and it still held up well....

2. And I judge what is a better game, and factor in the time of its release and development, which obviously impacted on the game, and those that stood alongside it at the time.

3. If you cant comprehend why the game was groundbreaking for its time, nor how much influence it had, mockingly thinking during its period "a game where you jump around castle paintings qualifies as groundbreaking.", then clearly you dont appreciate how progressive and innovative the game was.

skrat_01

I could care less about what people thought about back then about a game. Standards are different now and times change. Taking your time machine back to the past to judge a game is stupid and pointless.

It's understandable that M64 was a revolution back then, and I understand why: It was one of the earliest 3D games to be so massive, well-designed, and flat-out fun. However, Galaxy improves on M64 in every way possible. I don't care if it's revolutionary or not: It's just a better game overall.

When you are looking at a game that is over 12 years old, to one that isnt even a year old obviously you are going to take age into account :|

I don't :| We are comparing which game is better, not which one was better for its time. (even though I'd still give it to galaxy) 64 doesn't get a crouch because its older, its newer than the 2D games but still greatly inferior sowhy should age matter? Platformers is one of the only genres where age does not affect quality.

All three were great games (yes, even Sunshine). After a few playthroughs of each, I think that Galaxy was an all around better game than the other two, though I don't know if it will have the lasting impact that Mario 64 had. Sunshine wasn't as good, but it was still a great, underrated game.

SUNS SHEINENNNNNSon_of_Some

lolwut