A little of both. You definitely had some points that I felt were valid but disagreed with, some that I felt were valid and definitely agreed with, and some that just made me scratch me head in confusion. I also think your approach to this playthrough might have skewed your criticism of things a bit - going into it with the mentality of "I'm going to 100% complete this!" is not really how most people played this game and I don't really think it's how you're really intended to by the developers, either. There's a reason you don't need all 120 stars to fight the final bowser battle and beat the game. To me, the extra stars are there for those that really enjoyed their time playing, and for players to have choices and options as to how they chart their own personal course through the game. By approaching it the way you did, I feel like you completely overlooked this, in my opinion, pretty solid piece of game design. You don't like tick tock clock? That's fine, you don't have to do it. There are only 7 stars there! Dire Dire Docks sucks ass? You only need to be there for one star to fight bowser 2. And so on. I'm not saying this as a refutation of your criticisms of the stages you don't like, but like I said earlier, I do think that way you chose to engage this playthrough deviated pretty hard from what most people experienced and you may have overlooked things about the game because of it. That said, I don't think your approach to the playthrough and review were "wrong" necessarily - if a player decides that they WANT to engage with the game that much, it not being designed around it isn't an excuse to be met with bullshit that ruins the enjoyment of the game, and there is a fair bit of that in 64, I can't even lie. You should be rewarded for wanting to engage more with the game, not feel like you're bashing your head against a wall (I definitely remember that feeling when I played Rainbow Ride as a kid 😂). ALSO, while I have no problem with the use of save states in general, using them for a good faith review is not the best idea in my opinion. I get why you did, and I don't blame you, but in the same way that your approach to the run skewed your criticism, your use of savestates did as well, just in the opposite direction. You should have played that shit raw, I wanted to hear a 6 minute long rant about how absolutely fucking stupid and outdated the extra lives system is 😂 Anyways, thanks for sharing your opinion, genuinely. The fandom and cultural zeitgeist around this game are massive, so I can imagine that this review took some balls to upload. Cheers, mah dude. 👋
@@DarkAuraLord thanks for not just saying im wrong and leaving a hate comment like others 😭. Im a firm believer in playing a game the way that’s most fun to you so, im not judging anyone who does or doesn’t like this game
As someone who semi-professionally reviews games, I think your video touches on a major problem of reviewing older games (which, I think, ultimately became a problem in the video itself). How does someone actually review such a game? About a decade ago, I was seriously mulling over what is an appropriate and fair way to review such games. What I ended up concluding was that it was only fair to review games in the context of the time in which it was released. The reason for that is because comparing something like this to modern day games isn't really fair on a number of levels. For instance, the game mechanics. Can you really compare this game to something that was released in 2024? Not really. There was a lot of experimentation and refinement in overall game design that had since happened that would make the mechanics better. Compared to a modern game, the mechanics of this game is kind of bad. However, taken into context of what was around at the time, this was actually a very good game on that front. If you thought the camera system in this game is bad, Silent Hill was infinitely worse because you simply couldn't see where you were going half the time. Also, you mentioned that you were playing on an emulator as well. For that, you have to take into consideration what bugs are introduced because of the emulator, not necessarily the game itself. A lot of lag can be introduced by the emulator. What's more, if you are running an emulator, if you are using a keyboard, you lose a lot of the flexibility of what the controller offered as well. For instance, slow walking becomes much more difficult when it is dead simple on a controller. I get having to use an emulator, but you have to also consider the friction points in the experience introduced by the emulator that is actually no fault to the game itself. On original hardware, I've only ever experienced lag on the game Perfect Dark (when there were lots of enemies on screen). When I reviewed this game, I ended up giving it an 88%. I felt like it had a great difficulty curve and you can expect to experience harder game mechanics as you get to the end levels. The camera, at times, wasn't perfect, but I really didn't have any other complaints in the game itself.
"On original hardware, I've only ever experienced lag on the game Perfect Dark" Straight cap. Maybe you only REMEMBER lag in perfect dark, but there are LITERALLY speedrunning strats that change the way the camera is oriented to reduce lag, and they run the game on the OG hardware. Dire Dire Docks and a few other stages ABSOLUTELY lag like fuck on original hardware. Emulators usually run BETTER, actually, which is why they were eventually made into their own separate category on the speedrun leader boards - Faster Load Times, and less lag made competition between emulator and N64 runs imbalanced.
@@DarkAuraLord When you are speedrunning, you are literally counting frames saved. At that point, even the tiniest slowdown that can happen that normal players at the time wouldn't notice then matters. At this point, we're trying to argue that Super Mario 64 is sluggish because it doesn't run at 120 frames per second. At that point, I have to issue a reminder that we're talking about a game released in 1996, not 2021. 3D gaming was in the earliest stages of development at the time.
DarkAuraLord is correct. Areas such as Whomp's Fortress (when the tower is spawned) or the submarine area in Dire Dire Docks consistently cause lag when played on an actual N64. Depending on the emulator, you might very well get a less laggy experience than on original hardware.
I don't know what you were expecting from that game, but 5/10 is kinda unfair to be honest, even when comparing it to todays 3d platformer game standards (since mario 64 basically defined those standards)
It's honestly really impressive how the game evolved, from a n64 cartdrige to a digital computer rom, you get mario 64 ex-coop, mario 64 plus, render96. Etc. Top of all of that, beta textures were found, original mario voice clips, motos. Etc. And the lost render of luigi. It's really impressive. This is what makes the game Super Mario 64
This is without an question the best Super Mario 64 review I've seen ( next to Somecallmejohnny ). And you sum it up perfectly on my thoughts of the game. It was an good game from it's time and I understand how important it is. But as of today's standard, it's not that amazing and it ain't the best Mario game as alot of people say it is.
There were other 3D games out at the time and this was one of the only ones (if not only one) that was even playable, so of course it worked. Was it perfect? No, but it was a big step in the right direction to show these kind of games could work.
Super Mario 64: Good Super mario sunshine: better Super mario galaxy 1 and 2: Great Super Mario Odyssey: Best Odyssey has by far the best controls and camera.
I think some of your criticisms are valid. The game has a lot of jank, and some design decisions are... questionable. However even with these flaws I feel the game shines above a lot of modern games and is infinity repayable by it's own merits. I think if you gave the game a bit more time and did not use save states, you would have had a much better time. This is coming from a tik tok brained gen z: save states ruin games. It falls under the slippery slope of cheating. When I went back and played Super Mario Bros. on the nes, I thought it was the worst game ever and used save states. Only after I went back to it again years later without using save states, was I able to fully appreciate the game in it's entirety. I now beat the game at least twice a year. Also on a side note, the reason the later stages were so jank and hard is because they ran out of time, and had to rush the last stages together in a couple of months with minimal playtesting. It is generally agreed upon that the earlier courses in the game are better.
It's certainly not the best Mario game and I do think there are better games than Mario 64. But I can say it is important. Without it, video games wouldn't be the way Mario 64 handles it. Same with Super Mario Bros. or Pac-Man or Donkey Kong 1981.
Never understood judging a game based on the time it was released. "It was innovational and the best they had back then" ok but its still a pain to control today, and saying the graphics and gameplay were good 30 years ago sort of invalidates the 30 years of improvement in those things
great video I can relate as well on not beating the game, I actually never played SM64 I played the DS version, it's a little different, but yeah I don't think I made it past 20% of the game I was really young, I also absolutely HATED the ice slide level with the penguin, I couldn't control mario loool 2/10 for me
I played this game for the first time a few years ago, and I literally hated it. Especially the controls. In basically any other Mario game I look forward to platforming challenges. In this game, it made me wanna quit. Mario controls like he’s on ice and doing anything precise is so annoying.
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Do you agree with my feelings about Super Mario 64? Let's have a friendly conversation in the comments below! 😄❤
.... No.... just.... no.....
This video honestly made me believe you don't know how to review games. But, hey, you do you.
@@DETahaX …..No……just…….no…….
@@JacobCruise absolutely-... absolutely not.
A little of both. You definitely had some points that I felt were valid but disagreed with, some that I felt were valid and definitely agreed with, and some that just made me scratch me head in confusion.
I also think your approach to this playthrough might have skewed your criticism of things a bit - going into it with the mentality of "I'm going to 100% complete this!" is not really how most people played this game and I don't really think it's how you're really intended to by the developers, either. There's a reason you don't need all 120 stars to fight the final bowser battle and beat the game.
To me, the extra stars are there for those that really enjoyed their time playing, and for players to have choices and options as to how they chart their own personal course through the game. By approaching it the way you did, I feel like you completely overlooked this, in my opinion, pretty solid piece of game design. You don't like tick tock clock? That's fine, you don't have to do it. There are only 7 stars there! Dire Dire Docks sucks ass? You only need to be there for one star to fight bowser 2. And so on. I'm not saying this as a refutation of your criticisms of the stages you don't like, but like I said earlier, I do think that way you chose to engage this playthrough deviated pretty hard from what most people experienced and you may have overlooked things about the game because of it.
That said, I don't think your approach to the playthrough and review were "wrong" necessarily - if a player decides that they WANT to engage with the game that much, it not being designed around it isn't an excuse to be met with bullshit that ruins the enjoyment of the game, and there is a fair bit of that in 64, I can't even lie. You should be rewarded for wanting to engage more with the game, not feel like you're bashing your head against a wall (I definitely remember that feeling when I played Rainbow Ride as a kid 😂).
ALSO, while I have no problem with the use of save states in general, using them for a good faith review is not the best idea in my opinion. I get why you did, and I don't blame you, but in the same way that your approach to the run skewed your criticism, your use of savestates did as well, just in the opposite direction. You should have played that shit raw, I wanted to hear a 6 minute long rant about how absolutely fucking stupid and outdated the extra lives system is 😂
Anyways, thanks for sharing your opinion, genuinely. The fandom and cultural zeitgeist around this game are massive, so I can imagine that this review took some balls to upload. Cheers, mah dude. 👋
@@DarkAuraLord thanks for not just saying im wrong and leaving a hate comment like others 😭. Im a firm believer in playing a game the way that’s most fun to you so, im not judging anyone who does or doesn’t like this game
As someone who semi-professionally reviews games, I think your video touches on a major problem of reviewing older games (which, I think, ultimately became a problem in the video itself). How does someone actually review such a game? About a decade ago, I was seriously mulling over what is an appropriate and fair way to review such games. What I ended up concluding was that it was only fair to review games in the context of the time in which it was released.
The reason for that is because comparing something like this to modern day games isn't really fair on a number of levels. For instance, the game mechanics. Can you really compare this game to something that was released in 2024? Not really. There was a lot of experimentation and refinement in overall game design that had since happened that would make the mechanics better. Compared to a modern game, the mechanics of this game is kind of bad. However, taken into context of what was around at the time, this was actually a very good game on that front. If you thought the camera system in this game is bad, Silent Hill was infinitely worse because you simply couldn't see where you were going half the time.
Also, you mentioned that you were playing on an emulator as well. For that, you have to take into consideration what bugs are introduced because of the emulator, not necessarily the game itself. A lot of lag can be introduced by the emulator. What's more, if you are running an emulator, if you are using a keyboard, you lose a lot of the flexibility of what the controller offered as well. For instance, slow walking becomes much more difficult when it is dead simple on a controller. I get having to use an emulator, but you have to also consider the friction points in the experience introduced by the emulator that is actually no fault to the game itself. On original hardware, I've only ever experienced lag on the game Perfect Dark (when there were lots of enemies on screen).
When I reviewed this game, I ended up giving it an 88%. I felt like it had a great difficulty curve and you can expect to experience harder game mechanics as you get to the end levels. The camera, at times, wasn't perfect, but I really didn't have any other complaints in the game itself.
@@YourEraGamer It was definitely hard to review. I just decided to be honest and let people think what they think
"On original hardware, I've only ever experienced lag on the game Perfect Dark"
Straight cap. Maybe you only REMEMBER lag in perfect dark, but there are LITERALLY speedrunning strats that change the way the camera is oriented to reduce lag, and they run the game on the OG hardware. Dire Dire Docks and a few other stages ABSOLUTELY lag like fuck on original hardware. Emulators usually run BETTER, actually, which is why they were eventually made into their own separate category on the speedrun leader boards - Faster Load Times, and less lag made competition between emulator and N64 runs imbalanced.
@@DarkAuraLord When you are speedrunning, you are literally counting frames saved. At that point, even the tiniest slowdown that can happen that normal players at the time wouldn't notice then matters. At this point, we're trying to argue that Super Mario 64 is sluggish because it doesn't run at 120 frames per second. At that point, I have to issue a reminder that we're talking about a game released in 1996, not 2021. 3D gaming was in the earliest stages of development at the time.
@@YourEraGamer No, I'm arguing that the areas in the game are sluggish because they don't even run at the native 24 FPS that the n64 runs on. Lmao.
DarkAuraLord is correct. Areas such as Whomp's Fortress (when the tower is spawned) or the submarine area in Dire Dire Docks consistently cause lag when played on an actual N64. Depending on the emulator, you might very well get a less laggy experience than on original hardware.
I don't know what you were expecting from that game, but 5/10 is kinda unfair to be honest, even when comparing it to todays 3d platformer game standards (since mario 64 basically defined those standards)
@@Pedroco1585 Just being honest
I mean. It's certainly no 10/10, 9/10 or even an 8/10. But an 7/10 would be fair.
It's honestly really impressive how the game evolved, from a n64 cartdrige to a digital computer rom, you get mario 64 ex-coop, mario 64 plus, render96. Etc. Top of all of that, beta textures were found, original mario voice clips, motos. Etc. And the lost render of luigi. It's really impressive.
This is what makes the game Super Mario 64
I played it recently and still totally love it
@@sHART1780 Glad to hear !
YES no need for this video
watch it
This is without an question the best Super Mario 64 review I've seen ( next to Somecallmejohnny ). And you sum it up perfectly on my thoughts of the game. It was an good game from it's time and I understand how important it is. But as of today's standard, it's not that amazing and it ain't the best Mario game as alot of people say it is.
WOW! Thank you! This comment means so much to me :)
There were other 3D games out at the time and this was one of the only ones (if not only one) that was even playable, so of course it worked.
Was it perfect? No, but it was a big step in the right direction to show these kind of games could work.
100%
Idk how sm64 cramps out so much good gameplay in a dense level
Super Mario 64: Good
Super mario sunshine: better
Super mario galaxy 1 and 2: Great
Super Mario Odyssey: Best
Odyssey has by far the best controls and camera.
I think some of your criticisms are valid. The game has a lot of jank, and some design decisions are... questionable. However even with these flaws I feel the game shines above a lot of modern games and is infinity repayable by it's own merits. I think if you gave the game a bit more time and did not use save states, you would have had a much better time. This is coming from a tik tok brained gen z: save states ruin games. It falls under the slippery slope of cheating. When I went back and played Super Mario Bros. on the nes, I thought it was the worst game ever and used save states. Only after I went back to it again years later without using save states, was I able to fully appreciate the game in it's entirety. I now beat the game at least twice a year.
Also on a side note, the reason the later stages were so jank and hard is because they ran out of time, and had to rush the last stages together in a couple of months with minimal playtesting. It is generally agreed upon that the earlier courses in the game are better.
It's certainly not the best Mario game and I do think there are better games than Mario 64. But I can say it is important. Without it, video games wouldn't be the way Mario 64 handles it. Same with Super Mario Bros. or Pac-Man or Donkey Kong 1981.
Never understood judging a game based on the time it was released. "It was innovational and the best they had back then" ok but its still a pain to control today, and saying the graphics and gameplay were good 30 years ago sort of invalidates the 30 years of improvement in those things
@@XD-zi2sd Tru
Normal Jacob? Normal Jacob.
im normal
@@JacobCruise not livestream jacob...
great video
I can relate as well on not beating the game, I actually never played SM64 I played the DS version, it's a little different, but yeah I don't think I made it past 20% of the game I was really young, I also absolutely HATED the ice slide level with the penguin, I couldn't control mario loool 2/10 for me
Back then it was amazing. Now not so much because of the camera controls..
yeahhh
And the level designs gets worst once you go on bottom and top of Peach's Castle.
I played this game for the first time a few years ago, and I literally hated it. Especially the controls. In basically any other Mario game I look forward to platforming challenges. In this game, it made me wanna quit. Mario controls like he’s on ice and doing anything precise is so annoying.
You're garbage.
WHAT you just skipped the best one: Jolly Roger Bay??!! Edit: nope you didn’t, good! It’s my fav!!
@@brittany16950 LOL yeah i love Jolly Roger bay
The answer is yes it was good
Moving on. (Didnt watch)
@@SarahConnor618 watch the vid i worked hard on it :(
Soooo ya don’t like it??!! Gen Z. Can’t please ‘em. Back in our day, it’s what we had!! And we were thankful!!
Did you do a review of DK country? They’re gonna remake the game for the switch so I think it deserves a review.
@@jokerpilled2535 I haven’t. they’re not remaking the game just remastering it
@@JacobCruise oh thanks for clarifying
Great video, like always
thank you :)