Polioliolio
Member
Shadows of the Empire is better then Mario 64.
What? WHAT??
Not adding to the list because I know you can't possibly believe that.
Shadows of the Empire is better then Mario 64.
What? WHAT??
Not adding to the list because I know you can't possibly believe that.
What a weird idea for a thread.
But it gives me the chance of saying this: The PS1 Crash games are NOT better than Mario 64.
Super Mario Galaxy is not better than Super Mario 64
My disagreements, I am ONLY posting disagreements to games that I personally have played and that have not been challenged before (because this would be redundant).
Dark Souls is a lot of busywork, it's controls are far less immediate and its level design is mechanically way less interesting than Mario 64's. I think Dark Souls is a game that plays considerably worse than Mario 64 on all levels. Well, maybe not in regards of camera control.
I only know Resident Evil 4 out of those: Resident Evil 4 has a very uneven difficulty curve and quite a few very boring scenes. It also plays way clumsier than Mario 64.
Advance Wars has elements of chance, therefore is automatically inferior to Mario 64.
Super Paper Mario has super-redundant elements like this "walking on a treadmill" stuff. There are numerous scenes that are just there for a joke and have no gameplay value. Therefore it is considerably weaker than SM64.
Weak disagreement here: SMB3 and SM64 are on the same level of quality. SM64 is more innovative, but SMB3 puts every other game previously released to shame, so even in these secondary criterions it's impossible to give the edge to one of them. Since the thread is asking for something that is better than Mario 64, I have to refute SMB3.
I have only played God of War 1 & 2, but both are way weaker than Mario 64. The fights are mindless, the puzzles are too simplistic and there is too much in the game that is there purely for presentational reasons without any gameplay value, that is even disrupting gameplay.
GTA5 is unfocussed, has too much mechanical fluff and is overall an abysmal game, so certainly not better than Super Mario 64.
Catherine has too much fluff in between the puzzles, the controls are clunkier than SM64's and it is not varied enough in its challenges.
J&D1 has very floaty controls, and some real stinker levels, particularly that forest area.
Knack is just absolute trash, which SM64 is not, so it is certainly a lot weaker.
Streets of Rage 2 bores me to death, not better than Mario 64.
Galaxies have already been challenged, I have already challenged SMB3 (and already said that it itself is better than 1 & 2). Super Mario Land is way too short, too easy and too stiff, Super Mario Land 2 is quite imaginative, but it has worse controls and a very uneven difficulty curve. Sunshine has already been challenged. Super Mario World is a similar case to Super Mario Bros. 3: As good as Super Mario 64, but not better. I won't challenge Yoshi's Island though (so I challenge all the games in the list other than Yoshi).
Spyro is utter junk. The developers had absolutely no idea how to use collectibles to structure a game and instead just dumped them into the game. The overall level design is just plain boring and the controls are significantly worse than Mario 64's.
I have already challenged it above.
Bayonetta is a great character action game, but it has a lot of empty areas and puts too much emphasis on stylish sequences over pure gameplay. Not better than Mario 64.
Metroid Prime is a similar case to SMB3: It does the same thing as Mario 64, successfully bring its series to the third dimension. It is focused and has amazing gameplay and level design. So does Mario 64 though and I see no difference in quality here. So I challenge Metroid Prime because it is not better than Mario 64, but just on the same level.
In TTYD you had to walk around the whole game world in the end to collect some super dumb collectibles. There was no challenge to it, just busywork. Busywork is always inexcusable. Therefore TTYD certainly is not better than SM64.
Tetris has elements of chance to it, so it cannot be better than SM64.
There are no better games than Super Mario 64.
Super Mario Galaxy is a better game than Super Mario 64.
Not denying how influential the game was, but several platformers from that same era were already much better games.
I oppose this statement with every fibre of my being.The list will take a long time. First we can scratch off every 2D and 2.5D platformer game ever made because 3D outperforms 2D.
Resident Evil 4, Red Dead Redemption, The last of Us....
What am I saying, there are hundreds of games better than Mario 64.
Banjo Kazooie - badly implemented item use by tying the movepool to haphazardly scattered doodads which makes the stage feel less like a fun race track and more like a constant grind.The character's default speed is slow and none of the movements feel as exhilarating as SM64's. Banjo feels like a dead animal for at least 50% of the time you control him.
If Banjo Kazooie is "badly implemented item use" then I'm scared to see what you think of Donkey Kong 64 lol
DK64 is still a good game tho
Conker > DK64.
Nailed it in one!Super Mario Galaxy is a better game than Super Mario 64.
Bubble Bobble
DOOM
Dune 2
Jet Set Radio Future
Klonoa
La Mulana
The Last of Us
Monkey Island 2
Portal 2
Quake
Sonic 2
Super Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros. 2
Super Mario Land 3: Wario Land
Super Smash Bros.
Tomba
Super Mario Galaxy 2, though - is better than Mario 64.
Banjo was poor in collecting items and moves. The item collecting aspect was plentiful, but the collecting was awful. The game makes you feel like shit when you're not using items to move fast. That game makes you truly appreciate Super Mario Sunshine's ability to refill the FLUDD through water, water barrels, sprinklers, etc. All of that is done without using an anti-immersive number gauge for fuel.
Super Mario Galaxy is a better game than Super Mario 64.
I only know Resident Evil 4 out of those: Resident Evil 4 has a very uneven difficulty curve and quite a few very boring scenes. It also plays way clumsier than Mario 64.
J&D1 has very floaty controls, and some real stinker levels, particularly that forest area.
The list will take a long time. First we can scratch off every 2D and 2.5D platformer game ever made because 3D outperforms 2D.
I dispute this one. Xenoblade Chronicles loses steam at the halfway point, with the combat becoming more shallow as the enemies become less diverse and the player has largely collected the full cast and gained access to pretty much all the battle mechanics. The environments become noticeably more linear and the plot fails to build off the developments at the midpoint in a satisfactory way. All in all, the game slowly becomes a chore as you approach the end.Xenoblade Chronicles (the Wii original one, not X)
Yes. Kazooie is more charming than FLUDD, but FLUDD has a way better movepool (i.e. water slide).Did you even use Kazooie while playing that game at all? She's essentially Banjo's FLUDD lol.
Yeah, Banjo by himself is slow as shit, but Kazooie makes moving around so much faster. Whenever I play the game, I basically just use the talon trot move like 90% of the time and it really helps with moving around quicker. Plus jumping while using the talon trot at the same time really helps as well (especially in speed runs and stuff like that).
Not every character has to be as fast as Mario. In fact, I'm pretty sure the talon trop makes Banjo and Kazooie run about the same speed as Mario does in 64, and when you use the running shoes, they run even faster than Mario does. So I'm not sure what you're complaining exactly. Did you want the whole game to be as fast as when you have the running shoes on? That'd be pretty bad and would make the game nearly impossible to play!
J&D 1 has vastly more believable and immersive environments than SM64 and far more aerial mobility and fluidity in the controls. SM64 only beats it in the music department and that is thanks to Koji Kondo not the game designers.
3D worlds are more immersive than 2D worlds. What do you want to argue about on that? You could easily argue that SM64 has worse platforming designed levels than the 2D Mario games, but the 3D itself pushes it over-the-top in terms of max pleasure felt.Vader1 said:Is "reasoning" even a thing anymore?
Pretty much. I'll give it credit for being the first proper 3D platformer. I'm sure it had the wow factor when it releases. But the game really isn't great. There were far better platformers even in its own generation, and there's a ton more now. There were also a ton of platformers way better than Mario 64 before Mario 64. They just weren't in 3D.
I wouldn't even give it credit for that, as Jumping Flash! came out the year before and featured a far more interesting triple jump mechanic along with expansive platforming layouts that take full advantage of this ability, and does a better job than Mario 64 of integrating combat elements into the platforming gameplay during these expansive levels as well (although there's no getting around the fact that the fps dungeon levels that restrict your jumping are just plain bad.) I would even argue that Jumping Flash! 1 and 2 hold up better than Super Mario 64.
Resident Evil 4 is a better game than Super Mario 64.
these are the only ones i might agree with so farQuake 1 is better than Super Mario 64.
Nope. And if you were gonna even try that argument you should have said SMG2.Super Mario Galaxy is a better game than Super Mario 64.
Nope. And if you were gonna even try that argument you should have said SMG2.