This Old Neon Forum

Kong Wen wrote:

Turai wrote:Mario's first 3D outing is still among his best.
SMB, while important has been overshadowed many times over.

SM64, while important has been overshadowed many times over.

Turai wrote:

Kong Wen wrote:

Turai wrote:Mario's first 3D outing is still among his best.
SMB, while important has been overshadowed many times over.

SM64, while important has been overshadowed many times over.

I wholeheartedly disagree.

Sunshine was terrible, Galaxy even worse and haven't played Galaxy 2(and never will).

Slurmee wrote:Which 3D Mario do you rate better than 64 Kong?

Kong Wen wrote:

Slurmee wrote:Which 3D Mario do you rate better than 64 Kong?

As hesitant as I am to say this: Galaxy. And a host of non-Mario 3D platformers, of course.

I'm not arguing this to say that Mario 64 is bad or undeserving, as this is a tough bracket plain and simple. I'm just twisting Turai's vote logic to show that it applies equally well to either game. SMB and SM64 are both seminal, genre-defining entries. They're both somewhat primitive, suffer from technical limitations of the time, and have been surpassed and supplanted by games that followed in their footsteps.

Slurmee wrote:I think he was saying SM64 was the best 3D game. So you liked Galaxy better than Galaxy 2 or you saying the Galaxy series is better?

Kong Wen wrote:

Slurmee wrote:I think he was saying SM64 was the best 3D game. So you liked Galaxy better than Galaxy 2 or you saying the Galaxy series is better?

His message was pretty clear: "Mario's first 3D outing is still among his best. SMB, while important has been overshadowed many times over." He voted for SM64 because it's still among the best, in contrast with his not voting for SMB because it's important but has been overshadowed many times over. I simply demonstrated how that construction is equally true in reverse.

Turai wrote:
Sunshine was terrible

Turai wrote:
Galaxy even worse

Claytone wrote:

The Shoemaker wrote:

Jordan wrote:I actually picked super mario bros. here over 64. I have two reasons for this. The first reason is that 64 was kind of an unpolished game in certain ways. There were a lot of goofy ass glitches. The second reason is that I preferred Super Mario Bros. structure to the "collectathon" type of game that 64 represented. There are some people who swear by 64's non-linearity and poo-poo all the other Marios, but I personally found the non-linearity to be a mixed bag. There were times that I was genuinely frustrated at being unable to find some star here or there. Both are 10/10 games in my book though.

I don't think Mario 64 is the pinnacle of the series, but I find the structure of Super Mario Bros less appealing. The main thing is that I'm not really into arcade like experiences so I don't like that there's no way to save the game. That a game over results in going back to the beginning.

If you hold A (or B?) when you press Start at the opening screen after a game over, it will jump you to World X-1, where X is the world where you game over'd. Just for what it's worth.