racketboy.com

I don’t know where to start with this N64 talk so I’ll just mention a few things.

I really liked the N64 growing up and it did have some very influential games. Games that set the standards for game design going forward. But a lot of the games I played growing up have been re-released and I prefer them more that the originals 99% of the time. Some have not been released obviously but I don’t have a strong desire to go back and play them.

I prefer the DS version of Mario 64 (I know — that’s crazy talk). The two Zelda remakes of the 3DS are great in my opinion. The two Banjo games and Perfect Dark got great ports on the Xbox 360.

All that being said, 5th Gen for me was mostly spent with a GBC in hand. And my nostalgia is stronger with the GameCube and GBA since that was the console/portable that was out during my high school days.

I still miss some games like DK64, Paper Mario (prefer TYD), Yoshis Story, MK64, and a couple of the WWF games.

RCBH928 wrote:

marurun wrote:I don't think anyone is arguing against the N64's historical importance. I think the detractors are mostly commenting on what it means to go back to it now. Not everything influential holds up on its own. Sometimes influences are indeed best remembered through the things they influenced.

hmmm... thats a weird thing to say on a retro forum. I thought the idea of retro games is to enjoy them for what they were, obviously something like Tomb Raider doesn't hold a candle next to `Uncharted Lost Legacy. The 2D stuff holds well because it kind of reached the pinnacle around the SNES era. Still looks good, in fact modern games being released with that look because its aesthetically pleasing but beyond graphics I don't think any one will enjoy Ghost 'N Goblins or Battletoads without a modern saving system, hardly any one will enjoy those in one go except those dedicated for a challenge.

I don't think it's that weird a thing to say. Many of us are selective about our playing and collecting. I don't think loving classic games means loving ALL classic games, and there's always a heavy gloss of nostalgia affecting many of us. A lot of stuff absolutely holds up, but not everything does, and we shouldn't be afraid of being critical of the things we love.

Unrelated to the above...

I'd also like to de-escalate the save-states discussion a little. It's clear people have strong opinions, and words like "cheating" have a lot of baggage. Let's try to avoid language that implies a value judgment when talking about how people play single-player experiences. Ideas about accomplishment and the value of experiences are purely subjective and personal outside of contests and competition. That's why tournaments, high score lists, and world record charts have participation rules. They act as an authority imposing standards, and that's good and appropriate. It's OK to share your thoughts and opinions, but please avoid the impression of making a value judgment of others.

o.pwuaioc wrote:It's only [REDACTED] if it's in competition with another.
[snip]

No one would say e.g. that watching a movie's ending before the rest of it is...

You don't "beat" a book. You don't "beat" a movie.

If you "beat" a game, you're in competition with the game, right? If you "beat" a level boss, you're in competition with that boss, or with the game designers, or, more abstractly, with the challenge that the designers created, right?

RCBH928 wrote:I don't consider it [REDACTED], but I would consider that I didn't not complete the challenge intended by the developer. And why should I care?

I don't know that you necessarily should care, except as far as knowing how it may affect your experience with or perception of a game.

Gaming has changed a lot over the years, and gamers have changed a lot over the years. This is well-trod territory, but most NES games were pretty short once you "mastered" them. A huge part of the game, arguably padding, was playing the early levels over and over again, even after mastering them.

If you played Super Mario Bros. on the NES to any extent, you got to the point where you could essentially speedrun the first couple of levels before the first warpzone, and probably world 4-1 as well. And there's some amount of joy to come from that. People point to Metroid, but I would argue that this early gaming experience also contributed a lot to the development of speedrunning. All gamers used to be speedrunners to some extent. I could be totally wrong, though, and I'm sure I'm not the first person to suggest this.

Maybe you don't want or care about that experience. That's fine. There are lots of gaming experiences I don't particularly want or value.

I will say, though, that I have definitely had the experience where how I approached a game has greatly affected my perception of and enjoyment of it. A couple of years ago I replayed The Legend of Zelda. I loved that game as a kid and replayed it in my early twenties, enjoying it again. On my last play-through, though, I was trying to share it with my kids but it was too hard for them. Instead, they wanted me to just play it while they watched. So I played it, now just wanted to beat it.
It was awful and I hated it, because I was just trying to get through it to get to the end.
I had forgotten enough about the game that I really needed to explore to find some things I needed and some labyrinths. But I didn't want to explore. I wanted to just finish the game.
So, I really just missed out on the whole point of the game (the joy of exploration and discovery) because of how I was approaching it.

Limewater wrote:

o.pwuaioc wrote:It's only [REDACTED] if it's in competition with another.
[snip]

No one would say e.g. that watching a movie's ending before the rest of it is...

You don't "beat" a book. You don't "beat" a movie.

If you "beat" a game, you're in competition with the game, right? If you "beat" a level boss, you're in competition with that boss, or with the game designers, or, more abstractly, with the challenge that the designers created, right?

You absolutely are in competition with a book. Did you finish it? Can you understand it? Were you able to sit through the end of a movie and watch it all? Did you understand that line of dialogue? Did you look up what it might mean? What's the difference? There's a reason teachers and even professors give tests on literary works. Just because you read it doesn't mean you understand it. Games are just a form of that sort of media consumption, just using different skills instead. There is no competition because it's just you and the game, and a game has no feelings.

You even hear the same words being used. "Oh, I had to give up that book / that boss / that series. It defeated me."

o.pwuaioc wrote:You absolutely are in competition with a book. Did you finish it? Can you understand it? Were you able to sit through the end of a movie and watch it all? Did you understand that line of dialogue? Did you look up what it might mean? What's the difference? There's a reason teachers and even professors give tests on literary works. Just because you read it doesn't mean you understand it. Games are just a form of that sort of media consumption, just using different skills instead. There is no competition because it's just you and the game, and a game has no feelings.

You even hear the same words being used. "Oh, I had to give up that book / that boss / that series. It defeated me."

Touché.

I don't want to cause trouble but it's been statisically proven that 85% of people who slag off the N64 are chumps with dumb meaty hands.

I've gone on record before that I'm not a fan of the 5th gen in general and will accept all the tomatoes thrown at me for that.

There's a lot of cool experimental stuff but almost none of it controls well and I don't particularly have nostalgia for the way things looked like I do with the pre-3D era. Obviously I love a lot of stuff that came out on these consoles but they also have the highest concentration of games whose jank I lose patience with the fastest, even some of the well loved classics.

I got more into PC gaming in those days and mouse and keyboard controls were a lot more friendly for early 3D.

Sload Soap wrote:I don't want to cause trouble but it's been statisically proven that 85% of people who slag off the N64 are chumps with dumb meaty hands.

What's the other 15%?
Intelligent, skeletal-handed Don Juan's?

Sload Soap wrote:I don't want to cause trouble but it's been statisically proven that 85% of people who slag off the N64 are chumps with dumb meaty hands.

Can confirm my hands are the dumbest part of my body. Pancreas is a close second.

@Limewater

I might be in competition with the game or the boss or the developer but they make it in a way that they take your money and give you a frustrating experience. Would be more cool if you had to pay to get the game but if you completed it with no cheats they give you the money back, how about that for a challenge?

I am not up to take on the challenge of every developer and game out there. There is a fine line between fun, challenging, enjoyable experience and frustration.