which game is better
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
which game is better
which game is better
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Mario 64 falls apart in the upstairs area. It feels unfinished in some parts. For that I have to say OoT, even though I like playing Mario 64 more.
OoTroon soley because it has mass appeal unlike bing bing wahoo 64 the children game
Both suck
Star Fox is better than both
but smash is the best N64 game
Here's your (You) you tasteless Black person
All of those games are good
Frick you, you contrarian butthole.
Bitchmade homosexual
NOOOO I WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT moronic SHIT ON 4CRAP
Left has more content, but right is better because, ultimately, as a 3D game, it could hold itself better. No empty spaces, no autotargets, almost zero cutscenes. With OoT they took one of the best 2D games and made a lot of sacrifices in order to make it work for 3D. While Mario 3D suffered a radical change too, it stands on its own. This is what makes the game so replayable.
While OoT is memorable to a whole generation who became gamers thanks to it, Mario 64 its more than a movie disguised as a game. The fact that the moveset its still the best in the series despite more than 20 years of improvements on not hardware and software it’s an indication that in the 2D to 3D process gameplay was ultimately transformed but not perverted.
>No empty spaces
you're fricking moronic, because theres tons of empty spaces.
>the moveset its still the best in the series despite more than 20 years of improvements
you're literally lying to yourself and beyond moronic.
>you're literally lying to yourself and beyond moronic.
He's literally right though. Super Mario 64 has the best movement of any 3D mario game. You just suck at the game.
I loved both
I never wanna play either one again
Not sure what that says about 'em
weird, i'm the same way and it seems so rare. To be honest, I could see myself perhaps playing SOME of Sm64 for nostalgic sake, but I doubt i'd ever want to beat it again.
Same, in fact worse so, with OOT. I already did all that shit. I loved it, it was a very memorable and happy time of my life then and the journey through OOT was one-of-a-kind. But frick ever doing that shit again, and puzzles are gay as hell.
i could replay MM if it didn't have that boring-as-shit "collect da eggs and avoid da troony pirate guards lol" nonsense. Each time I start a new game, I make it to getting the zora mask and nope out forever. Frick that shit.
I like what Nintendo was doing back then because these two series felt like sibling games. Mario was the popular younger brother who was athletic and extroverted (he's open to many different approaches and rewards creativity, lets you chose when and where you want to play, gives you story and information when you look for it) while Zelda was the moody older brother who tried to be mature and taken seriously (he has a particular idea about how interactions should go, he says vague things and lets try to make sense of it)
>noooo they're different genres you cannot compare them, they're like two parts of a whole game!!
/Majora's Mask gays
Both are very inspired pioneering games that create a balanced internal logic when there were not many other games to reference. Visionary creations.
(and yeah, OoT borrowed much of its identity from ALttP, but it's doing a lot that its predecessor can't - and has to solve problems of 3d on its own. Not to mention the integration of narrative and gameplay to which ALttP can't begin to hold a candle)
Mario 64 has a limited set of character moves that can produce thousands of gameplay outcomes when Mario is inserted into different stages.
OoT has more interlocking gameplay systems, and thematic interest. It's a more complex game from a development perspective.
There is more of an immediate ability for satisfying player intention and expression in Mario 64. That's down to Mario's arcade roots. It's definitely a plus for SM64.
Contrarily, OoT is much more linear - not in the structure of stages and pacing, but in the moment-to-moment gameplay. However OoT's higher narrative importance gives a more meaningful impression to discovering and revisiting locales. So, in straying from the arcade design school, it gains this trait.
(It's still a brisk experience to get into the game essence of OoT when compared to modern adventure titles).
SM64 is simpler in design whereas OoT is more sophisticated. Despite the wonderful breadth of expressive action available to Mario, I think OoT is saying something bigger with its design. It's a slower release experience that captures the imagination through building a captivating world while being too naive to eschew completely the tenets of Japanese game design, which really works in its favour and creates a mercurial balance. I think it's more influential on the game industry, too, looking from 2024.
Better, I don't know but I prefer Mario 64 because I'm not a big fan of 3D Zeldas.
mario64 and its not even close.
at the time, oot was more ambitious, innovative, and had a lot more going on, while mario was little more than 3d parkour/exploration. however, this works in mario's favor because while it doesnt do a whole lot, it does it very well and is satisfying to play. oot is an exercise in tedium and frustration. it is so far outshined in every single area by other games since then, that its just miserable to go back to. while newer (mario) games might have some tighter controls and denser playing areas, the margin of difference is far slimmer. mario definitely holds up better.
I like the N64 zeldas more, but mario has literal hundreds of romhacks you could play until the end of time.
What do you think of Indigo? I liked how they integrated shit like Zora's Flippers and Roc's Feather in a 3D Zelda game.
Low key, Majora's Mask
Lower key, Donkey Kong 64
What's the overall point of ranking shit?
I don't get it either but it seems to get conversations going.
Frivolous conversations that never go anywhere, and never end.
Lies should be destroyed.
This, they're two very different games
It's like the Flights of Fantasy Resident Evil vs Mario 64 segment.
I think I'd prefer to play mario these days. I've played both of them like 20 times and mario is just a bit faster paced and more kind of tricky in terms of movement and stuff
Doom 64
majora > mario 64 > ocarina
all three games though are basically 10's, and heads and shoulders above everything else on the entire system
Love both, but OoT.
Being into Mario games is genuinely pathetic.
Zelda is more dignified.
I can't vote because I've never played OoT or really much Zelda in general. More into platformers whether it's Mario, Sonic, Banjo, Crash etc.
>M64: worse than World and SMB3
>OoT: worse than ALttP
>Gamers: they lose their fricking minds over these two games and discuss them for an eternity
Mario 64. It's a great game whereas Ocarina of Time is a 15FPS proof of concept.
oh, please.
Both are good, I'm still happy to replay both.
most levels in M64 are pretty bad
I think I played through OoT more times in my life. Hard to say though. They're both masterpieces. I'm just glad I was alive at the time and had an N64.