/vr/ - Retro Games

Donkey Kong 64 was never good and if you think so then you should try playing through the entire game instead of just the beginning that's stuck in your nostalgic memories.

The problem with collect a thon games is the part people like the most about them is break you get from the mini games which are just poorly done versions of other games.

>>3090

I found the collecting to be an utter chore, too, but I wouldn't straight up call it a "bad" game.

>>3098

99% of the game is collecting things and all your gained abilities are used for collecting things.

There is no real challenge other than if you're willing to back track to the same area 5 times for each level and search every corner.

On the plus side at least you get to play Jetpac.

>>3114

>he doesn't like early 3D graphics

Why are you even here?

>complaining about nostalgia

>on a retro board

By the way, many people on this board, myself included, were already well into our teens when we got our hands on N64. We already went through NES, gameboy, Genesis, SNES, arcades at their peak, and early Saturn and PS. There's no room for nostalgia, we had enough years of mountains of top level content that we were well able to filter good from bad by that point. We weren't 7 year old kids on our first system.

N64 isn't my favorite, but it was legit.

>>3118

Some look good and has a certain charm to it (OOT, Super Mario 64, 1080 Snowboarding for examples) but others like Waverace 64 makes me want to gouge out my eyeballs. I might've enjoyed them more if it wasn't for the god awful controls

>complaining about nostalgia

>on a retro board

yeah I know, I'm also quilty of nostalgic bias when it comes to the consoles I had. But while I never owned an NES back in the day, I still highly enjoy playing it, unlike the N64. It's very overrated.

>>3114

Back to reddit.

>>3121

So you're saying Reddit has better taste in video games than you?

>>3135

>He's saying that you're a faggot for thinking you're "retro" when you're likely barely 18 years old

I'm not sure how a person can be retro, but I do enjoy playing and collecting retro games. There's not a lot to it

>If you want an advantage over the vast majority of your generation - which you do, because the world is competitive, and knowledge is power - then you need to shut the fuck up.

lol what is your point even? You want me to shut up, listen to you explain why the N64 is good and somehow that will give me an advantage over others my age? wtf?

>>3138

One of the biggest things about judging any kind of media is to not compare it to current releases and instead basing any judgement on other similar releases at the time of release. Vintage video games have a massive problem with retards not understanding that.

>>3139

>I was just pretending to be retarded

Fuck you.

>>3140

there's nothing retarded about not liking a console :^)

>>3138

>You realize that OoT was the first game of its kind to use a lock-on system of that type in a 3D game, right?

I like OoT but this triggers me because I remember locking on in Tomb Raider at least two years earlier.

>>3141

>he's going all out

>>3139

>cool story bro, I wasn't even that serious.

When you say something, it's like turning in your homework with your name written on top - if your name is on it, you're responsible for it. If you say "I hate niggers" and some people want to stab you for it, but you tell them, "I wasn't that serious" it's not going to matter, and that's not what adults do. I'm not offended, I just want to educate people about the hobby so that they can enjoy it/appreciate it for what it is.

>>3154

I don't recall that game having a lock on that moved the camera over your shoulder, automatically tracked enemies regardless of items, etc…I didn't really play it that much but I guess I stand corrected on that point. I'd like to think it doesn't kill my whole argument, but thanks for pointing out the error.

I'd take it over the PlayStation, but the library of quality releases was pretty limited.

>>3186

I'm anonymous though, it doesn't matter much if I say stupid things here

>>3197

>I'm anonymous though, it doesn't matter much if I say stupid things here

You're missing the point, man. Of course we're anonymous. I'm not trying to correct you just for the sake of correcting somebody, I'm trying to make you consider taking a step back and trying to appreciate things for what they are because it will improve your life.

Thinking that cave paintings suck because photoshop paintings "look cooler" means that there are that many less "cool paintings" on the planet for you to look at - but to stick with the cave paintings analogy, if you took a second to think, "Wow, there literally was no such thing as a painting before these were done. The person who drew this deer was literally the inventor of paintings," suddenly the cave painting becomes cooler, and you enjoy it more. Same with old video games. Video games didn't used to have any graphics at all, until somebody invented them. Yes, the graphics were "unimpressive" by today's standards, but understanding that they were literally the first graphics ever is impressive in its own right.

>>3212

Fair enough, I see your point. But while 8-bit and 16-bit games still look good in their own way, the low polygon graphics of the N64 doesn't in my opinion. Some games are good enough gameplay wise that it doens't matter of course.

and you haven't defended the controllers yet so I'm assuming you're with me on that one.

>>3214

Graphical quality is subjective and relative to whether or not you saw it when it was cutting edge. The first super mario game had impressive graphics, but if you're some snot-nose Call of Duty kid you're the type to dismiss it without consideration. That's my point.

I disagree about the controller, actually, but just haven't addressed it because it's a moot point. There are mongoloids on here who say the Gamecube controller was shit.

>>3222

Yes I understand what you mean about looking at it how it was at the time. But if you look from the perspective of someone who never owned an N64 or SNES, and later played both of them, the 16-bit looks more appealing.

>>3224

I won't get into the psychology of how we interpret different kinds of visual information, but I'll allude to it with an example that's easy to relate to:

You've seen a girl in a cartoon or anime that you thought looked "Cute," right? (If you haven't, realize that many many many people have, so bear with me)

Well, if you saw that "cute" anime girl walking around in the 3D world, you'd be scared shitless. Enormous eyes, sharp-edged mouths, huge heads and necks thinner than soda cans. They'd be terrifying freaks.

When you interpret something that's not meant to actually be representative, you look at it in a different way. That's why old 3D animation looks bad, because your brain is trying to look for the level of quality it sees in the 3D world. When your brain is looking for 2D, and it sees a sprite, it looks good, because that's what it's looking for. I hope that crude explanation gets the idea across.

Anyway, good talk.

>>3222

Anyone who played Metroid Prime knew that the Gamecube controller was shit. Ironically, the Madcats clear controller with the memory button on it was ABSURDLY SUPERIOR. Better grips, better triggers, so no RSD from scanning every goddamn thing. It must have been opposite day or something.

Also, the N64 was said to be butt-like in visuals because it was a matter of late 2D versus early 3D.

>>3303

Lay off the jenkem, the Gamecube controller is fantastic.

>>3309

SAGE!

Fuck you board owner for not removing this obnoxious sage text.

SAAAAAAAAGEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>3306

that peninsula thing goin on between the handles was uncomfortable as hell.

>>3140

>One of the biggest things about judging any kind of media is to not compare it to current releases and instead basing any judgement on other similar releases at the time of release. Vintage video games have a massive problem with retards not understanding that.

Fucking this. I'm 21, so I have a relatively poor memory of that generation of consoles growing up and I can at least understand some of the shortcomings of particular games in regards to current conventions.

I think the N64 is a decent console that suffered badly from a lack of third party development. Also the failure of the 64DD clipped the wings of their more ambitious games. However, I find the textures a lot better to look at than the PS1 and the few games that did come out on it managed to shine. Super Mario 64 is obviously dated (along with a bunch of so-called derogatorily dubbed collect-a-thons), but they still manage to entertain if you're willing to put the time into them. I bet OP thinks they're being edgy when they say OOT is overrated.

>things that aged badly

>people complaining about graphics

>a board for retro games

Anyway, I still find the blocky textures of the N64 very charming, personally. I guess maybe it is because it makes me think of my childhood again, when I was a lot happier or at least when videogames made me happier.

I fucking hate the controller, however. That, combined with the camera of a lot of games, is so awkward to play with now. At the time I probably didn't think much of it, but playing it more recently has made me realise this.

>>3118

>>he doesn't like early 3D graphics

>

>Why are you even here?

I know I'm months late on this, but PS1 did early 3D graphics a lot better. Crash and Spyro make the N64 Marios and Zeldas look like shit.

>>3140

>One of the biggest things about judging any kind of media is to not compare it to current releases and instead basing any judgement on other similar releases at the time of release. Vintage video games have a massive problem with retards not understanding that.

At the same time, I go to compare a lot of the shit people fawn over, like the most popular N64 games, and see that they weren't very good compared to some of their contemporaries, or even predecessors. Mario Kart 64 isn't as good as Super Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing. Ocarina of Time isn't as good as Link to the Past or Spyro the Dragon.

>>3222

The Gamecube controller was shit. Shitty d-pad, gimped right stick, and the face button layout made it impossible to hit B at the same time as X or Y, while any other four button controller, taking after the SNES, let you hit any combo with ease. All this, and it still had less inputs than the Dualshock 2 (or Dual Analog on PS1) and Xbox controllers. Gamecube simply had a less functional and practical controller.

N64 controller is by far the worst though. Can't hit the D-pad or L without moving your entire hand, so games had to be made with this in mind, severely limiting control options and making it so the D-pad and L might as well not even be there in the majority of games. The Saturn 3D controller (which came out like a week after the N64, IIRC) and PS Dual Analog would then have much more logical shapes which let you hit all the buttons at once, despite the Dual Analog actually having more inputs than the N64.

Nintendo just kept fucking up on controllers between the SNES and Wii U, which is funny, because the SNES and Wii U both have some of the best controllers ever made.

The N64 was by far the inferior console of its generation, but it has Nintendo first party games, and those are usually worth playing. At the time, though, if you were a kid who could only afford one, the answer is PlayStation. It has plenty of exclusives to rival the N64's, and they frequently have better graphics and controls, almost always much better sound. Third party games were no contest. Anything multiplatform was severely gimped on the N64, and there are plenty of great multiplatform games of that gen.

Once again, I'm not comparing N64 graphics to modern graphics, I'm comparing them to contemporary rivals. Just face it, Ocarina of Time always looked like shit. It's a good game, but the graphics are a weak point for it. It's not one of the best of its entire gen, like so many try to say. Better than Majora's Mask though.

>>4074

>At the time, though, if you were a kid who could only afford one, the answer is PlayStation.

People still fighting over this like it matters

Not necessarily you

But damn people you are easily baited and triggered

>>3309

>implying malon isn't top qt

>>4074

>Saturn 3D controller

The Saturn 3D controller requires you to hit a switch to actually use the DPad though and it cannot be used at the same time as the stick. So it's basically equivalent to the N64 minus moving the hands in that respect.

>>4083

It's still an improvement. Also the Saturn has perhaps the best D-pad ever.

>>4083

>>4086

Also it doesn't have the ability to use the d-pad + stick, which is great for shooters (unless you're a southpaw like me and have to make due with the C buttons).

I don't see how the N64 aged badly at all. The games have held up tremendously well compared to their competition….

>>3114

I couldn't disagree with you more. Every older console is going to have "dated" looking graphics compared to anything from the xbox generation onward. The 64 controller was really built for Mario, Zelda, and Star Fox. You have to realize that Nintendo was extremely focused on 1st party titles with the 64, and the design of the controller shows it.

Give it another go but on a CRT TV with an S-Video adapter. Any old console looks terrible on newer sets. :-)

ITT: OP's mom

>>4096

>The 64 controller was really built for Mario, Zelda, and Star Fox. You have to realize that Nintendo was extremely focused on 1st party titles with the 64, and the design of the controller shows it.

Yet the controller still would have been better if they just put the D-pad next to the joystick and the L button above or below the X button, like they did on all later controllers. Because as they made it, the D-pad and L button are practically useless.

>>4074

>At the time, though, if you were a kid who could only afford one, the answer is PlayStation.

It's fun to say truths when you people keep lying.

If you have any kind of money to buy games, you can afford several consoles. That's not an issue. You're probably talking about casuals who never understood anything about games, could only afford one console and no games, and pirated a shitton of them and spent all their time trying them out instead of actually immersing themselves, dropping anything that didn't hit their skinner box soft spot immediately and hard. That's the core PS audience who would call it "obvious" that PS is the best way to go. Anybody who isn't a casual can tell you that even on PS, they needed to find their personal niche among everything the platform offered, and persevered in finding it.

Nintendo was just a higher risk of personally being the one person who got the wrong console for themselves. But if you weren't, it made no difference except PS offered the opportunity to stick passing time with shitty ADD gaming without ever finding out what kind of cancer you are to the community, or dropping the hobby for some more suitable chad activity.

You're not recommending PS to somebody you know and think might like something specific about it. You would recommend PS to anybody just to lower your chances of being wrong, but if that person would have liked a Nintendo lineup he'd still have had 0% chance of getting the games he wanted, because you don't understand video games, him, or yourself. Making the statistical error of equating quantity with quality in a lame ad populum argument is fucking laughable, especially since gaming trains you off of that shit if there's any chance you ever did it right.

>>4115

Oh snap, son!

>>4575

>If you have any kind of money to buy games, you can afford several consoles. That's not an issue. You're probably talking about casuals who never understood anything about games, could only afford one console and no games, and pirated a shitton of them and spent all their time trying them out instead of actually immersing themselves, dropping anything that didn't hit their skinner box soft spot immediately and hard. That's the core PS audience who would call it "obvious" that PS is the best way to go. Anybody who isn't a casual can tell you that even on PS, they needed to find their personal niche among everything the platform offered, and persevered in finding it.

You're an absolute retard. Even in the actual quote you used, I said "if you were a kid." You think kids can just go out and afford these types of things? Until you're a grown ass adult with a stable enough job that you can pay rent comfortably and shit, video game consoles are a luxury, and more than one even more of a luxury.

So for people on this board younger than their mid-30s at least, yes, it was frequently a concern.

>But if you can afford one you can afford many!

Are you retarded? Do you have no sense of money? Do you not realize that two is twice as much as one? You could buy like ten games for the price of a console, if you weren't buying them new, and even if you were you could buy several games for the price of a console. And once again, you know full well if you're a kid and you ask for a second console when you already have one, you'll get the response from your parents "But you already have one, why do you need another?" It's a completely different thing from buying new games. Especially when they go to the store and see many of the same games are on both consoles. (And those games are almost always vastly improved on PS1 compared to the N64 versions, by the way, though most kids wouldn't have both consoles to compare, so they would never know that, which is probably one reason you keep defending the inferior system).

Kids also don't typically know how to pirate, especially in the fucking '90s. Closer to the end of the system's lifespan it started to get more well known, but even then it wasn't like everyone knew how to do it. it was more like you might know a guy who knows a guy who knows how to do it.

>But if you weren't, it made no difference except PS offered the opportunity to stick passing time with shitty ADD gaming without ever finding out what kind of cancer you are to the community, or dropping the hobby for some more suitable chad activity.

It made the difference that one had a much smaller library of technically inferior games. Multiplatform games were always completely gimped on N64, and while N64 did have good exclusives, so did PS1. For every Mario there was a Crash, for every Zelda, a Spyro. But I suppose fucking Tomba and Ape Escape are for chads now. All the dudebros fucking loved Parappa the Rapper and Um Jammer Lammy.

>but if that person would have liked a Nintendo lineup he'd still have had 0% chance of getting the games he wanted, because you don't understand video games, him, or yourself.

Obviously if the person I'm talking to is totally autistic for Super Mario, he's not going to listen to recommendations, he's going to get the system that has Super Mario on it. Games make a system, and your argument is "well what if the person you're talking to really likes a Nintendo exclusive?" Well alright. What if they really like a playstation exclusive? Those are personal things and cancel out. What isn't personal are the actual points I'm bringing up. If those objective facts don't matter to you, then fine.

>Making the statistical error of equating quantity with quality in a lame ad populum argument is fucking laughable

I argued that for all the N64 exclusives PS1 has just as good if not better ones. I just wasn't arguing about the quality of specific games because that's a different topic. But if you want we can argue that. I was putting aside my personal opinions that the best exclusives were actually on PS1 to give more objective opinions. But if you want to just shittalk specific games instead you might as well make another thread for it instead of derailing this one.

>>4587

>Kids also don't typically know how to pirate, especially in the fucking '90s.

If you had been older than infant in 1998 you'd know it was only easier than today. Because people actually existed who would sell you those pirate copies for cheap. That's what real piracy used to be, and even the legislation is written on that premise. If that doesn't count for you then congratulations, you're not the people I'm talking but just a person who misses the point thinking it's always all about you. I guess you were too much of a rich kid to know any russian immigrants.

>technically inferior games

Yeah, nintendo never supported AutoCAD either, the most technically impressive video game of all time.

If you're talking about fucking Tomba here then try to keep to your own damn argument. But if somebody wanted Bomberman 64 and Goldeneye then guess what, they still wasted their money on the Tomba machine. Chads are the people who did that only because their dad figured he should definitely have Colin Macrae on it as well, and that's probably why they grew up as chads anyway. If they hadn't, they might have not bullied you into becoming the wiener you are now.

But at least they didn't waste that time on an inferior system either, amirite? And I'm hoping here, that you didn't become this anal without some severe social damage affecting you, otherwise you're just too sad to exist.

>>4587

>Those are personal things and cancel out.

This is so retarded it deserves its own response. No they fucking don't. Somebody else having better theoretical chance of liking your console that you only tolerate because it's all you have doesn't cancel out shit. I told you this is a statistical error, and you stared truth in the face and remained willingly ignorant. That's objective.

>>4591

>If you had been older than infant in 1998 you'd know it was only easier than today. Because people actually existed who would sell you those pirate copies for cheap.

I already addressed this. Thanks for not reading. It was relatively uncommon unless you knew the right people, and even if you did, you'd have to convince your parents to let some shady chinese man at the flea market fiddle with your system while promising "no breakee" before you could actually play those games. To say this is easier than today, when anyone can download shit, is absurd.

The PS was relatively easy to pirate for, but that doesn't mean it was particularly popular with the audience we're talking about. Because that audience would be too young for that. You're making the classic autist mistake of thinking everyone is as autistic as you. You're even doing this throughout time, and acting as if kids 20 years ago were as autistic as you are now.

>If you're talking about fucking Tomba here then try to keep to your own damn argument.

Do you have no reading comprehension. The point I'm making by listing games is that your whole argument just boils down to "well my favorite games are on N64, so there!" That's subjective. You're just being too butthurt to acknowledge that some people don't have the same favorites as you. And I'm not using that argument to say "no, you're wrong, the best games are elsewhere!" I'm using that to just point out that you could actually try to argue more objectively, instead of being a butthurt babby.

>>4592

>Somebody else having better theoretical chance of liking your console that you only tolerate because it's all you have doesn't cancel out shit. I told you this is a statistical error, and you stared truth in the face and remained willingly ignorant. That's objective.

You realize this argument applies better to yourself than it does to me, right? The only problem is that your console, that you only tolerate because it's all you have, actually gives people a worse theoretical chance of liking the games on it. You're trying to argue that people might like your favorites better, while ignoring the fact that that works both ways, and then getting mad when I point out that it works both ways. If you want to argue that your favorite games are objectively the best, go ahead, but just admit that's what you're doing.

That was a bad theme for a thread.