20 Years Later, Does Super Mario 64 Hold Up?

[OverdriveOtaku]

***This thread is posted on behalf of Rebel-TT, via the Adopt-a-User Thread***

Let me preface this by stating that I've yet to even touch Mario Odyssey and it is one of my most anticipated games of perhaps the past decade.

Here goes: After seeing many lists of the best Mario games of all-time featuring Super Mario 64 at the top, or very near to the top, I simply cannot understand: I'm of the opinion that Super Mario 64 has aged terribly, and perhaps was not very good to begin with.

While the controls are outstanding and navigating the world is undeniably fun, and I grant you that the game was a landmark title that demonstrated the potential of 3d gaming and the analogue stick like no game before it, I believe the core game design failed for one reason, repetition.

Prior to Mario 64, collection in Mario games was optional, and every level, even if themed to fit a world, was different from the one before it.

In Super Mario 64 however, completion was the name of the game. I believe the design to be based on hardware constraints: how can a designer, using the limited memory available and the few brilliantly laid out levels give the player more to do? The answer was not what I expected or wanted. Many levels required retreading of the EXACT same pathways with little or no variety to get to the same endpoint. And collecting 100 coins for a star is the busiest of work.

Two of the more egregious examples include: navigation to King Bob-omb in the first world, and navigation to the flag for the footrace with Koopa the Quick; and the navigation to the underwater cavern at least three times for different stars in the Hazy Maze Cave.

Super Mario Sunshine evolved the concept as far as it could go - to my dismay - and I for one couldn't believe how great Galaxy was after these two preceding games because of the endless variety it offered, with few worlds featuring retreading in the vein of Super Mario 64 (mainly the beach levels in Galaxy 1).

Now Odyssey is upon us and I'm somewhat dreading a return to the Super Mario 64 formula, even though I trust these developers with my life and enjoyed the miniature puzzles the Koroks presented in Breath of the Wild.

For me, Mario variety is the spice of platforming life. And Odyssey seems to have it in spades based on the limited bits I've seen.

TL;DR/Summary: Question then is, playing Super Mario 64 today, do you think it has aged well, and freeing yourself of the burden of nostalgia, was it ever really, TRULY a great game? If anyone here has played it for the very first time, what's your opinion? How do you think it should stack up to the majestic Galaxy games, or even the amaze-balls 3D World, today? Was it simply too repetitive for its own good?

 

[mrmickfran]

Camera is a little iffy, but the gameplay still holds up.

 

[Mediking]

I'll letcha know when the inevitable HD remake happens for Switch ;)

 

[Renna Hazel]

Absolutely. Probably still the best Mario game of all time.

 

[Soul Skater]

Still the best controls/movement.

 

[spectrumfox]

The camera often gets in the way, but overall YES. It holds up.

 

[ManaByte]

Yes. Still is just a joy to run around the levels. Odyssey matches it, but 64 is still amazing.

 

[DrMoguera]

I played through it with all 120 stars for the first time in like a decade the other week. The camera is more than a little iffy in my opinion. It's awkward to control and can frequently screw you over, doesn't at all feel meant for some of the more platform challenge-heavy back half of the game. Which when combined with how slippery (and occasionally sticky) Mario can be means you're pretty much guaranteed to die on accident if you aren't intimately familiar with the game. I think it's a game that honestly only gets worse the longer it goes on. Some of the levels in this game just aren't that fun no matter what star you're going after.

 

[TripleBee]

Camera is a bit rough, on native hardware it's a bit blurry, and obviously the N64 controller itself doesn't really hold up.
But game play wise it holds up better then Sunshine.

 

[Phire Phox]

It does hold up. Mechanically still a great game even if the camera isn't the best. And the Water World sucks.

Absolutely. Probably still the best Mario game of all time.

Click to shrink...

Nah. Surpassed by the Galaxy games and definitely surpassed by Odyssey.

 

[Anth0ny]

Yup. Still the best Mario :)

 

[MCN]

Holy shit, where have the past 20 years gone?

 

[Deleted member 1074]

I would love to see an update version one day with proper camera controls

 

[ManaByte]

Holy shit, where have the past 20 years gone?

Click to shrink...

It's actually 21 years now!

 

[carlosrox]

It absolutely lives up.

For the most part I don't usually subscribe to the idea of a game "not aging well" unless a game is almost literally unplayable today. To me games like Zelda 1 and Metroid 1 fit that bill very nicely, but I'm sure that's sacrilegious to some. I've tried to play those games again and again and what I find to be extreme difficulty and cryptic design ruins them for me. I respect the games and I think in a broad sense they're very good games, but they're not for me, and I didn't experience them right at release personally.

Back to Mario 64, there is nothing about that game I find dated. It's an extremely eloquent design that transcends the era it released in. Elegant design is elegant design is elegant design. For me, it's very hard to take away something like that from a game.

Mario 64 is just a masterpiece that changed the gaming landscape forever. It still plays great, even if not fully in sync with "today's modern standards", which I think is a point of contention in the first place. Newer doesn't necessarily mean better. I could make the argument Mario 64 actually plays even better from a mechanical standpoint than Odyssey does. They both feel different but they both feel great. Odyssey's refinements to the formula don't negate what Mario 64 achieved.

Mario 64 plays very smooth, it has great level design, the challenge is there, the music is incredible, the atmosphere is great, and the graphics are STILL nice to look at, especially if you appreciate it from a "time capsule" perspective.

There's nothing "quaint" about old games. A great game is a great game.

I've heard the same criticism thrown at Goldeneye or Turok 1 and I just couldn't disagree more.

Doom 4 existing and being as good as it is doesn't suddenly make Doom 1 "dated".

 

[Argot]

I played through it recently. The only real knock against it is the camera, especially in the later levels it's frustrating having these finely tuned levels and a great moveset but having to fight the camera the whole way. Still pretty great, but I didn't do a 100% run so I don't know whether it gets more frustrating at that level.

 

[qq more]

Still a fantastic game. I still play it a lot from time to time. Only issue is maybe the camera... sorta? But it's an early 3D game and revolutionary for its time, so I'll forgive it (and the camera issues didn't hinder the game very much anyways so nbd)

I feel there hasn't been a 3D Mario that has topped it yet to me, 3D World came a litttle close though. (I can't wait to play Odyssey though, looks super amazing)

 

[Deleted member 1413]

I played it last year. Still fun.
Camera is a bit funky and you don't have as much control as newer games, but the movement is still really cool.

 

[gcwy]

It absolutely does. I replayed it last year on the DS, and several years before that on the N64. It was a spectacular experience on both. Its only drawbacks are the outdated controls and the camera system which has a mind of its own.

 

[Eegah]

I still love to play through it once in a while. Just moving around in Mario 64 is fun. In that sense there is no other game like it.

...Maybe Quake III.

 

['3y Kingdom]

Two of the more egregious examples include: navigation to King Bob-omb in the first world, and navigation to the flag for the footrace with Koopa the Quick; and the navigation to the underwater cavern at least three times for different stars in the Hazy Maze Cave.

Click to shrink...

In response to your first example, I would say that, while the destination is the same, the ease of reaching that point differs between the two missions. In the Koopa the Quick race, you have to hurry to that point, whereas in the fight against King Bob-omb is all about exploration.

Your second example fits your criticism better, but I think this is where most will fundamentally disagree with you. In Mario 64, a player is not told where each star is, nor guided (a la Galaxy/3D World) along a set path. Instead, they have to explore, using the level name as a vague hint. Now, if you know where all the stars are already, this might be tiresome, and I think it does hurt the replay in 64 a bit. But you'll have to explore and learn before reaching that point.

Anyway, I think Mario 64 is not obsolete yet if only because its controls, even with Odyssey, have yet to be bettered (save for camera control). Mario fit the N64 controller like a glove, and the degree of control over the character in that game feels more responsive than any Mario game after. I also prefer the way diving and momentum works in this game to the long jump-roll and air-dive mechanics of Odyssey.

It absolutely lives up.

For the most part I don't usually subscribe to the idea of a game "not aging well" unless a game is almost literally unplayable today. To me games like Zelda 1 and Metroid 1 fit that bill very nicely, but I'm sure that's sacrilegious to some. I've tried to play those games again and again and what I find to be extreme difficulty and cryptic design ruins them for me. I respect the games and I think in a broad sense they're very good games, but they're not for me, and I didn't experience them right at release personally.

Back to Mario 64, there is nothing about that game I find dated. It's an extremely eloquent design that transcends the era it released in. Elegant design is elegant design is elegant design. For me, it's very hard to take away something like that from a game.

Click to shrink...

Thank you for this. I think the concept of games aging is vastly overstated (I don't think either of the games you listed fit the bill, for example). But I think it does speak to two different ways of viewing gaming. Either it is mere disposable entertainment, in which case the newer fads tend to replace the old, or it has some art in it, in which case works of any era can still be appreciated today.

 

[Renna Hazel]

It does hold up. Mechanically still a great game even if the camera isn't the best. And the Water World sucks.


Nah. Surpassed by the Galaxy games and definitely surpassed by Odyssey.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, I can see the argument for just about any 3D Mario game (aside maybe Sunshine). I love them all, but Mario 64 is still the best. I admit I prefer the more open style to the linear style of Galaxy so that helps put it over in my opinion. Mario is definitely the hardest series to rank for me since it has so many top tier titles.

 

[THErest]

Was it ever really truly great? Of course. You can't hold it responsible for future innovations and improvements that hadn't been invented yet. Was Super Mario Bros ever really truly great? See how ridiculous that sounds? Lol.

 

[Poppy]

i would still play this game any day of the week, anytime. it is an unbelievably good game

 

[New Fang]

Comparing Mario 64 to Odyssey that just came out days ago, it does not compare favorably at all. The higher framerate of Odyssey alone makes it feel so much more responsive and fun to control.

BUT, Mario 64 in 1996 was a mind blowing revelation in gaming. I can still recall the first moment I jumped into the water around the castle and my brain struggled to process that I was moving a character smoothly around a 3D environment. It was really a crazy thing to see for the first time.

So as a milestone is gaming progress, Mario 64 is an incredible landmark game. The fact that it turned out as good as it did, working on brand new hardware, with no template for how to make a game of it's kind, was and is a remarkable achievement.

 

[Robiin]

The camera, the water levels and the obscurity (obviously now I know that I'm supposed to cannon myself into that wall but how the fuck did I ever figure that out as a kid?) kinda drags it down but it is still very fun to play.

Spoiler

On the Wii Virtual Console with a Gamecube controller, cause fuck that three-legged thing with the worst analog stick of all time.

 

[CallMeShaft]

I only have access to the DS port, so I can't comment much on how the original controls.

I can say the graphics are still fine for what is needed, the gameplay is still addicting, and it has some of the best level design in the franchise's 3D installments.

 

[Deleted member 3017]

Certain aspects of it have obviously been improved upon in recent years, but yes, it absolutely holds up. Which cannot be said for almost any other 3D game from that era.

 

[Servbot24]

I know it's the favored controls for speed runners, but for normal players I think the controls in Galaxy and Odyssey are better.

But to the point of the thread, yes the game holds up.

 

[Possumowner]

I've played through it many a time and it's still magical....recently surpassed by Odyssey in my opinion,but still incredible

 

[harz-marz]

It's the greatest game of all time. I will never forget the awe of seeing it in magazines and wondering how it was even possible...then seeing it in person on a demo kiosk before launch.

Incredible feelings.

 

[TwinsUltra64]

Absolutely yes.

 

[Eszik]

It's the first modern 3D platformer, and still the best to date IMO. Just moving around in this game is incredibly fun, the way all the moves chain into one another is brilliant! I've honestly had very few issues with the camera, and I never felt repetition at all, just because the game offers so many movement options and, often, many paths to the same goal. Its only flaw is its water levels I think (particularly Dire Dire Docks), but all the other levels are so fun to move around in! I don't think I'll ever get tired of this game.

 

[nicoga3000]

Of course! Favorite Mario and favorite game of all time. I replay it at least once a year. Odyssey is good, but 64 just feels...Special.

 

[kegkilla]

I've never liked this game. The tone of it always felt off to me, didn't feel like Super Mario. I think being constrained to the castle was part of it.

 

[Courage]

It absolutely does. Only Odyssey manages to rival its controls and moment to moment feel of moving Mario around, which is a joy in and of itself. I also think 64 is sort of an outlier in the Mario series, along with SMB 2, from an aesthetic standpoint. Mario 64 has such an unorthodox art style for a Mario game, even all these years later. I think Odyssey tries to harken back to this with some of its weird looking worlds, such as New Donk City and some of the Wooded Kingdom. It's my favorite Mario game and the one I've played the most throughout the years.

 

[Shard Shinjuku]

It would be nice if we could get Super Mario 64 DS with proper analog controls.

 

[alexbull_uk]

Unpopular opinion, but no - I don't think it does.

Camera issues aside, it just feels like an early 3D game, y'know? I've never truly understood why people think the controls were so good.

It definitely had a ton of good ideas, and it was revolutionary at the time, but it's surpassed handily by Galaxy & Odyssey.

 

[Dean Wormer]

Still holds up minus the sometimes frustrating camera. Played it about a year ago or so. Even the shitty penguin race is still fun. :)

 

[Buffer]

Played it on the 3DS. Camera bugged me a lot.

 

[wondermagenta]

First of all, I'm pleasantly surprised this thread isn't about how the controls "have aged poorly" - they haven't and I'm tired of discussing this with people, lol.

You're right in saying that the structure was a result of the designers trying to maximize the value of each asset. 3D levels were hard to build, so reusing content in this way was basically a necessity. I agree there are some egregious examples like Tall Tall Mountain where the peak literally has multiple Power Stars right next to each other, requiring you to climb the entire thing multiple times.

I can definitely see why you would take issue with this, but personally I think the actual design of these levels does a lot to mitigate the sense of repetition. Mario 64's worlds are big sandboxes, but they're not flat land; instead, they consist of intricate platforming paths that all intertwine, and they're wide and open enough to be tackled in numerous ways. The fact that Mario's movement is so sophisticated now leans into that design as well: just taking the same path over and over again will look wildly different every time as you get more and more to grips with the controls (which wasn't as much the case with the more linear and less complicated 2D games).

The non-linear setup of Peach's castle is also worth mentioning: players of the day weren't expected to do all seven stars in any given stage in one go (and in fact this isn't even possible a lot of the time seeing how certain power ups need to be unlocked within the castle first before they can be used inside the paintings to complete certain challenges). The player has enough freedom to mix things up with wildly different stages very early on and keep themselves from getting burnt out, and returning to an earlier painting is effortless once they feel up for it again.

So, while it's undeniable that Mario 64's game progression was a compromise born from technical/resource limitations, I think the overall design leans into that progression so hard and so well that it becomes a non-issue for me (EDIT: the game progression, level design and controls are actually exactly WHY it's my favorite Mario game). I think that's also why non-linear hubs and sandbox levels were increasingly less of a focus in the series as 3D assets became easier to produce.

 

[A_Jazzy_Book]

Yeah, it holds up. I think subsequent entries, Odyssey included, are better (sans Sunshine), but yeah it holds up well.

That camera and Mario turning like a tank making the back-end of the game (Rainbow Ride for instance) and other obstacle course levels annoying to go through kind of soured it a bit for me.

It's a great game, a childhood favorite, and its impact can never be overstated, but I think as a game its been bettered.

 

[Porco Rosso]

I play it every December. The game ages like fine wine. The level design and movement are still top-notch.

 

[Suzushiiro]

I'm kind of immune to Mario 64 nostalgia because I never really got around to sinking my teeth in it when it was relevant- becoming a Square fanboy in the SNES era put me on the SNES->Playstation path, and while I did a temporary exchange with an N64-owning friend a few years later I spent more time with the Zeldas and Star Fox and never really got into Mario.

Regardless, the thing with the N64/PS1 era is that devs had two new major toys to play with - optical media, which exponentially increased the amount of space your game could take up, and 3D polygonal graphics, which enabled forms of gameplay impossible with sprites. That's a big reason why several of the games that are considered to be the most highly-regarded and/or influential of all time came out in that era- everyone was trying to figure out what the fuck they could do with that new tech, so the few who managed to utilize one or both of those drastically better than everyone else made games that were fucking legendary, some of the most notable ones being Zelda OoT, Metal Gear Solid, and Final Fantasy VII. Mario 64 was another one of them, of course, because it was a "true" 3D platformer (and by that I mean to exclude games like Crash Bandicoot, where the core gameplay tended to be 2D) that was executed much better than anything else at the time- in particular, realizing that 3D meant that the focus of the game should be less on going from point A to point B and more on exploration (ie finding stars rather than just clearing an obstacle course) was a pretty genius move at that time, relatively speaking.

How well any of those games hold up is generally proportional to how well future games iterated on what they did, and I'd argue that Mario 64 was iterated on by future 3D platformers (Nintendo-made or otherwise) better than OoT, MGS, or FF7.

 

[daTRUballin]

The game itself does. The camera does not.

 

[The Almighty Tria]

Yes. Much more so than Bros 1, World and Sunshine, and I'm saying that despite the graphics having aged poorly. The game design and controls are mad good. Camera is off too, but not so much that it bothers me as much as it did in Sunshine.

 

[ArmsofSleep]

The camera is shit. Some of the graphics are ugly. The difficulty curve can be all over the place. Some worlds are flatout not fun. A lot of the stars are a grind. It's repetitive.

Who cares. It's the greatest game ever made. It makes me so happy.

 

[Poppy]

Yes. Much more so than Bros 1, World and Sunshine, and I'm saying that despite the graphics having aged poorly. The game design and controls are mad good. Camera is off too, but not so much that it bothers me as much as it did in Sunshine.

Click to shrink...

i see people saying this sort of thing lately re: super mario world, did i miss something? super mario world has always been something that was directly compared to super mario bros 3 whenever i saw it mentioned, and i have always had it just below 64 in my list of best mario games. why doesnt super mario world hold up?

 

[Cassius Bright]

Camera was bad when it was released, and it's downright diabolical now. The controls are godawful too.

I was never a big fan. Odyssey is incredible though and shows far Mario has come since then.

 

[NintendoNinjaNews]

Gameplay is fine - controls and camera angles have aged