curl-6 said:
Michael-5 said:
curl-6 said:
Michael-5 said:
Super Mario 64 - Because it did it right the first time. Was such a graphical jump from everything else at the time, really pushed the N64, and it was a well made game.
Galaxy is fun, but being in 480p feels a bit gritty. It might push the Wii, but the Wii is not the graphical house it used to be.
|
So you're judging SM64 for it's time, but Galaxy by how it holds up today? Bit of a double standard, isn't it?
|
No. Galaxy wasn't at all graphically impressive for its time (compared to PS3/360 games it looked meh), but Super Mario 64 looked AMAZING for its time, and for a long while after. Plus it still looks good, a real graphical lightlight from then 90's.
|
Galaxy recieved a lot of praise for its visuals in 2007.
|
For a Wii game in 2007 it looks great. However for a video game in 2007 it looks meh.
Super Mario 64 on the other hand looked amazing as an N64 game AND as a video game in general in 1995.
Plus graphics aren't everything, Galaxy is fun, but the physics engine doesn't push the console as much as Super Mario 64 did in 1995, and I don't much care for the CG in Galaxy. Basically I think Galaxy is as good of a game as Super Mario 64, but Super Mario 64 did everything Galaxy does a decade sooner. That's why it's my favorite Mario platformer.