NormalBoots Goldeneye vs Paper Mario, are those two even comparable? I mean sure if you had say, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark or Doom fair enough but with these two games being sooo far apart I just don't get the connection, just me or no?
NormalBoots I do have an Idea for the next one... after madness season two. Best SNES Games; you name them. Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Super Mario World, Super Mario Kart, Final Fantasy IV & VI, Star Fox, Super Mario RPG, Kirby Super Star, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Secret of Mana, Super Castlevania IV, Mega Man X and Etc. etc. etc.
goldeneye innovated a genre. Paper mario stands the test of time. if youre the kind of guy who can appreciate what something did. its goldeneye If youre the kind of guy who can appreciate what something does? Paper Mario
Yeah. It's similar with a lot of these games. Some stand the test of time while others, fantastic and maybe superior at the time, don't, just because games that came after were able to do things so much better.
I don't disagree with your friend. Paper Mario IS a better game. But in the Nintendo 64 context, 007 had more influence, both on the players and on the console. I won't even discard Paper Mario influence, because it born sequels spin-offs as well. Goldeneye legacy, just like Nintendo 64, died off, and Paper Mario still have its mark going on. I do love Paper Mario, but back in the day, sadly, It was more of a cult hit. I get your point but please, don't evaluate taste on this spefic mindset.
Ozmounth It’s basically the same argument made in the Ocarina of Time vs Majora’s Mask Debate where they admit the loser is the better game. But the winner is more important to the legacy of the console.
Pokemon Snap ep: "Yeah its the worse game, but I would love to sit down and play it today." Snap wins. Goldeneye007 ep: "Nobody would ever sit down and play this today." Goldeneye wins. I love you guys.
To be fair, if they'd picked Diddy Kong Racing over Pokemon Snap, I would have raised unholy hell. .-. I'm biased, to be fair, but any racing game is crap and boring; they kept saying that it had more to do than Pokemon Snap but my thing is that it really didn't. You drove around in a circle on different skinned maps. Maybe you did a figure 8 even. There wasn't that much to it, even if there was a battle mode. Besides, I spent a lot of time with friends playing Pokemon Snap; we'd take turns and find all sorts of secrets and compete to see who could take the best pictures. Pokemon Snap holds a far more unique memory and spot to me than just another racing game.
I did play it when I was a kid, actually. It was mostly fun to kick my brother's ass at it but now that we're older and live on opposite sides of the country, it lost its appeal. :P
@Otterly lost Diddky kong racing was FULL of content and modes. Exploration and secrets and it was freaakin amazing, pokemon snap was taking pictures on rails with a few alternate playthroughs possible. No contest DKR blew that game out of the water, it was not just a racing game.
The main reasons on why they vote has changed drastically every video, its now all invalid and what they should do is redo this with actual rules or guildlines in to what is counted towards the vote, so far we've had: best game, best n64 game, what would i play now, more fuller of a game, etc etc. they need consistency 10000000000000000%
I think it all depends on the games being matched up, for party/multiplayer games like Mario Party 2 and Smash Bros and similar games like the two Zelda games, it makes more sense to talk about what is currently more fun, but for games that are completely different, it makes more sense to judge them based on what they brought to the console as a whole.
If they had consistency on what’s more fun to play today like they did in the first episode, Diddy Kong Racing, Majoras Mask, and Paper Mario would have all won.
I was in the same boat as Jared, I was all in for Paper Mario at first, but Jirard's point about what the N64 brought to the multiplayer table is spot on. Paper Mario is easily the more happy game of the two, and definitely the one I'd rather play now, but 007 was probably the one that brought more happiness to the world overall. That bring said, for me Paper Mario is the better game, and 007 is the more important one. (Edited for clarity and crap)
I dislike the argument that one game may be a better game overall but is not a better n64 game as it just is contradicting, makes for a lack of consistency and messes up the main focus and points. This topic keeps getting brought up and destroys the voting process. 2 games already got screwed because they were “better games” but “worse n64 games”. They keep stating topics about which aged better and which game stands to the test of time but that all gets tossed out the window when they bring up which game is the better n64 game. If it is a better video game overall than it theoretically should be a better n64 game. It’s just contradicting to almost all previous points and hurts the final votes. None of the less I love this series and the normal boots cast. Great show and concept, plus the editing is superb. I just wish they could figure out what it is they are really arguing about, and judge accordingly. Thank you
Yeah, logically if one game is better than another on the same system it is the better game on that system. A lot of these discussions seem to be coming from the perspective of people who no longer play those games, but if you still do you obviously won't really care about which one "carries the essence of the system more", you'll usually care more about how good it is and how well it has held up today. As somebody who still owns an N64 and still plays it frequently, there are games I still play because they held up and those that I don't really play because they haven't aged as well. Paper Mario is one of those games that even on an N64 without any sort of hdmi mods or other things still looks quite good and the game plays well enough. GoldenEye is not one such game. I get that for many there is the nostalgia factor of playing with friends, that works for several of the games they voted against before such as Super Smash Bros or Mario Kart 64. Constantly bringing up which game carries the essence of an N64 or which one feels more like an N64 game as opposed to which is the better game comes across as more superficial. If it's based on popularity there's probably a watchmojo video that accomplishes much the same thing.
Right. Also, just because it's very important and has a legacy doesn't mean it's the better game overall. And I personally believe "best" to be somewhat synonymous with "favorite", because if you're picking a best, you're inevitably biased regardless anyways, and your opinions are still being involved in the equation. I understand the difference between a technical best, like I can get on board with that level of objectivity. But when these guys start speaking in these abstract semantics in every episode, it's like, yeah of course they're going to create a different standard by which to judge these games each time. They should have literally just said, "what's your favorite game that happens to be from this console in terms of how it holds up today?" Because the thing is, when they keep bringing up legacy and how many waves it made at the time, obviously it's going to end up being either Goldeneye, Ocarina of Time, or Super Mario 64, like everyone's always said. Because those games' legacies became so over the years because of how good they actually are, nostalgia aside. Yeah it's fine to discuss the game's legacy, but when you put that into consideration for why it's the best, it just doesn't work in my opinion. Same with that weird, "this one's my favorite, but this one's the better N64 game," thing that keeps coming up, like I find it weird that they didn't realize that would come off as really strange. And I assume these were all pre-filmed to over the course of a day or two maybe? I can't imagine all these dudes coming together to make a video once a week lol unless they all live nearby now, which I have no idea if they do or not at this point. But I mean, yeah, I agree, and I love all these guys too, and this was a really good idea for a video series for this channel. I'm really into the idea of the videos that go on the Normal Boots channel being more like this where they can involve all or some of the guys, and involve topics like these like best of's and documentaries and commentaries and such. When I found out via The Completionist about this channel, I was like finally lol hell yeah. But yeah, nothing wrong with a little criticism. This is the only complaint I personally have with the show. Everything else is spot on perfect imo. I sorta wish they were a bit longer, but that's just because I enjoy longer content, nothing against the videos themselves. (And yeah, I do believe 007 Goldeneye is still a fantastic game that does deserve all the hype it's gotten).
Melody To add to that, most multiplayer games that people had fun with when they were younger were fun regardless of the game. It was hanging with your friends that was fun, and in a way you don't get to do now as an adult. Doesn't mean the games can't be good, but there's a reason why you play the current multiplayer game and not crack out the old one. Because it's where your friends are. You could easily play a crappy multiplayer game with your friends and still have fun. Being in person is something older consoles demanded which is also why there's more fonder memories than just chatting online.
Exaclty I mean they even said that Doom64 was better than Goldeneye if that's the case ¿why was Goldeneye even here? like ¿which is the criteria for best N64 game? is obviously not what's the best game overall because Majora's and Paper Mario lost regardless of aging better and they admitting they were better games. It's seems is nostalgia and if that's the only factor then this is incredibly biased, unfair and contradictory because also OoT won over Majora's because to them OoT was an experience that was friendly to introduce Zelda to someone unfamiliar with it. Basically they said OoT was perfect to show someone unfamiliar with the N64 what was so good about it. But in this case the game that's aged the worst of the whole list and is one the worst possible ways to introduce a FPS won, it's trumped by every shooter after it's relased date (literally Half-Life launched the next year and Quake was already out). It didn't even had a legacy, it became obsolete as soon as Halo arrived and actually showed how to design a FPS for consoles, no wonder that to this day every console shooter models it's control scheme to Halo's.
It's especially dumb because they don't even define "essence of N64 game" even though it's the main reason to pick Goldeneye. Like what they're talking about doesn't mean anything other than legacy which doesn't tell you which is the better game anyway. The way they judge games has been terribly inconsistent as the "essence of N64 game" argument would mean Smash Bros and Diddy kong racing should have won, but they deemed them as the less fun game that they wouldn't play today just like Goldeneye
Yunno what I don’t get, They say that majoras is a better Zelda game, and ocarina is a better N64 game. I think it’s the other way around. Ocarina of Time basically defines what a zelda game is. Majoras feels like a completely different and cool idea. It is debatably a better 64 game.
It also makes no sense considering one of the points was that Ocarina should be used to introduce people to what Zelda is. If that is the case then by that logic Ocarina is the better Zelda as well. Maybe not for narration, gameplay or anything but as representation of the Zelda franchise. That's literally what comes with the recommendation.
They keep going back and forth per video. That's my only real gripe with this series is that they'll let their nostalgia take over instead of thinking how much fun it is to play today, which is what I'm pretty sure they're supposed to be getting at.
ok, somethings been irritating me about this series and I'v finally pinpointed it. Each time an important game in gaming history comes up, the arguments for it are always about how influential it is and how none of the best games would exist without it, but they ignore the arguments about whether or not that game is *actually better*. The only reason ocarina won last time was because two of the votes(both of whom agreed majora was better) were based on it's importance instead of its quality. We need to stop asking "Was this game influential to history" and start asking "which game is better ignoring all nostalgia, influence or how good any other game in the series may have been, and simply discuss which of the two is better on its own". Also, several times they've said "x game (on the n64) is the better game but y is the better n64 game." That is an absurdly oxymoronic statement and is logically impossible. If x is a better game than y, and they're both on the n64, than by definition x is the better n64 game...
Boltaan'jistman Games do not exist in a vacuum, and considering their influence on the industry is a valid thought for this series. A beautiful part of loving things is that everyone's reasoning can be different, and recognizing WHERE something you love came from can be massively important in deciding which was "better"... For you, for the industry, or for the player. All are valid.
The question is not "is this game widely regarded" or "Did this game make other games better". The question is simply "Is this one better than the other" and if you have to use other games or other influences as examples, then you are failing at answering the question. Games not existing in a vacuum doesn't prevent you from discussing them as though they are.
as an example, the point of "halo wouldn't exist if it weren't for goldeneye" is irrelevant to the question of if it's a good game or not. The game could be the worst game of all time but influence the industry greatly, but that doesn't make it a good game or better than a less influential game.
@@BewbsOP How good a game is in the context of the history of gaming is absolutely essential to appreciation and understanding of the game and the experience of playing it. Just as it is for all forms of art. You can't understand or appreciate Schoenberg unless you know what music came before it and what was new and innovative about it. Agreed with your point on "better N64 game" vs. "better game" though. In these matchups the answers to those questions are necessarily the same.
If the question was which is a better game in a specific context, or which resulted in better games, I'd agree. The problem is that literally any game can be argued for that way. Where does it stop? Could we call bubsy 3d a good game just because it helped the devs learn to make games and tons of good games came about as a result, and we'd never have the siphon filter games if it it werent for bubsy 3d? No! Bubsy 3d is a terrible game regardless of its legacy. Legacy, history, influence etc. have nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of a game. The question is which game is better, and only that.
The Toy Room literally the only thing that makes this broken mess of a game even remotely playable are nostalgia goggles. Seriously for someone like me who has only played Golden eye with 18 jears it is a mystery how anyone could perfer this crap over a timeless classic like Paper mario
I agree and as was said the control scene for shooters on n64 is terrible. I tried to play it and couldnt believe i once played it regularly with inverted controls with the c buttons
I think it's extremely bizarre that the multiplayer aspect of a game supposedly makes it a "better Nintendo 64 game." If that's the case then there is a huge bias against not only any game that isn't multiplayer, but in accordance to some of their arguments could technically "work" on another system. Is the best Nintendo 64 game primarily in reflection to what other consoles can or can't offer versus what the games themselves are trying to offer utilizing Nintendo 64 hardware? Working off of Austin's comments, there are single player games where multiple people can come around and watch and contribute to. That was definitely the case for me when I was playing Paper Mario, and still is. But I can't get anybody to play Goldeneye with me anymore. If one of the biggest factors of making a Nintendo 64 game the best is if it can bring people together, then I think it's worth discussing whether it's still can, and if single player games are capable of doing that even if only one person has a controller in their hand.
I 100% agree. My fondest memories of the N64 were playing Paper Mario with my dad sitting next to me and talking about what was happening. That and printing literal hundreds of pages of guide books off the internet (since the computer was in the other room) for Ocarina of Time and having my step-sister play while I read them to her. Those memories live with me much more than a last second, unbalanced, 4-player addition to a game. Obviously we can talk about what goldeneye did for the genre, but it's starting to frustrate me that each guy has his agenda coming in and it's up to 1-2 guys to convince the 2-3 "swing" guys why his agenda is better and it's not consistent. If multiplayer should win, then shouldn't Smash Bros. just undeniably win this bracket because it's the most quintessential multiplayer game for the console?
that's pretty much how any discussion works. One person has a strong opinion and the rest either keep theirs or change based on arguments. Also, while I agree, I'd say many people disagree with smash being the best/most unique multiplayer experience of n64.
+Think Fact, I do not agree with your comment. I think that, while analysing what is the best N64 game, it is important to see what the game did. I do love Paper Mario. But it doesn't shine. It is shadowed by Mario RPG and by Paper Mario 2. On the other hand, some of the arguments are exaggerated. I played Golden Eye with some friends not so long ago and it is still fun. Also, saying that Golden Eye is not a good game because the control is shaky nowadays it's unfair. Golden Eye had more replylability and more diversity than Paper Mario. The looks didn't agree that week but they were high note at the time. My point is that saying that we prefer a game today by today standards make it better is not fair. I agree that not everything should be in the past. But the discussion was good. Also, about multiplayer, I think that Mario party 2 was the best N64 multiplayer and it had high chances of winning. Finally, I think that the fact that a game uses things unique to the console is a plus. For example, Okami was played better in Wii. (Sorry if the arguments are not well connected, I haven't sleep well)
Weird part is, didn't they kill of smash because Mario Party 2 "was the better game to this day". They flat out chose Pokemon Snap because it "was the better game by today's standards" Most of their argument seemed to be situated that by today's standards for previous games yet none of that was applied here. That Smash Bros 64 or Mario Kart 64 is bad or mediocre more so because future titles did it better, while being the opposite for Mario Party 2. Realistically Golden Eye shouldn't have made it past the first round against any n64 game, let alone Paper Mario. If by today's you can't play it, it's not a good n64 game. N64 was filled with many timeless classics and some not so timeless. If people do buy an N64 mini in the future, it's going to be for Pokemon Snap and Stadium. It's gonna be for Paper Mario, Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, etc. People aren't gonna buy it for Golden Eye.
I honestly don't understand how GoldenEye has a chance against Paper Mario. "Paper Mario is the better game but GoldenEye is the better N64 game"... WHAT???? How tho? It's more nostalgic sure, but its such an inferior game overall. This argument has been used almost every episode but not this one, where it would have been a killer. "Which would you want to play now if you had both of them in front of you." GoldenEye doesn't hold up in the slightest. It just aged like crap. Paper Mario can be played today and look and feel just as good as it did back then.
ICE Ricer That's kind of the point... The idea is for N64, not the game itself. PM can still be played and enjoyed today... I have it on my Wii and its what allowed my kids to get into it... That said, OG GoldenEye is worth the experience ONLY on N64. As the topic is about the essence of the N64 & not the game itself... GoldenEye was a defining game for the N64, whereas PM could have been picked up & played by new players on other systems... I agree that PM is a better game long term, BUT GoldenEye (much like the N64) was timely in its release and must be accounted for by what ONLY it could offer. As such, GoldenEye is the better defining N64 game as PM can still offer the same experiences on today's systems.
I disagree, I think its about which game, that is on N64, is better. "Better" being defined by ALL factors, not just its significance to the genre. While GoldenEye does a lot as far as that goes, it does nothing else. Paper Mario does that as well but not as well as GoldenEye and is just plain a better game than Goldeneye.
ICE Ricer except in these videos, just as this one starts, they keep saying "its an essential part of the 64 experience". For new players, they can get that PM experience, just like on the 64, from other systems. Some players Only get it from other systems... If it's available (in its original form) from anything other than a 64, than the 64 isn't essential to it. As such, GoldenEye (as it originally was) is only available for those 1st experiences on the 64. So GoldenEye would be the more "N64" essential game over PM.
I feel that you are overvaluing your Nostalgia's influence on the "N64 experience." If I were to show a friend who has never played the N64 a bunch of N64 games, I would not bother to show them GoldenEye. Despite this, I think I would be able to show him the "N64 experience" and get him to appreciate the system. GoldenEye is only thought of as being so important by people who played the N64 during a very specific period of time.
They didn't set the ground rules properly. They basically rotate between 3 different ideas; which game has had the most impact, which game is the best experience today, and which game was the best experience for it's time. It honestly happens a lot on the internet with people claiming that OoT or Mario 64 or Goldeneye are some do best games ever but don't define what they mean by best best game ever. All 3 of those games are definitely very influential and were excellent games for their time but I'd argue that there are far better games within their genre now and really don't deserve such accolades in comparison.
Yeah, I played Goldeneye and it was one of the stupidest games I've ever played. The graphics are abysmal, the controls are so bad that it's unplayable, and the missions don't tell you what you're doing they just throw you in to some random area assuming that you know what the heck is going on. It's just infuriating. I honestly thought that it was just stupid shovelware when I first played it.
I agree man, I feel like judging these games as “the better N64 game” rather than “the better game” is really unfair because that means the game with more flaws or less intuitive controls can win simply because of the legacy or importance to the N64
Liam - I 100% guarantee you didn't play it in 1997 then. You're trying to judge a game from the past by comparing it to modern games. Your argument is invalid. Overall greatness and timelessness are two different things. Of course a JRPG is going to be more timeless than a tactical first person shooter. There are plenty of examples of games being better in their time but perhaps aging worse than other games. Typically the pioneer type games are going to age worse because they have been built upon the most. For instance, the original "command and conquer" sucks balls now but back than it was some of the most fun I ever had and it helped create the RTS genre. Plus everyone complaining about Goldeneye's graphics, that's just how the N64 made 3d games, man. None of them aged well. Nintendo had an advantage by making cartoonish games with bright, primary colors and mixed in 2d images. Games going for realism always looked worse than the cartoon games on N64.
I was with you up until here Jirard, but Shane stole my heart with Paper Mario. Paper Mario IS a good game still to this very day. GoldenEye is.... a good memory at best. I don't really understand the logic behind these votes. At some points, they're voting because it's the best game to COME from the N64. At other times they're voting because it's the best game FOR the N64. I think those are two very different logics. Like, they said Mario Party 2 is better than Smash 64 because that's the best Mario Party game and Smash 64 is arguably the worst in the series. That's voting for the best game to COME from the N64. While on this they voted for GoldenEye because it's the best game FOR the N64, even though they admitted it's nowhere near as good a game as Paper Mario still is. I really REALLY like this series, but the inconstancies in voting logic are a little bit aggravating. I wish they just stated at the start if they were voting for the best game "from" or "for" the N64. The "best" N64 game on its own is a little too vague. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I can't accept the argument that a bad game is better than a good game based solely on the fact that it's more synonymous with its console. They both came out on the N64, and Paper Mario is just a better game through and through. (EDIT: I hope I didn't come off as a whiny jerk, I don't mean for it to sound like that. I've really been enjoying this series and I do like all the stuff that y'all do. I just thought this could be somewhat of a "constructive criticism" of some sort.)
I guess I just don't get the point of these videos (other than to watch a discussion which is entertaining on it's own). As others have pointed out, there's no consistency in logic. First of all, I'd argue that arguing that 007 is better because of multiplayer is not really a great argument on it's own. Yes, the N64 did have 4 controller slots but arguing that a game being multiplayer is more in the spirit of the N64 is disingenuous, why even include single player games in that situation. Furthermore, it seems that not a lot of attention is really being paid to which game is actually better, but rather which game was more popular back then. At that point, these videos aren't really needed because you could just look at a list of best sellers. That's not really my idea of a good competition. In this pairing, Paper Mario wins hands down. Because while you can play newer Paper Mario games, and arguably some are better (Thousand Year Door especially comes to mind), others actually prefer the original due to it's simplicity. Regardless, playing both is worth your time since they have different stories. With GoldenEye not only is it not really a game I would want to play now a days due to the controls, there are much better FPS games, and better James Bond games.
Melody you answered yourself... Because you can get the same PM experiences on today's systems, OG GoldenEye is the better N64 game as those experiences are really only available on the N64. Its supposed to be about the console and the defining games of such... PM being available and just as fun on today's systems just doesn't preclude it to being the N64 choice...
You can play Paper Mario on other platforms, but you don't have to. The controller may not be the best, but it works well enough that you won't really have any problems playing the game on an actual N64. Furthermore, as I stated in my commend, visually the game holds up well enough even without any sort of hardware mods. GoldenEye isn't best played on an actual N64. Rather if you want the game to be playable, you have to use an emulator as well as an injector in order to get mouse and keyboard controls and 60fps. Or at least one could map the camera to the right stick on a modern controller. Furthermore, while they were quick to dismiss the wii remake, GoldenEye 007: Reloaded is a better game if you're going by original releases. That it was treated so poorly despite it being better should really get them thinking. If the Wii remake is a better game and it is supposedly crap like they say it is, do they really love 007 or the memories, if nostalgia is all that is driving this then imo they're doing these games a disservice. Again, you can play Paper Mario on other platforms, but you don't have to the original release looks and plays just fine. If you play older games still you would understand this. It being ported to the virtual console should not be considered a bad thing. Otherwise that would disqualify many of the games in the brackets and would create an unfair bias. On the other side is a game that arguably you can't play on anything other than an N64, but the game itself is best played on anything BUT an N64. And arguably it would be better to just play the Wii remake. I'm saying this as somebody that generally prefers traditional controls. But I do concede from time to time when the pointer controls work well and this is one of them. And it also supports classic controller anyway so other than nostalgia there's not much reason to go back to the N64 original.
I don't know why anyone says "we can go back and play it now" you aren't gonna go back and play either game now because they are old and outdated, the only way you can determine the better N64 game is by comparing them when they were released. Goldeneye was more popular, everyone played the heck out of it and paper mario was the best single player rpg on the console. From there it's all personal preference on which experience matters more to you.
The "you can only play Goldeneye on N64" logic is bs. You can play Goldeneye on any system today, it's just so trash and dated that no one would *want to* .
Paper Mario isn't outdated though. It's graphics might not be as good as later Paper Mario games, but it's art style definitely holds up even today. The controls also holds up well considering the controller. It alongside Thousand Year Door are better than Super Paper Mario, and much better than Sticker Star and Color Splash. And while I prefer Super Mario RPG to the Paper Mario games, the first two Paper Mario games are great games. The paper aesthetic definitely helped make the games timeless. Not every game dies when it is old. Not every game becomes outdated.
Chase 64 Cubed paper mario definently aged the best, but goldeneye where the one people obsessed over back in the day. At least that's what I remember.
Purple Dawn Depends how you look at it. If you handed somebody an N64 (who has never owned one) and some games which would you tell them are worth playing? I doubt many would still say 007 unless they haven't played it in years.
Chase 64 Cubed that's what I mean. Paper mario is the better game. But back in the glory days of the N64, not once did I hear my friends talk about paper mario. It was always goldeneye. So goldeneye, not the best game, but certantly impactful.
Purple Dawn Gotcha. I had the opposite in my school. Only "nerds" had games in my area and we all liked Mario. Only knew 2 people that even owned 007 for the longest time.
I obsessed over Paper Mario as a kid. I still obsess over Paper Mario as an adult. I just did a 10HP run last week and it was a blast. I think, regardless of bias, it stands to this day as one of the best RPGs. It's so impeccably well-designed.
Maaaaaan, this series is really frustrating to watch. I love all the normal boots crew and I love the discussions..... buuuuut you are all so inconsistent with your bases for voting. I think you guys need to set some ground rules as to what you're judging the game on. Is it based on what you would like to play now? What was more fun back then? Whether or not it changed the gaming industry? What made the best use of n64 gimmicks? Most innovative? You are taking all of these points into consideration but the weight you put into each category changes from episode to episode. Example: Jared voted for pokemon snap because it was the game he "would rather play right now". He said the same thing for paper mario and voted for golden eye.
Spot on. They keep making up arbitrary criteria like which they'd rather play now, or which one was the "essence" of the N64. Just vote for which game is better!
Paper Mario is the game that got so many people into Jrpgs with how easy, intuitive, and engaging it was. Golden eye has not aged well at all and is rather driven by nostalgia compared to paper mario. Honestly this one is a slaughter to me. Goldeneye just doesnt hold a candle
LOSTLEAD8R i see paper Mario as the sad attempt at a true successor to Super Mario RPG. As a kid I played Super Mario RPG and paper mario was a very sad let down after that experience. In fact, paper mario is what pushed me into final fantasy, which I was not interested in before VII. Meanwhile Goldeneye started it all... To me its not about how any game ages, its the weight it carries. Goldeneye sits easily as top 5 nintendo games of all time due to what it spawned in my opinion. Super Mario RPG is also in that list and is what kicks paper mario out.
+IfOUGHTpIRANHAz But if that is the "essence of N64" Then why did Mario 64 beat Mario Kart 64 and Pokemon Snap beat Diddy Kong racing when, from what I understand as "the essence of N64", those games had multiplayer over a single player experience. And Jirards point on making friends with Golden Eye is kinda moot as well since I feel like if he had Paper Mario instead he could just find other people who played it, talked about it and shared secrets about it like what badges they got, and became friends. Feels like Paper Mario lost at the end for kinda unfair reasons.
Ok. Even without nostalgia goggles Paper Mario is still a better game with its fairly tight game play. But because the "N64 experience" is multiplayer they chose that. The only one who actually really defended it was Jirard because he grew up with golden eye while finally playing Paper Mario in recent years. Meanwhile the other 3/4 grew up with both (from the sound of it) and said they all thought Paper Mario still held up in many ways as opposed to golden eye. It sounds like Jirard was the one with nostalgia goggles on.
As fun as these are to watch, I think for your next bracket, you've got to decide exactly what it is that you're debating. No one can seem to agree whether you're talking about which is a better game, which is a more influential game, which is a more defining game, or whatever. There needs to be some consistency going forward. PBG joked that the entire bracket is invalid because Majora's Mask lost, but he's actually kinda right about that. It is invalid, but it's because everyone is going back and forth about what the question is that they're trying to answer. There needs to be a clear question so everyone can debate the answer. Also, Majora's Mask losing definitely does make the bracket invalid :P
I think that's a really good point. I find myself not wanting to take all this too seriously, but consistency over what exactly the question is has been a bit frustrating. Though I have still enjoyed the series.
Think Fact really OoT won because its OoT, OoT is going to win this thing hands down and I hate OoT but the way these are being judged thats how its going
The rules of who wins each pair seems to change between episodes, so that kinda sucks the fun out of it. Also, some of these match ups don't even compare. How can you compare an RPG spin-off to a multiplayer FPS?
I agree, I just mentioned it in another reply comment. It's an abstract semantics issue they're bringing up inevitably when they say, "it's my favorite, but it's not the best on N64 title." Imo, that makes no sense. It's either your preferred game from that console, or it isn't. And favorite is the same thing as best, because what you would say is "best" comes down to one's own taste, in the end, whether they're trying to be objective or not. Technical best is different from nostalgic best, I can get on board with that, but when they start talking in, "but is it the best as an N64 game??", they start losing me. And from what I understand, they basically had these randomly paired up to go against each other so it would be fair from the beginning, which I can understand, and I think it does make for slightly more interesting discussions in a way. But at the same time, I think it would have been better to have at least just the first brackets be games vs games that make sense rather than RNG.
They did mention in the beginning the whole bracket is RNG. They didn't intentionally pair up any of these games against each other, it just randomly wound up this way. They've even said as much that some of these are not fair matches to have right away because the two games are really good (case in point, Smash vs. Mario Party). Plus there is a loser's bracket. So even if a game loses in the first round, it still can come back.
XA44 OoT isn’t my favorite either, but I acknowledge that it’s a well-made game. Just curious, why do you hate it? And don’t tell me it’s just because you like another Zelda better.
I hate whenever they go for the iconic argument, cuz they aren’t arguing the more iconic games, they are arguing the best games. I think. Actually, I think that they need to better set the parameters as to what they are arguing for better. Without better parameters, there is no way to correctly compare these games
I knew from the beginning that Paper Mario was not going to beat Zelda, Mario Kart, or basically any of the first round winners. But are you serious? Goldeneye? It couldn't have one victory? I guess there's always the loser brackets, but after seeing this, I don't think it'll beat anyone on the chart. Oh Paper Mario.....how wronged you were....I'll always love you.
As much as I like listening to the argument, and the people behind it, this serie is starting to feel too... weird ? There is no consistency on what are the criterias for "best n64 game". Is it the best game ? The essence of N64 ? The one people would rather play now ? The most impactful ? Does the way the game holds up nowadays counts more than what it was in the context of its release ? Having at least a guideline would be way better for the show, and allow for more cohesive arguments, instead of a constantly changing point between episodes. Yet, it's still fun to watch, and I hope it will get better in the future.
nworder4life I disagree on that. Both Goldeneye and Paper Mario we’re the first games of their respective genres for many people, but over time RPGs have been a much bigger presence on Nintendo systems than shooters.
First time they got it wrong. The argument for Goldeneye contradicts what they said in other videos. They admit Paper Mario is a better game and only give Goldeneye the win because it has multiplayer? The multiplayer for Goldeneye is extremely shallow and was only played so much because it was the best at it's time. Paper Mario however still holds up today with it's core mechanic. And the less we speak about Goldeneye's single player the better. No way should Goldeneye have won this without heavy nostalgia glasses and bias.
On personal note I have to say paper mario, I grew up with dyslexia meaning it was very difficult for me to learn how to read. I hated reading books more than anything. When I played Paper Mario I got caught up in the world. I wanted to know what was going on so I pushed myself to learn to read the dialogue, I know it sounds stupid and unrealistic but I'm not lying when I say Paper Mario helped me learn to read.
"N64 is all about playing with friends" That's why any other time in this series so far that a single player game has gone up against a multiplayer game the single player game won?
Plus, Considering more than half of these games on this bracket are single player games that are fan favorite Nintendo games kind of validates that the N64 was definitely as enjoyable playing on your own as it was with friends.
Right, I just don't understand how that statement shifted this entire episode. Granted goldeneye was a fantastic game I don't think that should have had such a turn on their opinions.
jesus barrera I agree %100 on the fact that DKR should have best pokemon snap. I'm not saying that 007 shouldn't have one either. I was saying the fact that they used multiplayer as an argument when no other MP game has won kind of makes it irrelevant. And they chose solely on the MP part of 007 barely even talked about the single player. Goldeneye definitely hasn't aged well
Vemoes I kinda thought the same. Yes at first Goldeneye was great but once you played both Perfect Dark and that game in recent years, there is only one that aged well and it is Perfect Dark.
I don't understand the argument of something being a better game vs something being a better n64 game. If you are debating on 2 games that are both on the n64, then the better game is the better n64 game. I'm not upset about choosing golden eye, but that reasoning is pretty dumb.
Ricky McKinney Their reasoning is very inconsistent, but the crux of the argument is that the better N64 game is the better game for the time and only in the context of the N64 and its other games.
Joe Mirakian even at the time though golden eye isn’t better than Paper Mario. The games haven’t changed. The only thing that has changed is their opinion. Only now are people realizing that golden eye wasn’t an amazing game. It only seemed good at the time. So their argument still doesn’t make sense.
Drewsefer89 that’s not what better n64 game means. When someone says this game is the best n64 game they usually mean the best game on the system, not most influential. It is clear that that was what they were originally arguing. The only reason they chose golden eye is because it had multiplayer which is ridiculous. They should just do what the title say and choose the BEST n64 game. It means exactly what it says.
Drewsefer89 who they choose is purely subjective so idk what your going on about with it not being based on subjectivity. I have no problem if you think golden eye is a better game. That is not the problem. They admitted themselves that paper Mario is the better game. In that case it should’ve won. If you actually saw each of the debates you would see that they are choosing the better n64 game. That’s why Pokémon snap won, that’s why Mario party won, and that’s why Mario 64 won. They were better made games and they said that if they had to choose which game they would like to play more they would choose those ones. The problem is after that they started bringing up dumb reasons as to why the other one was a better n64 game. Like with Majora’s mask they said it was the better Zelda game but not the better n64 game. No matter how you look at it that doesn’t even make any sense. There both n64 games and Majora’s mask is better. I think it’s clear which should’ve won. I’m not using my own opinions I’m using theirs. By their standards Majora’s mask should’ve won. They did the same thing with golden eye. They did not choose it because it was BETTER or the BEST, just like the title says, but they chose it because it had a multiplayer mode. Any game can have a multiplayer mode but that does not make it a better game. If it’s not about which game is the better n64 game then don’t say it’s about the best n64 game. You can’t add other meanings to what best n64 game means. The meaning shouldn’t even be debated.
I had an idea! Next time you guys do a tournament like this, you should have someone go through and play both games for each matchup, and then their vote could be worth 2. You could also record the gameplay and put it up as a separate video. Can't speak on behalf of everyone else, but I would definitely watch those.
YES. I was looking for this comment. Ogre Battle 64 is arguably one of the best RPGs (in terms of storyline) ever made. One of my favourite games, and forgotten WAY too often.
Hey guys, I don't know why i bothered starting this series. I was initially thinking it wouldn't care since I kinda only watch DYKG regularly, and there's just so much "which game is better" I've watched on YT already. But this series is great. Aside from the not great camera quality, and the sometimes weird pans and edits, this is is a really great series. I'm stoked to watch more of it and future series about other systems!
Man, this was a great discussion. I changed my mind like 4 times whenever someone brought up another argument. These games are so different it almost doesnt even feel fair to have them go head to head like this.
I love how they each have their own way of voting. PBG goes for what he liked most as a kid usually, Shane goes for what he thinks is the best game, Jirard goes for what game has the better legacy, and Jared constantly second guesses himself trying very hard to be objective.
I'm still confused why Harvest Moon 64 isn't on the bracket. Was it really that bad? I mean it had issues, but what 3D game back then didn't? I still think it's one of the best in the series.
That's because it's absolutely one of the best in the series, and I'd argue THE best. There's also a noticeable lack of Sin & Punishment or Mischief Makers, clearly there's an anti-Treasure conspiracy going on here...
Yeah, HM64 had some of the fastest days in the franchise. Even though it's sort of dated, you always felt engaged in everything you did in its world. Such a great soundtrack, as well. That game is really special to me.
There are many comments about people not understanding the standard that you guys are following for your vote. But what makes this so great is that it’s just a bunch of friends discussing their love for games. There doesn’t need to be a standard. They’re just having fun. Keep it up guys! I’m loving it!
I don’t buy that “it’s not a better game but it’s a better n64 game” argument. It’s a label to make the n64 the multiplayer console. Just because it had four controllers My best memories on N64 are single player games so Paper mario definitely wins Goldeneye does not hold up
I still don't understand the difference between "best game" and "best N64 game." How does that work? Saying that one game is the best, already implies that it is the best from that console. For example, if you say that Metal Gear Solid is the best game, then you are saying that it is also better than any other PS1 game. This is what confuses me the most about these videos. I don't understand what Jared means when he says GoldenEye isn't a better game, but it's a better N64 game. That statement makes no sense lol.
It makes perfect sense. It means he likes Paper mario more and it's the better game for him BUT as an N64 game Goldeneye was way more influential and people were crazy over it. Everybody played Goldeneye, it was THE N64 experience back in the day. Which makes it the better N64 game.
jesus barrera I've literally never met anyone who says that Tetris is the best game of all time. Maybe it's the game that has sold the most, but that doesn't make it the best.
nworder4life but why is the "best game" not the game that he likes the most. I get that Goldeneye was influential, but that doesn't make it the best. This still makes no sense to me, if they are picking the game they think is best, then they should pick the one they like best.
I think its kinda dumb to rank it by "N64 game" it should be by quality alone, bc that game is literally unplayable, its just not fun now. Quality is by far the most important thing when it comes to ranking one game to another not sentimental nostalgia or the important experiences of owning an N64. That is too relative, and subjective. If you handed someone an N64 who had never played old games, or heard of Golden eye or paper mario, and asked them after playing through both games which one they liked better what do you think they would say?
If anything it's the opposite, you can absolutely rank them by quality now but it's impossible to get a fair ranking on how fun they were 20 years ago.
Unless you were around 20 years ago like I was lol. They are all shit games now but at the time Goldeneye was the game to own, paper mario wasn't even in the same stratosphere in terms of popularity and praise.
Hot take before I even make it deep into the video: Goldeneye hasn't just not aged well, it sucked when it came out. It sucked then. It sucks now. It's controls were a direct regression from the console versions of DOOM and I have no worldly idea how it is so widely beloved.
Picking a worse game because it was the "essence" of the N64? No thank you. I would never sit down to play Goldeneye over Paper Mario. I'm with Shane on this one.
For years i've been visiting and revisiting all these classic games, specially the ones i've never played. To see the influences in modern design and just to have a good time with some of the best games of all time, i mean if you are playing something, why not choose whats considered the best right? Golden eye is the only classic game i've tried to play but then inmediately abandoned it after taking a few steps. I just couldn't stand it, and listen i generally are not very picky about unconventional shooter controls. I love megaman legends, metroid prime, i'm even that guy that loves the tank controls in classic resident evil. But i can't stand golden eye lol. Its the game with the worst aging that i have ever seen.
I remember my brothers and I used to play so much Paper Mario. I remember being so traumatized by the stupid cake baking segment that we left a slice of cake to die in the ice level. Not caring how much it healed.
As someone who only recently picked up the N64, and playing all the old games through paper Mario does stand the test of time and works with the controller.
Goldeneye consumed hundreds of hours and was an experience to be shared. Paper Mario was great, but was something you played alone. You didn't get perfect, memorable summer nights and sleepovers from Paper Mario. Also, anyone who still has Goldeneye on the N64, SET THE CONTROLS TO SOLITAIRE. You move with the D-pad and aim with the stick, it's way better! It makes the game feel much less dated.
If you lived out in the sticks with maybe 1-2 friends max, Paper Mario was the real summer night game. I played through it at least a dozen times as a kid.
Throughout every episode I've thought about every point made and this is the only video so far where I've actually disagreed with the outcome. I LOVE THIS SERIES BTW THANK YOU.
I got into RPGs with Final Fantasy... (Five? I think) long before finding a copy of Paper Mario, and Even after not playing Paper Mario until AFTER TTYD, I STILL find it an AMAZING RPG. It has all the fundamentals, all hidden over an easy to use interface. I understand the argument that Goldeneye is a better N64 game, because at the time it could only have been an N64 game, and the only reason that later consoles generally have four players is BECAUSE of that game. However, as mentioned, Goldeneye does not stand the test of time, and it's legacy only serves to push it to even with Paper Mario's great gameplay. Nintendo's own words, "Gameplay first"
This is starting to tick me off a bit, the fact that Jirard and Jared are the only ones in the mindset of "Best Nintendo 64" and the others are just "Best game". Dude of course!! If you look TODAY, Goldeneye is complete trash, the game runs slowly, the graphics are nightmare inducing. Paper Mario get's a pass because they don't even try to look realistic. But the thing is: Even if paper Mario was on gameboy, PSone, Dreamcast, It would be just as awesome, meanwhile, 007 wouldn't work as well because not many consoles had multiplayer above 2 players. And gather friends around and playing was a big part of N64. And 007 was one of the friend gathering games. I agree with Jirard, if you're just going for best game, then scratch the title, redo it all over with the RIGHT mindset and put this to rest.
Ozmounth the title says best n64 game which means best game on the n64. That means they should rate the game by how good it is today. Nostalgia doesn’t make a game good and I think you know that. The title is fine but their logic isn’t.
What does it even mean to be the "best N64 game" when it doesn't take how good the game is into consideration? You could say they're looking at how good it was at the time, but it's 2018 so that's completely irrelevent.
I disagree that you couldn't have played Goldeneye on another system. .-. If it had been released on the PS1 after they decided to use a dualstick control scheme, it would have been a patently better game on the PS1 than the N64. It would have ran better, would have had better graphics, and it would have controlled better. As much as I love the N64, the PS1 had stronger hardware and a better controller.
I mean like yeah, N64 had multiplayer as a major selling point, but there are other multiplayer games I’d rather play over Golden Eye, like the Mario Party Games and Smash Bros. Paper Mario is full of character and charm and there’s no experience quite like it in the entire N64 library. Also I don’t like the argument of “it’s the better N64 game” because that basically boils down to what was more popular at the time.
I like how Jirard came to the most logical conclusion, using arguments which had been established by Jared in the Zelda match up, but people are still angry.
Yeah, I don't really agree with saying Goldeneye is the better game because it's "an essential part of the N64 experience" when you're all admittedly saying that Paper Mario is, quality wise, the much better game. I mean, you guys went with Super Mario 64 over Mario Kart 64 (and not saying this was the wrong choice, Super Mario 64 is far better than Mario Kart 64) when MK64 fits the bill just as much as Goldeneye in the "essential N64 experience" with its multiplayer and, much like Goldeneye, has aged horribly but we all still have nostalgic feelings of playing it.
jesus barrera, for some people Tetris could wind up being a better game than Pokemon due to simple bias and vice versa. If it comes to which is the better game you've got the argument of endless - but limited replayability vs. a RPG Collectathon with a bunch of things that need tweaking. By my own personal taste and judgement Tetris is just more enjoyable than the original Pokemon games, assuming we are strictly talking about Red/Green/Blue/Yellow. If we bring in the Gameboy Color games (Silver/Gold/Crystal) -- then that changes everything due to the level of polish compared to the originals. If you want to have a bit of a debate over this I'd be happy to oblige.
I'm with Shane, it's no competition, Paper Mario is far superior. It seems everyone agrees, so why vote for Goldeneye? I don't care if it was more "defining" of the N64, it's aged like a carton of milk. Goldeneye isn't even the best N64 FPS, Perfect Dark is.
Perhaps I was spoiled by playing Perfect Dark first, but for me Goldeneye wasn't even a *good* game, let alone deserving of being included in a discussion about the best N64 games.
Was just thinking what a good idea this series is! It's almost infinite! You can do it with a different order of games a number of times, with a number of different consoles! You guys hit a jackpot with this series
Can you please do this for PS1 as well? I played way more PS1 than N64 as a kid, so this would be even more fun for me. Symphony of the Knight vs. Metal Gear Solid would destroy me. (It's MGS though... lol)
i think it's funny how everyone agrees Paper Mario is the better game, and Jirard even admitted he was choosing GoldenEye strictly for nostalgia. But yet Golden Eye won... Paper Mario was robbed.
Jirard specifically said he didn't play Paper Mario as a kid, so he didn't any nostalgia for it, which was why he chose Goldeneye. He admitted Paper Mario was the better game but voted for Goldeneye anyway. Made me lose a bit of respect for him to be honest.
+Flareboxx No, you just dont understand his arguemnt and that in no way discredits it. This isnt the best game or the best game on the N64 bracket, this is the best N64 game. There is nuance there you are failing to grasp.
You can vote on which 90s Cartoons get into Madness season 2 here: twitter.com/NormalBoots/status/1026929980951781376
First (Response
First Response
NormalBoots
Goldeneye vs Paper Mario, are those two even comparable? I mean sure if you had say, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark or Doom fair enough but with these two games being sooo far apart I just don't get the connection, just me or no?
NormalBoots I do have an Idea for the next one... after madness season two. Best SNES Games; you name them. Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Super Mario World, Super Mario Kart, Final Fantasy IV & VI, Star Fox, Super Mario RPG, Kirby Super Star, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Secret of Mana, Super Castlevania IV, Mega Man X and Etc. etc. etc.
Seriously though... Invader Zim.
goldeneye innovated a genre. Paper mario stands the test of time.
if youre the kind of guy who can appreciate what something did. its goldeneye
If youre the kind of guy who can appreciate what something does? Paper Mario
This is actually an amazing explanation. It allows people on both sides to see the other reasoning.
This is fair. I played Paper Mario for the first time 5 years ago and loved it. Age didn't affect the game in the way it affects a FPS.
Yeah. It's similar with a lot of these games. Some stand the test of time while others, fantastic and maybe superior at the time, don't, just because games that came after were able to do things so much better.
Well said
The thing is Paper mario also innovated it's genre to the point that you could even say that it created a new genre of RPG
This is probably the weirdest pair so far.
Perfect Dark should have taken Goldeneye 007's slot.
R.I.P Paper Mario
Where did you get your shirt, man?!
I thought I was the only one who thought it was weird
Hello ^_^
* *Lights a candle* * This one is for all my people with good taste in games...
DidYouKnowGaming? It hurt me so bad :( thank you
Paper Mario is the better game.
I don't disagree with your friend. Paper Mario IS a better game. But in the Nintendo 64 context, 007 had more influence, both on the players and on the console. I won't even discard Paper Mario influence, because it born sequels spin-offs as well. Goldeneye legacy, just like Nintendo 64, died off, and Paper Mario still have its mark going on. I do love Paper Mario, but back in the day, sadly, It was more of a cult hit. I get your point but please, don't evaluate taste on this spefic mindset.
Ozmounth It’s basically the same argument made in the Ocarina of Time vs Majora’s Mask Debate where they admit the loser is the better game. But the winner is more important to the legacy of the console.
You voted for Pokémon Snap over Diddy Kong Racing.. Nuff said. I do agree with you on this one. Paper Mario is the better N64 game :)
Pokemon Snap ep: "Yeah its the worse game, but I would love to sit down and play it today."
Snap wins.
Goldeneye007 ep: "Nobody would ever sit down and play this today."
Goldeneye wins.
I love you guys.
Go back and veto this decision guys. Be freaking consistent.
Your mistake was expecting consistency from these guys.
To be fair, if they'd picked Diddy Kong Racing over Pokemon Snap, I would have raised unholy hell. .-. I'm biased, to be fair, but any racing game is crap and boring; they kept saying that it had more to do than Pokemon Snap but my thing is that it really didn't. You drove around in a circle on different skinned maps. Maybe you did a figure 8 even. There wasn't that much to it, even if there was a battle mode. Besides, I spent a lot of time with friends playing Pokemon Snap; we'd take turns and find all sorts of secrets and compete to see who could take the best pictures. Pokemon Snap holds a far more unique memory and spot to me than just another racing game.
I did play it when I was a kid, actually. It was mostly fun to kick my brother's ass at it but now that we're older and live on opposite sides of the country, it lost its appeal. :P
@Otterly lost Diddky kong racing was FULL of content and modes. Exploration and secrets and it was freaakin amazing, pokemon snap was taking pictures on rails with a few alternate playthroughs possible. No contest DKR blew that game out of the water, it was not just a racing game.
They keep flipping between better game or more of a "N64" game. Both have merit, but consistency guys!
The main reasons on why they vote has changed drastically every video, its now all invalid and what they should do is redo this with actual rules or guildlines in to what is counted towards the vote, so far we've had: best game, best n64 game, what would i play now, more fuller of a game, etc etc. they need consistency 10000000000000000%
I think it all depends on the games being matched up, for party/multiplayer games like Mario Party 2 and Smash Bros and similar games like the two Zelda games, it makes more sense to talk about what is currently more fun, but for games that are completely different, it makes more sense to judge them based on what they brought to the console as a whole.
If they had consistency on what’s more fun to play today like they did in the first episode, Diddy Kong Racing, Majoras Mask, and Paper Mario would have all won.
Epic Monkey actually Pokémon snap won because it is more fun to play today. You were right about the other ones though.
MegA - Oh, then they were just wrong about that.
I was in the same boat as Jared, I was all in for Paper Mario at first, but Jirard's point about what the N64 brought to the multiplayer table is spot on. Paper Mario is easily the more happy game of the two, and definitely the one I'd rather play now, but 007 was probably the one that brought more happiness to the world overall.
That bring said, for me Paper Mario is the better game, and 007 is the more important one.
(Edited for clarity and crap)
I dislike the argument that one game may be a better game overall but is not a better n64 game as it just is contradicting, makes for a lack of consistency and messes up the main focus and points. This topic keeps getting brought up and destroys the voting process. 2 games already got screwed because they were “better games” but “worse n64 games”. They keep stating topics about which aged better and which game stands to the test of time but that all gets tossed out the window when they bring up which game is the better n64 game. If it is a better video game overall than it theoretically should be a better n64 game. It’s just contradicting to almost all previous points and hurts the final votes. None of the less I love this series and the normal boots cast. Great show and concept, plus the editing is superb. I just wish they could figure out what it is they are really arguing about, and judge accordingly. Thank you
Yeah, logically if one game is better than another on the same system it is the better game on that system. A lot of these discussions seem to be coming from the perspective of people who no longer play those games, but if you still do you obviously won't really care about which one "carries the essence of the system more", you'll usually care more about how good it is and how well it has held up today. As somebody who still owns an N64 and still plays it frequently, there are games I still play because they held up and those that I don't really play because they haven't aged as well.
Paper Mario is one of those games that even on an N64 without any sort of hdmi mods or other things still looks quite good and the game plays well enough. GoldenEye is not one such game. I get that for many there is the nostalgia factor of playing with friends, that works for several of the games they voted against before such as Super Smash Bros or Mario Kart 64.
Constantly bringing up which game carries the essence of an N64 or which one feels more like an N64 game as opposed to which is the better game comes across as more superficial. If it's based on popularity there's probably a watchmojo video that accomplishes much the same thing.
Right. Also, just because it's very important and has a legacy doesn't mean it's the better game overall. And I personally believe "best" to be somewhat synonymous with "favorite", because if you're picking a best, you're inevitably biased regardless anyways, and your opinions are still being involved in the equation. I understand the difference between a technical best, like I can get on board with that level of objectivity. But when these guys start speaking in these abstract semantics in every episode, it's like, yeah of course they're going to create a different standard by which to judge these games each time. They should have literally just said, "what's your favorite game that happens to be from this console in terms of how it holds up today?"
Because the thing is, when they keep bringing up legacy and how many waves it made at the time, obviously it's going to end up being either Goldeneye, Ocarina of Time, or Super Mario 64, like everyone's always said. Because those games' legacies became so over the years because of how good they actually are, nostalgia aside. Yeah it's fine to discuss the game's legacy, but when you put that into consideration for why it's the best, it just doesn't work in my opinion. Same with that weird, "this one's my favorite, but this one's the better N64 game," thing that keeps coming up, like I find it weird that they didn't realize that would come off as really strange.
And I assume these were all pre-filmed to over the course of a day or two maybe? I can't imagine all these dudes coming together to make a video once a week lol unless they all live nearby now, which I have no idea if they do or not at this point.
But I mean, yeah, I agree, and I love all these guys too, and this was a really good idea for a video series for this channel. I'm really into the idea of the videos that go on the Normal Boots channel being more like this where they can involve all or some of the guys, and involve topics like these like best of's and documentaries and commentaries and such. When I found out via The Completionist about this channel, I was like finally lol hell yeah. But yeah, nothing wrong with a little criticism. This is the only complaint I personally have with the show. Everything else is spot on perfect imo. I sorta wish they were a bit longer, but that's just because I enjoy longer content, nothing against the videos themselves.
(And yeah, I do believe 007 Goldeneye is still a fantastic game that does deserve all the hype it's gotten).
Melody To add to that, most multiplayer games that people had fun with when they were younger were fun regardless of the game. It was hanging with your friends that was fun, and in a way you don't get to do now as an adult. Doesn't mean the games can't be good, but there's a reason why you play the current multiplayer game and not crack out the old one. Because it's where your friends are. You could easily play a crappy multiplayer game with your friends and still have fun. Being in person is something older consoles demanded which is also why there's more fonder memories than just chatting online.
Exaclty I mean they even said that Doom64 was better than Goldeneye if that's the case ¿why was Goldeneye even here? like ¿which is the criteria for best N64 game? is obviously not what's the best game overall because Majora's and Paper Mario lost regardless of aging better and they admitting they were better games.
It's seems is nostalgia and if that's the only factor then this is incredibly biased, unfair and contradictory because also OoT won over Majora's because to them OoT was an experience that was friendly to introduce Zelda to someone unfamiliar with it. Basically they said OoT was perfect to show someone unfamiliar with the N64 what was so good about it.
But in this case the game that's aged the worst of the whole list and is one the worst possible ways to introduce a FPS won, it's trumped by every shooter after it's relased date (literally Half-Life launched the next year and Quake was already out). It didn't even had a legacy, it became obsolete as soon as Halo arrived and actually showed how to design a FPS for consoles, no wonder that to this day every console shooter models it's control scheme to Halo's.
It's especially dumb because they don't even define "essence of N64 game" even though it's the main reason to pick Goldeneye. Like what they're talking about doesn't mean anything other than legacy which doesn't tell you which is the better game anyway. The way they judge games has been terribly inconsistent as the "essence of N64 game" argument would mean Smash Bros and Diddy kong racing should have won, but they deemed them as the less fun game that they wouldn't play today just like Goldeneye
"This is a better game but this one is a better n64 game"...smh everytime I hear that it makes even less sense than the time before.
Yea Majoras got shafted when it is clearly the better game than Ocarina.
Except Ocarina is the better game.
psap29 [X] Doubt
Yunno what I don’t get, They say that majoras is a better Zelda game, and ocarina is a better N64 game.
I think it’s the other way around. Ocarina of Time basically defines what a zelda game is. Majoras feels like a completely different and cool idea. It is debatably a better 64 game.
It also makes no sense considering one of the points was that Ocarina should be used to introduce people to what Zelda is. If that is the case then by that logic Ocarina is the better Zelda as well. Maybe not for narration, gameplay or anything but as representation of the Zelda franchise. That's literally what comes with the recommendation.
I'm confused on if you guys're ranking these by if it's still fun today, or if it's legacy and nostalgia.
It doesn't seem like they know either.
They keep going back and forth per video. That's my only real gripe with this series is that they'll let their nostalgia take over instead of thinking how much fun it is to play today, which is what I'm pretty sure they're supposed to be getting at.
I feel it's a mixture of both.
Yes
It's both of them and neither of them at the same time
ok, somethings been irritating me about this series and I'v finally pinpointed it. Each time an important game in gaming history comes up, the arguments for it are always about how influential it is and how none of the best games would exist without it, but they ignore the arguments about whether or not that game is *actually better*. The only reason ocarina won last time was because two of the votes(both of whom agreed majora was better) were based on it's importance instead of its quality. We need to stop asking "Was this game influential to history" and start asking "which game is better ignoring all nostalgia, influence or how good any other game in the series may have been, and simply discuss which of the two is better on its own".
Also, several times they've said "x game (on the n64) is the better game but y is the better n64 game." That is an absurdly oxymoronic statement and is logically impossible. If x is a better game than y, and they're both on the n64, than by definition x is the better n64 game...
Boltaan'jistman Games do not exist in a vacuum, and considering their influence on the industry is a valid thought for this series. A beautiful part of loving things is that everyone's reasoning can be different, and recognizing WHERE something you love came from can be massively important in deciding which was "better"... For you, for the industry, or for the player. All are valid.
The question is not "is this game widely regarded" or "Did this game make other games better". The question is simply "Is this one better than the other" and if you have to use other games or other influences as examples, then you are failing at answering the question. Games not existing in a vacuum doesn't prevent you from discussing them as though they are.
as an example, the point of "halo wouldn't exist if it weren't for goldeneye" is irrelevant to the question of if it's a good game or not. The game could be the worst game of all time but influence the industry greatly, but that doesn't make it a good game or better than a less influential game.
@@BewbsOP How good a game is in the context of the history of gaming is absolutely essential to appreciation and understanding of the game and the experience of playing it. Just as it is for all forms of art. You can't understand or appreciate Schoenberg unless you know what music came before it and what was new and innovative about it.
Agreed with your point on "better N64 game" vs. "better game" though. In these matchups the answers to those questions are necessarily the same.
If the question was which is a better game in a specific context, or which resulted in better games, I'd agree. The problem is that literally any game can be argued for that way. Where does it stop? Could we call bubsy 3d a good game just because it helped the devs learn to make games and tons of good games came about as a result, and we'd never have the siphon filter games if it it werent for bubsy 3d? No! Bubsy 3d is a terrible game regardless of its legacy. Legacy, history, influence etc. have nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of a game. The question is which game is better, and only that.
In my opinion, 007 is overrated. It's definitely a classic, but I've always felt Perfect Dark was far superior, but always gets overshadowed.
Yeah well ur mom gay
Ok
I agree. It's hard for me to even go back to GoldenEye.
The Toy Room literally the only thing that makes this broken mess of a game even remotely playable are nostalgia goggles. Seriously for someone like me who has only played Golden eye with 18 jears it is a mystery how anyone could perfer this crap over a timeless classic like Paper mario
I agree and as was said the control scene for shooters on n64 is terrible. I tried to play it and couldnt believe i once played it regularly with inverted controls with the c buttons
I think it's extremely bizarre that the multiplayer aspect of a game supposedly makes it a "better Nintendo 64 game." If that's the case then there is a huge bias against not only any game that isn't multiplayer, but in accordance to some of their arguments could technically "work" on another system.
Is the best Nintendo 64 game primarily in reflection to what other consoles can or can't offer versus what the games themselves are trying to offer utilizing Nintendo 64 hardware?
Working off of Austin's comments, there are single player games where multiple people can come around and watch and contribute to. That was definitely the case for me when I was playing Paper Mario, and still is. But I can't get anybody to play Goldeneye with me anymore. If one of the biggest factors of making a Nintendo 64 game the best is if it can bring people together, then I think it's worth discussing whether it's still can, and if single player games are capable of doing that even if only one person has a controller in their hand.
I 100% agree. My fondest memories of the N64 were playing Paper Mario with my dad sitting next to me and talking about what was happening. That and printing literal hundreds of pages of guide books off the internet (since the computer was in the other room) for Ocarina of Time and having my step-sister play while I read them to her. Those memories live with me much more than a last second, unbalanced, 4-player addition to a game. Obviously we can talk about what goldeneye did for the genre, but it's starting to frustrate me that each guy has his agenda coming in and it's up to 1-2 guys to convince the 2-3 "swing" guys why his agenda is better and it's not consistent. If multiplayer should win, then shouldn't Smash Bros. just undeniably win this bracket because it's the most quintessential multiplayer game for the console?
that's pretty much how any discussion works. One person has a strong opinion and the rest either keep theirs or change based on arguments. Also, while I agree, I'd say many people disagree with smash being the best/most unique multiplayer experience of n64.
+Think Fact, I do not agree with your comment. I think that, while analysing what is the best N64 game, it is important to see what the game did.
I do love Paper Mario. But it doesn't shine. It is shadowed by Mario RPG and by Paper Mario 2.
On the other hand, some of the arguments are exaggerated. I played Golden Eye with some friends not so long ago and it is still fun. Also, saying that Golden Eye is not a good game because the control is shaky nowadays it's unfair.
Golden Eye had more replylability and more diversity than Paper Mario. The looks didn't agree that week but they were high note at the time.
My point is that saying that we prefer a game today by today standards make it better is not fair. I agree that not everything should be in the past. But the discussion was good.
Also, about multiplayer, I think that Mario party 2 was the best N64 multiplayer and it had high chances of winning.
Finally, I think that the fact that a game uses things unique to the console is a plus. For example, Okami was played better in Wii.
(Sorry if the arguments are not well connected, I haven't sleep well)
Weird part is, didn't they kill of smash because Mario Party 2 "was the better game to this day". They flat out chose Pokemon Snap because it "was the better game by today's standards" Most of their argument seemed to be situated that by today's standards for previous games yet none of that was applied here. That Smash Bros 64 or Mario Kart 64 is bad or mediocre more so because future titles did it better, while being the opposite for Mario Party 2. Realistically Golden Eye shouldn't have made it past the first round against any n64 game, let alone Paper Mario. If by today's you can't play it, it's not a good n64 game. N64 was filled with many timeless classics and some not so timeless. If people do buy an N64 mini in the future, it's going to be for Pokemon Snap and Stadium. It's gonna be for Paper Mario, Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, etc. People aren't gonna buy it for Golden Eye.
Right? Pokemon Snap beat Diddy Kong Racing...still don't get it
Before this starts...I don't care what the outcome is...Paper Mario will always be my favorite 64 game.
this
holy shit i'm playing paper mario 64 right now!!
While watching the video?
Paper Mario was the best paper Mario game
Gary Parks Jr i'm sad that paper mario 64 lost, play it at least once a year 100%, and for me it's the better game
I honestly don't understand how GoldenEye has a chance against Paper Mario. "Paper Mario is the better game but GoldenEye is the better N64 game"... WHAT???? How tho? It's more nostalgic sure, but its such an inferior game overall. This argument has been used almost every episode but not this one, where it would have been a killer. "Which would you want to play now if you had both of them in front of you." GoldenEye doesn't hold up in the slightest. It just aged like crap. Paper Mario can be played today and look and feel just as good as it did back then.
ICE Ricer That's kind of the point... The idea is for N64, not the game itself. PM can still be played and enjoyed today... I have it on my Wii and its what allowed my kids to get into it... That said, OG GoldenEye is worth the experience ONLY on N64. As the topic is about the essence of the N64 & not the game itself... GoldenEye was a defining game for the N64, whereas PM could have been picked up & played by new players on other systems... I agree that PM is a better game long term, BUT GoldenEye (much like the N64) was timely in its release and must be accounted for by what ONLY it could offer. As such, GoldenEye is the better defining N64 game as PM can still offer the same experiences on today's systems.
I disagree, I think its about which game, that is on N64, is better. "Better" being defined by ALL factors, not just its significance to the genre. While GoldenEye does a lot as far as that goes, it does nothing else. Paper Mario does that as well but not as well as GoldenEye and is just plain a better game than Goldeneye.
ICE Ricer except in these videos, just as this one starts, they keep saying "its an essential part of the 64 experience". For new players, they can get that PM experience, just like on the 64, from other systems. Some players Only get it from other systems... If it's available (in its original form) from anything other than a 64, than the 64 isn't essential to it. As such, GoldenEye (as it originally was) is only available for those 1st experiences on the 64. So GoldenEye would be the more "N64" essential game over PM.
I feel that you are overvaluing your Nostalgia's influence on the "N64 experience." If I were to show a friend who has never played the N64 a bunch of N64 games, I would not bother to show them GoldenEye. Despite this, I think I would be able to show him the "N64 experience" and get him to appreciate the system. GoldenEye is only thought of as being so important by people who played the N64 during a very specific period of time.
They didn't set the ground rules properly. They basically rotate between 3 different ideas; which game has had the most impact, which game is the best experience today, and which game was the best experience for it's time.
It honestly happens a lot on the internet with people claiming that OoT or Mario 64 or Goldeneye are some do best games ever but don't define what they mean by best best game ever. All 3 of those games are definitely very influential and were excellent games for their time but I'd argue that there are far better games within their genre now and really don't deserve such accolades in comparison.
#ShaneWasRight
Yeah, I played Goldeneye and it was one of the stupidest games I've ever played. The graphics are abysmal, the controls are so bad that it's unplayable, and the missions don't tell you what you're doing they just throw you in to some random area assuming that you know what the heck is going on. It's just infuriating. I honestly thought that it was just stupid shovelware when I first played it.
I agree man, I feel like judging these games as “the better N64 game” rather than “the better game” is really unfair because that means the game with more flaws or less intuitive controls can win simply because of the legacy or importance to the N64
Except on the episode with pokemon snap vs diddy kong racing. Diddy kong racing was the better game!
Yeah it sucks, completly overrated.
Liam - I 100% guarantee you didn't play it in 1997 then. You're trying to judge a game from the past by comparing it to modern games. Your argument is invalid. Overall greatness and timelessness are two different things. Of course a JRPG is going to be more timeless than a tactical first person shooter. There are plenty of examples of games being better in their time but perhaps aging worse than other games. Typically the pioneer type games are going to age worse because they have been built upon the most. For instance, the original "command and conquer" sucks balls now but back than it was some of the most fun I ever had and it helped create the RTS genre. Plus everyone complaining about Goldeneye's graphics, that's just how the N64 made 3d games, man. None of them aged well. Nintendo had an advantage by making cartoonish games with bright, primary colors and mixed in 2d images. Games going for realism always looked worse than the cartoon games on N64.
I was with you up until here Jirard, but Shane stole my heart with Paper Mario. Paper Mario IS a good game still to this very day. GoldenEye is.... a good memory at best.
I don't really understand the logic behind these votes. At some points, they're voting because it's the best game to COME from the N64. At other times they're voting because it's the best game FOR the N64. I think those are two very different logics.
Like, they said Mario Party 2 is better than Smash 64 because that's the best Mario Party game and Smash 64 is arguably the worst in the series. That's voting for the best game to COME from the N64. While on this they voted for GoldenEye because it's the best game FOR the N64, even though they admitted it's nowhere near as good a game as Paper Mario still is.
I really REALLY like this series, but the inconstancies in voting logic are a little bit aggravating. I wish they just stated at the start if they were voting for the best game "from" or "for" the N64. The "best" N64 game on its own is a little too vague.
I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I can't accept the argument that a bad game is better than a good game based solely on the fact that it's more synonymous with its console. They both came out on the N64, and Paper Mario is just a better game through and through.
(EDIT: I hope I didn't come off as a whiny jerk, I don't mean for it to sound like that. I've really been enjoying this series and I do like all the stuff that y'all do. I just thought this could be somewhat of a "constructive criticism" of some sort.)
You didn't. If you want measurable confirmation, just look at the other comments. Pretty much everyone (including myself) feels the same way.
I like paper mario more... THEN WHY DIDNT YOU VOTE FOR IT?! :O
Yeah, it's hard to understand what the criteria is here... he said the same thing about Majora's Mask but voted for Ocarina of Time.
Common things for 30 year old white guys in gaming “ duh legacy” comes first
Same with the Majoras mask one
Because bad logic
Two did, but the rest didn't.
I guess I just don't get the point of these videos (other than to watch a discussion which is entertaining on it's own). As others have pointed out, there's no consistency in logic.
First of all, I'd argue that arguing that 007 is better because of multiplayer is not really a great argument on it's own. Yes, the N64 did have 4 controller slots but arguing that a game being multiplayer is more in the spirit of the N64 is disingenuous, why even include single player games in that situation. Furthermore, it seems that not a lot of attention is really being paid to which game is actually better, but rather which game was more popular back then. At that point, these videos aren't really needed because you could just look at a list of best sellers. That's not really my idea of a good competition.
In this pairing, Paper Mario wins hands down. Because while you can play newer Paper Mario games, and arguably some are better (Thousand Year Door especially comes to mind), others actually prefer the original due to it's simplicity. Regardless, playing both is worth your time since they have different stories. With GoldenEye not only is it not really a game I would want to play now a days due to the controls, there are much better FPS games, and better James Bond games.
Melody you answered yourself... Because you can get the same PM experiences on today's systems, OG GoldenEye is the better N64 game as those experiences are really only available on the N64. Its supposed to be about the console and the defining games of such... PM being available and just as fun on today's systems just doesn't preclude it to being the N64 choice...
You can play Paper Mario on other platforms, but you don't have to. The controller may not be the best, but it works well enough that you won't really have any problems playing the game on an actual N64. Furthermore, as I stated in my commend, visually the game holds up well enough even without any sort of hardware mods.
GoldenEye isn't best played on an actual N64. Rather if you want the game to be playable, you have to use an emulator as well as an injector in order to get mouse and keyboard controls and 60fps. Or at least one could map the camera to the right stick on a modern controller. Furthermore, while they were quick to dismiss the wii remake, GoldenEye 007: Reloaded is a better game if you're going by original releases. That it was treated so poorly despite it being better should really get them thinking.
If the Wii remake is a better game and it is supposedly crap like they say it is, do they really love 007 or the memories, if nostalgia is all that is driving this then imo they're doing these games a disservice.
Again, you can play Paper Mario on other platforms, but you don't have to the original release looks and plays just fine. If you play older games still you would understand this. It being ported to the virtual console should not be considered a bad thing. Otherwise that would disqualify many of the games in the brackets and would create an unfair bias.
On the other side is a game that arguably you can't play on anything other than an N64, but the game itself is best played on anything BUT an N64. And arguably it would be better to just play the Wii remake. I'm saying this as somebody that generally prefers traditional controls. But I do concede from time to time when the pointer controls work well and this is one of them. And it also supports classic controller anyway so other than nostalgia there's not much reason to go back to the N64 original.
I don't know why anyone says "we can go back and play it now" you aren't gonna go back and play either game now because they are old and outdated, the only way you can determine the better N64 game is by comparing them when they were released. Goldeneye was more popular, everyone played the heck out of it and paper mario was the best single player rpg on the console. From there it's all personal preference on which experience matters more to you.
The "you can only play Goldeneye on N64" logic is bs.
You can play Goldeneye on any system today, it's just so trash and dated that no one would *want to* .
Paper Mario isn't outdated though. It's graphics might not be as good as later Paper Mario games, but it's art style definitely holds up even today. The controls also holds up well considering the controller. It alongside Thousand Year Door are better than Super Paper Mario, and much better than Sticker Star and Color Splash. And while I prefer Super Mario RPG to the Paper Mario games, the first two Paper Mario games are great games. The paper aesthetic definitely helped make the games timeless. Not every game dies when it is old. Not every game becomes outdated.
Paper Mario easily. Go back and play both and tell me which one doesn't feel like crap. I said it.
Chase 64 Cubed paper mario definently aged the best, but goldeneye where the one people obsessed over back in the day. At least that's what I remember.
Purple Dawn Depends how you look at it. If you handed somebody an N64 (who has never owned one) and some games which would you tell them are worth playing? I doubt many would still say 007 unless they haven't played it in years.
Chase 64 Cubed that's what I mean. Paper mario is the better game. But back in the glory days of the N64, not once did I hear my friends talk about paper mario. It was always goldeneye. So goldeneye, not the best game, but certantly impactful.
Purple Dawn Gotcha. I had the opposite in my school. Only "nerds" had games in my area and we all liked Mario. Only knew 2 people that even owned 007 for the longest time.
I obsessed over Paper Mario as a kid. I still obsess over Paper Mario as an adult. I just did a 10HP run last week and it was a blast. I think, regardless of bias, it stands to this day as one of the best RPGs. It's so impeccably well-designed.
Maaaaaan, this series is really frustrating to watch. I love all the normal boots crew and I love the discussions..... buuuuut you are all so inconsistent with your bases for voting. I think you guys need to set some ground rules as to what you're judging the game on. Is it based on what you would like to play now? What was more fun back then? Whether or not it changed the gaming industry? What made the best use of n64 gimmicks? Most innovative? You are taking all of these points into consideration but the weight you put into each category changes from episode to episode. Example: Jared voted for pokemon snap because it was the game he "would rather play right now". He said the same thing for paper mario and voted for golden eye.
Exaxtly. They should redo this with guidelines on how they're judging the games
Spot on. They keep making up arbitrary criteria like which they'd rather play now, or which one was the "essence" of the N64. Just vote for which game is better!
Madness...
Paper Mario is the game that got so many people into Jrpgs with how easy, intuitive, and engaging it was.
Golden eye has not aged well at all and is rather driven by nostalgia compared to paper mario.
Honestly this one is a slaughter to me. Goldeneye just doesnt hold a candle
It is the essence of the N64, man.
LOSTLEAD8R i see paper Mario as the sad attempt at a true successor to Super Mario RPG. As a kid I played Super Mario RPG and paper mario was a very sad let down after that experience. In fact, paper mario is what pushed me into final fantasy, which I was not interested in before VII.
Meanwhile Goldeneye started it all... To me its not about how any game ages, its the weight it carries. Goldeneye sits easily as top 5 nintendo games of all time due to what it spawned in my opinion. Super Mario RPG is also in that list and is what kicks paper mario out.
+IfOUGHTpIRANHAz But if that is the "essence of N64" Then why did Mario 64 beat Mario Kart 64 and Pokemon Snap beat Diddy Kong racing when, from what I understand as "the essence of N64", those games had multiplayer over a single player experience. And Jirards point on making friends with Golden Eye is kinda moot as well since I feel like if he had Paper Mario instead he could just find other people who played it, talked about it and shared secrets about it like what badges they got, and became friends.
Feels like Paper Mario lost at the end for kinda unfair reasons.
Also unless that was just a funny quote or something then I still mean it. I don't think I said anything offensive anyway.
Ok. Even without nostalgia goggles Paper Mario is still a better game with its fairly tight game play. But because the "N64 experience" is multiplayer they chose that. The only one who actually really defended it was Jirard because he grew up with golden eye while finally playing Paper Mario in recent years. Meanwhile the other 3/4 grew up with both (from the sound of it) and said they all thought Paper Mario still held up in many ways as opposed to golden eye. It sounds like Jirard was the one with nostalgia goggles on.
As fun as these are to watch, I think for your next bracket, you've got to decide exactly what it is that you're debating. No one can seem to agree whether you're talking about which is a better game, which is a more influential game, which is a more defining game, or whatever. There needs to be some consistency going forward. PBG joked that the entire bracket is invalid because Majora's Mask lost, but he's actually kinda right about that. It is invalid, but it's because everyone is going back and forth about what the question is that they're trying to answer. There needs to be a clear question so everyone can debate the answer.
Also, Majora's Mask losing definitely does make the bracket invalid :P
I think that's a really good point. I find myself not wanting to take all this too seriously, but consistency over what exactly the question is has been a bit frustrating. Though I have still enjoyed the series.
Except Ocarina is the better game.
Think Fact really OoT won because its OoT, OoT is going to win this thing hands down and I hate OoT but the way these are being judged thats how its going
The rules of who wins each pair seems to change between episodes, so that kinda sucks the fun out of it. Also, some of these match ups don't even compare. How can you compare an RPG spin-off to a multiplayer FPS?
I agree, I just mentioned it in another reply comment. It's an abstract semantics issue they're bringing up inevitably when they say, "it's my favorite, but it's not the best on N64 title." Imo, that makes no sense. It's either your preferred game from that console, or it isn't. And favorite is the same thing as best, because what you would say is "best" comes down to one's own taste, in the end, whether they're trying to be objective or not. Technical best is different from nostalgic best, I can get on board with that, but when they start talking in, "but is it the best as an N64 game??", they start losing me.
And from what I understand, they basically had these randomly paired up to go against each other so it would be fair from the beginning, which I can understand, and I think it does make for slightly more interesting discussions in a way. But at the same time, I think it would have been better to have at least just the first brackets be games vs games that make sense rather than RNG.
Compare sonic 06 to FF7 thats not really a problem
I could take this same bracket and do it better.
Mostly because I’m not biased.
Seriously tho. Jirard even admitted at the beginning he could only argue for the one he grew up with (Goldeneye)
They did mention in the beginning the whole bracket is RNG. They didn't intentionally pair up any of these games against each other, it just randomly wound up this way. They've even said as much that some of these are not fair matches to have right away because the two games are really good (case in point, Smash vs. Mario Party).
Plus there is a loser's bracket. So even if a game loses in the first round, it still can come back.
You guys make these debates really close, and fair as your judgment can be. It's great!
I'd love to see you guys debate the best games of other Nintendo consoles too. Then pit all of Nintendos greatest games against each other.
MetallicBats OoT would win lol
(I hate OoT but thats how it looks to me)
Pit all the consoles themselves against each other...
I mean, you’d think Switch would win, but I bet these guys would pick N64...
XA44
OoT isn’t my favorite either, but I acknowledge that it’s a well-made game.
Just curious, why do you hate it?
And don’t tell me it’s just because you like another Zelda better.
I love how little of the goldeneye music you're playing through this video to not get a copyright strike.
Oh god, don't tweet me... please....
Ok I wont
Furst You know your fate, now accept it, fool.
They need to create a new hastag, #JusticeForPaperMario!
I disagree with your opinion in the video but I still love you. Don't worry, I'll only tweet you the cutest puppy pictures.
There's no need. Shane will take care of you . . .
This one hurt my heart
I hate whenever they go for the iconic argument, cuz they aren’t arguing the more iconic games, they are arguing the best games. I think. Actually, I think that they need to better set the parameters as to what they are arguing for better. Without better parameters, there is no way to correctly compare these games
This seriously needed clarity as to whether you're looking for the "best game" or "most important game".
I knew from the beginning that Paper Mario was not going to beat Zelda, Mario Kart, or basically any of the first round winners. But are you serious? Goldeneye? It couldn't have one victory? I guess there's always the loser brackets, but after seeing this, I don't think it'll beat anyone on the chart. Oh Paper Mario.....how wronged you were....I'll always love you.
I love these debate segments. Can't wait to see more of them. Good job!
As much as I like listening to the argument, and the people behind it, this serie is starting to feel too... weird ?
There is no consistency on what are the criterias for "best n64 game". Is it the best game ? The essence of N64 ? The one people would rather play now ? The most impactful ? Does the way the game holds up nowadays counts more than what it was in the context of its release ?
Having at least a guideline would be way better for the show, and allow for more cohesive arguments, instead of a constantly changing point between episodes.
Yet, it's still fun to watch, and I hope it will get better in the future.
Lee, you are doing a good job editing those videos. Major props.
Paper Mario is better
but Goldeneye was better on the N64 than paper mario was.
nworder4life I disagree on that. Both Goldeneye and Paper Mario we’re the first games of their respective genres for many people, but over time RPGs have been a much bigger presence on Nintendo systems than shooters.
This is one of my favorite series on YT right now. Keep it up guys.
First time they got it wrong. The argument for Goldeneye contradicts what they said in other videos. They admit Paper Mario is a better game and only give Goldeneye the win because it has multiplayer? The multiplayer for Goldeneye is extremely shallow and was only played so much because it was the best at it's time. Paper Mario however still holds up today with it's core mechanic. And the less we speak about Goldeneye's single player the better. No way should Goldeneye have won this without heavy nostalgia glasses and bias.
I appreciate the music remixes in the background of these Madness episodes. That 8-ball Octo Expansion level music remix was dope!
On personal note I have to say paper mario, I grew up with dyslexia meaning it was very difficult for me to learn how to read. I hated reading books more than anything. When I played Paper Mario I got caught up in the world. I wanted to know what was going on so I pushed myself to learn to read the dialogue, I know it sounds stupid and unrealistic but I'm not lying when I say Paper Mario helped me learn to read.
I'm enjoying this alot more then I thought I would. Can't wait for the next episode, please keep them coming.
Perfect Dark is better than Golden Eye man
this isn't about perfect dark though they get there and improve on what they did with goldeye so of course its should be better
Not more impactful.
Thank you
while off-topic, it's needed to be said haha.
Perfect Dark is on the list of GOAT games. Truly an underrated masterpiece
FINALLY a good episode with solid arguments on BOTH sides instead of just being unfair and one-sided. I loved this one, it could've gone either way.
"N64 is all about playing with friends" That's why any other time in this series so far that a single player game has gone up against a multiplayer game the single player game won?
Plus, Considering more than half of these games on this bracket are single player games that are fan favorite Nintendo games kind of validates that the N64 was definitely as enjoyable playing on your own as it was with friends.
Right, I just don't understand how that statement shifted this entire episode. Granted goldeneye was a fantastic game I don't think that should have had such a turn on their opinions.
jesus barrera I agree %100 on the fact that DKR should have best pokemon snap. I'm not saying that 007 shouldn't have one either. I was saying the fact that they used multiplayer as an argument when no other MP game has won kind of makes it irrelevant. And they chose solely on the MP part of 007 barely even talked about the single player. Goldeneye definitely hasn't aged well
That silent-pistol-shooting-Mario sound effect when Goldeneye won the bracket was glorious
Between Paper Mario and Goldeneye 007.... I think Perfect Dark wins. YES I SAID IT.
Vemoes I kinda thought the same. Yes at first Goldeneye was great but once you played both Perfect Dark and that game in recent years, there is only one that aged well and it is Perfect Dark.
Yes
Disagree about PD being better than Paper Mario but it is absolutely better than Goldeneye, and also still pretty sick.
Seriously loving these videos! Hype for the next one!
I don't understand the argument of something being a better game vs something being a better n64 game. If you are debating on 2 games that are both on the n64, then the better game is the better n64 game. I'm not upset about choosing golden eye, but that reasoning is pretty dumb.
Ricky McKinney Their reasoning is very inconsistent, but the crux of the argument is that the better N64 game is the better game for the time and only in the context of the N64 and its other games.
Joe Mirakian even at the time though golden eye isn’t better than Paper Mario. The games haven’t changed. The only thing that has changed is their opinion. Only now are people realizing that golden eye wasn’t an amazing game. It only seemed good at the time. So their argument still doesn’t make sense.
Drewsefer89 that’s not what better n64 game means. When someone says this game is the best n64 game they usually mean the best game on the system, not most influential. It is clear that that was what they were originally arguing. The only reason they chose golden eye is because it had multiplayer which is ridiculous. They should just do what the title say and choose the BEST n64 game. It means exactly what it says.
Drewsefer89 who they choose is purely subjective so idk what your going on about with it not being based on subjectivity. I have no problem if you think golden eye is a better game. That is not the problem. They admitted themselves that paper Mario is the better game. In that case it should’ve won. If you actually saw each of the debates you would see that they are choosing the better n64 game. That’s why Pokémon snap won, that’s why Mario party won, and that’s why Mario 64 won. They were better made games and they said that if they had to choose which game they would like to play more they would choose those ones. The problem is after that they started bringing up dumb reasons as to why the other one was a better n64 game. Like with Majora’s mask they said it was the better Zelda game but not the better n64 game. No matter how you look at it that doesn’t even make any sense. There both n64 games and Majora’s mask is better. I think it’s clear which should’ve won. I’m not using my own opinions I’m using theirs. By their standards Majora’s mask should’ve won. They did the same thing with golden eye. They did not choose it because it was BETTER or the BEST, just like the title says, but they chose it because it had a multiplayer mode. Any game can have a multiplayer mode but that does not make it a better game. If it’s not about which game is the better n64 game then don’t say it’s about the best n64 game. You can’t add other meanings to what best n64 game means. The meaning shouldn’t even be debated.
I had an idea! Next time you guys do a tournament like this, you should have someone go through and play both games for each matchup, and then their vote could be worth 2. You could also record the gameplay and put it up as a separate video. Can't speak on behalf of everyone else, but I would definitely watch those.
I can't believe this... it truly is MADNESS
PAPER MARIO 4 LIFE!
Great video guys :)
Rewatch this whole series and take a shot every time they say "But which one is the better N64 game?"
General Madness Drinking Game:
Take a drink every time someone asks, "but which is the better N64 game."
13:23 um actually Jared you forgot about Ogre Battle 64 so there's actually 4 RPG's. Boom roasted.
YES. I was looking for this comment. Ogre Battle 64 is arguably one of the best RPGs (in terms of storyline) ever made. One of my favourite games, and forgotten WAY too often.
DarkKnightTrinity I've never personally played it but I know of it, I plan to play it soon. Not a huge RPG fan, outside of Paper Mario, and Xenoblade.
Also he forgot to mention Hybrid Heaven, though it wasn't your standard rpg.
Hey guys, I don't know why i bothered starting this series. I was initially thinking it wouldn't care since I kinda only watch DYKG regularly, and there's just so much "which game is better" I've watched on YT already. But this series is great. Aside from the not great camera quality, and the sometimes weird pans and edits, this is is a really great series. I'm stoked to watch more of it and future series about other systems!
Man, this was a great discussion. I changed my mind like 4 times whenever someone brought up another argument. These games are so different it almost doesnt even feel fair to have them go head to head like this.
I love how they each have their own way of voting.
PBG goes for what he liked most as a kid usually, Shane goes for what he thinks is the best game, Jirard goes for what game has the better legacy, and Jared constantly second guesses himself trying very hard to be objective.
I'm still confused why Harvest Moon 64 isn't on the bracket. Was it really that bad? I mean it had issues, but what 3D game back then didn't? I still think it's one of the best in the series.
That's because it's absolutely one of the best in the series, and I'd argue THE best. There's also a noticeable lack of Sin & Punishment or Mischief Makers, clearly there's an anti-Treasure conspiracy going on here...
Yeah, HM64 had some of the fastest days in the franchise. Even though it's sort of dated, you always felt engaged in everything you did in its world. Such a great soundtrack, as well. That game is really special to me.
There are many comments about people not understanding the standard that you guys are following for your vote. But what makes this so great is that it’s just a bunch of friends discussing their love for games. There doesn’t need to be a standard. They’re just having fun. Keep it up guys! I’m loving it!
Shane represents all of us here
Loving these videos. I hope to see a gamecube game smackdown next!
I don’t buy that “it’s not a better game but it’s a better n64 game” argument. It’s a label to make the n64 the multiplayer console. Just because it had four controllers
My best memories on N64 are single player games so Paper mario definitely wins
Goldeneye does not hold up
This is my new favorite channel. Hosted by my favorite youtubers.
I still don't understand the difference between "best game" and "best N64 game." How does that work? Saying that one game is the best, already implies that it is the best from that console. For example, if you say that Metal Gear Solid is the best game, then you are saying that it is also better than any other PS1 game. This is what confuses me the most about these videos. I don't understand what Jared means when he says GoldenEye isn't a better game, but it's a better N64 game. That statement makes no sense lol.
It makes perfect sense. It means he likes Paper mario more and it's the better game for him BUT as an N64 game Goldeneye was way more influential and people were crazy over it. Everybody played Goldeneye, it was THE N64 experience back in the day. Which makes it the better N64 game.
jesus barrera I've literally never met anyone who says that Tetris is the best game of all time. Maybe it's the game that has sold the most, but that doesn't make it the best.
nworder4life but why is the "best game" not the game that he likes the most. I get that Goldeneye was influential, but that doesn't make it the best. This still makes no sense to me, if they are picking the game they think is best, then they should pick the one they like best.
Andy We don't know what they are picking. Game they personally like the best or the better N64 game at the time.
jesus barrera "it literally has no flaws" are you high, bro? there are plenty of flaws in that game.
I’m just expecting him to walk in the house and Shane’s just there with a baseball bat
I think its kinda dumb to rank it by "N64 game" it should be by quality alone, bc that game is literally unplayable, its just not fun now. Quality is by far the most important thing when it comes to ranking one game to another not sentimental nostalgia or the important experiences of owning an N64. That is too relative, and subjective. If you handed someone an N64 who had never played old games, or heard of Golden eye or paper mario, and asked them after playing through both games which one they liked better what do you think they would say?
You can't rank these games by quality when they came out in the 90's.
nworder4life yes you can
If anything it's the opposite, you can absolutely rank them by quality now but it's impossible to get a fair ranking on how fun they were 20 years ago.
Unless you were around 20 years ago like I was lol. They are all shit games now but at the time Goldeneye was the game to own, paper mario wasn't even in the same stratosphere in terms of popularity and praise.
nworder4life popularity and praise don't make a good game that is what matters.
Is it just me or do I hear the dungeon theme from anglers cave in links awakening at 7:13?
PBG: I’M IN A CAVE, IT’S DARK! I’M IN A CAVE, IT’S WET!
Hot take before I even make it deep into the video: Goldeneye hasn't just not aged well, it sucked when it came out. It sucked then. It sucks now. It's controls were a direct regression from the console versions of DOOM and I have no worldly idea how it is so widely beloved.
I agree. I didnt like it as a kid either.
Picking a worse game because it was the "essence" of the N64? No thank you. I would never sit down to play Goldeneye over Paper Mario. I'm with Shane on this one.
For years i've been visiting and revisiting all these classic games, specially the ones i've never played. To see the influences in modern design and just to have a good time with some of the best games of all time, i mean if you are playing something, why not choose whats considered the best right?
Golden eye is the only classic game i've tried to play but then inmediately abandoned it after taking a few steps. I just couldn't stand it, and listen i generally are not very picky about unconventional shooter controls. I love megaman legends, metroid prime, i'm even that guy that loves the tank controls in classic resident evil.
But i can't stand golden eye lol. Its the game with the worst aging that i have ever seen.
I remember my brothers and I used to play so much Paper Mario. I remember being so traumatized by the stupid cake baking segment that we left a slice of cake to die in the ice level. Not caring how much it healed.
That's hilarious.
I would choose Paper Mario over Goldeneye. But if it was Perfect Dark, I'd probably reconsider. My god it was wayyy better and way more polished.
TheMattychu yes
Shane voting for all my favorites in this series makes the hours I spent trying to win his love in Asagao worth it.
Gonna be honest, I’ve disagreed with literally every single one they’ve officially voted on. 😂
As someone who only recently picked up the N64, and playing all the old games through paper Mario does stand the test of time and works with the controller.
Goldeneye consumed hundreds of hours and was an experience to be shared. Paper Mario was great, but was something you played alone. You didn't get perfect, memorable summer nights and sleepovers from Paper Mario.
Also, anyone who still has Goldeneye on the N64, SET THE CONTROLS TO SOLITAIRE. You move with the D-pad and aim with the stick, it's way better! It makes the game feel much less dated.
Paper mario has those summer nights feels ... Only for the people with no friends hahaha( or friends that play videogames)
There is also a dualstick mode if you use 2 controllers.
Yes! The dual stick mode is awesome for playing the campaign, or for when you've only got two people, but Solitaire works great for 4-players
If you lived out in the sticks with maybe 1-2 friends max, Paper Mario was the real summer night game. I played through it at least a dozen times as a kid.
Still have it and occasionally still play it, for nostalgia...
Love this series! Would love to see more systems done when all the brackets are done. Maybe SNES? Megadrive? Or Gamecube 😉
Easy. Paper Mario for sure.
Throughout every episode I've thought about every point made and this is the only video so far where I've actually disagreed with the outcome. I LOVE THIS SERIES BTW THANK YOU.
Goldeneye is completely overrated. Paper Mario holds up so much better nowadays.
I got into RPGs with Final Fantasy... (Five? I think) long before finding a copy of Paper Mario, and Even after not playing Paper Mario until AFTER TTYD, I STILL find it an AMAZING RPG. It has all the fundamentals, all hidden over an easy to use interface.
I understand the argument that Goldeneye is a better N64 game, because at the time it could only have been an N64 game, and the only reason that later consoles generally have four players is BECAUSE of that game. However, as mentioned, Goldeneye does not stand the test of time, and it's legacy only serves to push it to even with Paper Mario's great gameplay. Nintendo's own words, "Gameplay first"
This is starting to tick me off a bit, the fact that Jirard and Jared are the only ones in the mindset of "Best Nintendo 64" and the others are just "Best game". Dude of course!! If you look TODAY, Goldeneye is complete trash, the game runs slowly, the graphics are nightmare inducing. Paper Mario get's a pass because they don't even try to look realistic. But the thing is: Even if paper Mario was on gameboy, PSone, Dreamcast, It would be just as awesome, meanwhile, 007 wouldn't work as well because not many consoles had multiplayer above 2 players. And gather friends around and playing was a big part of N64. And 007 was one of the friend gathering games.
I agree with Jirard, if you're just going for best game, then scratch the title, redo it all over with the RIGHT mindset and put this to rest.
Ozmounth the title says best n64 game which means best game on the n64. That means they should rate the game by how good it is today. Nostalgia doesn’t make a game good and I think you know that. The title is fine but their logic isn’t.
What does it even mean to be the "best N64 game" when it doesn't take how good the game is into consideration? You could say they're looking at how good it was at the time, but it's 2018 so that's completely irrelevent.
I disagree that you couldn't have played Goldeneye on another system. .-. If it had been released on the PS1 after they decided to use a dualstick control scheme, it would have been a patently better game on the PS1 than the N64. It would have ran better, would have had better graphics, and it would have controlled better. As much as I love the N64, the PS1 had stronger hardware and a better controller.
THANK YOU Ozmouth
I mean like yeah, N64 had multiplayer as a major selling point, but there are other multiplayer games I’d rather play over Golden Eye, like the Mario Party Games and Smash Bros. Paper Mario is full of character and charm and there’s no experience quite like it in the entire N64 library.
Also I don’t like the argument of “it’s the better N64 game” because that basically boils down to what was more popular at the time.
I’m saying goldeneye
This background music is a fantastic selection, wow. Awesome job to whoever’s responsible
YES SO MANY GOOD VIDEOS ARE COMING OUT TODAYYYYYYYYY
talking about Mario games... while playing Sonic music in the background ... lol
Go Paper Mario!
I like how Jirard came to the most logical conclusion, using arguments which had been established by Jared in the Zelda match up, but people are still angry.
GoldenEye 007 was always bad and many people are too blinded by nostalgia to accept it.
If it was always bad then nostalgia wouldn't be a factor because people wouldn't of played it. Think.
I played GoldenEye 007 back in the day. But Paper Mario 64 was my childhood and is a game I still play today.
Link’s Awakening Remixed music in the background! I love you guys
Yeah, I don't really agree with saying Goldeneye is the better game because it's "an essential part of the N64 experience" when you're all admittedly saying that Paper Mario is, quality wise, the much better game. I mean, you guys went with Super Mario 64 over Mario Kart 64 (and not saying this was the wrong choice, Super Mario 64 is far better than Mario Kart 64) when MK64 fits the bill just as much as Goldeneye in the "essential N64 experience" with its multiplayer and, much like Goldeneye, has aged horribly but we all still have nostalgic feelings of playing it.
jesus barrera, for some people Tetris could wind up being a better game than Pokemon due to simple bias and vice versa. If it comes to which is the better game you've got the argument of endless - but limited replayability vs. a RPG Collectathon with a bunch of things that need tweaking.
By my own personal taste and judgement Tetris is just more enjoyable than the original Pokemon games, assuming we are strictly talking about Red/Green/Blue/Yellow. If we bring in the Gameboy Color games (Silver/Gold/Crystal) -- then that changes everything due to the level of polish compared to the originals.
If you want to have a bit of a debate over this I'd be happy to oblige.
Everyone, on September 3rd, south Carolina will be attacked by vampires.
I'm with Shane, it's no competition, Paper Mario is far superior. It seems everyone agrees, so why vote for Goldeneye? I don't care if it was more "defining" of the N64, it's aged like a carton of milk. Goldeneye isn't even the best N64 FPS, Perfect Dark is.
It was because Jirard didn't play it as a kid so he let nostalgia get in the way with goldeneye
Perhaps I was spoiled by playing Perfect Dark first, but for me Goldeneye wasn't even a *good* game, let alone deserving of being included in a discussion about the best N64 games.
Glad they went to the “if we had a bottle of vodka” argument at least for a little lol
Perfect Dark was better than Goldeneye fite me
Anyone who would fight such a correct opinion is a fool.
That's not even an opinion, it's an objectively true fact. In every single conceivable category, Perfect Dark beats Goldeneye at its own game.
Was just thinking what a good idea this series is! It's almost infinite! You can do it with a different order of games a number of times, with a number of different consoles! You guys hit a jackpot with this series
Can you please do this for PS1 as well? I played way more PS1 than N64 as a kid, so this would be even more fun for me. Symphony of the Knight vs. Metal Gear Solid would destroy me. (It's MGS though... lol)
Another good discussion is Conker's bad fur day VS Banjo-Kazooie
That's not even a fight, for as cool as Conker is, B-K is just a better game all around. Conker really falls apart around the halfway mark.
i think it's funny how everyone agrees Paper Mario is the better game, and Jirard even admitted he was choosing GoldenEye strictly for nostalgia. But yet Golden Eye won... Paper Mario was robbed.
They didn't choose off nostalgia, they chose what better defined the N64 experience.
Jirard specifically said he didn't play Paper Mario as a kid, so he didn't any nostalgia for it, which was why he chose Goldeneye. He admitted Paper Mario was the better game but voted for Goldeneye anyway. Made me lose a bit of respect for him to be honest.
it didnt define the n64 experience at all. it sucked back then and it sucks now.
Agreed. Paper Mario > GoldenEye
+Flareboxx No, you just dont understand his arguemnt and that in no way discredits it. This isnt the best game or the best game on the N64 bracket, this is the best N64 game. There is nuance there you are failing to grasp.
I love this series so much, which there were hundreds of episodes