Unfortunately, Super Mario 64 on the Switch will not be an enhanced remake.
Very lame...guess I'll try getting that of port instead lol.
Just ridiculous and lazy. What a waste of potential.
What about the other two games in the collection?
They look better than 64, as you'd expect. I'm not sure how that's relevant?
@SullysCigar - because it means they did at least put some effort in the other titles.
@Neonridr What effort? If Nintendo had truly wanted to put effort into this collection, they wouldve remastered all 3 games at full 1080p/60fps and converted Mario 64 to widescreen. That shouldve been the MINIMAL effort put into this collection. Its hard for me to justify this at 60.00 when Crash N Sane and Spyro trilogies got full remakes of those games and sold new for 39.99 each. By comparison this is highway robbery. What kills me the most is Nintendo had already set the template on how to do a remaster with Zelda Wind Waker on Wii U. Why in hell did they drop the ball so hard with this???
"I'm not sure how that's relevant?" Because all three are in a single collection? While one game does not get a huge facelift, the other two do.
@King_Noctis & @Neonridr, are you guys both just ignoring that this article is about how Mario 64 looks, not other Mario games? That's why I commented in relation to Mario 64..
Why couldn't they just take the DS version and add onto it? I mean we all see those fan video concepts of remakes, Nintendo have the resources to do it so why be lazy with it. I would have taken a full on expanded remake with maybe a few extra levels like how Activision handled Crash Bandicoot, over a collection with other ports.
Why would they, whatever they release their fanboys will just go gaga over it, I mean, Xenoblade Chronicles DE on the switch (amazing game, don't get me wrong), runs at a variable resolution of 504p-720p when docked, nobody said anything about it. They just consume and say thank you.
Absolutely correct their fanbase get the low end of the deal in gaming yet they still follow them
Dude, XC was a Wii game that was later ported to a "new Nintendo 3ds", even with the small upgrades to the visuals, it's still a port of a wii game that on occasions runs while DOCKED at 504p on a switch, how lazy is that?
We purchased this. We could care less about the resolution, pleased to play xeno without busting out the wiiu. We are flummoxed there are real life people playing an involved game of that nature and thinking, "damn this just needs some more resolution, how dare anyone 'consume' it in this state!"; akin to "NAH can't read that book, font too small!"; "nah won't watch that film, in black and white!".
@GreenDragonCVR I mean why should people have standards and wanting at least minimum effort for their hard earned money? Right? I mean it's not like they are charging full price for it? Oh... They are. Consume!
Ooo OK ok so standards of "not shiny enough" and the fact that you worked hard entitle you to things for less than an arbitrary "full price" (TOTALLY not like that same logic justifies the pub demanding full price for their own work). Perfectly objective. Might we suggest @rpgsama you seem like what you're upset about is not our "consumption" (is this what one does with a game?) but a price-and pixel based impediment to yours.
@Father_Merrin It's not because we don't care about Nintendo's lazy practices. I love Nintendo, but the Mario All Stars thing is pretty bad business practice. I was pretty bummed that they didn't touch the games, just threw them onto the Switch. That couldn't have been very difficult for them to do to sell for $60. I'm not defending that. We still follow Nintendo because they give us the most enjoyable first party titles. There are a handful of exclusives on any other console I care about (Halo, Ratchet and Clank, God of War); but Nintendo has tons that I care about (Super Smash, Mario, Zelda, Metroid [someday], Pokemon, the list could go on). They may be pretty damn greedy but they make the best games.
@GreenDragonCVR Low standards for full price. Good for you bro....... 🙄
resolution aside, it's a great game, so while it sucks that the resolution is a little sub-par that doesn't make it a bad game. If it was awful, then you'd have some real legs to stand on. But this is the hardware that we get, what do you want them to do? Not release the game period?
because its Nintendo. they have major potential with their older games but hardly do anything with them. and if they do, its like they put no effort in them at all. mario sunshine doesnt even have gamecube controller support which is just ridiculous if u think about it. fans would EAT THAT SHIT UP. but alas that didnt happen
The DS version was trash, but I'm more triggered that they couldn't give us 16:9 widescreen when there is a PC port out there that does exactly that
I wanted a Super Mario 64 remake with Super Mario Odyssey graphics, but noooooo that's too much work for Nintendo right? Can't put all those resources into remaking the game and making it look beautiful like Odyssey. Just port it over because lazy and costs much less money.
Even besides graphics, i expected them to at least do something. Coop, new content, a race mode. Leaderboards. SOMETHING Its literally a ROM dump lol.
I didnt want them to go to THAT extreme because I do think there's a certain charm to the original Mario 64 aesthetic that should be preserved. However I do think Nintendo should've at least remastered the game in 1080p/60fps with widescreen support. I wouldve been very happy with that.
There are fans out there happy to do this for free and Nintendo shuts them down whenever they get wind of it. If Nintendo are going to keep threatening fans then maybe they should do the job themselves.
Its not nostalgic if its not the same as it was when it released tbh. This is an anniversary collection.. Im sure they have plans to remake it as a full product down the road.
Other old games let you flick back and forth between old and new graphics on the fly - and have been for years. Mario 64 was truly amazing when it launched. Now it feels old and looks janky. With a little love from Nintendo, younger fans would get to experience anothet wonderful Mario game, but as it is, they will likely play for 5 mins, say "wtf is this lol" and turn it off. It's just not s good look.
@SullysCigar. 100% I bought Mario 64 at launched and loved it and for so many years I've looked forward to the rerelease that I knew would come one day... But not like this! It's lazy and virtually no money has been put into it. Nintendo didn't have to do a full remake, but they could have spent a little bit to redo the graphics so it was at the very least widescreen. It's literally one of the best games ever made, a graphics upgrade would have made it more accessible to today's audience. I just wish Nintendo showed it the love it deserves.
that's because kids nowadays only care about 4k. When I was a kid you had to use your imagination to see a circle on the screen, but we had fun anyways. To each their own.
^ @Neonridr, when you was a kid there was no option for better. Also, what you were seeing was the best they could do, so was impressive (in Mario 64's case, VERY impressive) at the time, because Nintendo had pride in the quality of their products. They cared about their customers, not just quick cash. It's so sad to see this flagrant abuse of a treasured franchise.
Calling it a remake is hilarious.
But they are not. You are calling it a remake
Huh? Are you Okay??? The Headline of the article is "Super Mario 64 Switch Remake Features Same Graphics Style" = the article writer /website are calling it a remake, not me.
with they I meant Nintendo. With "you" I meant all of you, hahaha, the article-website, you, all the people upset by this
FML just take the shame
They know people will buy it no matter what so why spend money improving the graphics? People need to stop being sheep and talk with their wallets and loud on social media.
Seriously. All I'm seeing is postings of people overly excited about this whole collection and I don't understand why. Mario 64 got almost no upgrades. I have the same version, better version in fact, on my PC emulator that up scales. Sunshine at least got the wide-screen treatment. And Galaxy, while never my favorite, looks great, but without Galaxy 2 seems like a weird decision. But people are gonna eat this up. Especially with the limited release window.
Exactly. I'm starting to believe now all those people who said Nintendo always gets a pass. If this was Sony or Microsoft they would be the laughingstock of social media right now. But since it's Nintendo it's completely fine to make a minimal effort product.
But that's the problem, we can't talk with out wallets in this case. Normally I would wait until the price has dropped significantly but I do want to play Galaxy again and I have never played Sunshine. With it being limited, that means the price will never be lower than the initial one so either I don't buy it at all or I give in.
In this case I would advice to just use an emulator that will give you a much better experience than the poor job Nintendo did. If they had done a good job they would get my money. They didn't. So, for this, lets use emulators.
True. The only issue I have with that is mapping the wii controls to a normal controller. But now that I think about it, if this collection is so lazy, their control mapping will probably be lazy too (though they do have motion controls, just not pointing). And the Switch controllers are pretty horrible in themselves. Ok. Emulator it is :P
Nintendo regularly re-releases games on new generations with small-no enhancements and charges full price. Funny how Nintendo gets away with this! Other developers want to charge a small fee for upgrades in the new generation and all hell breaks loose. And let’s not forget Nintendo consoles have ZERO backward compatibility which also gets swept under the rug.
That last comment you made was stupid. Nintendo has had backwards compatibility with some of their systems: Wii(GameCube disc) Wii U, and most of their handheld systems. I guess you didn't own many Nintendo systems over the years
Oh didn’t realize Switch had backward compatibility.. you’re apparently more up to date on Nintendo consoles than me. Wii/Wii U were basically the same console But you’re right about the handhelds. The 10 iterations of DS all had compatibility.
The wii only had backwards compat for gamecube as it was basically a GameCube in a different box with motion controls. It’s pretty much the same system. Other than that name one console that has proper backwards compatibility where you could put a previous gen game into it and it would play? Snes didn’t play nes N64 didn’t play snes Gamecube didn’t play n64 Switch doesn’t play anything Now I admit they offer some old games via paid emulation like the virtual console/rereleases but that isn’t back compat that’s money grabbing
It's a port.... Not a remake...
That's the problem.
The thing is the title of the article says the remake has the same graphical style. Remake entails new assets. A port is using the original assets and just getting them to run on different hardware. So that title is just inaccurate and the complaint doesn't make sense.
I totally agree, the article doesn't help in the slightest, but I really think Nintendo could have done better with Mario 64. This was a landmark game that went down in history for it's impact on gaming (especially platformers) and it should be experienced by gamers that were not about at the time. They won't give it the attention it deserves, looking like that, which is their loss, but Nintendo's fault, imo.
Half the people here clear don't know the different between a remake an a remaster. If giu don't like it then don't support it.
Another of people chastise activision (cod), ea (madden etc), and most recently Rockstar (gta 5) for selling the same game over and over again but, the truth is that no company does this more shamefully and egregiously than nintendo.
WoW all that 240p glory
Meanwhile on the unofficial PC port, fans are modding everything to look more like the promotional art. Pure laziness, keep that shite.
Outside the collection existence. They have done so much questionable stuff with this. Limiting its window for buying even digitally, give widescreen to the other 2 with 1080p but 720 with no widescreen for mario 64... It's like they try to see how lazy ppl will let them be lol.
I don't care about the graphics style, did they fix the camera? A real R stick camera that truly rotates is a huge deal for this game if they added it.
It shouldn't be $60 especially due to the fact that Mario 64 is just a port of the original with no enhancements.
That's disappointing. They could have at least rendered at a higher res, adjusted the colors to be a bit more vibrant, and upscaled the textures with AI. That would have made a big difference for relatively little effort.
Totally dislike 3d Mario (and party and kart etc etc). But we love remasters without updated graphics for full price (what, you want it for free?). Because we love good games playable on current hardware. If the game is good, what it could have been is an extrinsic consideration. Are there really people here willing to forgo playing something they love because it isn't as shiny as they hoped, all to make a point (that no one gives af about nor will notice) to a publicly traded company?
For something that is suppose to have a limited production run a customer expects the game to at least be polished up looks wise shouldn't have been that hard to polish up Mario 64. I mean modders have been able to make Mario 64 look great for years. I'll still grab it since I did not get to play Mario Sunshine or Galaxy.
Remake? lol this isn't even a remaster its a rom up scaled for the system.
Lazy money grab. Nintendo this is pathetic. You should be better than this. Real gamers wouldn't spend a penny on such laziness
More remaster than remake.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.