Super Mario 64 VS. Nights Into Dreams

Two Killer App games released for two rival consoles in 1996. One of them was a modest hit that got a special controller and a Christmas bonus disc made for it and even earned acclaim from a certain gaming legend, while its rival did so well it literally codified an entire genre of video games. One has platforming and collecting, while another has more surreal, arcade like gameplay (plus a Virtual Pet system). Both are very innovative, quality games that deserve recognition to this day.

Which do you prefer?

edited 18th Apr '12 8:45:39 PM by Prinzenick

This seems like two very odd things to attempt to pit against one another.

I was honestly expecting a news post about how someone was merging the two games.

Super Mario 64. Nuff said.

apples and oranges, friend.

Why not Adventure?

^You mean Sonic Adventure? Hm, that seems like an interesting idea. I might just give it a shot.

Sonic Adventure is certified mediocre, though, so it wouldn't be any contest.

Yeah, apples and oranges. The two are barely comparable.

Also, its not Nights, its NiGHTS.

edited 20th Apr '12 4:44:25 PM by Zeromaeus

Nights Into Dreams wins, because its Sega, and we all know Sega was better.

Me, playing favorites? What gives you that idea?

(to be honest, I liked Mario 64 but honestly found it kind of disappointing when it was first released. I'm more forgiving of its shortcomings these days though).

Wait, why are we comparing a bizarre on-rails adventure to a standard setting Platformer?

(Personal opinion. Ni GHTS Into Dreams)

I don't understand what's so weird about comparing the Killer Apps of the two biggest rivals.

Because that's the only thing they had in common?

They're hardly comparable. As Pippi said, they can't really even be considered to be of the same genre. Sure, Miyamoto thinks highly of NiGHTS, but that's more or less where the line is drawn.

You'd do a better job comparing something like Banjo Kazooie to Super Mario 64.

They're about as different as night and day. It really boils down to whether you like exploration or fast-paced gameplay.

I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE.

Super Mario 64 compared to Banjo-Kazooie i guess would be an okay comparison, but i thought the contrast between Mario 64 and Nights would be more interesting than comparing Mario 64 to a game that rode off its formula (albiet with many improvements).

Super Mario 64 is the greatest game ever released,..that isn't Banjo Kazooie.

It's damn unfair to compare the two,..now Ni GHTS vs Crash Bandicoot,that's a little better,but Ni GHTS wins that one easily.

I don't think I could compare them as games, due to their being as different as a nuke and a ninja. Story-wise, though, Ni GHTS in a landslide.

I don't really understand why they're impossible to compare. Whichever game you enjoyed more wins. It's simple to me.

edited 21st Apr '12 8:46:05 PM by Sabertooth1000000000

You can like one game more than the other, but is it possible to give reasons beyond "This one is more fun", music, or visuals? Which really seems kind of shallow.

edited 21st Apr '12 10:20:07 PM by hnd03

It's not that it's impossible to compare the two, but that it'd be an unfair comparison.

Next lets compare Mass Effect with Super Mario Galaxy

The only way you can compare them is by Music, Asthetics (Really,the term Graphics to describe the visual appeal of a game irritates me.) and fun factor are the only way you can compare the games.

Which as others point out, is an unfair comparison.

edited 22nd Apr '12 4:22:51 AM by PippingFool

Well, you do happen to explore planets by jumping around them with really wonky physics in both games, so there is a bit of a comparison there!

edited 22nd Apr '12 8:50:14 AM by SgtRicko