It's like 75% of the way to being as good as I wish it was, but a few concerns hold it back.

The controls, while incredibly refined for a first effort, still have their quirks compared to later games. For example: why does Mario sometimes walk in an arc instead of turning around in place? When the controls work as intended, it feels amazing to long jump around 64's levels, but if you've experienced the immaculate game feel of Sunshine or Odyssey, this game can occasionally feel like a step back, even if only a small one.

While it has a greater level of completeness and polish to its mission design than Sunshine, I still feel like a few too many stars are janky or less interesting, particularly cannon stars, the wing cap, and anything to do with swimming.

Its structure that lets you grab almost any star on a particular level is nice and does a better job of encouraging exploration than the more restrictive shines in Sunshine, but the way it kicks you out after grabbing just one still discourages you from actually exploring beyond a single path each time you enter. Not to mention that starting from the same position every time only serves to accentuate how samey some stars feel. (Thank god for Odyssey's moon madness--that game's structure feels like an antidote to all the ills of past collectathons.)

Lastly, the music, while largely unforgettable, is unfortunately limited by the N64's storage space to be repeated across numerous stages. In my dreams, I see a Spyro Reignited-style remaster of SM64 that offers alternate orchestrations of the same song for each level, or something like that, but alas.

In spite of these gripes, it's still a benchmark 3D platformer and a blast to jump, kick, and dive around in--arguably more so than some of the series' later entries. (If you're able to Completely Legally back up your own ROM of this game, try the decompilation team's PC port which offers slightly improved camera control, can upscale to any resolution, and runs at 60fps. Why couldn't Nintendo get this game running at 60fps when they re-released it almost 25 years later?)

Best world: Rainbow Ride

Some serious structural problems and jank underlie what is, at its core, one of the most good-natured, atmospheric, distinctive, and fluid (get it?) platformers ever. In spite of its flaws, it's STILL this good. If this game didn't have any levels at all, but still let you move around as Mario, it'd be at least a 6/10.

I wish it had a more interesting goal than "beat 7 preordained missions in each world," as it makes secrets and optional shines entirely worthless without the more freeform star-grabbing of SM64. I also wish it better communicated that you only had to beat seven missions in each world--I spent way too long exploring and trying optional challenges I hoped would reward me with some sort of tangible progress, as if I were playing Super Mario 64. I wish it had fewer missions that required a total reset of the stage, as a few of them feel padded. Plus, with a smaller set of core missions, additional shines could be placed in the world without kicking you out upon obtaining one, encouraging exploration. As it is, the worlds are big (by 3D platformer standards), beautiful, and detailed, but with absolutely no worthwhile incentive to step outside the path to your single objective. Well, no incentive aside from sheer vibes, which as this game shows, are sometimes all you need.

Don't pretend the cannons in SM64 are any better than the chucksters.

Best world: Ricco Harbor

In my time playing Banjo-Kazooie, I found that the moment-to-moment exploration and platforming is excellent to this day. Realizing I might have to start replaying levels I'd already gotten most of the junk in to progress later on is not, and was in fact so deflating that I put the game down until I am ready to deal with that. (Apparently the Xbox ports help make this less tedious by remembering which notes you've already gotten, so you don't have to re-collect all of them every time you revisit a level to get more. Fingers crossed it comes to PC someday with that quality of life upgrade intact.)

All time great level design (except for moments like Gusty Glade's baffling required leap of faith or that part in Castle Crush with the FOUR hedgehogs, which I didn't know at the time you could roll into--they're literally covered in spikes!--yes, I'm still mad), all time garbage lives system. Maybe I'm not great at the game (I'm not), but consider that some of my favorite levels were still some of the most challenging ones; they just happened to also give you access to a save point before playing them, which made the challenge exciting rather than exhausting. Replaying a level you've already thoroughly mastered just to get to the one you haven't is rarely, if ever, fun. Unless you're willing to compromise the developer's "intended experience" by using save states if you're playing on a modern platform (which you should, seriously), this severely bogs down what should be some of the most thrilling and engaging parts of the game. I appreciate a good challenge, but the tedious save system in conjunction with levels which demand either trial-and-error repetition or more precision than this game's sometimes-sketchy hitboxes and tight camera allow make it a more tiring, frustrating experience than its streamlined predecessor.

Still, most of the early worlds, before the stingy save system gets so brutal as to be frustrating, and the last few levels, where you rarely need to play many in a row without saving, are truly intense and massively rewarding in a way that few platformers ever accomplish. Rare was even kind enough to include the surprisingly easy Toxic Tower right near the end as a token of gratitude for making it that far. When it's at its best, Diddy's Kong Quest promises to be an even better game than DKC1. It doesn't quite see that through, but I appreciate it all the more for trying.

The West’s introduction to Nintendo’s storied tactical JRPG franchise, Fire Emblem 7 is perhaps the best-presented Fire Emblem game, containing some of the best animation and sprite work on the GBA. It has some glaring issues, though, like a story full of painfully generic fantasy JRPG tripe that can’t help but fizzle out every time it threatens to go somewhere interesting, battles that are best played on an emulator with a fast-forward button, cutscenes that inexplicably autoplay dialogue at a dismally slow speed, and a late game full of inconsistent difficulty spikes if you're not aware of how best to min-max your party, how to get the good equipment, or which characters turn out to be useless or outclassed later on. I appreciate a challenge, but this game frequently isn’t, until it is.

I love the series’ trademark permadeath system, but I find it better in theory than I do in practice. It adds weight to your decisions, ups the challenge, and forces you to make tough calls about who you’re REALLY attached to. It also results in the game handing you a lot of useless duplicate class characters which frequently either replace ones you have or add little of value. Besides that, there are simply too many for all but a few to get any real character development. The way they’re referred to as “units” rather than “characters” is telling. Yet several plot-centric characters are capital-R Required, so upon “death,” either they become incapacitated so as not to affect the story, or you get an unceremonious game over. Now go replay the past twenty minutes because another swordsman with no personality died. See, this one has red hair, so he’s important.

I'd rather Fire Emblem take a page from western RPGs and give us a story that adapts to how we play, offering multiple endings and branching paths as consolation for our mistakes--and as a reward for our successes. Instead, FE7 opts for half measures. Choices have substantial gameplay weight, but are let down by a narrative that doesn't care about them. I understand this kind of design is a big burden on development, but I’d gladly take 10-20 chapters in a world that reacts to my choices, has characters worth caring about, and allows me to fail forward over this game’s set of 30+ linear, occasionally bland, frustrating chapters.

Of course, that’s asking a lot of a Game Boy Advance game. The gameplay, when everything falls into place and the challenge feels tuned precisely to your skills, is still sublimely satisfying. A character surviving almost-certain death with a lucky dodge or crit is as exhilarating as it is frustrating to lose an essential one to the same things. Out-maneuvering the opponent feels supremely rewarding, which makes it all the more annoying when an unannounced reinforcement punishes you for simply playing how the game had encouraged you. (Some Fire Emblem games have reinforcements that can move and attack on their first turn--at least I don’t recall this happening in this game.) Fire Emblem at its best--when it lives up to its promise--is incredibly fun. I just wish this one did so more often.

This one is supposed to have less endgame content than 4U, but who actually plays these things long enough to get there? I had a fine time hunting dinosaurs until I got tired. Isn't that all you need from a Monster Hunter game? 3U was my first foray into the series before the slow pace, general clunk, and gathering quests turned me off of it. This one had slightly better quality of life features, online play, and a couple of fun new weapons to try. This adds up to make it a better experience overall, even if I don't ever expect to become a Monster Hunter diehard.

I've been simping for Supergiant for the better part of ten years--ever since Bastion. Here's to the recognition they deserve. While Bastion and Transistor are fun (I haven't gotten to play Pyre yet), it does feel like their short playtimes are a necessity compensate for the limited depth of their gameplay. Hades can keep you playing much longer, and it absolutely earns that. Where their previous games excelled in vibes and storytelling, Hades does too--it's just even more replayable and addicting than most games out there manage.

I'm normally a bit of a snob about roguelites. Too much metaprogression feels bad to me; I like the notion that with enough skill, I could beat the game on my first run. I never will, but the sensation of fairness is what matters. Most of my favorite roguelites, like FTL, Monster Train, Slay the Spire, and Into the Breach, only offer unlockable new options rather than powers; the game never gets substantially easier until you get substantially better (or luckier). When games like Rogue Legacy let you become more powerful with each successive run, it can start to feel like the game is designed around grinding to overcome challenges rather than developing skill and familiarity. Hades does exactly this, but it sets itself apart by considering how this altered gameplay loop should necessarily impact every other part of the game. The writing, themes, and the game's entire artistic vision hinge on this progression, and it makes the whole gameplay loop feel justified. A halfway-finished run can still advance the narrative in one way or another, while a finished run doesn't have to close the door on your motivation to keep playing thanks to all the additional content and options at your disposal. Hades is so brimming with polish, it makes it look effortless to make a game this good. It's only after you go back to play some of the games it resembles that its real level of quality is drawn into sharp focus.