Super Mario 64 beta (prerelease)

A photo of the dev card in the console with the TV running the game would be a good proof.
Or heck, even a video.
'cause this just looks like a simple rom hack

 

its funny cause he takes his time to put his little shitty Watermark name in each image but taking one with a piece of paper Is just to hard guys.

 

One thing that bugs me in the first two pictures is how the ground texture seems way too scretched, like it's badly put together.
I guess that pictures that match with the videos would be good but it won't be enough to make us believe it's real.
A video of the thing running on an actual console is the way to go

 

Put a piece of paper next to it with the time date and assember written on it with your user name then I Will believe you.

 

Next time use images that are of similar resolution because the shadow will blend better.
Also dont use photoshop to export it because it will leave traces in the exif data. That or at least fix the shadows properly like on the left side of the cart. Or you know, remove the tags photoshop left .

Either post the cart with a paper with your screen name, or a video of the cart. Please stop wasting people's time with this. Just prove it's legitimate and everything will be fine.
Exif data for those interested.

Spoiler

File Type JPEG
File Type Extension jpg
MIME Type image/jpeg
Image Width 720
Image Height 960
Encoding Process Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample 8
Color Components 3
Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling YCbCr4:4:4 (1 1)
JFIF
JFIF Version 1.01
Resolution Unit None
X Resolution 1
Y Resolution 1
ICC_Profile
Profile CMM Type Lino
Profile Version 2.1.0
Profile Class Display Device Profile
Color Space Data RGB
Profile Connection Space XYZ
Profile Date Time 1998:02:09 06:49:00
Profile File Signature acsp
Primary Platform Microsoft Corporation
CMM Flags Not Embedded, Independent
Device Manufacturer IEC
Device Model sRGB
Device Attributes Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
Rendering Intent Perceptual
Connection Space Illuminant 0.9642 1 0.82491
Profile Creator HP
Profile ID 0
Profile Copyright Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company
Profile Description sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Media White Point 0.95045 1 1.08905
Media Black Point 0 0 0
Red Matrix Column 0.43607 0.22249 0.01392
Green Matrix Column 0.38515 0.71687 0.09708
Blue Matrix Column 0.14307 0.06061 0.7141
Device Mfg Desc IEC http://www.iec.ch
Device Model Desc IEC 61966-2.1 Default RGB colour space - sRGB
Viewing Cond Desc Reference Viewing Condition in IEC61966-2.1
Viewing Cond Illuminant 19.6445 20.3718 16.8089
Viewing Cond Surround 3.92889 4.07439 3.36179
Viewing Cond Illuminant Type D50
Luminance 76.03647 80 87.12462
Measurement Observer CIE 1931
Measurement Backing 0 0 0
Measurement Geometry Unknown
Measurement Flare 0.999%
Measurement Illuminant D65
Technology Cathode Ray Tube Display
Red Tone Reproduction Curve (Binary data 2060 bytes)
Green Tone Reproduction Curve (Binary data 2060 bytes)
Blue Tone Reproduction Curve (Binary data 2060 bytes)
APP14
DCT Encode Version 100
APP14 Flags 0 [14]
APP14 Flags 1 (none)
Color Transform YCbCr
Composite
Image Size 720x960
Megapixels 0.691

 

Not sayings it's real or anything but he probably used photoshop to add his little watermark in the bottom corner.

 

That doesnt explain the resolution change on the cart/background if only a watermark was added.

I see theres also a stage select image but it's very poor quality.
Take a better picture of that.

 

I tried my best to take a good photo of the stage selection menu, but unfortunately this is the best I could shot as I also had to make the paper and the content of it visible.

 

so you can add more images, So you can also type? Are you allergic to paper?

Look no one bother posting again Unless He fucking Either 1.shoots a video with A TIMESTAMP or 2. Shoots A photo with CART IN CONSOLE POWERED ON WITH A TIMESTAMP.

Also Can afford rare dev cart but cant buy decent camera GGNORE

 

I'm done here. You know you can do better.

 

Well.. what if it is real.. It seems the biggest crime is that he has a crappy camera.. Before we toss him to the wolves, let's see what else he post..
I understand that a lot of fakes get made when people want their five minutes of fame, and we should always use caution.. at the same time, let's see if can post some screenshots.. Demanding this and that on his first post, he might just be like f*** this, no one cares..

Stranger things have happened.. Remember before the Xbox 360 was released and a kid on the gamespot forums told everyone he has one at his dad's house? Everyone flamed him, he did end up taking pictures including himself in them.. lol but his dad got in a lot of trouble..
Echo II just got dumped for Dreamcast.. Borman found an unknown Sonic game for Xbox.. Someone found an actual Neptune prototype in someone's closet..

Let's all chill, welcome him or her, and if they end up being an attention whore, post some memes and do your thing, then ban them. In the meantime, let's use our best manners and put away the pitchforks.. for now..

 

You can still put a piece of paper in a scene with a crappy camera. Timestamp assembler.

 

I agree, you guys are being too hard on him. We don't know it is fake for sure right? So why flame him right away? Give him some time.

 

I dont think so, all we are asking is for a legit timestamp, even explained to him what it was.

to which he hasnt done yet, but upload another(s)?

All we want is a bloody timestamp that shows Console with said dev cart and tv.

 

I'm not being hard I just want a piece of paper in his photos with time stamp and assembler written on it. Is that being mean or being very reasonable. Pen and paper is all that is needed and dev cart next to it.

 

The sonic one is old. It's been known to exist for some time. The only change now is that Borman offered a price for the kit it was on and the owner agreed. That's the only reason we have it *now* (and Borman's reputation being pretty good).
The Sega Neptune had a long backstory that wasn't merely a claim. It had all the needed information from the start and wasn't just a claim. I don't know the Ecco 2 story but I'll get to it. I dont pay attention to Dreamcast as much (I'll get to reading it. Never cared for Ecco is my main reason).

I get newly registered users can speak the truth, as many have in the past, but showing up and making your first post about SM64 with little to no evidence, as well as providing minimal supplementary information but only after a number of posts have been made asking for it, only to have very very poor quality and modified images, as well as a lack of clear photos? That's not a way to start a thread and keep it going. That's not a way to prove authenticity. Posting a picture of the cart in an N64 with the TV in frame and a timestamp is. In a basement? Okay use flash on the camera. TV didn't come our right? Take one without flash and post both. Still not a good picture from brightness? Move the set to a more lit room (with or without the TV).

The point is if they're going to start a thread with something very sought after by many members, and only provide what they feel and find more excuses for why it's so poor quality, then I feel it's absolutely reasonable to call bullshit. It's the fastest way to cause commotion, the easiest way to do it, and in the end unless they can clear all this up, will likely end up getting banned.

 

Heres an example of a time stamp bro. Saturn collection

 

Added a better image.

 

Can you please show that paper with your dev cart. It would be much appreciated.

 

Okay, hold your horses.
That stage select menu.
The names do seem to match with the level names on the final Jp version of the game.
We need more details. A picture of the dev cart with that paper on it & if possible a video or a photo showing both the game screen & the cart in the console with the paper
(I'm just wondering why only the first five levels are listed & why they are in the exact same order as they are in the score screen)