I was watching a Crash Bandicoot run done at AGDQ this year and it dawned on me that the PSX Crash series is probably the best 3D platformer ever made.
>aged exceptionally well
>smooth controls, absolutely no moment in which one is left saying to themselves "I did not deserve to die"
>character design isn't bad
>first installment came out a month after SM64 and
is truly better than SM64
Sidebar: Why the fuck does Europe get better cover art - this is bullshit
>Coco Bandicoot in heels and miniskirt.
She should had wore that outfit more often.
>implying you needed to adjust the camera for a single moment in Crash
Just because something is muh open world, doesn't mean it's objectively better. Banjo's levels are far too stretched out, and unlike Mario 64, Banjo also doesn't move very fast. Combine those two, and you got a game that may play well, but is far too sluggish to be compared to Crash Bandicoot's exceptional pacing and compact level design.
Thanks dude, this whole article (which the picture was from, I could have reverse IS'd it hey hey what do you say) is pretty sweet
While the third in the series is stellar, I've always been partial to Crash 2. The reason why Crash as a series was better than BK/SM64/DK64 was that there was less emphasis on collecting bullshit. Sure you had to grab boxes, that's a pain, but it's better than getting every stupid jiggy or every coin in a level that sucks
>trial and error
>nearly the same mechanics as 2D platformers
>nearly just as smooth and fluid
Crash Warped probably is the most solid platformer. The story isn't cringeworthy, it plays well, it's got variety in actually fun ways, has good music, is about the right difficulty for regular ending, and challenging for 105% true end.
Personally I would prefer to play other top tier games like Spyro 1, but you can't easily 100% Warped in 12 hours or less, so it's got more play-time value than its competitors.
Yeah, 2nd game is one of my all time favourite games. 3rd game started straying too much from platforming, had bland sceneries, less impressive graphics, and slightly more sluggish controls in mid-air.
I think I might be the last SM64 fan in the world. Do I think it's the best 3D platformer ever? Well... maybe.
Galaxy 2is it's only real competition.
SM64 never stops being fun. I picked it up again a couple weeks ago and it's still fun.
Ain't no shame in being a furry.
A "furry" ranges all the way from someone who likes anything starring anthropomorphic animals, to people who dress in fursuits at furry conventions and/or furiously masturbates to cartoon animal porn.
I mean... depends on how you define supremacist? I'm pretty sure it's my favorite 3D platformer and that it makes my top 10 games list. I understand that that's at least partly fueled by nostalgia though (even though I can defend certain things the game does right. I think the simple act of moving around in Mario 64 is more fun than in almost any other game), so I don't shit on people who disagree with me.
I can't agree with Galaxy anything because they're really all flash and no substance. They look great, they sound great, they're an enjoyable experience, but the actual gameplay is really weak. Very linear, pretty sluggish and imprecise controls compared to Mario 64, and really no reason to ever play it more than once. Not to mention Galaxy 2 is basically the same game with none of the impact or substance of the first.
Both games have awesome soundtracks though. I just can't see them being any better than 64 with how much of them is just hallway simulation. Same feelings about 3D Land and 3D World, and probably about Crash games based on what I've seen in screenshots. Blame it on Mario 64 being introduced to me when I was 6, but I can't see linear 3D as being anything but pointless waste of technology.
I hold firm in my conviction that the 1st game was the best in the trilogy. It had everything, the perfect controls, variety in level design, perfect difficulty curve, challenging bosses, fun characters, challenging levels, extra content for the players who want a bit more and in my opinion the perfect length of a game of the particular genre. The fact that the levels are presented linearly is a good thing, because on an initial playthrough the player has to get through all the levels any way, and having the player select which level to tackle first does not make sense, as the player does not know what to expect anyway. 10/10 platformer. The other 2 games were also good, but as i said, a bit lacking, i rate them 8/10.
>The reason why Crash as a series was better than BK/SM64/DK64 was that there was less emphasis on collecting bullshit.
Unlike the others, Crash isn't a real 3D platformer though, it's 2.5D
>load up a Crash game
>"Wow, the graphics are really good for a PS1 game!"
>"The voice acting's top-notch, too!"
>"Crash controls really well!"
>"Cool, a bonus section!"
>"I think I really like these games!"
>play for a few more minutes
>take out the disc
>never play the game again
Every single time.
At no point was there any need to adjust the camera, other than a limited number of backtracking segments that you didn't need to do unless you were going for 100%. Besides, in this context, I assume he's talking about how slippery Mario 64 is compared to Crash's rather rigid platforming.
Some of the worst things I know in platformers is bad control in mid-air (whether it's extremely limited, or if you have to constantly adjust until you land), and landing on small platforms only to slip off because m-m-muh momentum.
Good thread OP. I still play Crash 1-3 to this day and they have yet to get stale.
They are more varied in the wrong way. Crash Bandicoot 3 doesn't introduce new mechanics and challenges to the actual platforming levels. The platforming levels do virtually nothing we haven't seen in Crash 2 already. Everything new in Crash 3 is covered in the vehicle levels, of which there are far too many.
>Don't even compare Crash 1 and SM64. Each level is a straight hallway with a little bit of left/right movement available.
Sm64 is like 10 levels you visit over and over again. Most of the levels are boring. The most fun levels were the "straight hallway" type that worked as courses.
Crash was a better conversion of 2D platformers to 3D. Sm64 started the trend of hub worlds and collectathons that ultimately destroyed the platformers.
The Crash series are probably the best 'pure' platformers, in that they're entirely about plat forming and doing it well. There are better games that happen to be platformers though.
Yeah, and only in recent years has Mario gone back to the straight courses in the 3D titles. How fucking ironic is that, that only nearly 2 decades later they figure out how unfocused those giant ass box shaped playgrounds of 64 are.
I really don't understand why the game isn't more contraversial. The bulk of the game is piss easy, the late game challenge stages are completely inferior to what Crash 3 offers with its time trials and the few levels with what you could call exploration are still far more straightforward and offer much less freedom than Mario 64 or BK.
I feel Koizumi's skill as a director is wasted on Mario.
Crash could've had all those technical details and gameplay mechanics and still be a game nobody cares about. What really really made Crash stand out was the presentation of the character. Crash is the literal embodiment of the Looney Tunes attitude in video games. He looks radical, does dangerous shit and beats his enemies in style and with no effort. He's the video game Bugs Bunny. His death sequences are flat out Looney Tunes inspired animations. He even has a Taz like spinning attack. He just doesn't give a fuck. Fucking Crash is the man.
>that ultimately destroyed the platformers.
Weren't platformers already mostly decimated around the 4th gen due to the overabundance of bland Sonic cash-ins with sloppy gameplay? If anything shit like Mario 64 and Crash, no matter which platformer style you prefer more, were a breath of fresh air in comparison.
Agreed, I have no idea were the collection platformer hate comes from, given it's one of the best ways the make exploring an environment in 3D space work well and there are so many solid games in the sub-genre.
Someone's buttmad that they could never get platinum on Area 51.
Playing Warped as my first game, going backwards shows just how dated the previous two games are. They are not even significantly different in terms of gameplay, but the presentation is night and day. Just from the start screen you can clearly see that Naughty Dog had gotten more comfortable with what they were doing and had stopped trying so hard to draw attention by being completely in your face with goofy and retarded storytelling. There is a lot less obvious plagiarism too, as Crash was clearly just another attempt to build a mascot character, rather than build a game by its own merit. Everything is just far more polished from the warp room, enemy models, animations, level complexity, through to actually well-presented menus and results screens. There is no doubt that Warped was the high point of the series.
Honestly I could understand why one wouldn't like the sub-genre, but it never really bothered me that much. As long as I enjoy it then I don't really give a shit. Then again in terms of 3D platformers I personally prefer Spyro and some other stuff over Rare's work, but I can still see the latter's merits.
>Crash was clearly just another attempt to build a mascot character
Yes, but he was still one of the fewest examples of the concept done right.
>going backwards shows just how dated the previous two games are.
I disagree. As much as I like the third, I think the other two still hold up by their own merits as well.
honestly crash has aged pretty badly compared to rayman 2, mario 64 and spyro
the character designs are very dated, they're still stuck in the tail-end of that 90s radical mascot era that sonic started
the controls, whilst 'smooth' lack any sense of momentum and inertia, which makes them a lot shallower than mario 64's
the on-rails camera design was very good for the technical limitations of the PS1, but severely limiting to the gameplay of the series, and makes the game feel like a step between 2d and 3d platformers rather than a full evolution
>Crash was a better conversion of 2D platformers to 3D
Damn son you're almost at the stage of self awareness. The fact is that Mario 64 wasn't a conversion of 2D platformers at all. Miyamoto reinvented Mario for the transition to 3D.
Crash on the other hand is like a continuation of Donkey Kong Country but with 3D being the gimmick - Crash wouldn't have even needed polygons to work, a powerful 2D scaler for a Mode 7 style effect could have sufficed.
The reason Mario 64 style 3D platformers dies is because every genre started to intergrate their open-world elements. GTA3 is what killed the 3D platformer, not DK64. It even has 100 hidden packages throughout the world! That's also why Jak 2 was turned into a GTA3 clone.
>crash was quite obviously based on the eary to mid 90s radikewl style
Partially, and even then that's more or less design wise. He was more of a Looney Tunes pastiche personality wise. Conker (at least his BFD incarnation) was the exact opposite; while seemingly not showing much design wise, he fit the "edgy and radikwel" shtick more in terms of his own personality.
>crash was quite obviously based on the eary to mid 90s radikewl style e.g. Poochie
This post is perfect from taking apart people who actually played the games from people who just look at promotional material.
Probably because there's not much documentation and/or tools released for the Crash games in comparison to Mario 64. It's sad, because I think Crash games have a shitload of romhacking potential; that said in recent times there has been at least some forms of progress:
I disagree. While that anon was going way too far in claiming Banjo as the best of its genre, I still think those games still have their merits at least in terms of presentation. I still prefer Spyro in the long run when it comes to that style of 3D Platformer though.
It's hard to romhack Crash because the game engine relies on per-frame pre-computed occlusion/visibility. The engine can't actually calculate it on its own.
If you start to alter scenes, you mess with the carefully pre-calculated scene render. The only way around it would be to provide your own pre-computed occlusion/visibility for your ROM hack.
Mario 64 actually calculates everything in real-time like a modern 3D engine so the engine happily adjusts to whatever you throw at it.