Yeah pacman and pong were seminal but so was elite on the BBC, and Populous which I think was on the spectrum. Also unreal tournament, silent hill, vice city, homeworld, doom 2016, beam ng, I enjoyed em all but I can't decide. Ppl here have done much more gaming than me, I'm wondering what you all think is the best game ever. Age, platform, genre, bla bla - what's best ever?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The last console I had was the Sega Mega Drive, so I don't have much knowledge of console games, but are you sure Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time "essentially set the foundations of 3D gaming that are still used today?".

Quake 1, was released on June 1996. Quake II was released on December 1997.

Ocarina of Time was released on November 1998, the same time as Half-Life.

Sure, Mario 64 was released in June 1996, same time as Quake 1, but Quake 1 also had multiplayer - a key milestone for 3D gaming at that time).

You also had Frontier: First Encounters, released in April 1995, with primitive, but full 3D graphics:

Tomb Raider was released in October 1996 (Sega Saturn, DOS, PlayStation):

Mechwarrior II was released in July 1995:

I am just curious, is there something about Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time that I don't know about with respect to their contribution to 3D gaming (either from a technical or game design perspective)? They are clearly great games, I just don't really understand how they could be the foundation for all 3D gaming.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Fair enough lol. Not all 3D gaming obviously (I mean they aren't First person shooters, like most of your examples), but effectively the Action, Adventure, Platforming, etc angle (which makes up a fairly massive chunk of games today).

What I'm talking about is the fundamental gameplay of both. Online Multiplayer was revolutionary, but it wasn't really a fundamental change to the gameplay itself (Like with Marathon introducing mouse control)

It's interesting that you mention Tomb Raider though because that's a perfect comparison. It was a fairly indicative of the industry as a whole with its stiff controls, static cameras, and dodgy combat.

Mario 64 brought a full range of movement and action to games. It was really the first 3D game where just moving was fun (which is why they started the game in a peaceful courtyard, they wanted you to just have a fuck about). It also brought the user controllable camera to games (It hasn't aged well, but that camera system was amazing when it came out). Also, while it didn't invent the Hub world (it had been used in 2D games) it pretty much set the standard for it.

OoT built on Mario64 with two major bits of gameplay. Target lock-on (Then called "Z-Targeting") and contextual buttons. Both of which are just so fundamental to games these days it just feels obvious. More relevant back then (but not now), it created the template for how you could faithfully transition a series from 2D to 3D while perfectly maintaining the feel of the 2D series.

Now, neither of those things alone would justify it being in my Top 5. The fact that they're both so aggressively fun and well made does that.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I see. I still think claiming that Mario 64 and Zelda 98 are the foundation for most 3D action and adventure games doesn't really align with reality.

Especially the piece about Mario 64 being the first 3D game were movement was fun. I understand that the definition of fun is subjective, but this is basically false.

Beyond Quake, in Frontier: First Encounters you could literally fly between solar bodies, do planetry landings, fly between cities. This is far more difficult to pull off well than the relatively primitive movement in Mario 64.

Same with setting the standard for player hubs. I haven't played Mario 64, but I have seen friends play Mario Galaxy and the hub area in Galaxy is well designed, but simplistic and with no dynamism related to gameplay.

Not sure about how exactly target lock-on functions in Zelda 98, but target lock-on definitely existing long, long before Zelda and in more complex, dynamic environments.

Don't get me wrong, you like what you like and clearly Mario 64 and Zelda 98 are good games, but it is strange to put them on the pedestal in this manner. Especially when many of your statements almost approach a PR level of what I assume is hyperbole (e.g. "first 3D game with fun movement" - this is clearly false).

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Mario 64 was the first use of the analog stick in a console game. Push it a little bit to walk, push it all the way to run, and several states in between. Maybe you can find a simulator that had analog control, but I'm sure you can see the difference.

Ocarina of Time was a solution to that type of game in 3D space that, as discussed above in things like Tomb Raider, was far more awkward in its predecessors as the industry was figuring out how to make games work in 3D. It's very similar to how Halo wasn't the first console FPS, but it was the first one smart enough to put guns, grenades, and melee all on their own buttons, among other innovations.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 5 points 2 months ago

I'd also add Mario 64's use of a controllable third person camera - all the games @Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world mentioned are first person, and I don't think movement in those types of games is at all comparable. The camera was the key point to making a 3D platformer even possible at all, and it immediately became vital to many other genres too.

I know that by today's standards that camera is known for being rather antiquated, but it was revolutionary for its time. One detail I think deserves more credit is how they tried to anthropomorphize the camera as Lakitu to introduce it to players.