28th February 2015, 4:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 28th February 2015, 4:22 PM by Dark Jaguar.)
Wait, that's what that is?! I thought it was mud! ... Well "night soil" I guess.
Here's a tidbit about DK64. Remember how it was such a big deal it had the expansion pak and everything? Nintendo went on and on about how DK64 just wouldn't work without it. Well, later games actually did take advantage of it (like Majora's Mask) but it's been revealed that DK64 actually did NOT take any real advantage of that extra memory. In a way, this makes sense, considering how poor things like draw distance were in that game (BT, which didn't use the expansion pack, had much farther draw distance). Why did it absolutely need the expansion pak, to the point where it was Nintendo's choice as the game the extra hardware would be included in? It was to fix a bug... Yeah, that's basically it. There was a game killing bug that would occasionally lock up the game, and the only workable fix Rare was able to find in time for the game's release was to use the expansion pak. Kinda disappointing, isn't it?
It's funny, since the ol' debate threads here about DK64 vs BK, I've talked to many other Rare fans over the years. When I can get it out of them, it really does seem like personal preference lies, mostly, along the lines of which one they played first. ABF and I both played DK64 first, and so we end up really loving the game. Those who played BK first tend to like that one best. I can totally see that. The complaints are legit I think, but I didn't see them as flaws when I first played it. For me, and many others, it wasn't a comparison to BK so much as a comparison to Mario 64. When you compare along those lines, DK64 does come away as a very good game going it's own way.
Now, as the years have gone by and I've had time to play BK and BT a few times (as well as their 360 ports), I can safely say I don't consider DK64 a better game than either. I think at this point I might in fact put BK (original) as the best of the bunch. However, I've never once hated DK64. I still consider it a very well made game, and I'm not sure I'll ever change my mind on that.
One thing's for true, the newer generation of gamers don't seem to like any of them. Weird, but I think maybe it comes from them having started with modern and more refined platformers. All they see when they play the old ones is what they don't have, the lack of features modern 3D platformers take for granted. The common refrain you might here is "Why do I have limited lives? That's stupid!". As I get older, it becomes clear that most new kids claiming to like the old games are going to be like us as kids claiming to like old movies. That is, just parroting what we think will make us look "mature".
Here's a tidbit about DK64. Remember how it was such a big deal it had the expansion pak and everything? Nintendo went on and on about how DK64 just wouldn't work without it. Well, later games actually did take advantage of it (like Majora's Mask) but it's been revealed that DK64 actually did NOT take any real advantage of that extra memory. In a way, this makes sense, considering how poor things like draw distance were in that game (BT, which didn't use the expansion pack, had much farther draw distance). Why did it absolutely need the expansion pak, to the point where it was Nintendo's choice as the game the extra hardware would be included in? It was to fix a bug... Yeah, that's basically it. There was a game killing bug that would occasionally lock up the game, and the only workable fix Rare was able to find in time for the game's release was to use the expansion pak. Kinda disappointing, isn't it?
It's funny, since the ol' debate threads here about DK64 vs BK, I've talked to many other Rare fans over the years. When I can get it out of them, it really does seem like personal preference lies, mostly, along the lines of which one they played first. ABF and I both played DK64 first, and so we end up really loving the game. Those who played BK first tend to like that one best. I can totally see that. The complaints are legit I think, but I didn't see them as flaws when I first played it. For me, and many others, it wasn't a comparison to BK so much as a comparison to Mario 64. When you compare along those lines, DK64 does come away as a very good game going it's own way.
Now, as the years have gone by and I've had time to play BK and BT a few times (as well as their 360 ports), I can safely say I don't consider DK64 a better game than either. I think at this point I might in fact put BK (original) as the best of the bunch. However, I've never once hated DK64. I still consider it a very well made game, and I'm not sure I'll ever change my mind on that.
One thing's for true, the newer generation of gamers don't seem to like any of them. Weird, but I think maybe it comes from them having started with modern and more refined platformers. All they see when they play the old ones is what they don't have, the lack of features modern 3D platformers take for granted. The common refrain you might here is "Why do I have limited lives? That's stupid!". As I get older, it becomes clear that most new kids claiming to like the old games are going to be like us as kids claiming to like old movies. That is, just parroting what we think will make us look "mature".
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)