I think if they're going to make a 3D Donkey Kong game, they're going to take more of a 3D Land/World approach. In other words, it's basically going to be like Returns/Tropical Freeze in 3D, you go through linear levels to get to the goal instead of a sandbox style world looking for Golden Bananas and whatnot.
I honestly think Donkey Kong should go in a slightly different direction in 3D though, maybe somewhat of a God of War/Werehog/Knack approach where the gameplay works in some beat em up elements (not to the point that those guys did where every other room traps you in an arena with lots of enemies, something that could flow a bit better with the platforming). Hell, the series is already halfway there, the general theme lends itself towards beat em up very well, as does the platforming elements, the random button mashing segments in Returns/Tropical Freeze, and the use of throwing items/enemies, they just need to add in some punching/kicking moves (and ideally ones that have platforming, such as the Sho-Hog-Ken in the Werehog gameplay that can be used as an uppercut move, but also gives your jump an extra boost as most speedrunners demonstrate).
From what I've played of the game, the 3D angles in the barrel sections just feel like unnecessary visual gimmicks, and I don't see why graphics and animation matter in that kind of game at all.
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why "3D" games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why 3D games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
They are. Aside from that one mine cart section, when did the 3D ever add anything meaningful to the level design? For the most part, you were basically railroaded down a particular path or stuck to one particular plane, the 3D was completely unnecessary and just added visual flare to the levels.
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why 3D games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
They are. Aside from that one mine cart section, when did the 3D ever add anything meaningful to the level design? For the most part, you were basically railroaded down a particular path or stuck to one particular plane, the 3D was completely unnecessary.
I don't know what necessary means. You either enjoyed it or not. I guess you didn't. I did.
From what I've played of the game, the 3D angles in the barrel sections just feel like unnecessary visual gimmicks, and I don't see why graphics and animation matter in that kind of game at all.
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why "3D" games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
I agree that the barrel pieces added depth to the game, it's one of the (many) aspects that made DK:TF a great game. I have to side with iKhan on the 3D issue though. It takes more code to make a 3D environment. Instead of 4 possible directions in a 2D game, you have to define movements in 6 directions. Also you have a way more elaborate collision detection. 3D really needs a lot more computative power than 2D.
From what I've played of the game, the 3D angles in the barrel sections just feel like unnecessary visual gimmicks, and I don't see why graphics and animation matter in that kind of game at all.
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why "3D" games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
I don't think the predefined engines don't create models. They have some predesigned textures, but if we are talking Nintendo most of their stuff is built from scratch. 3D has been common since the N64 and always has taken more resources. Do you honestly think Super Mario 64 and Yoshi's Story required the same amount of effort?
The level design takes work, which is why I never said they should only be made my indies. Professional development of all types of genres is important. But I fail to see what makes graphics important at all post 6th gen (for most games, Pandora's tower is an exception that could have really benefited from higher fidelity.)
They're not gimmicky at all, and they're not only in the barrel sections. They are everywhere, for example, some brilliant moves in the minecart levels. They add immersion to the game which is stunning. I'm not a game developer but I think this game took a lot of tremendous work regarding the graphics and the levels design. I don't see why 3D games, which have been common since the N64 and use pre-defined engines that do all the work require more work, I just don't.
They are. Aside from that one mine cart section, when did the 3D ever add anything meaningful to the level design? For the most part, you were basically railroaded down a particular path or stuck to one particular plane, the 3D was completely unnecessary.
I don't know what necessary means. You either enjoyed it or not. I guess you didn't. I did.
I mean that the 3D didn't really do anything that couldn't be done in 2D.
I personally don't get all the hate. DK64 was no worse than any other N64 collect-a-thon. It just lasted much longer.
It's called overstaying your welcome. Plus, DK64 was weird and bland even for a collect-a-thon, and brought the number of stuff you had to collect up to outrageois levels. Most collect-a-thons had 3 or so major things to collect, with Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie pushing the limits already. Donkey Kong 64 had about 9 or 10 things to collect per character. That is just tedious.
Yeah, but a lot of those were in intuitive places that you were eventually going to go to with the necessary character, eventually.
No. No they weren't. Unless you're implying being forced to cover every inch of every area with every character, sometimes multiple times due to power ups, is intuitive.
I personally don't get all the hate. DK64 was no worse than any other N64 collect-a-thon. It just lasted much longer.
It's called overstaying your welcome. Plus, DK64 was weird and bland even for a collect-a-thon, and brought the number of stuff you had to collect up to outrageois levels. Most collect-a-thons had 3 or so major things to collect, with Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie pushing the limits already. Donkey Kong 64 had about 9 or 10 things to collect per character. That is just tedious.
Yeah, but a lot of those were in intuitive places that you were eventually going to go to with the necessary character, eventually.
No. No they weren't. Unless you're implying being forced to cover every inch of every area with every character, sometimes multiple times due to power ups, is intuitive.
Yeah, you had to look harder for some bananas or fairies or you had a difficult task to achieve something, but making the game more compolicated as it progresses is expected, it's not an issue.
However, I understand that if you don't like collecting stuff, getting EVERYTHING can be annoying, but the game never forced you to get everything. Yeah, you had to collect bananas to fight bosses and yeah, you needed to have a certain amount of golden bananas to reach certain areas. The bar wasn't set really high, because:
Collecting the fairies was optional
You could easily gather all the bananas you needed with 5 Kongs without breaking a sweat (500 bananas in each world)
201 golden bananas are in the entire game, but if I remember correctly, having about half of that allowed you to get through the game
Banana coins were plentiful, so that was not an issue
There was a lot to collect, but very little was forced. I mean, you did love Super Mario 64, right? That was also performing tasks to collect stars so you could progress in the game. They also became harder to get the farther you were in the game. DK64 is only tedious if you like to collect everyhting and are out to get that 100% score.
I liked Super Mario 64 because I didn't need a damn spreadsheet for what I had to get. Just because it's optional doesn't excuse it for being bad. That just makes it filler, and filler is never a good thing. Besides, the levels were largely boring anyways, even on the first time through, and a lot of things in the game were just weird and out of place.
I liked Super Mario 64 because I didn't need a damn spreadsheet for what I had to get. Just because it's optional doesn't excuse it for being bad. That just makes it filler, and filler is never a good thing. Besides, the levels were largely boring anyways, even on the first time through, and a lot of things in the game were just weird and out of place.
Well, to each it's own, no point in arguing over opinions. Nothing can be liked by everyone.
Agreed. I don't know why the hell Nintendo's gotten into such a 2D platformer fetish as of late. They should just keep those as small scale downloadable titles, and put their money into quality 3D platformers.
The casual audience isn't too fond of 3D platformers. They prefer the simplicity of X-axis-only movement...for some reason. I'm more of a 3D fan, which is why I want Yarn Yoshi to transform into a freaking 3D platformer!
And a proper 3D Kirby...a 3D DK would be cool too, I guess.
Has Lara Croft jumped into 2D after 3D? No. Has Bejeweled been in 3D? no. Has Candy Crush Saga been in 3D? No. And that's because there's no need to jump to 3D at all. 3D games are just as fun as 2D games but I'm just saying that some series are better off in 2D. I want a new 2D Metroid game after playing the first five and I've still yet to play the prime series.
When Pokemon came into 3D, Some things had to change which I didn't like. Why did they change the tones of Pokemon? Also in aesthetic terms, it was just passable. Nothing mind blowing like Dream Team, 3D Land or even Dark Moon.
When you go 2D, there is a variety of art styles that can be possible to do. 3D while it does show that, still feels odd even though its appealing (like Yoshi's new island).
Tomb Raider has also stayed almost exclusive to home consoles, Bejeweled, Candy Crush, and Plants vs. Zombies to flash, handheld and downloadable platforms. No one is expecting a 2D Metroid for Wii U but for 3DS. When we do get a AAA puzzle game, it's the likes of Portal, which is of much greater scope and likely requires many more resources to develop.
Some people didn't like the change in Pokemon because Pokemon's fanbase is made up of several mindless sheep that will take whatever the hell their king and leader Masuda gives them, even if its blatantly anti-consumer, and praise every word he says. (Honestly, whenever I criticize the series for cutting back on challenge and exploration in more recent iterations, I tend to get a billion responses about how I should "go play a different series because Pokemon is only about collecting, battling, and socializing)
I'm not saying either should disappear, but just that they are designed for distinctly different platforms.
What do you mean that no one is expecting a 2D Metroid game? People will want another Metroid game whether its 2D or 3D and that's that. The 2D ones are the ones that many are used into so there's nothing wrong in asking for something that is possible to do. Besides, I doubt that another Metroid Prime game will be announced for either because of it being concluded.
It all depends on what works with the series. Most people didn't like Zelda 2 because of it being frustrating unlike the previous Zelda games.
I think it is exactly where they should go back to with that series there is lots they could do to improve that formula. (Instead of repeating the same thing over and over - With more and more handholding).
“30fps Is Not a Good Artistic Decision, It's a Failure”
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.
Agreed. I don't know why the hell Nintendo's gotten into such a 2D platformer fetish as of late. They should just keep those as small scale downloadable titles, and put their money into quality 3D platformers.
The casual audience isn't too fond of 3D platformers. They prefer the simplicity of X-axis-only movement...for some reason. I'm more of a 3D fan, which is why I want Yarn Yoshi to transform into a freaking 3D platformer!
And a proper 3D Kirby...a 3D DK would be cool too, I guess.
Problem with 3D Platfomers for me is any of the ones worth playing are almost impossible to play initially. (At least the first time having not recently played one in that series).
To make it so anybody can play it straight away the only way to do it is to remove all the precision and pace which is the reason I play platformers (2D or 3D) in the first place.
Collectables are the worst thing to happen to the platformer genre as well.
“30fps Is Not a Good Artistic Decision, It's a Failure”
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.
I liked Super Mario 64 because I didn't need a damn spreadsheet for what I had to get. Just because it's optional doesn't excuse it for being bad. That just makes it filler, and filler is never a good thing. Besides, the levels were largely boring anyways, even on the first time through, and a lot of things in the game were just weird and out of place.
And that is why a collect-a-thon should stick with 2 collectibles at most. No more.
Has Lara Croft jumped into 2D after 3D? No. Has Bejeweled been in 3D? no. Has Candy Crush Saga been in 3D? No. And that's because there's no need to jump to 3D at all. 3D games are just as fun as 2D games but I'm just saying that some series are better off in 2D. I want a new 2D Metroid game after playing the first five and I've still yet to play the prime series.
When Pokemon came into 3D, Some things had to change which I didn't like. Why did they change the tones of Pokemon? Also in aesthetic terms, it was just passable. Nothing mind blowing like Dream Team, 3D Land or even Dark Moon.
When you go 2D, there is a variety of art styles that can be possible to do. 3D while it does show that, still feels odd even though its appealing (like Yoshi's new island).
Tomb Raider has also stayed almost exclusive to home consoles, Bejeweled, Candy Crush, and Plants vs. Zombies to flash, handheld and downloadable platforms. No one is expecting a 2D Metroid for Wii U but for 3DS. When we do get a AAA puzzle game, it's the likes of Portal, which is of much greater scope and likely requires many more resources to develop.
Some people didn't like the change in Pokemon because Pokemon's fanbase is made up of several mindless sheep that will take whatever the hell their king and leader Masuda gives them, even if its blatantly anti-consumer, and praise every word he says. (Honestly, whenever I criticize the series for cutting back on challenge and exploration in more recent iterations, I tend to get a billion responses about how I should "go play a different series because Pokemon is only about collecting, battling, and socializing)
I'm not saying either should disappear, but just that they are designed for distinctly different platforms.
What do you mean that no one is expecting a 2D Metroid game? People will want another Metroid game whether its 2D or 3D and that's that. The 2D ones are the ones that many are used into so there's nothing wrong in asking for something that is possible to do. Besides, I doubt that another Metroid Prime game will be announced for either because of it being concluded.
It all depends on what works with the series. Most people didn't like Zelda 2 because of it being frustrating unlike the previous Zelda games.
I said no one expects a 2D Metroid game on Wii U. If we get a 2D Metroid, everyone is expecting it on 3DS. And to be frank with you, I'd be upset if it were on Wii U.
Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F
I personally don't get all the hate. DK64 was no worse than any other N64 collect-a-thon. It just lasted much longer.
It's called overstaying your welcome. Plus, DK64 was weird and bland even for a collect-a-thon, and brought the number of stuff you had to collect up to outrageois levels. Most collect-a-thons had 3 or so major things to collect, with Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie pushing the limits already. Donkey Kong 64 had about 9 or 10 things to collect per character. That is just tedious.
Yeah, but a lot of those were in intuitive places that you were eventually going to go to with the necessary character, eventually.
No. No they weren't. Unless you're implying being forced to cover every inch of every area with every character, sometimes multiple times due to power ups, is intuitive.
Yeah, you had to look harder for some bananas or fairies or you had a difficult task to achieve something, but making the game more compolicated as it progresses is expected, it's not an issue.
However, I understand that if you don't like collecting stuff, getting EVERYTHING can be annoying, but the game never forced you to get everything. Yeah, you had to collect bananas to fight bosses and yeah, you needed to have a certain amount of golden bananas to reach certain areas. The bar wasn't set really high, because:
Collecting the fairies was optional
You could easily gather all the bananas you needed with 5 Kongs without breaking a sweat (500 bananas in each world)
201 golden bananas are in the entire game, but if I remember correctly, having about half of that allowed you to get through the game
Banana coins were plentiful, so that was not an issue
There was a lot to collect, but very little was forced. I mean, you did love Super Mario 64, right? That was also performing tasks to collect stars so you could progress in the game. They also became harder to get the farther you were in the game. DK64 is only tedious if you like to collect everyhting and are out to get that 100% score.
Collecting stuff means playing slowly which saps 100% of the fun out of playing the game.
“30fps Is Not a Good Artistic Decision, It's a Failure”
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.
Forums
Topic: We need a 3D Donkey Kong game
Posts 41 to 59 of 59
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.