What's Your Favorite Kirby Ability?

[E-Man]

Yeah, but it's a lot more convenient that the inflation button and the float button are the same instead of using two separate commands. It really helps when I want to get out of pits.

[Maxpphire]

Kat I have no idea what you're even getting at any more. Is your grievance that it's a game that utilizes 3D models and environments but is still just a sidescrolling platformer? I take it then that you also disliked the Kirby Wii and 3DS titles? Also a safe bet that you did not like any of the New Super Mario games, Sonic Rush, or the recent Donkey Kong Country installments?

I can understand if you didn't like the game because of its aesthetics or because of the game mechanics such as the copy mixing or because of the game's slow pace in comparison to most Kirby games, but complaining that you can only move across a plane parallel to the screen like you do in literally every Kirby adventure game ever seems either arbitrary or that you really just don't remember the game that well in which case it's probably not good idea to be dissing on it in the first place.

Like I said I can understand if that particular game didn't appeal to everyone, but your reasons are just ... perplexing.

Ok maybe I'm not explaining myself well enough, but even in most 3D platformers you're still given a little room to be able to control the character "freely"

Like you can move side to side as well as back and forth, so it is actually possible for you to miss jumping on a platform, as well as if you are playing multiplayer like in the new mario games, you're not moving in a single solitary line with everyone but you're moving around others and trying to get to the end with everyone or without depending on the game.

Crystal Shards wasn't like that. Kirby was on a specific track. Unless there is another Kirby 64 game that I'm missing, which if there is I apologize, but it didn't feel natural to control Kirby.

Basically think of controlling a Train on a Train track, you can't deviate from the tracks because trains don't move like that. It felt as if they had the same thing for Kirby in mind.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that platformers go from one end in to the other. It has to do with the fact that Kirby couldn't move freely with the stage he was on. The only other platformer that I can think of that does this that isn't 2D is Paper Mario, of which I really liked because it actually felt natural for a piece of paper to move in a singular track for the most part because he is flat, and the perspective the game has shows only one camera angle and thus it felt natural. It was like Paper Mario wanted to be a 2D Platformer but with using sprites for the characters and 3D backgrounds to make the characters stand out more and thus acted as such, which made it feel very natural and moved with the actual Rhythm of the game and made sense. Meanwhile with Kibry and it's Dynamic Camera Angles (which was cool and all) and the fact that they showed Kirby to not be a 2D character but indeed a 3D character in a 3D setting, but continued to have him move as a 2D character which makes no sense, and ruins the flow of the game for me.

I hope this explains it better.

[Tellis]

I think another way to put what Kat is saying is that, due to the dynamic camera and the fact that it has to be up close to Kirby to be effective at showing itself off, the viewpoint of the game winds up feeling... claustrophobic? At least for some people, me included.

Compared to other Kirby games that give you a wide field of view, you honestly can't see much around you, especially when the camera is pointed more behind you than in front of you (like it is in the very beginning of the first stage), which can get frustrating when you have an urge to see what's ahead. I think that, plus being able to see a detailed 3D background but not being able to travel beyond the path laid out for you makes it seems "railroaded" where previous Kirby games didn't. Even other 3D platformers (all the examples you listed off) do a fair job of still making the segment of the world you are traversing feel like the most important parts of it, either by objects only aligning to your plane or simply taking place on a thin character-wide strip of ground, whereas Crystal Shards often has these sprawling visible areas with detailed background objects. The only thing to really denote where stuff was going was the dirt path at your feet, which only serves to give the feeling that you should be able to explore more but can't.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy the game (I really wish the ability mixing thing would make a comeback, it was super fun), I'm just saying this is still valid criticism, even if it doesn't affect everyone playing hte game.

Oh, and my favorite ability is Sword. Always has been, always will be.

[Terminal Devastation]

I think the problem a few of you are having is labeling Kirby 64 as a 3D platformer.

It isn't one.

It's a 2D platformer that uses 3D graphics that takes advantage of using the 3D visuals to get creative with the camera angles and backgrounds.

Perhaps TOO creative to the point where it causes that on rails feel, but regardless.

The entire game could probably be duplicated on an SNES (possibly an NES) using flat 2D resources like all the previous Kirby titles, and there would be next to no need to change how it played at all, physics included, with the possible exception of the final final challenge, which might require some tweaking to work right in not 3D.

I think that Kirby 64 was one of the pioneers of the 2.5D though... so it could just be they needed some more practice and stuff.

(I just want the Kirby 64 cast to show up again... I want Adeliene and Ribbon to return...)

[Kriven]

The final boss would be entirely doable on SNES technology... It would probably have been easier to make than Yoshi's Island final battle.

[Maxpphire]

If it wants to be 2.5D then it pulls it off poorly.

Paper Mario, yet again pulls of being 2.5D perfectly.

You can't have a 2.5D platformer if everything is 3D but the controls, I'm sorry but it makes it feel unnatural. If it can be run on an SNES besides the graphics and is instead being run on a better system then something is wrong with that to me. I think games should fully take advantage of what system they are on, obviously earlier in the system's life, the games don't take as full advantage as games made in late life do because the technology is new and it's hard to really determine the limits of a brand new system so many games slowly test out many different limits until mid-late lifespan and thats when games REALLY can take full advantage of the system they are on and make something spectacular! (Simple things can be spectacular too, it honestly depends on what you're trying to do with your game. Sometimes simple things make the best things, but it doesn't mean that they don't take full advantage of what they use to run said game)

But Kirby isn't an early to mid N64 game.

Crystal Shards game out March 24, 2000

The early 2000's was the end of the N64's lifespan. (Gamecube came out September 14, 2001)

To put this into perspective Paper Mario came out August 11, 2000.

Paper Mario and Crystal Shards are only 5 months apart in age.

I guess I could understand your excuse for it the beginning of 2.5D if it was early to mid N64 life, but it's not. It's late life. Paper Mario certainly wasn't made in 5 months. To be honest I highly doubt that they had much time to even learn from any mistakes that Kirby made before they released Paper Mario considering that Crystal Shards was still p.new for game by the time Paper Mario came out.

So yes, it might have been a first 2.5D game but it didn't pioneer much for it. If anything I'd say Paper Mario did most of the heavy legwork in what people should base their 2.5D platformers after.

Spoiler

[Jermungandr]

I don't understand why you keep comparing Kirby 64 to Paper Mario as if they are the same type of platforming. Paper Mario is not a 2.5D platformer, it's a 3D platformer viewed from a fixed camera angle. You are capable of moving in any direction in 3D space. It just uses 2D assets for the visual aesthetics, but it is not a 2D or even 2.5D platformer.

Kirby 64 is the exact opposite, a 2D platformer that just used 3D graphics for its visual aesthetics. Again, it is exactly the same as the Kirby Wii/3DS games, Donkey Kong Country Returns games, New Super Mario Bros. games, or Sonic Rush games. Even the upcoming Yoshi wool game uses the same concept.

The statement "You can't have a 2.5D platformer if everything is 3D but the controls" seems to imply you don't actually know what a 2.5D platformer is. It's defined by the fact that it is a game that uses 3D assets but where you still move on a single plane as if it were 2D. Kirby 64 is 2.5D. Paper Mario is not. Your comparisons make no sense.

[MrYoshbert]

Hammer, Jet, Suplex, Beetle, and Ninja are my top favorites just for the raw star-abusing power you can unleash with them. Beam (from RtDL and onwards) is also pretty awesome. I've also taken a liking to Archer and Leaf.

[Maxpphire]

I don't understand why you keep comparing Kirby 64 to Paper Mario as if they are the same type of platforming. Paper Mario is not a 2.5D platformer, it's a 3D platformer viewed from a fixed camera angle. You are capable of moving in any direction in 3D space. It just uses 2D assets for the visual aesthetics, but it is not a 2D or even 2.5D platformer.

Kirby 64 is the exact opposite, a 2D platformer that just used 3D graphics for its visual aesthetics. Again, it is exactly the same as the Kirby Wii/3DS games, Donkey Kong Country Returns games, New Super Mario Bros. games, or Sonic Rush games. Even the upcoming Yoshi wool game uses the same concept.

The statement "You can't have a 2.5D platformer if everything is 3D but the controls" seems to imply you don't actually know what a 2.5D platformer is. It's defined by the fact that it is a game that uses 3D assets but where you still move on a single plane as if it were 2D. Kirby 64 is 2.5D. Paper Mario is not. Your comparisons make no sense.

How can Paper Mario be a fully 3D platformer if all of the characters are literally just Sprites (It's a link, go ahead and click on it) and not models? Like I seriously do not get that, one aspect of the game's graphics is not 3D but it is somehow a 3D platformer. That is what makes no sense. Just like a game where it has everything in 3D except the controls. It makes no sense to call it not a 3D platformer because of this. The 2D, 2.5D, and the 3D refer to graphics, not control schemes.

Also even so, With the New Super Mario games your character can still move freely on the stage that it is on. Hell you can even move around other players in that game, The sonic games, for fucks sakes, Sonic doesn't go in a straight line, the game makes sure that doing so is impossible because they want getting the rings to be a challenge, so even he can freely move on the stage he is on.

I don't think you're understanding my problem with Kirby 64. Kirby isn't a 2D platformer, it's a 3D platformer that has the controls of the character so restricting that you literally cannot touch the back wall of the stage with kirby, you can't touch the front wall with kirby. It isn't the moving of one basic direction I have a problem with, it's literally that the control scheme is only two fucking buttons, which doesn't feel natural. It is a N64 game with 3D graphics, thus the controls should match. Let me show you an image of what I mean.

[Kriven]

When speaking in terms of platformers, 3D and 2D refer to the play area, not the graphics. 2D platformers exist on two-dimensional playing space... left, right, up, down. 3D platformers exist on a three-dimensional playing space... left, right, up, down, near, far. It's possible to create 3D gameplay with 2D assets (Doom, Paper Mario) or a 2D game with 3D assets (Kirby 64, Klonoa, New Super Mario Bros., Yoshi's Story) although this isn't traditionally done. Examples of 3D platformers: Banjo-Kazooie, Super Mario 64, Croc.

I'm not understanding your argument about movement at all really. NSMB allows you to move left, right, up and down... It doesn't allow you to move toward the background or foreground elements at all. You can't run in circles, only back and forth... just like Kirby 64.

[Jermungandr]

How can Paper Mario be a fully 3D platformer if all of the characters are literally just Sprites (It's a link, go ahead and click on it) and not models?

You literally are not listening to what people are telling you are you. A 3D platformer is defined by the fact that you can move in 3D space. I.E. you can move across the X, Y, and Z axises. The fact that the characters are not 3D models has nothing to do with it.

I also take it you haven't played or seen the Sonic Rush games because they play like this. He does not move freely in 3D space. Straight line.