Support NeoGAF

[Eddie-Griffin]

So go ahead. I want all those games with 3D analog movement and dynamic camera control on PC

You know the reason why people aren't backing you up is you keep moving goal posts and changing what counts because you know it's 109% true most games today didn't take influence from Mario 64. You also continue to show your mental distress by imagining someone said Mario 64 was not influencial at all, which was never said.

But the fact you think people can be influenced by Mario 64 who never played it because you're a blind fanboy is telling. You also dont know what the word Dynamic means, most games today didn't use dynamic cameras because they have full or mostly full control of the camera, Mario 64 does not. Notoriously. So you can't even keep your story straight by defending outdated hogwash that was necessary on the N64 because it didn't have another option.

You are a very unintelligent and obsessed man.

Even with all that you're still wrong:

>Hunter (1991) supports Amiga analog sticks, 360 degree movement, "dynamic" camera control.

>Soultrap (1996) supports Win or DOS compatible analog sticks, can play in FP OR TP, TP 360 degree movement, full camera control.

>Fire Team (1993) support analog pc stick, camera control.

>Every 3D polygon or otherwise Tandy game since the official controllers were analog and in many cases were included in the box. For nearly all iterations of the computer family.

So yeah you dont know what you're talking about. I can name more games but I'm curious if you'll continue digging this hole.

Sometimes it's ok to admit you're wrong and know nothing about games outside the N64.

I'm sure you'll change the rules again say something doesn't count etc. (Lol saying FPS dont count because they dont need analog, neither does third person games, what a nut. Not to mention fps is a dominant genre today lol.)

(I Forgot about Apple and Mac too, wow you really are heading down south)

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

You know the reason why people aren't backing you up is you keep moving goal posts and changing what counts because you know it's 109% true most games today didn't take influence from Mario 64. You also continue to show your mental distress by imagining someone said Mario 64 was not influencial at all, which was never said.

But the fact you think people can be influenced by Mario 64 who never played it because you're a blind fanboy is telling. You also dont know what the word Dynamic means, most games today didn't use dynamic cameras because they have full or mostly full control of the camera, Mario 64 does not. Notoriously. So you can't even keep your story straight by defending outdated hogwash that was necessary on the N64 because it didn't have another option.

You are a very unintelligent and obsessed man.

Even with all that you're still wrong:

>Hunter (1991) supports Amiga analog sticks, 360 degree movement, "dynamic" camera control.

>Soultrap (1996) supports Win or DOS compatible analog sticks, can play in FP OR TP, TP 360 degree movement, full camera control.

>Fire Team (1993) support analog pc stick, camera control.

>Every 3D polygon or otherwise Tandy game since the official controllers were analog and in many cases were included in the box. For nearly all iterations of the computer family.

So yeah you dont know what you're talking about. I can name more games but I'm curious if you'll continue digging this hole.

Sometimes it's ok to admit you're wrong and know nothing about games outside the N64.

I'm sure you'll change the rules again say something doesn't count etc. (Lol saying FPS dont count because they dont need analog, neither does third person games, what a nut. Not to mention fps is a dominant genre today lol.)

(I Forgot about Apple and Mac too, wow you really are heading down south)

None of those games feature a dynamic camera system. None!
Soultrap is a first person game. Do I really need to explain to you why movement in a first person game works entirely different than in a game with a visible character? Do I really need to explain why first person games don't need a dynamic camera system? This isn't moving the goal post or changing the rules, you just don't get it. Again.


Hunter features afaik a 8-directional movement. While Hunter is certainly very influential in its own right, the movement can't be compared at all:

Saying every tandy game has 360 degree analog movement because they came with a joystick is ingenious as well. Most of those games aren't even 3D to begin with.

I don't know about a game called Fire team from 1993. I couldn't find any trace of it online. None. Now I'm not saying you making this game up, but perhaps it is known by a different name?

Only thing I could find was this:

FireTeam (video game) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or do you mean SEAL Team?



Here I can only say the same thing: Influential in its own right, but the movement can't be compared. The character movement is seems very stiff. Doesn't look like there are different speeds for the character controlled by the analog stick, instead you press a button to tell your character to move slow or to run, making it digital. In general it seems like the movement is digital while the camera can be controlled freely with the mouse or that camera and character movement don't control individually from each other but simultaneously. At the very least it doesn't seem to be possible to have 360 degree character movement and free camera control individually at the same time and that there are definitely many restrictions. I don't know for sure, I haven't played it, but its definitely a stepping stone. That doesn't change the impact and influence of Mario 64 though. Not at all!

See how that works?

Different speeds determined by how much you push the stick in one direction, a freely controllable camera working independent from the character movement, precise movement determined by where you press the analog sticks creating 360 degree movement. None of the games you listed come even close to Mario 64 (or this demo). They are influential, but neither in the same realm as Mario 64 (none of those games made an impact even remotely comparable), nor does their camera and character movements compare in the slightest.

So, that's what you give me? Ridiculous!

You also dont know what the word Dynamic means, most games today didn't use dynamic cameras because they have full or mostly full control of the camera, Mario 64 does no

Most games back then had static camera systems or automated camera systems. For the most part only first person games had freely movable cameras, but those games are first person so it only makes sense they have this feature. I mean duuuhhh obvious. Again, they don't work the same as 3D games with a visible character.
Super Mario 64 was the first video game in history to have a freely controllable camera that moved independently of the main character.

Most video game characters had two speeds: running and not running.
Most video games had digital movement and were far from the precision that Mario 64 brought to the table. Most video games didn’t have 360-degree analog control, especially not in a 3D space. Mario 64 established it and set the standard.
A feature that is so common in modern games that most gamers don’t even think about it.

Those two aspects are so mundane and normal in 3D game development today, that it’s ingenious to claim Mario 64 isn’t one of the most important games of all time. 3D analog movement and camera control are still an essential part in the development of most 3D games today. Mario 64 set the standard and most 3D games with a visible character were either directly or indirectly influenced by it.

Not to mention that Mario 64 conveniently showed why analog sticks were the way to go for 3D games. Most controllers today have analog sticks. There were analog sticks before the N64, but it was in fact the N64 that made it mainstream for 3D games. Controllers today don’t have analog sticks because of the Atari 5200 controller, they don’t have it because of the Saturn 3D-Pad (although that was a nice controller), they don’t have it because a small handful of arcade games had analog movement before and they don't have it because of analog joysticks. They have it because of the N64. The DualShock that released a few years later is basically the blueprint for modern gaming controllers. You could still play the vast majority of modern 3D games with the original Dualschock, but if it wouldn’t be for the N64 controller and Mario 64, the DualShock wouldn’t even be. Now it could be argued that if it wouldn’t be for the N64 controller and Mario 64, then another controller and another game would’ve taken its place and while that could be true, it doesn’t change the impact at all unless if you want to rewrite history that badly.

But the fact you think people can be influenced by Mario 64 who never played it because you're a blind fanboy is telling.

No. Not at all. I just know how influence works. You obviously do not.
You don't have to consume something to be indirectly influenced by it. Another completely ingenious claim.

Let's take Halo for example. Often credited for inventing two stick aiming and HP regeneration. It's did invent neither. The first FPS with HP generation was an obscure game
called Faceball 2000:


Games like Turok had a similar control method, you could play GoldenEye with two analog sticks when plugging in two N64 controllers, there was Alien Resurrection on the PS1 that had two stick aiming, but none of them had the impact that Halo had on the gaming world for its control scheme and therefore it's only right to contribute Halo with having the biggest influence on making two stick aiming a standard. It didn't invent two stick aiming, but FPS on consoles don't use this feature because of Alien Resurrection, neither do many FPS games have HP regeneration today because of Faceball 2000. They have HP regeneration because of Halo and Call of Duty.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

None of those games feature a dynamic camera system. None!

You never played any of the games nor knew they had analog support. You're saying they dont have dynamic camera yet you have no idea how they play. (??????)

Super Mario 64 was the first video game in history to have a freely controllable camera that moved independently of the main character.

Nope, but hey you know nothing about games so this isn't surprising. Keep making stuff up. You've already moved the goalposts multiple times as well.

Soultrap is a first person game. Do I really need to explain to you why movement in a first person game works entirely different than in a game with a visible character?

And here is where we part ways and you embarrass yourself for the last time. Even putting aside you ignored what I wrote about it earlier, screenshot:

Third person, analog support, full camera control.

Please stop pretending your educated and know about games outside the N64. You can't even research games right. How did you speed research soultrap and conclude it was only a First Person game when there's instant images of it in TP showing up in search results? The dog has lost its bark. (Also no sane person plays the game in FP)

You also should learn how to debate, making stuff up isn't an argument, sorry. Just because your ignorant doesn't mean you get to pretend everyone else is.

You've have already proven to be toxic, deceiving, and arrogant, this just makes everything else you say from here on uncredible.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

You never played any of the games nor knew they had analog support. You're saying they dont have dynamic camera yet you have no idea how they play. (??????)

I know Hunter and played it. It does not have a dynamic camera system, you evidently don't even know what that is.
Also you can easily see that a game like SEAL Team (oh, pardon, Fire Team mr. video game historian) doesn't have analog movement or a dynamic camera system.

And here is where we part ways and you embarrass yourself for the last time. Even putting aside you ignored what I wrote about it earlier, screenshot:

You can't even grasp why first person games work entirely different when it comes to character and camera movement as opposed to games with a visible character. The same goes for third person shooters. Those, at least back then (not so much now), work very similar to first person shooters.

As for Soultrap:




Apparently you can play the game in third person too, but it doesn't change the fact that the game does not have a dynamic camera system neither does it have 360 degree analog character movement. There is digital character movement with a FPS-like free camera. Not a dynamic camera system, not 360 degree analog movement. The animations are subpar too, but that's beside the point. It's essentially a FPS platformer mix with the possibility to play in third person.

Do you really want to compare this to Mario 64 or the demo I've posted? You are deluded.

Nope, but hey you know nothing about games so this isn't surprising. Keep making stuff up.

You know nothing about video game development. It's so apparent. Don't try to fool anyone that you know anything about it. You can't even grasp what I am talking about. You are completely misinterpreting even the most basic notions.

You've have already proven to be toxic, deceiving, and arrogant, this just makes everything else you say from here on uncredible.

And you have proven to be idiotic, one dimensional, dishonest, incapable of grasping basic concepts, incapable of thinking outside the bubble you are apparently in and to be a complete waste of oxygen.


Hunter was an influence for open world concepts and sandbox gameplay, not one for 360 degree analog movement and camera movement.
Fire Team does not exist. SEAL Team was an influence for military simulations like Ghost Recon, not for 360 degree analog movement and camera movement.
Soultrap does not have 360 degree analog movement and a dynamic camera system. The third person view is not even properly animated, which shows that its preferably played in first person. There is a reason why the level design in this game is super simplistic. The movement doesn't allow for much precision.

Not to mention these games had almost no impact in the gaming world. This is what you compare to Mario 64? Ridiculous!
It's apparent though that you don't know how influence works. I would say read my take on Halo, but you probably lack the reading compression skills needed for that.

How you try to paint be as a N64 fanboy is cute too. It's literally my least favorite Nintendo console (except if you count the Virtual Boy).
I mean, you are even disqualifying quotes by well known game devs themselves. It's pretty funny to see how you are grasping at straws while conveniently ignoring or misinterpreting pretty much anything.

You are completely incapable, so I will leave you dying on that hill. Lonely, and completely brain dead.

 

[KeepYourHeart1989]

This video shows how little I care about open world games. But there ARE some very good games there, and others which weren't mentioned, but it's funny how many of the best open world games are Japanese. Western open world games are only about getting a gun or a sword and pointing at a random stranger and killing them, it seems. I can't find fun in this juvenile, needlessly violent thing.

I liked that games like Body Harvest were mentioned, but the fact is that N64 had other open-world games (or semi-open, whatever) which didn't appear there. Rare games like Banjo-Kazooie and specially DK64 and Banjo-Tooie are great examples. Banjo-Tooie in special goes so fucking overboard it seems like the whole game is in slowdown.

Body Harvest is essentially proto-GTA3, and it was made by the same team, which was known back then as DMA Design. They also made the super underrated Space Station Silicon Valley, also for the N64, which was a super fucking lit game.

Weird they also forgot Mario Odyssey, it's a good and recent and unusual example. But great video overall, and nonetheless.

 

[nerdface]

The evolution of trying to find a videogame somewhere in this pretty grass shader.

What a horrible approach to game design.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

I know Hunter and played it.

Doubt it, especially with an analog stick plugged in.

I mean, you are even disqualifying quotes by well known game devs themselves.

No, you're disqualifying devs citing thief, Star Control, Tomb Raider, and Ultima Underworld etc as influence because they aren't N64 games. Anyone can do quote wars, you're just too childish to accept anything you dont agree with.

You're trying to project a handful of devs over the entire industry because you're desperate and the only tool you have left is to lie because you have nothing of value to discuss.

You can't even grasp why first person games work entirely different when it comes to character and camera movement

Apparently you can play the game in third person too,

Why do you keep embarrassing yourself as these two quotes show? Why do you lie about games you never played? I said from the start you could play Soultrap in third person, you ignored me twice, and now you are only kind of admitting you're wrong because I posted a screen shot showing it in third person.

You make the same mistake over and over and over again. You're just a liar who wants to push their beliefs on people through ignorance and constantly moving the goal posts, you've changed your criteria multiple times now(you did it twice in this post)

It's just sad.

the fact that the game does not have a dynamic camera system neither does it have 360 degree analog character movement. There is digital character movement with a FPS-like free camera.

Keep making up lies about the games you never played. Especially games with multiple control methods. You know the video you put up is a user playing with a keyboard. That doesn't mean it's the only way to play. You know this but you are desperate enough to be that shitty.

You already got caught talking out your ass about this same game twice, you even said it was first person without doing research. How much deeper will you dig your grave?

You're just a shameless fanboy, absolutely shameless.

The worst part about this is you already lost the original argument long ago. You said most games owe Mario 64 for "3D game design" and lost that debate when you said "First Person games dont count" proving my point most computer games took no influence from it.

You're just a lying goalpost moving troll. You have nothing left but to lie about controls for games you never played.

It's the end of the road man and you're all by yourself.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Jesus, you're right. You've changed your story so much I had to go back and check what idiocy you spouted to start this.

This is a common theme in this thread, constant rule changes over multiple posts. It's done so it can confuse observers who are to lazy to go back and read the original poor argument made.

By the end of the 5th or 6th post there are so many qualifiers and goal posts moves it's almost a completely different convo.

At this point best to drop it and let them swim in their own little world.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Eddie-Griffin

Man, you really like to close your mouth and let your ass talk. I had fun with you...

It's absolutely glorious that you think these three or two random niche games (since you invented one) can be compared in any way to the buttery smooth and precise 360 degree movement of Mario 64 in any shape or form. Or your incabability of figuring out what "influence" is. Or that you so obvious don't know what a dynamic camera system is. Or that you think the movement and camera control in a first person or third person shooter game can be compared to the movement of a 3D game with visible character with direct character movement (aka. most 3D games) where the camera is controlled independently. Or your lacking reading comprehension skills. Or that you conveniently leave out details to feed your very own agenda.

But whatever, because nothing you say will change the impact that Mario 64 had on the gaming world. No matter how much you try to downplay its influence, the game already made its mark and that speaks much louder then your senseless ramblings. The impact of Mario 64 was huge and its influence lives on. You can't change that.

So, I wish you much luck on the hill you put yourself on to die an embarrassing and lonely death.

Good evening!

 

[Lanrutcon]

Good evening!

I think it is best if you go be with your own people. Swim free, Nintendork. Swim free.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

I think it is best if you go be with your own people. Swim free, Nintendork. Swim free.

To be fair. If I had gotten Soultrap instead of Mario 64 or Crash in 1996, I would hate myself too, which is an emerging trait in your people.
There is a reason why this game has a mechanic that drops your momentum and pulls you down.

 

[Lanrutcon]

To be fair. If I had gotten Soultrap instead of Mario 64 or Crash in 1996, I would hate myself too, which is an emerging trait in your people.
There is a reason why this game has a mechanic that drops your momentum and pulls you down.

Actually, in 1996 my people were playing Quake. Between that and Duke 3D, I'm not sure we had time to play games for kids.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Actually, in 1996 my people were playing Quake. Between that and Duke 3D, I'm not we had time to play games for kids.

The time you only want to consume "adult" content as you deem everything else as "childish" is when you hit puberty.
As an adult, using the "games for kids" label as a means to discredit a game shows insecurity and nothing else.

 

[Lanrutcon]

The time you only want to consume "adult" content as you deem everything else as "childish" is when you hit puberty.

Never said anything of the sort. I played the adult games that year cause I found them to be better. (I can hear you typing furiously already)

As an adult, using the "games for kids" label as a means to discredit a game shows insecurity and nothing else.

Naw. You hunt an old one with a rocket launcher in one game and play a mildly racist depiction of a plumber in his quest to rescue a princess from a cartoon turtle in the other.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

absolutely glorious that you think these three or two random niche games can be compared in any way to the buttery smooth and precise 360 degree movement of Mario 64 in any shape or form.

To bad no one argued this, since that isn't what you originally argued and you added it later. Same with "niche" games (remember when Crash and TR were out selling M64 3:1 in 96-98 before the sequels came out? I do.)

This was your original argument:

Anyone saying that Mario 64 is not the quintessential blueprint for 3D games

Which you quickly back-pedaled on with this:

FPS dont count

Proving my point you were wrong. It was only later where you started adding rule changes and qualifiers but you already lost the argument. Omitting a perspective thats not only currently dominate, but has the most game releases than any other perspective in the history of video gaming since existence.

You then claimed Mario 64 did certain things "first" you lost that argument too.

You then poorly researched Soultrap and doubled down on calling it an FPS, you lost that argument as well, and you haven't played any of the games mentioned, and did awful research which is why you still can't find fire team and think it's made up. It's a sad thing to see.

Everything else you added to the conversation, like the first quote, is something you made up in a failed bid to save yourself but see this is a gaming forum, where people who use it have to know how to read, so you're not fooling anyone.

I think it is best if you go be with your own people. Swim free, Nintendork. Swim free.

The guy is literally lying about controls for games he has never played in general, let alone with an analog stick plugged in. Just because he doesn't want to believe he's wrong. Even omitted a whole genre from the conversation to save his poor argument.

He has also changed his argument on what counts multiple times, just above you can see how far from his original argument he has strayed.

You also mentioned Quake, an influencial 3D game, guess what? That came out in 1996 too! It's almost like hes been talking out his ass since he entered the thread.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Quake was uh...ooof. Like, in terms of technology? There are games today that still use parts of that engine. It pretty much fueled 3D for decades to come. In terms of gameplay style? Ehhh. Debatably hit and miss.

 

[porkchopexpress]

The Terminator (1990) was a truly groundbreaking game, it was so far ahead of its time. Glad to see it listed here but it still is massively underappreciated.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Naw. You hunt an old one with a rocket launcher in one game and play a mildly racist depiction of a plumber in his quest to rescue a princess from a cartoon turtle in the other.

Whats even your point?

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Eddie-Griffin

Take the L and live with it.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Whats even your point?

Welcome to us, looking at your posts, in this thread.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Welcome to us, looking at your posts, in this thread.

Your answer to "labeling games as "for kids" as a means to discredit the game shows insecurity"

is

"well in one game you have a rocket launcher and in the other game you go after a cartoon turtle."

What kind of shit is that?

 

[Lanrutcon]

Your answer to "labeling games as "for kids" as a means to discredit the game shows insecurity"

is

"well in one game you have a rocket launcher and in the other game you go after a cartoon turtle."

What kind of shit is that?

Ah, I see the confusion. You posted a some bullshit and assumed I was posting a rebuttal. I was posting an explanation. Mario 64 comes off as a kids game next to Quake.

You know what, you should probably take the L and live with it. You know, that L you post over and over like repeating it makes you any less of a jackass? That one.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Ah, I see the confusion. You posted a some bullshit and assumed I was posting a rebuttal. I was posting an explanation. Mario 64 comes off as a kids game next to Quake.

You know what, you should probably take the L and live with it. You know, that L you post over and over like repeating it makes you any less of a jackass? That one.

Well, you and your degenerate buddy that even invents games are pretty stupid, I have to admit. Pointing out the obvious that Mario 64 is a game made for kids (or for everyone as a matter of fact) next to a game like Quake, is probably a Jimmy Neutron-esque "flash of thought" for you guys.

The problem is that you are acting like being a game tailor made for kids is something bad. It's not.

 

[Lanrutcon]

<sore loser talk>

I'm sorry, by the rules of forum battle royale you've been (counter) served the L and, by not activating your Anti-L shield, you've lost. In hindsight, it was probably not in your best interest to act like a dismissive nutjob without reading the rules of forum combat.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Zelda was the first to do it right and set the standard again with BOTW.

what standard? no other game since has weapons that always break and being able to climb anywhere. nobody copied anything from it.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

the psychotic ramblings of a lost soul

okay. Can you fuck off now? Thanks!

 

[Big Baller]

 

[Lanrutcon]

okay. Can you fuck off now? Thanks!

You're adorable when you...wait. I just got deja vu.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

deja vu.

After arguing with one person with the brain capacity of a fly I am arguing with another person with the brain capacity of a fly.
That's sorta deja vu.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

what standard? no other game since has weapons that always break and being able to climb anywhere. nobody copied anything from it.

Ubisoft released a game that basically copies as many elements from BOTW as possible. It's also known as Immortals: Fenyx Rising.

​

 

[Lanrutcon]

After arguing with one person with the brain capacity of a fly I am arguing with another person with the brain capacity of a fly.
That's sorta deja vu.

I know exactly what you mean.

Exactly.

Ubisoft released a game that basically copies as many elements from BOTW as possible. It's also known as Immortals: Fenyx Rising.

​

There's also that gatcha JRPG which is pretty much BOTW, but they copied the gliding stuff and the general "feel".

 

[Exoil]

I haven't watched the video yet but the thread itself sure gave me some amusement.

How one can argue Mario 64 is an open world game is beyond me and how another can argue that Mario 64 isn't a groundbreaking game is also beyond me, but to hell it with, at least I'm entertained!

 

[Exoil]

Ubisoft released a game that basically copies as many elements from BOTW as possible. It's also known as Immortals: Fenyx Rising.

​

So, 4 years after release you can only give one example of a game that borrowed a bit from BOTW and you still want to go with the narrative that BOTW set the standard going forward?
There's still time to change your mind you know.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Ubisoft released a game that basically copies as many elements from BOTW as possible. It's also known as Immortals: Fenyx Rising.

​

is that it? just one game? i thought it became the standard for open world games? its a decent game but not ground breaking at all. it did nothing compared to something like GTA for example.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

So, 4 years after release you can only give one example of a game that borrowed a bit from BOTW and you still want to go with the narrative that BOTW set the standard going forward?
There's still time to change your mind you know.

I am just saying that there are definitely games that borrowed from BOTW.
There is also


and

is that it? just one game? i thought it became the standard for open world games?

The climbing may set a new standard. I've seen the Assassins Creed games becoming much more open with their climbing mechanics since (I think even the devs themselves said something along the lines that they were very impressed by BOTW) The physics engine is also very robust and strong, same goes for how this game handles weather and weather effects. Most open world games have certain restrictions in terms of progression. BOTW doesn't have restrictions. It's a big playground and the game encourages you to do anything as freely as possible, while other games still have rules when you are in a mission or dungeon for example, and even the open world can feel restrictive. This comes at the expense of the story though. A game like Red Dead Redemption 2 is much better with its plot and characters because the games takes its time to introduce each character and its motives, making the world authentic and lively. BOTW's plot is pretty barebones. Thats something other games in the franchise did better. Other than that much of BOTW is more like a consequent evolution of mechanics that were already there.

How big the influence of BOTW will end up be is something we will see when games like the new Elder Scrolls, the new Fable, the new Horizon etc. will release.
Open world games usually take a lot of time and many of those that released after BOTW were already years into development, so it makes sense that they don't drastically change the game.

 

[Exoil]

I am just saying that there are definitely games that borrowed from BOTW.
There is also


and

I'm with you there, some games definitely borrowed some mechanics from BOTW.
Maybe I'm confusing you with someone else who said that BOTW set a new standard for the genre

 

[TheGodfather07]

I am just saying that there are definitely games that borrowed from BOTW.
There is also


and



The climbing may set a new standard. I've seen the Assassins Creed games becoming much more open with their climbing mechanics since (I think even the devs themselves said something along the lines that they were very impressed by BOTW) The physics engine is also very robust and strong, same goes for how this game handles weither and weither effects. Most open world games have certain restrictions in terms of progression. BOTW doesn't have restrictions. It's a big playground and the game encourages you to do anything as freely as possible, while other games still have rules when you are in a mission or dungeon for example, and even the open world can feel restrictive. This comes at the expense of the story though. A game like Red Dead Redemption 2 is much better with its plot and characters because the games takes its time to introduce each character and its motives, making the world authentic and lively. BOTW's plot is pretty barebones. Thats something other games in the franchise did better. Other than that much of BOTW is more like a consequent evolution of mechanics that were already there.

How big the influence of BOTW will end up be is something we will see when games like the new Elder Scrolls, the new Fable, the new Horizon etc. will release.
Open world games usually take a lot of time and many of those that released after BOTW were already years into development, so it makes sense that they don't drastically change the game.

I actually disliked that about breath of the wild. That's why it was so bland imo. Better to make it more focused instead of being able to do things in whatever order you want.

Ultimately it's all the same thing anyway, so what difference does the order make? Wheres the dungeons? Why am I running through a silent open world? Where the hell is that amazing music that zelda is known for? It has so many problems that I hope are fixed for the sequel.

I'm hoping they kinda rushed it, which is why its missing so much of the zelda charm and the sequel is the real version they wanted to make.

 

[Dash Man 3D]

Super Mario 64 was the first video game in history to have a freely controllable camera that moved independently of the main character.

Mechwarrior 2 predates it by over a year and literally has the camera system most computer games used after, and most modern PC and console games use now presently, or at least close variations of it.

The only games that used M64's flailing or forced angle camera were on consoles because N64 had one stick and PS1/2 games rarely used the second stick for camera control until post Xbox.

Mario 64 definitely had its time but it was limited in duration and in platforms. Putting things mildly, this quote is completely inaccurate.

 

[Dash Man 3D]

Just going to leave these gif captures here to support the above post

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

After the beat down he vanished, and was never heard from again.

 

[Great Hair]

open world 3D games suck donkey balls! All of them!

 

[IbizaPocholo]

We all love a good open world game, and here at GamingBolt, we take every opportunity we get to gush on and on about some of our favourite ones. But maintaining a consistent level of quality across a massive open world experience isn't exactly an easy task, and there have been more than a few examples of games over the years that have failed to do just that. Here, we're going to talk about some of the worst open world games we've ever had the displeasure of playing.