/vr/ - Retro Games

>>9838192
Not really. The defining factor for a platforming game to qualify as collectathon is tying general progress to collectables. 2D/3D or linear/radial level design don't necessarily matter. Also, there's no need to complicate things by arguing what games featuring jumping and literal platforms do so as a "primary mechanic".

DKC2 lets the player complete levels and reach an ending while ignoring collectables, but a whole extra world and the real boss fight are only accessible through them, so it could be argued as a collectathon. DKC3 more obviously so, but DKC1 would hardly qualify for example. And DK64 of course would be one of the most infamous examples of a pure collectathon going way fucking overboard.

Super Mario 64 was the most popular template of course, but claiming it was designed like that by "failing to adapt" is kind of silly. The developers explored what sort of level design would take most advantage from 3D environments, and came up with the radial level designs with variable goals, which came with the tradeoff of limited traversal distances compared to linear levels . Other devs at the same time simply decided to build more conservatively on the previous conventions of platforming games (i.e. obstacle courses) and that's how Crash Bandicoot came to be for example. Both are good games, but if one should be called less evolved, almost by definition that would be CB.

What is it about the 5th gen and incredibly satisfying to look at metal and crystal graphics? Why was this art lost in the 6th gen?