It was a fun game, but I don't understand the comments stating it was so novel. It was basically a clone of banjo & kazooie themed using the already created awesome universe of DK from the super NES. Basically a patchwork of copies.
Honestly, the very first one was a lot more innovative:
- completely original licence, with terrific characters, world design and music composition
- incredible graphisms pushing the limit of what the console could do
- new gameplay mecanisms everywhere: dual play, animals, barrels...
- humour a the center of platformer for the first time
The 64 version just reused that. I have to assume this was amazing for the people that started the serie with this one, because while it was nice, it's probably the least remarkable of the whole serie.
It's like when everybody told me how good Mass Effect was, the pinnacle of RPG. Then I played it and was stunned people enjoyed it so much. It was a far cry from even classic titles of 10 years before. Linear, bad UI, lacking combat system and a scenario ripping off Babylon 5. But then I realized: if this is your first big RPG, then yes, it makes sense.
So if it was, indeed, your first DK and you haven't played D&K, then playing the rest may feel backward. And you enjoyed all the goodness in one big shot.
I prefer SNES DKC series over DK64. Speaking as someone that picked up the green DK64 N64 set.
DKC is great 2D platforming. DK64 was comprised of random minigames and unfortunately was not anywhere near the greatness of other 3D platforming games (Super Mario 64). If I wanted minigames, I'd play N64 Mario Party.
I dunno. I may just have been the right age for it but loved DK64 as one of my top games of the era even after B&K and a couple of DKCs. There were still innovative parts, new takes and iterations and a new scale, the collectathon (loathed by some, enjoyed by 11yo me).
I found the endgame and last boss fight particularly memorable.
You do have a point but with very few exceptions every innovative game after the 80s is in some sense an iteration on existing concepts.
Indeed. Seeing, for example, how some otherwise balanced adults easily get sucked into sinking thousands of hours into incremental clickers while some find them incredibly boring and pointless tells me it just might be due to different "player styles" as well
Honestly, the very first one was a lot more innovative:
- completely original licence, with terrific characters, world design and music composition
- incredible graphisms pushing the limit of what the console could do
- new gameplay mecanisms everywhere: dual play, animals, barrels...
- humour a the center of platformer for the first time
The 64 version just reused that. I have to assume this was amazing for the people that started the serie with this one, because while it was nice, it's probably the least remarkable of the whole serie.
It's like when everybody told me how good Mass Effect was, the pinnacle of RPG. Then I played it and was stunned people enjoyed it so much. It was a far cry from even classic titles of 10 years before. Linear, bad UI, lacking combat system and a scenario ripping off Babylon 5. But then I realized: if this is your first big RPG, then yes, it makes sense.
So if it was, indeed, your first DK and you haven't played D&K, then playing the rest may feel backward. And you enjoyed all the goodness in one big shot.