this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2026
74 points (100.0% liked)

RetroGaming

30767 readers
343 users here now

Vintage gaming community.

Rules:

  1. Be kind.
  2. No spam, AI slop, or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Spyro in 1998 had no precision jump and no memorable villain. It had 12,000 gems and a glide that forgave almost everything. Is that what puts it above many “serious” 3D platformers?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KRAW@linux.community 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

That's a pretty big claim considering Super Mario 64 predates Spyro by 2 years. I'll admit I'm biased, since I had an N64 and not a PS1 growing up. However, when I went to play Spyro recently, the levels just seemed bare and collecting the gems and freeing the dragons felt very inconsequential. In comparison, collecting a star in SM64 felt like a real task that you were rewarded for completing by further unlocking doors in the castle. It's possible that I did not let the game "settle in" before dropping it, but the game just didn't seem to have an alluring gameplay loop.

[–] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 2 points 18 hours ago

You might like the sequels more since they lean more into the objective based structure of Mario 64. Spyro 1 was more a kind of vibes game that was fun to just run around in while grabbing stuff. It felt a lot more like a sandbox compared to the sequels which feel more tightened up and give more definitive goals.