I always laugh about the boulder stage argument. It's nothing but good reaction tests. You have plenty of time to notice the pitfalls and traps, and jump over them.
I agree the boulder sections are bad, but implying that they're not based on reaction time is wrong because they are. Visibility was not mentioned in the video's Dark Souls comparison.
It wasn't even a nostalgia argument. He was talking about child-like curiosity and how these games encourage that attitude. Just because they mention a child doesn't mean that it must be a direct appeal to the past lives of certain gamers.
Matpat in the Dark Souls debate: “Dark Souls is great because just like Crash Bandicoot, it keeps you on your toes, using trial-and-error and memorization in order to progress” Matpat here: “Crash sucks because it’s all just trial-and-error and memorization”
That would've been cool. Although a big part of this guy's argument is how they aren't nostalgic for Crash at all, so you can't accuse them of being biased.
I personally like the original Spyro series better, they introduced many mechanics that most other games didn't have, such as adaptive difficulty curves that adjusted to the player, double world rendering, infinite glides, no actual loading screens, etc... It was just better and cleaner mechanically
You also said to vote in the comments Mat, and also keep in mind that the why can be explained in the comments, so would you actually consider unjustified voting, or the source where you could understand the thinking behind the votes in all of the deadlockeds more? Just a question cause that's where I'll be voting if I get an actual answer.
Gabriel Draper here are some old games I still play: crash twinsanity, spyro and some kind of dragonflie thingie , Jak and daxter, and I think that's all
My Spyro: Year of the dragon was rendered unplayable by the speedway glitch. It prevents you from getting the egg from the speedways if you enter one, exit, save, and restart your game. Also, the bosses were really easy.
This video is *FLAWED* - and here's why: You're going into this deadlock episode with the questions: "Just how well do these games hold up? Were the Crash games actually good to begin with, or have we been giving them a pass just because of childhood nostalgia?" The questions alone already raise some very controversial points to the discussion at hand. *Do they hold up? vs. Actually good to begin with?* Tackling both of these themes in a single video seems a little bold, if not completely foolish. What constitutes better and worse game design has changed a lot with the years, and when you try to answer a question of 'was it good to begin with?' using the same 21 years of game design knowledge brought up in the "does it hold up" section of the video - you end up with an unfair, and honestly flawed critical view. *Actually good to begin with?* When MatPat says "trial and error and memorization"(6:30) with such a weighted voice, he's doing it with the perspective of a game critic of the present day and not the past. In the 90s the standards surrounding unfair mechanics were undeniably different. I don't have to make a list of games famous for utilizing artificial difficulty elements. I don't, because when I write unfair enemy placement, button-to-action delays, questionable hit boxes, extra lives, lack of information, waiting mechanics and memorization you've already got a few popping into your head. There's that many. We have come to view this as *bad design* today, while at the time it was less of an issue - clearly, seeing as critics were praising many of these games at the time. So was it good then? It was every bit a part of the experience as the rest of it, yes. In fact, my own biggest personal pet peeve with game critique is that the people that cry out how "unfun" certain punishment methods are, usually state the bloody obvious. Of course it's unfun, it's a punishment. You're not meant to feel okay with it. It's something you have to face as an adversary, you have to overcome and master it - and that takes work. Some games give you this work, and some games avoid it for clarity and easy accessibility. Having the distinction should not come down to "good or bad" but "easy fun or hard fun" - artificial difficulty or no. *Of course* these things can be executed poorly in comparison to other games, but the concepts in of themselves are not inherently *bad* - they're par for the course, of this era of gaming. Taking them out of N. Sane Trilogy, for instance, would be misrepresenting the experience. *Do they hold up?* This question is too bloody vague. It's about as good a discussion topic as "are carrots alright?" - why? Because it's a multifaceted answer, and shouldn't be approached in such a polarized yes/no fashion. Here's some potential answers to it: Does it hold up to today's standards? No. It has lives, it has a weird hit box, it has a lack of information with secrets and several traits that commonly avoided in games today. Does it hold up to today's gaming scene? Yes. Today's gaming scene has many retro games easily accessible through means both illegal and legal, a selection so great that Crash stands out for a reason - it isn't bad. Does it hold up to Mario then and now? You seemed obsessed with this comparison, for reasons that elude me entirely. Crash Bandicoot is an on-tracks experience much like many of the Sonic titles. You are given courses that have very defined paths and few variables. Mario 64 presents courses that are a playground experience, where paths are defined by the player and variables are through the roof. Of course there's going to be different design philosophies for both - and so I answer the question with the fact that different philosophies interest different people: it varies. This isn't a yes/no scenario. Does it hold up to the concept of having fun today? I'll leave that one up to whoever's read this far, because I do believe it's a subjective matter that can't be measured and *shouldn't* be measured. *In Conclusion* When the video tackles too much at once, and has two theorists approach the problem from a "it was good then" angle versus a "but it's bad now" angle, it ultimately doesn't accomplish a significant or intelligent discussion because you're not discussing. You're presenting facts that cater to two different groups, and then measuring the size of the groups statistically by seeing who takes what side. It's not a discussion in the end. It's not taking sides that even sensibly rival each other. It's just measurement. Perhaps it would have been more interesting to discuss the ups and downs of on-tracks platformers versus more open-world platformers? I don't comment much on videos from this channel - I find most of them are as far-fetched as they are entertaining, whilst also being rich with information stemming from a hard working team. However, this topic I feel has been handled poorly, and I think it's worth pointing that out. I haven't watched many deadlock videos, but I do hope that you will make some that are a lot richer in the future - because I know you can. And I'm aware it's easier to tear into someone's work than it is to do it, but on the off chance this is read by you, I hope it provides the honest perspective of one of your more infrequent but nevertheless attentive viewers - and that it provokes an urge to respond with even better content, rather than a defensive stance towards any points raised.
Ryder failed to defend the eight directional controls. They worked fine for the type of game Crash is. You press left, Crash immediately snaps to the left. In SM64 you pressed left and mario would gradually turn to the left. Both control schemes suit their respective games' gameplay styles. Also the camera shifts back a bit during the boulder chase levels to allow you to see ahead. Ryder could've easily used the information above to defend Crash. Smh
He failed to defend the eight directional controls by not refuting the claim that SM64 had "analog controls". The N64 controller had an 8 directional joystick. It was not an analog thumbstick.
He did not mention that when crash 1 was made, the daul shock controller did not exist so when you plug in a daul shock, it dose not work unlike crash 2 and 3
People say that crash 1 is hard to control but I say no I still play the ps1 games on my old PS3 and rather controls are not bad because if your in the air you can controls him well and some times slow him down a lot of times on the night road I saved my self with the back D pad
I've noticed an easy way of differentiating Hardcore Crash fans with Out-of-touch Crash fans. Out-of-touch Crash fans say "Nnnn-sane". Hardcore Crash fans say "Enn-sane".
It's more of a power bar I suppose, every good point they make gives them more power (as opposed to knocking the other sides health down). I could be wrong, but that's just how I saw it.
Yes crash had it's flaws but you have to admit, it was a game changer, i say crash was a game of history, thousands upon thousands of people look back on the fun times that they had playing him, i say... LET'S GO CRASH!! :D
It really wasn't though, by the time Crash came out Super Mario 64 was already released with full control and an open world, Crash really wasn't a game changer
Gameboy224 On it's own merit, yes I agree. But Finmotion didn't say that, they said "it was a game changer". No mention of "for (INSERT CONSOLE HERE)". For what the devs had, it's an exceptional game but just not a game changer.
Finmotion i can see where you're coming from, but i politely disagree with one point, crash bandicoot didnt really change anything, even in its own era. Other 3d games handled the format better and gave more effective styles that have directly impacted gaming as an industry to the point where we can see the influence of games like mario 64, ocarina of time, etc in almost all aspects of the medium. Crash however, was flawed in design and prospered mainly because of its tongue and cheek design. The gameplay was pretty bad in comparison to other great 3d platformers of its time, but its personality held it up above the others. So, yeah it is an over rated game with some of the worst concepts of design i can think of, but it was fun, goofy, and stood out. For some, thats enough, and i can respect that.
@@jacklajoie9126 I agree the controls are janky, but it’s not unplayable. The remaster, also, fixed the controls and made it look unplayable by comparison.
I love crash but what does you beating it have to do with being unplayable. That’s like a doctor saying “your finger is broken” and ur like “oh it’s fine it doesn’t hurt”. Just because it doesn’t hurt doesn’t mean it ain’t broken. The argument should be it may be hard but it’s not unplayable. You beating it doesn’t tell him anything. Clearly a lot of people beat it so obviously it’s playable.
I miss the old animations at the bottom of them actually fighting. But I think crash bandicoot was a challenging game that brought frustrations, but good sections as well. I dont think crash is a bad game, not in the least, but it isn't a Mario 64 by any means. I think it's a mediocre game overall with positives AND negatives
15:35 Have you ever even tried to get a Platinum Relic, Bro?! Also, Crash 2 is really good at upping the ante of obstacles throughout each level. (ex: "See those two hovering enemies patrolling those platforms over there? Figure out how to cross the gap." Later in the level (and/or carried over to similarly themed levels where the obstacle-ante is upped again): "Remember those two hovering enemies that were patrolling those platforms earlier? Notice how these platforms are the ones that fall when weight is applied to them? Well, now there are three hovering enemies and the platforms fall after you land on them...oh, yeah, the enemies move faster, now, too. See you on the other side!" Seriously, Crash 2 is great for seeing how people learn (does the person get frustrated, does the person get creative, ect.) and how well solutions to earlier problems are recalled and applied to another variation of that initial problem--sort of like how math textbooks gradually increase the complexity of the problems while maintaining the same fundamentals. So, yeah, I'm done now. Too much caffeine, not enough sleep. How old is this video anyway? I was looking for a different one and saw, "Mah boi, Crash"
@@typeterson2421 His first argument is not flawed at all! crash bandicoot is a whole another game when one goes relic hunting(time attack). One cannot use checkpoints so reaction time and pattern recognition is important, makes the game much harder and imho more enjoyable
I am not blinded by nostalgia because I did not grow up playing crash. However, when I did see the Easter egg in Uncharted 4, played the game on older systems, and saw/played the N.Sane Trilogy, I just loved it. It truly was in inspiration, and a move that could’ve killed naughty dog, but one that did just the opposite
Also Mat Pat doesn't know how many levels Warped has exactly. The guy who claims to know the ins and outs of games like the back of his hand doesn't know how many levels there are exactly. And oh, so you never need to use the spin jump. Or the double jump. Or the dash. Good luck clearing those pits and getting those relics.
"Crash Bandicoot was a really great game back in the day, but now you know, I-I've come to realize that may-maybe it's not that great, hmmmmm?" "Well, I played Crash recently and I still think it rocks my socks off, I play it everyday and enjoy it very much so and I think it could even possibly be the greatest game ever design-ed."
I feel like this is just a battle between someone who grew up with a PS, and therefore crash/spyro, and someone who grew up with the nintendo thinger and mario. Yes, I said thinger, I'm a PS kid xD
Are so many people disliking because he's arguing against Crash? He loves Crash, he has to do it for the show :p Those nitro boxes I remember distinctively though, and I always wondered why they didn't make sounds and "bop" like usual nitroboxes. Figured that one out last as I 100%'ed the game back then ^^
In terms of secrets there are always very subtle hints to them. Like the nitro staircase doesn't bounce like normal nitros indicating it was a secret. Or like the flower bieng excluded on its own platform unlike any other platform. Or the little extra land in unbearable showing that you can go back unlike any other chase level.
There are, but going by the fact that MatPat can't do basic research, he should probably stay away from that, and really just cancel this entire series
Love the new style! but may i suggest putting back in your names above the bars? it kept throwing me off since health bars are normally above that persons head
"it's difficult because i cant just run threw the game and win" dude i beat these games when i was like 9. i think people are playing up rage for views.
Well, I for one vote for Crash! Sure the gameplay was sometimes a bit..weird but these were the BEST games to play with friends. You got to laugh at one another for messing up and compete as far as who could get through a level faster or find the secrets. Sure it was advertised as a one player game but.. most of the time it was a family affair! On top of that, the third game had loads of replay value as far as little me was concerned. I beat the game with my best friend, then beat the game with my sister, then when my little brother got old enough we beat it together. All the while shouting, laughing and sometimes roughhousing over it. Crash Bandicoot is more of an experience really. All in all these games helped change everything.. and were incredibly fun to play!
You know, I could make the same arguments for NES games that Mat brought up for Crash. "How tf am I supposed to know you can go behind the background in Mario 3?" "Ninja Gaiden is too hard with its unfair bullcrap!" "Kirby's Adventure is too linear!" Video games are LITERALLY all about overcoming challenges and bullcrap, it's only unfair when you believe it's unfair. So yeah, you need to GIT GUD.
Zer0scope You don't have to go behind the background in Super Mario Bros. 3, that happens once or twice, and isn't something mandatory to win the game because you just get a warp whistle out of it, an item directly made for skipping large chunks of the game. Kirby's Adventure being "too linear" wouldn't be a challenge or an obstacle, it's a design choice. And... I've personally never heard of Ninja Garden. A game being unfair is usually because it has trial and error difficulty, that means you can't beat the game without an unfair death. A fair game gives you the tools you need to overcome it, so when you die you know it's your lack of skill and is therefore fair. Having unfair difficulty plagues games like Dark Souls and other such titles, and while I'm not going to sit here and argue over the difficulty of Crash Bandicoot, saying that, "it's only unfair when you believe it's unfair" isn't really true. By the way, I believe you mean to say, "get good" not, "GIT GUD". I mean, the former is an actual phrase, the latter is made up of an insult used as slang by some British and Australian people, put together with something that isn't even a word.
...What? Ok, first of all, that reference to Super Mario Bros. 3 was countering Mat's point about how cryptic the secrets in the 2nd game were. Secrets are supposed to be cryptic, that's why they're called secrets. In today's modern world, yes, making your game linear would be a design choice. But that line about Kirby's Adventure was countering Mat's point about how linear the 1st game was. Ninja Gaiden is an EXTREMELY hard NES game, that I just so have happened to beat, but nonetheless. Whether or not something is unfair mostly depends on your tolerance. Imagine it like this. You've got a graph, with one line representing a game's "Fairness". And then you've got a second line representing your tolerance. The point where those 2 lines intersect is the point where you scream bullshit and call the game unfair. It doesn't matter how fair or unfair a game actually is because your tolerance can warp your perception. Also, the "Git Gud" was an intentional choice. But hey, that was just an opinion.
Zer0scope True that. I can at a the same thing about Puyo Puyo being difficult for me. I for the life of me SUCK at that game but i dont consider it bad. It's just not for me.
Zer0scope For one thing, SMB3's warp whistles were for directly skipping the game, while the secrets in Crash 2 are for 100 percenting the game. And making a game linear has been a design choice since around 1990, with games like Metroid, Zelda 1, and in the 3D world games like Super Mario 64. All of these came out before Crash Bandicoot and mostly on far inferior consoles. I feel the point about linear design was how the game was very narrow, especially as a 3D game. Super Mario 3D world is a pretty linear game but at least each level is quite open. Tolerance, while definitely controlling when you personally quit and call it unfair, does not say how fair the game actually is. As you say, tolerance can warp perception, but something like fairness isn't really an opinion and more an objective thing. You can tolerate something like, say, extreme torture, but it's pretty objectively awful. You can tolerate an unfair game but it's still unfair. Like I said, an unfair game has trial and error difficulty. And I wish people would stop saying, "Git Gud", it makes the point seem weaker. But hey, that was just an opinion.
I haven't played the remake but for the old games they're not perfect but they're very fun. In my opinion Crash 2 is the best one but I know many that prefer Crash 3. Crash 1 is more for the hardcore players that like the satisfaction of actually beating something really hard. (As a good, smart, handsome, well educated and humble person with clear goals in life should be.) The controls were tight and precise and hitboxes were precise and where you wanted them to be. Sure, distance could be a little tricky sometime and sometimes the game pull some out of nowhere bs on you. But even with somewhat clunky controls the feel was good and the game were fair for the most time with good challenge. I'd recommend to at least try them. Download a demo or something. You'll know pretty quickly if it's a game you'll like or not because it kinda the same deal through all the games. Just like how a Mario game stays the same in it's core the whole game through these ones does too. And as with Mario 64 you're a tumbling fool in the beginning and basically a parkour master in the end.
Crash Bandicoot isn't overrated. It's a really great game. Crash's a video game legend, I must say. Crash Team Racing is also one of the best racing games of it's kind. Also, not all of the Non-Naughty Dog Crash games are bad. Look at Twinsanity, for example. Hate it or love it, Crash Bandicoot is one of the best and most important video game franchises of all time. Always was and always will be.
You know it's funny I'm playing crash bandicoot n-sane trilogywhile I watch this video and I am just getting more irritated and more irritated not buy the game but by Matt Pat rambling about how a nostalgic game has impacted a kid who may I add is an actual kid playing a game from 1998 who actually likes it I'm only a generation after the millennials and I still like it
Exept level nine in crash bandicoot n sane trilogy that level is the most annoying.its ive tried for 3 months to beat it and i just cant its impossible
This whole "debate" was biased. Crash Bandicoot is a great game and definitely still prevails as a one. Graphics and gameplay are astounding at the time of release. Simple, you may say? Argument can be made, since some people compare 1996-1999 games with late 2000s, but still tge execution is brilliant. Seriously, when I heard that matpat considers CTR as a some kind of "spin-off", I really started to think that he doesn't played tose games (or he just can't). Which leads me to the next point, namely, hardness of Crash's games. Crash definitely has a hard parts inside of it (let's mention Slippery Climb, Road to Nowhere, Hard Cold Crash or even Future Frenzy), but this is precisely why the game is a joy to play. Difficulty level performed in Crash's franchise is constructed with care and balance - we can find levels on each difficulty status - we have Toad Village which serves as an introduction to the gameplay, Toxic waste which (maybe annoying, but) gives us a challenge and Slippery Climb after which gamer screams "I made it!". I know how this may sound, but nevertheless this is the truth: If you think a level is too hard, there's a great chance you just don't have the skills it requires. And I say that both as a Crash Veteran and Gamer as a whole. Seriously, do we abandon a game ("Drive" is a prime example) after screwing a level couple times? I don't, I try and try until I make it. Therefore argument "it's too hard" is not really an argument, but whining of lack of respect. Beating all Oxide's ghost or gathering platinum relics is too hard? No, it's not. I and many, many more people done it multiple times. Also, Crash should be applauded for creating vast variety of levels and mechanics inside each game (including Rock it and Pack Attack, which are super). Also, matpat, your cynicism is not helping the debate. There are far more topics when it comes to analysis, but I've been writing this long enough, so I will restrain myself from discussing them. To conclude, I believe that Crash series (on the contrary to what youtube's shouting headlines (and other people) say) is underrated. Crash's just wonderful!
C'mon you didn't even mentioned how awesome the music on the original trilogy is, it can be one of the main reasons of why crash fans remeber the oldest games and one key factor of the success of the remaster that made a really good job taking the tracks to a new modern style Good video though, crash is not a perfect game at all, but the thing is that it never tried to be like that, Naughy Dog just packaged the most crazy ideas that they had for a game on a CD, and that in my opinion it is what it makes it so f#$;!*g good
thus crash was always good and that crash is good already won the debate since it has not been fully talked about thus extra points for crash good thus crash good won the debate
Weirdly, the entertaining side of Deadlock is lacking in this video and, I think I know why.... What are they really debating here? 'Is Crash Bandicoot Overrated?'... Seriously? I'm going to say this as politely as I can but... *WHO* *CARES!!!!* Okay. I for one, am a huge fan of Deadlock. Really. Flipping love the concept. Debating the absolute entirety of anything game related? Sign me up big time! But, arguing over whether a game sucks or not is (in my opinion), not a debate. Choosing it as the basis of debate can be hugely one dimensional, makes the whole video feel journey'less and can be (not that its your fault matpat!) infuriating for people to watch. To be honest, the reason why I'm taking my time with this TH-cam comment in the first place is that, I care about this show. I just don't want to see this show go bust (that might be really sad of me, but that's the truth). The lack of quality put into Deadlock right now is troubling. Here's hoping its just a dip in form and nothing else! I just wish, in any case, that my 'words of wisdom' is seen and used constructively, if nothing else. Anyway Matthew, keep that sprinkler sprinkling x
VADFilms I actually disagree with you. I quite like the topic plus it's something that is being debated in the gaming community right now. I'm interested in hearing the arguments.
The Completionist's 'Defend It' has a similar problem. When you're trying to make a full argument about whether a game is good or not, the video will more than always (even if unintentionally) pick a side on which opinion you should agree with. I prefer the arguments that go into controversial game mechanics or designs over whether a game is good or bad. (being overrated also falls into this category)
I feel like "Is Crash Bandicoot Overrated?" is more of a clickbait title than anything. What they seemed to be debating was "Is Crash Bandicoot Revolutionary?", which is clearer and a lot more interesting imo. I think I would've enjoyed the video a lot more if it was framed this way. In fact, I was on the fence about even watching it just because of the title.
Every time a new game comes out or Remastered from the 90s or 80s,Matpat is always like"I love Ruining peoples good little hearts and giving them the truth about this games or a horrible theory" but that's we a people love about this videos......OR DO WE THO!
It was kinda surprising that MatPat said that a challenge was bad considering that a lot of the games he loves on GTLIVE are challenging. I mean far out, he even says that he loves I Want To Be The Guy because of how challenging it is.
Yea, I dont get it. When Mario is challeging its a ok! But when Crash is,then its somehow 'unfair'. I played original and remake, and I feel the remake is much easier. They even give you hints on the loading screen. I dont think anyone needed hints there. My only ONLY complaint is that you cant choose Restart level if you're not on the Time Trial
I don't think Crash is unfairly hard. 2 and 3 sure weren't and while the first one is hard, I did 100% it, some level on the first try, including one of the rock levels. The controls are kinda dated, but I still think it was decent.
Crash is not "unfairly hard." Ghosts 'n Goblins and Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts would be closer to "unfairly hard" due to how slowdown can completely cheat you out of jumps or get you killed and cause you to see the map screen without even realizing what happened until it's too late.
there's a difference between challenging and flawed design. The hitboxes were made really tight/small, too tight, enough so where it was hard for the player to tell whether or not they could land on a platform and gauge their movement/jumps enough to land. You can't really learn from a game when the platforming/hitboxes/design is so inconsistent.
Personally, I always thought Crash was amazing. Even after revisiting them after 10 years, they still held up and had a massive influence on video games, even Mario took influence from some Crash games. So, Crash Bandicoot is actually a great series.
Kanadai-Magyar Mapper Most things, if not everything he said can be easily debunked. Let’s also not forget that he used the same argument he used to defend Dark Souls against Crash. I take it you’re a blind Nintendrone as well. P.S. anyone who’s a fan of a game all about closing and opening doors is in no position to say that a game sucks.
In this case I don't think linear is bad. I'm about halfway through crash 1 atm n it's awesome. Getting platinum speed runs is a nightmare but welcomed challenge
Crash has always been a fantastic unicerse with unique characters and in my point of view, a way funnier gameplay, even tho, crash has never made a ver complex story and almost all crash fans know that, the bosses, with the fabulous music, made a part of the unique touch of crash, so what makes cool crash...is its characters, music, gameplays, nostalgia, creativity, and its own world
So the fact that the first Crash Bandicoot game didn't offer analog stick support years before the PlayStation even had analog sticks, it loses a point? By that logic, they should dock Mario 64 points for not having online capabilities.
Nolan St. John Not necessarily because that's just an option in gameplay and doesn't affect all gameplay unlike not having well made controls for the actual game
Nolan St. John I'm not saying that should lose points but not having online gameplay is nowhere near as bad as not being able to control as well based on controller design
When I first played the remastered Crash 1 (first time playing one of the original crash trilogy games) I completed ot 100% in less than a month and loved every bit of it, and warped was just as good, although I haven't completed it yet, but the I don't really like tiger stages because the turning is horrible
I'm not sure what you mean. if you mean the original three (that are highlighted in this game) then I'm talking about the older games. (i did play other crash games like racing, party games, and even the twinsanity game series; all of which i enjoyed).
"They improved controls across all three games" Wasn't there a big hooplah about the new physics and things making the controls/platforming worse? Derp, they mention it right after I posted it while watching
Crash Bandicoot was awesome and that thing you said about nobody even cared about it until now, i was born in 2003 and crash came out waaaaaay before i was even thought of. i grew up with that game and as Ruder said as kids we didn't really care about how it played. I'm a huuuuge naughty dog fan and i also think that without crash bandicoot we wouldn't see a lot of games that are here today. i also noticed throughout the video, MatPat just kept insulting Ruder and the so called memes instead of focusing on the game itself. sorry but I grew up on all the naughty dog games and especially Crash Bandicoot so I have to try to defend it no matter what. It's my baby.
I'm a child and I actually like the original crash bandicoot. I didn't play it on the ps1 because I couldn't find it soooooo. See what I did there. I played on the ps2 because it works.
I understand that you wanted to upgrade the graphics, but why don´t you shoot at each other anymore? This whole thing would be hilarious if you shoot pixilated kamhamehas while arguing XD
Alex Rodriguez you are right mat pat lost it is in a song and the other person is right it changed lots of thing and hey it's just a theory a film theory!!!🎃🎃🎃🎃
the arguments against crash are hilarious. lol. "you have to play the levels without dying to safe" mimimimimimimimimi. fkn cazul. 13:12 but those crates are suspicious, because they dont hop....i found ALL those secret pathways as a child without help.
Your asking two very different questions here, was crash an influential game pushing the boundaries of its time? absolutely without a doubt, It influenced so many games and helped bring 3D to gaming. Does crash stack up to today's gaming standards? Not even close, Sloppy controls, horrible gimmicks, and what today would be terrible level design. It felt like the two of you where arguing different topics on the same games as opposed to the same topic.
+Antonio Rivera I said it doesn't hold up to today's gaming standards, however it is still fun (as any game should be) but it doesn't hold a candle to the bonfire that has become today's gaming industries standards. The remaster is a fresh coat of paint on beloved series but at absolute best it has been downgraded from a triple A game to an indi developer sort of quality with better visual assets.
I imagine that when Matpat thinks of a new Deadlock, he just walks into the Game Theorists room, and yells..."WHO THINKS OTHERWISE"
Lol is the perfect comment for this
Hi fellow nb
No it the game theory closet
He probably goes, “(insert controversial side) fight me”
I like that.
Here's a game query for ya - who put all those boxes around for Crash to find apples in? Could it be Bowser? From other video game??
could papyrus and sans put crash in undertale? because after all, he is ness.
They are wumpa fruit
@@gomango99 I thought they were grapes 🤨
@@ctn3850 Really? They do look like grapes in the N.verted levels in Crash 4
@@ethanmiller1808 You ever notice that Crash is an anagram for... SAHRC
"Before 2017 when was the last time anyone cared about Crash?"
Me: ....uh... Twinsanity? Pretty sure it was loved
*I LOVE TWINSANITY!!!! I'VE FINISHED IT LIKE 10 TIMES AND NEVER GET TIRED OF IT!!!!!*
Oh Yeah Yeah! Which one?
AysooWeeb who asked you
Tag team. That was the last time
@@AysooWeeb don't you hate that seal from high seas hi jinks?
Crash bandicoot was a game that was in my family since I was born
Same
Same
Same
Same
Samee
I miss the little animated fight during these.
X naM ageM Reversed yeah, but I would just take way long to make
It makes it so much more fun to watch
Me to
The Game Theorists Fake pat
I don't even like the original matpat anymore
If you took a shot every single time matpat laughed or was smug in the 2017 deadlock videos you would die in 25 seconds.
4 shots would be enough ain't that right Jhin?
Yuki Tennouboshi not it's not the shots that would kill you
Yes, but we aren t talking about those shots Yuki.
I know but I had to make the joke :p
challenge accepted
Yeah, Dark Souls was based on reaction time, so are you saying the boulder sections aren't?
I always laugh about the boulder stage argument. It's nothing but good reaction tests. You have plenty of time to notice the pitfalls and traps, and jump over them.
Okay but that has nothing to do with anything said by either myself or the video.
At least you can see in dark souls and is based off difficulty
I agree the boulder sections are bad, but implying that they're not based on reaction time is wrong because they are. Visibility was not mentioned in the video's Dark Souls comparison.
Those things are fun but difficult
Mat: "Ah, yes the nostalgia argument"
Ryder: *"Well yes, but actually no"*
(UNO Reverse Card)
Mat: WAT?!
Nostalgia shouldn't be an argument as to if a game is good imo
It wasn't even a nostalgia argument. He was talking about child-like curiosity and how these games encourage that attitude. Just because they mention a child doesn't mean that it must be a direct appeal to the past lives of certain gamers.
@@ptolemyhenson6838 thats what they said
Actually in warped there are A LOT of situations when you absolutely need to use the power ups you...🙅
Well it shouldn’t be a game were you need to use it in every level
You don't need them every level
I know right and even if you don't need it in every level they can make shortcuts and are just fun to use
Can’t like the vid gotta keep the joke there👌🏼
@@jjsix6943 exactly, those power ups are perfect for speedrunners, i was able to finish a level so quick with the power ups!
The fake nitro crates doesn't shake. That's how I realized they were fake
i never played the games (or intend to, nintendo ftw) what do the nitro crates do?
Kitten Master explode as soon as you touch it
And freaking 1-hit kills you in Crash Twinsanity. That was maybe the only thing I hated on that game.
bog brain moves
Matpat in the Dark Souls debate:
“Dark Souls is great because just like Crash Bandicoot, it keeps you on your toes, using trial-and-error and memorization in order to progress”
Matpat here:
“Crash sucks because it’s all just trial-and-error and memorization”
Is he saying Dark Souls suck?
Matpat = Nintendrone
Okay, Mr. Excellent and Mr. Mapper, you two need to stop.
I happen to like trial-and-error! If thats in the game, you can learn where you go wrong!
@@TheMorgueDonator=an idiot
Crash Bandicoot was a great trilogy in my opinion. Yes I grew up with it, and I’d still play it today.
Hell yeah!
No
Besides god of war yes
I feel like you should've argued with Caddicarus.
That would've been cool. Although a big part of this guy's argument is how they aren't nostalgic for Crash at all, so you can't accuse them of being biased.
Hehehe he will reach the level to choke mat
caddy would had tore matpat a new asshole xD
this needs to happen
Would've been much more better, he would completely throw matpats "points" out the window.
No
hoi Proto
Lol
Yes
Woah
Wrong answer. Crash sucks
See I adore Crash Bandicoot. My childhood in a nutshell. But I will listen to this with a relatively open mind. RELATIVELY.
Caitlin RC howd it go?
You still have like 5 mins kay il wait
Why is Matt so damn salty in these debates?
Then again DEADLOCK
deadlock... that is the answer.
Fnaf broke him
he’s always like that tho
@@memowl3663 in his videos he usually has a very happy and enthusiastic attitude, but in the debates he acts more aggressive and angry.
Crash had just survived attempted murder by Behind the Meme.
*Don't do this to the guy.*
#Bandicootsareanendangeredspecies
Bendy And The Ink Machine > BATIM > BaTiM > BTM > Behind The Meme
Well done! You're using more dead memes! What do you want, a cookie?
Neo Machine WOAH
Hating on BTM is a dead meme at this point
I personally like the original Spyro series better, they introduced many mechanics that most other games didn't have, such as adaptive difficulty curves that adjusted to the player, double world rendering, infinite glides, no actual loading screens, etc... It was just better and cleaner mechanically
You also said to vote in the comments Mat, and also keep in mind that the why can be explained in the comments, so would you actually consider unjustified voting, or the source where you could understand the thinking behind the votes in all of the deadlockeds more? Just a question cause that's where I'll be voting if I get an actual answer.
Gabriel Draper here are some old games I still play: crash twinsanity, spyro and some kind of dragonflie thingie , Jak and daxter, and I think that's all
My Spyro: Year of the dragon was rendered unplayable by the speedway glitch. It prevents you from getting the egg from the speedways if you enter one, exit, save, and restart your game. Also, the bosses were really easy.
I can agree.
I LOVE the original Spyro. Spyro, for me, is like the finish homework then crash on the couch and play on your gamecube, game.
This video is *FLAWED*
- and here's why:
You're going into this deadlock episode with the questions: "Just how well do these games hold up? Were the Crash games actually good to begin with, or have we been giving them a pass just because of childhood nostalgia?" The questions alone already raise some very controversial points to the discussion at hand.
*Do they hold up? vs. Actually good to begin with?*
Tackling both of these themes in a single video seems a little bold, if not completely foolish. What constitutes better and worse game design has changed a lot with the years, and when you try to answer a question of 'was it good to begin with?' using the same 21 years of game design knowledge brought up in the "does it hold up" section of the video - you end up with an unfair, and honestly flawed critical view.
*Actually good to begin with?*
When MatPat says "trial and error and memorization"(6:30) with such a weighted voice, he's doing it with the perspective of a game critic of the present day and not the past. In the 90s the standards surrounding unfair mechanics were undeniably different. I don't have to make a list of games famous for utilizing artificial difficulty elements. I don't, because when I write unfair enemy placement, button-to-action delays, questionable hit boxes, extra lives, lack of information, waiting mechanics and memorization you've already got a few popping into your head. There's that many. We have come to view this as *bad design* today, while at the time it was less of an issue - clearly, seeing as critics were praising many of these games at the time. So was it good then? It was every bit a part of the experience as the rest of it, yes.
In fact, my own biggest personal pet peeve with game critique is that the people that cry out how "unfun" certain punishment methods are, usually state the bloody obvious. Of course it's unfun, it's a punishment. You're not meant to feel okay with it. It's something you have to face as an adversary, you have to overcome and master it - and that takes work. Some games give you this work, and some games avoid it for clarity and easy accessibility. Having the distinction should not come down to "good or bad" but "easy fun or hard fun" - artificial difficulty or no. *Of course* these things can be executed poorly in comparison to other games, but the concepts in of themselves are not inherently *bad* - they're par for the course, of this era of gaming. Taking them out of N. Sane Trilogy, for instance, would be misrepresenting the experience.
*Do they hold up?*
This question is too bloody vague. It's about as good a discussion topic as "are carrots alright?" - why? Because it's a multifaceted answer, and shouldn't be approached in such a polarized yes/no fashion. Here's some potential answers to it:
Does it hold up to today's standards? No. It has lives, it has a weird hit box, it has a lack of information with secrets and several traits that commonly avoided in games today.
Does it hold up to today's gaming scene? Yes. Today's gaming scene has many retro games easily accessible through means both illegal and legal, a selection so great that Crash stands out for a reason - it isn't bad.
Does it hold up to Mario then and now? You seemed obsessed with this comparison, for reasons that elude me entirely. Crash Bandicoot is an on-tracks experience much like many of the Sonic titles. You are given courses that have very defined paths and few variables. Mario 64 presents courses that are a playground experience, where paths are defined by the player and variables are through the roof. Of course there's going to be different design philosophies for both - and so I answer the question with the fact that different philosophies interest different people: it varies. This isn't a yes/no scenario.
Does it hold up to the concept of having fun today? I'll leave that one up to whoever's read this far, because I do believe it's a subjective matter that can't be measured and *shouldn't* be measured.
*In Conclusion*
When the video tackles too much at once, and has two theorists approach the problem from a "it was good then" angle versus a "but it's bad now" angle, it ultimately doesn't accomplish a significant or intelligent discussion because you're not discussing. You're presenting facts that cater to two different groups, and then measuring the size of the groups statistically by seeing who takes what side. It's not a discussion in the end. It's not taking sides that even sensibly rival each other. It's just measurement. Perhaps it would have been more interesting to discuss the ups and downs of on-tracks platformers versus more open-world platformers?
I don't comment much on videos from this channel - I find most of them are as far-fetched as they are entertaining, whilst also being rich with information stemming from a hard working team. However, this topic I feel has been handled poorly, and I think it's worth pointing that out. I haven't watched many deadlock videos, but I do hope that you will make some that are a lot richer in the future - because I know you can. And I'm aware it's easier to tear into someone's work than it is to do it, but on the off chance this is read by you, I hope it provides the honest perspective of one of your more infrequent but nevertheless attentive viewers - and that it provokes an urge to respond with even better content, rather than a defensive stance towards any points raised.
Patrick Hansen bro, how long did you write this?
Thanks. You basically worded this way better than I could ever had.
Tl;dr: He makes valid points to an argument that shouldn't even be happening because it slanders the name of crash and sony in general
This guy gets it
Patrick Hansen Aren't all deadlock episodes?
In 2019 we have CTR Remastered AND ITS AWESOME
In 2020 we getting Crash 4
Even though I hate microtransactions, I still like CTR Remastered.
@@tiruliru1189 you don't even need to buy the coins?
@@tiruliru1189 just ignore it u dont need it to get the consumables
IN 2020 WE HAVE A DEADLY VIRUS AND ITS AWESOME
Something funny is that Matt is talking bad about crash yet he is showing people dash through the levels with no problem
So? You can watch a play through of people going through Battletaods and making it look easy? It is NOT easy
Ryder failed to defend the eight directional controls. They worked fine for the type of game Crash is. You press left, Crash immediately snaps to the left. In SM64 you pressed left and mario would gradually turn to the left. Both control schemes suit their respective games' gameplay styles. Also the camera shifts back a bit during the boulder chase levels to allow you to see ahead. Ryder could've easily used the information above to defend Crash. Smh
Crash isn't even eight directional. It's full 3D. At least from what I remember on the PS1.
He failed to defend the eight directional controls by not refuting the claim that SM64 had "analog controls". The N64 controller had an 8 directional joystick. It was not an analog thumbstick.
He did not mention that when crash 1 was made, the daul shock controller did not exist so when you plug in a daul shock, it dose not work unlike crash 2 and 3
People say that crash 1 is hard to control but I say no I still play the ps1 games on my old PS3 and rather controls are not bad because if your in the air you can controls him well and some times slow him down a lot of times on the night road I saved my self with the back D pad
For the ds version of sm64
I've noticed an easy way of differentiating Hardcore Crash fans with Out-of-touch Crash fans.
Out-of-touch Crash fans say "Nnnn-sane".
Hardcore Crash fans say "Enn-sane".
NPCarlsson same thing
Turtato | Yeah... no it's not. Would you call him "Nnnnuh-brio"?
enn-sane
NPCarlsson [insert meme sounds]
En-sanely correct there bruh.
Honestly I really love the Crash Bandicoot series and honestly I enjoyed them, even the HD trilogy!
Is it just me or are their health bars on the wrong side?
It's more of a power bar I suppose, every good point they make gives them more power (as opposed to knocking the other sides health down).
I could be wrong, but that's just how I saw it.
Lol
it isn't health bars now i guess. success meters XD
No it’s kinda like a power bar
Well that's just bad design then, using red and not pointing out it was a power bar when it usually was a health bar is really badly thought out
Both sides make pretty good points, too bad about half way through the video it felt like they were just repeating themselves with different wording.
Yes crash had it's flaws but you have to admit, it was a game changer, i say crash was a game of history, thousands upon thousands of people look back on the fun times that they had playing him, i say... LET'S GO CRASH!! :D
It really wasn't though, by the time Crash came out Super Mario 64 was already released with full control and an open world, Crash really wasn't a game changer
Finmotion it would of been one if super Mario did not come out two months later
Gameboy224 On it's own merit, yes I agree. But Finmotion didn't say that, they said "it was a game changer". No mention of "for (INSERT CONSOLE HERE)". For what the devs had, it's an exceptional game but just not a game changer.
Finmotion crash bandicoot was dark souls before dark souls fun but unbelievably difficult
Finmotion i can see where you're coming from, but i politely disagree with one point, crash bandicoot didnt really change anything, even in its own era. Other 3d games handled the format better and gave more effective styles that have directly impacted gaming as an industry to the point where we can see the influence of games like mario 64, ocarina of time, etc in almost all aspects of the medium. Crash however, was flawed in design and prospered mainly because of its tongue and cheek design. The gameplay was pretty bad in comparison to other great 3d platformers of its time, but its personality held it up above the others. So, yeah it is an over rated game with some of the worst concepts of design i can think of, but it was fun, goofy, and stood out. For some, thats enough, and i can respect that.
how tf u gonna say that crash 1 is unplayble
I beat that game and I loved it
and I didn't even grow up with it
sorry dude but their is something called opionons
@@firstfiveminutes9811 yes, and that was my opinion
because it's true
@@jacklajoie9126 I agree the controls are janky, but it’s not unplayable. The remaster, also, fixed the controls and made it look unplayable by comparison.
I love crash but what does you beating it have to do with being unplayable. That’s like a doctor saying “your finger is broken” and ur like “oh it’s fine it doesn’t hurt”. Just because it doesn’t hurt doesn’t mean it ain’t broken. The argument should be it may be hard but it’s not unplayable. You beating it doesn’t tell him anything. Clearly a lot of people beat it so obviously it’s playable.
I miss the old animations at the bottom of them actually fighting. But I think crash bandicoot was a challenging game that brought frustrations, but good sections as well. I dont think crash is a bad game, not in the least, but it isn't a Mario 64 by any means. I think it's a mediocre game overall with positives AND negatives
I don't agree with you. They were not good and the new ones are cheap death barrel in the cheap death tavern.
15:35 Have you ever even tried to get a Platinum Relic, Bro?!
Also, Crash 2 is really good at upping the ante of obstacles throughout each level. (ex: "See those two hovering enemies patrolling those platforms over there? Figure out how to cross the gap."
Later in the level (and/or carried over to similarly themed levels where the obstacle-ante is upped again): "Remember those two hovering enemies that were patrolling those platforms earlier? Notice how these platforms are the ones that fall when weight is applied to them? Well, now there are three hovering enemies and the platforms fall after you land on them...oh, yeah, the enemies move faster, now, too. See you on the other side!"
Seriously, Crash 2 is great for seeing how people learn (does the person get frustrated, does the person get creative, ect.) and how well solutions to earlier problems are recalled and applied to another variation of that initial problem--sort of like how math textbooks gradually increase the complexity of the problems while maintaining the same fundamentals.
So, yeah, I'm done now. Too much caffeine, not enough sleep. How old is this video anyway? I was looking for a different one and saw, "Mah boi, Crash"
HUGzJayGon
I think your argument is good but flawed.
Everyone learns in a different way, you may learn in that way but I don’t.
@@typeterson2421 His first argument is not flawed at all! crash bandicoot is a whole another game when one goes relic hunting(time attack).
One cannot use checkpoints so reaction time and pattern recognition is important, makes the game much harder and imho more enjoyable
By enjoyable you mean frustrating (this is my opinion)
Matt: too bad the games where garbage
Me: OBJECTION MATT
Phoenix Wright : thats my line -_-
👏👏👏👏👍👍
A-hemm... Tomb Raider was also a crusher of the 90's lol
Also let's not forget 1999s SA1
Uncharted is a rip off of tomb raider
@@V_For_Vigilante but it’s better
Oh my god Matthew take your jacket off! Stop drowning yourself in heat!
Wrong hemisphere.
Madeleine Ashdown he's not drowning himself in heat because it's cold in California
Madeleine Ashdown mans not hot
The girl told me take off ya jacket, I said babes, MATTS NOT HOT 🔥MATT CAN NEVER BE HOT
he sweat doe
I am not blinded by nostalgia because I did not grow up playing crash. However, when I did see the Easter egg in Uncharted 4, played the game on older systems, and saw/played the N.Sane Trilogy, I just loved it. It truly was in inspiration, and a move that could’ve killed naughty dog, but one that did just the opposite
And if it wasn’t a success, we would never have gotten the last of us!
Also Mat Pat doesn't know how many levels Warped has exactly.
The guy who claims to know the ins and outs of games like the back of his hand doesn't know how many levels there are exactly.
And oh, so you never need to use the spin jump. Or the double jump. Or the dash.
Good luck clearing those pits and getting those relics.
Yes
Right! I almost forgot the super-secret two hidden levels. That's 32 levels, MatPat!
Man, I'm amazed I even found those as a kid.
TheApachacha He's never "claimed" anything.
Yeah, Ryder mention that right afterward.
"Crash Bandicoot was a really great game back in the day, but now you know, I-I've come to realize that may-maybe it's not that great, hmmmmm?"
"Well, I played Crash recently and I still think it rocks my socks off, I play it everyday and enjoy it very much so and I think it could even possibly be the greatest game ever design-ed."
I feel like this is just a battle between someone who grew up with a PS, and therefore crash/spyro, and someone who grew up with the nintendo thinger and mario. Yes, I said thinger, I'm a PS kid xD
I grew up with Spyro... on the Wii. So.... win win?
A much better & fitting title for the video would be 'Has Crash Bandicoot Aged Well?' because it sounds neutral & is more inviting for discussion.
Are so many people disliking because he's arguing against Crash? He loves Crash, he has to do it for the show :p
Those nitro boxes I remember distinctively though, and I always wondered why they didn't make sounds and "bop" like usual nitroboxes. Figured that one out last as I 100%'ed the game back then ^^
TOCCL so many = 248? That’s not really a lot when you think about it and when compared to the 2k likes.
We're not disliking because he's against crash, we couldn't care less. WE ARE DISLIKING BECAUSE OF THE CRINGE.
TOCCL No, he doesn't like the game. He said so in GT Live.
I'm disliking this because they took the pixel fighting out.
I just disliked because the video was bad.
In terms of secrets there are always very subtle hints to them. Like the nitro staircase doesn't bounce like normal nitros indicating it was a secret. Or like the flower bieng excluded on its own platform unlike any other platform. Or the little extra land in unbearable showing that you can go back unlike any other chase level.
Do one about the original sonic games! There's a lot of unspoken flaws with game design there.
There are, but going by the fact that MatPat can't do basic research, he should probably stay away from that, and really just cancel this entire series
i agree.
Axelaxolotl with you?
I don't think there's "a lot" of flaws in the classic Sonic games, certainly not enough to make them "overrated"
We should do Modern Sonic vs Classic Sonic.
Love the new style! but may i suggest putting back in your names above the bars? it kept throwing me off since health bars are normally above that persons head
Lindsey D. And the characters fighting each other lol :)
Ohh snap here comes the hate comments
Joshua Hoge I ain't Hating, I am watching Game Theory 'Deadlock'
Joshua Hoge After the Overwatch vs TF2 Deadlocked, MatPat honestly has not gotten enough hate.
Snap? Last time i heard this word was when loving jesus was illegal
Guypersonmanthing3 how about mobile legends vs league of legends
Blake05 same
"it's difficult because i cant just run threw the game and win"
dude i beat these games when i was like 9. i think people are playing up rage for views.
This is like a middle school play. The acting is cringey.
I love you matpat
Well, I for one vote for Crash! Sure the gameplay was sometimes a bit..weird but these were the BEST games to play with friends. You got to laugh at one another for messing up and compete as far as who could get through a level faster or find the secrets. Sure it was advertised as a one player game but.. most of the time it was a family affair! On top of that, the third game had loads of replay value as far as little me was concerned. I beat the game with my best friend, then beat the game with my sister, then when my little brother got old enough we beat it together. All the while shouting, laughing and sometimes roughhousing over it. Crash Bandicoot is more of an experience really. All in all these games helped change everything.. and were incredibly fun to play!
You know, I could make the same arguments for NES games that Mat brought up for Crash.
"How tf am I supposed to know you can go behind the background in Mario 3?"
"Ninja Gaiden is too hard with its unfair bullcrap!"
"Kirby's Adventure is too linear!"
Video games are LITERALLY all about overcoming challenges and bullcrap, it's only unfair when you believe it's unfair. So yeah, you need to GIT GUD.
Zer0scope Good man.
Zer0scope
You don't have to go behind the background in Super Mario Bros. 3, that happens once or twice, and isn't something mandatory to win the game because you just get a warp whistle out of it, an item directly made for skipping large chunks of the game.
Kirby's Adventure being "too linear" wouldn't be a challenge or an obstacle, it's a design choice.
And... I've personally never heard of Ninja Garden.
A game being unfair is usually because it has trial and error difficulty, that means you can't beat the game without an unfair death. A fair game gives you the tools you need to overcome it, so when you die you know it's your lack of skill and is therefore fair. Having unfair difficulty plagues games like Dark Souls and other such titles, and while I'm not going to sit here and argue over the difficulty of Crash Bandicoot, saying that, "it's only unfair when you believe it's unfair" isn't really true.
By the way, I believe you mean to say, "get good" not, "GIT GUD". I mean, the former is an actual phrase, the latter is made up of an insult used as slang by some British and Australian people, put together with something that isn't even a word.
...What?
Ok, first of all, that reference to Super Mario Bros. 3 was countering Mat's point about how cryptic the secrets in the 2nd game were. Secrets are supposed to be cryptic, that's why they're called secrets.
In today's modern world, yes, making your game linear would be a design choice. But that line about Kirby's Adventure was countering Mat's point about how linear the 1st game was.
Ninja Gaiden is an EXTREMELY hard NES game, that I just so have happened to beat, but nonetheless.
Whether or not something is unfair mostly depends on your tolerance. Imagine it like this. You've got a graph, with one line representing a game's "Fairness". And then you've got a second line representing your tolerance. The point where those 2 lines intersect is the point where you scream bullshit and call the game unfair. It doesn't matter how fair or unfair a game actually is because your tolerance can warp your perception.
Also, the "Git Gud" was an intentional choice. But hey, that was just an opinion.
Zer0scope True that. I can at a the same thing about Puyo Puyo being difficult for me. I for the life of me SUCK at that game but i dont consider it bad. It's just not for me.
Zer0scope
For one thing, SMB3's warp whistles were for directly skipping the game, while the secrets in Crash 2 are for 100 percenting the game.
And making a game linear has been a design choice since around 1990, with games like Metroid, Zelda 1, and in the 3D world games like Super Mario 64. All of these came out before Crash Bandicoot and mostly on far inferior consoles. I feel the point about linear design was how the game was very narrow, especially as a 3D game. Super Mario 3D world is a pretty linear game but at least each level is quite open.
Tolerance, while definitely controlling when you personally quit and call it unfair, does not say how fair the game actually is. As you say, tolerance can warp perception, but something like fairness isn't really an opinion and more an objective thing. You can tolerate something like, say, extreme torture, but it's pretty objectively awful. You can tolerate an unfair game but it's still unfair. Like I said, an unfair game has trial and error difficulty.
And I wish people would stop saying, "Git Gud", it makes the point seem weaker. But hey, that was just an opinion.
Thank you Oney for the thumbnail matpat took
I haven't played the remake but for the old games they're not perfect but they're very fun. In my opinion Crash 2 is the best one but I know many that prefer Crash 3. Crash 1 is more for the hardcore players that like the satisfaction of actually beating something really hard. (As a good, smart, handsome, well educated and humble person with clear goals in life should be.)
The controls were tight and precise and hitboxes were precise and where you wanted them to be. Sure, distance could be a little tricky sometime and sometimes the game pull some out of nowhere bs on you. But even with somewhat clunky controls the feel was good and the game were fair for the most time with good challenge.
I'd recommend to at least try them. Download a demo or something. You'll know pretty quickly if it's a game you'll like or not because it kinda the same deal through all the games. Just like how a Mario game stays the same in it's core the whole game through these ones does too. And as with Mario 64 you're a tumbling fool in the beginning and basically a parkour master in the end.
I know if people can, (and I'm not sure if this is legal) you can download an emulator and the right rom for each game
I loved and still love Crash 1 the most. It was the thrill of the challenge that lead me to it!
the ps1 cold hard crash box is bullshit tho
Crash is the best I own a lot of the old crash games.
So... you own just Crash games?
15:53 WELL MATPAT, WHATS THE POINT OF HAVING TWO LIFE BARS IN DEADLOCK IF YOU'RE JUST GOING TO REACH 1% EVERY TIME?!
that's what's called a deadlock
That's kinda the whole point of the series...
Jonathan, good point.
It can't be a "Deadlock" if it doesn't end in a tie.
Still the health bar is meaningless if we already know from the beginning that it's going to be 1% to 1%
10:55 That screenshot is from Wrath of Cortex, not Warped
No it is from warped, wrath of cortex has better graphics
@@ste5842 No, Wrath of Cortex. You can briefly see the background, which is the Water Crunch level.
@@ste5842 th-cam.com/video/Cy_MWC5KIzI/w-d-xo.html
@@UltraHylia oh yeah srr you're right
@@ste5842 the wrath of cortex had almost the same graphics. it was not ps2 graphics at all tbh
Crash Bandicoot isn't overrated. It's a really great game. Crash's a video game legend, I must say. Crash Team Racing is also one of the best racing games of it's kind. Also, not all of the Non-Naughty Dog Crash games are bad. Look at Twinsanity, for example. Hate it or love it, Crash Bandicoot is one of the best and most important video game franchises of all time. Always was and always will be.
Are the health bars backwards?
Robin Rotten yep confusing right
Its not a health bar it seems, its a power bar. The bigger the point made is, the more red is added to the bar.
Cobalt Lukather if it was filling wouldn’t it start at the crystal and move to the opposite direction?
BabehFontancey i think it should have, but it seems like they were going towards the crystal as if it were the goal. Idk. Just my two cents.
Played the original about 6 months ago, I'm 20 (so no nostalgia bias) and I can say that the first game was amazing!!!
You know it's funny I'm playing crash bandicoot n-sane trilogywhile I watch this video and I am just getting more irritated and more irritated not buy the game but by Matt Pat rambling about how a nostalgic game has impacted a kid who may I add is an actual kid playing a game from 1998 who actually likes it I'm only a generation after the millennials and I still like it
You do know a 23 year old is the same generation as you
Ikr
crash is one of the best games ever
It was too difficult for me and too linear and i would have played something else
Yup
Exept level nine in crash bandicoot n sane trilogy that level is the most annoying.its ive tried for 3 months to beat it and i just cant its impossible
The second level was literally under water -MatPat (cough cough New Super Mario Bros.)
Mason Uranga that doesn't mean anything
That's the second world, not stage
Why don’t your characters fight anymore in deadlock? Don’t tell me that you get demonitized for cartoon violence!
Nathan Shaw this
This whole "debate" was biased. Crash Bandicoot is a great game and definitely still prevails as a one. Graphics and gameplay are astounding at the time of release. Simple, you may say? Argument can be made, since some people compare 1996-1999 games with late 2000s, but still tge execution is brilliant. Seriously, when I heard that matpat considers CTR as a some kind of "spin-off", I really started to think that he doesn't played tose games (or he just can't). Which leads me to the next point, namely, hardness of Crash's games. Crash definitely has a hard parts inside of it (let's mention Slippery Climb, Road to Nowhere, Hard Cold Crash or even Future Frenzy), but this is precisely why the game is a joy to play. Difficulty level performed in Crash's franchise is constructed with care and balance - we can find levels on each difficulty status - we have Toad Village which serves as an introduction to the gameplay, Toxic waste which (maybe annoying, but) gives us a challenge and Slippery Climb after which gamer screams "I made it!". I know how this may sound, but nevertheless this is the truth: If you think a level is too hard, there's a great chance you just don't have the skills it requires. And I say that both as a Crash Veteran and Gamer as a whole. Seriously, do we abandon a game ("Drive" is a prime example) after screwing a level couple times? I don't, I try and try until I make it. Therefore argument "it's too hard" is not really an argument, but whining of lack of respect. Beating all Oxide's ghost or gathering platinum relics is too hard? No, it's not. I and many, many more people done it multiple times. Also, Crash should be applauded for creating vast variety of levels and mechanics inside each game (including Rock it and Pack Attack, which are super). Also, matpat, your cynicism is not helping the debate. There are far more topics when it comes to analysis, but I've been writing this long enough, so I will restrain myself from discussing them. To conclude, I believe that Crash series (on the contrary to what youtube's shouting headlines (and other people) say) is underrated. Crash's just wonderful!
To be honest he probably likes it, it’s just DEADLOCK
C'mon you didn't even mentioned how awesome the music on the original trilogy is, it can be one of the main reasons of why crash fans remeber the oldest games and one key factor of the success of the remaster that made a really good job taking the tracks to a new modern style
Good video though, crash is not a perfect game at all, but the thing is that it never tried to be like that, Naughy Dog just packaged the most crazy ideas that they had for a game on a CD, and that in my opinion it is what it makes it so f#$;!*g good
thus crash was always good and that crash is good already won the debate since it has not been fully talked about thus extra points for crash good thus crash good won the debate
kryz422 "awesome music" is debatable
kryz422 Agreed. :)
Weirdly, the entertaining side of Deadlock is lacking in this video and, I think I know why....
What are they really debating here? 'Is Crash Bandicoot Overrated?'... Seriously?
I'm going to say this as politely as I can but...
*WHO* *CARES!!!!*
Okay. I for one, am a huge fan of Deadlock. Really. Flipping love the concept. Debating the absolute entirety of anything game related? Sign me up big time!
But, arguing over whether a game sucks or not is (in my opinion), not a debate. Choosing it as the basis of debate can be hugely one dimensional, makes the whole video feel journey'less and can be (not that its your fault matpat!) infuriating for people to watch.
To be honest, the reason why I'm taking my time with this TH-cam comment in the first place is that, I care about this show. I just don't want to see this show go bust (that might be really sad of me, but that's the truth).
The lack of quality put into Deadlock right now is troubling. Here's hoping its just a dip in form and nothing else! I just wish, in any case, that my 'words of wisdom' is seen and used constructively, if nothing else.
Anyway Matthew, keep that sprinkler sprinkling x
He wasn't really arguing if the game sucked. The debate was if it was overrated, and though they are similar debates to have, they are different.
VADFilms I actually disagree with you. I quite like the topic plus it's something that is being debated in the gaming community right now. I'm interested in hearing the arguments.
The Completionist's 'Defend It' has a similar problem. When you're trying to make a full argument about whether a game is good or not, the video will more than always (even if unintentionally) pick a side on which opinion you should agree with. I prefer the arguments that go into controversial game mechanics or designs over whether a game is good or bad. (being overrated also falls into this category)
I feel like "Is Crash Bandicoot Overrated?" is more of a clickbait title than anything. What they seemed to be debating was "Is Crash Bandicoot Revolutionary?", which is clearer and a lot more interesting imo. I think I would've enjoyed the video a lot more if it was framed this way. In fact, I was on the fence about even watching it just because of the title.
.
W O A H!
dead meme
DeD mEmEs? NeVeR hEaRd oF It
Isagail WOWOWOWOWO
Isagail WOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWO
*W O A H*
Every time a new game comes out or Remastered from the 90s or 80s,Matpat is always like"I love Ruining peoples good little hearts and giving them the truth about this games or a horrible theory" but that's we a people love about this videos......OR DO WE THO!
3:32 omg that crash bandicoot face XD
It was kinda surprising that MatPat said that a challenge was bad considering that a lot of the games he loves on GTLIVE are challenging. I mean far out, he even says that he loves I Want To Be The Guy because of how challenging it is.
MentalChicken He said its UNFAIRLY HARD. Not Challenging.
This game is not challenging. ITS UNFAIRLY HARD
Yea, I dont get it. When Mario is challeging its a ok! But when Crash is,then its somehow 'unfair'. I played original and remake, and I feel the remake is much easier. They even give you hints on the loading screen. I dont think anyone needed hints there. My only ONLY complaint is that you cant choose Restart level if you're not on the Time Trial
I don't think Crash is unfairly hard. 2 and 3 sure weren't and while the first one is hard, I did 100% it, some level on the first try, including one of the rock levels. The controls are kinda dated, but I still think it was decent.
Crash is not "unfairly hard." Ghosts 'n Goblins and Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts would be closer to "unfairly hard" due to how slowdown can completely cheat you out of jumps or get you killed and cause you to see the map screen without even realizing what happened until it's too late.
there's a difference between challenging and flawed design. The hitboxes were made really tight/small, too tight, enough so where it was hard for the player to tell whether or not they could land on a platform and gauge their movement/jumps enough to land. You can't really learn from a game when the platforming/hitboxes/design is so inconsistent.
When you’ve never played Crash Bandicoot and don’t know which side to vote for...
“Life Is Strange? Pfffft so predictable!”
*you feel every gaming veteran crawling on your back.*
Personally, I always thought Crash was amazing. Even after revisiting them after 10 years, they still held up and had a massive influence on video games, even Mario took influence from some Crash games. So, Crash Bandicoot is actually a great series.
A lot of mats points are opinions. INVALID!
Edit: they just got to warped and Caddicarus is PISSED
His points are opinions because Mat is a stupid Nintendrone.
Yup he's pissed
@@mr.excellent6510 ye.... NO. He said true things. Crash is sucks. AF
Kanadai-Magyar Mapper Most things, if not everything he said can be easily debunked. Let’s also not forget that he used the same argument he used to defend Dark Souls against Crash. I take it you’re a blind Nintendrone as well. P.S. anyone who’s a fan of a game all about closing and opening doors is in no position to say that a game sucks.
@@kanadai-magyarmapper9447 is sucks?
Lmao
I am a kid right now And I don't have the nostalgia of crash but I still find it AMAZING sorry matpat but I'll have to go with yes
When FootOfAFarret is in an episode, you know its gonna be good
15:01 just look at the sad “i lost” face on mat pat
Woah.
Woah!
Woah.
WOAH!
WOWOWOWOWOWO-
Woah man chill out.
InsanityGames normie
RetroBeetle Waaaahhhh
InsanityGames shut cha dumbass up and go make more shitty vids
WoAh
In this case I don't think linear is bad. I'm about halfway through crash 1 atm n it's awesome. Getting platinum speed runs is a nightmare but welcomed challenge
Ghost 777 Good man. *Pats you on the back*
Crash has always been a fantastic unicerse with unique characters and in my point of view, a way funnier gameplay, even tho, crash has never made a ver complex story and almost all crash fans know that, the bosses, with the fabulous music, made a part of the unique touch of crash, so what makes cool crash...is its characters, music, gameplays, nostalgia, creativity, and its own world
You can insult my favorite games all you want, but when you insult my Warped matpat....... i lost respect for you...
Niko it was gimmicky
Crash 4 on PS2 was worse and that was my childhood game.
I quess it was a little...
WARPED.
@@pyeltd.5457 play twinsanity
Thanks you
So the fact that the first Crash Bandicoot game didn't offer analog stick support years before the PlayStation even had analog sticks, it loses a point? By that logic, they should dock Mario 64 points for not having online capabilities.
Nolan St. John Not necessarily because that's just an option in gameplay and doesn't affect all gameplay unlike not having well made controls for the actual game
Nolan St. John I'm not saying that should lose points but not having online gameplay is nowhere near as bad as not being able to control as well based on controller design
What Tyler said. Plus I would also let Super Mario 64 DS loose points with the same argument.
Crash bandicoot was great Ryder definitely won. He made outstanding points. It is a classic game everyone will enjoy
In 2020: crash bandicoot 4:it’s about time is announced WOW
And got 3 million views and people are seeing It In a positive way
In 2021 CTR 2 is announced
When I first played the remastered Crash 1 (first time playing one of the original crash trilogy games) I completed ot 100% in less than a month and loved every bit of it, and warped was just as good, although I haven't completed it yet, but the I don't really like tiger stages because the turning is horrible
10:34 ''you never need to use skills'' *shows clip of crash bandicoot double jumping*
And you can't get the 100% without using the abilities to get the boxes. It's the reason they were added
crash is a great game. it's just not for everyone. i mean, have you seen those speedruns?! get good or get rekt MatPat.
Deena Phantom the New or old ones?(I just wanna know then I can agree or disagree with you)
I'm not sure what you mean. if you mean the original three (that are highlighted in this game) then I'm talking about the older games. (i did play other crash games like racing, party games, and even the twinsanity game series; all of which i enjoyed).
No New as in Remastered Cause their new
Matpat: calls warped bad
Cadicarus would like to know your location
Pffffttfff
"They improved controls across all three games"
Wasn't there a big hooplah about the new physics and things making the controls/platforming worse?
Derp, they mention it right after I posted it while watching
Crash Bandicoot was awesome and that thing you said about nobody even cared about it until now, i was born in 2003 and crash came out waaaaaay before i was even thought of. i grew up with that game and as Ruder said as kids we didn't really care about how it played. I'm a huuuuge naughty dog fan and i also think that without crash bandicoot we wouldn't see a lot of games that are here today. i also noticed throughout the video, MatPat just kept insulting Ruder and the so called memes instead of focusing on the game itself. sorry but I grew up on all the naughty dog games and especially Crash Bandicoot so I have to try to defend it no matter what. It's my baby.
i honestly feel crash bandicoot is undderated
Is it sad that at first, I watched this video for Crash and then just kept coming back for how HANDSOME Ryder is?
Not really
Ew...
I'm a child and I actually like the original crash bandicoot.
I didn't play it on the ps1 because I couldn't find it soooooo.
See what I did there.
I played on the ps2 because it works.
You are really lucky you didn't get the RSoD
MatPat is unsufferable throughout the entire episode and the game still gets justice, 10/10
I understand that you wanted to upgrade the graphics, but why don´t you shoot at each other anymore?
This whole thing would be hilarious if you shoot pixilated kamhamehas while arguing XD
Because then nothing can distract you from the terrible arguments presented in this video
Hopefully there might be more Deadlock in the future! It be nice to see a revival of this miniseries! ^^
Incoming "Woah" comments...
Devon Solheim WOAH
Devon Solheim woah
Devon Solheim WOAWOAWOAWOAWOAHH
Mat sorry bud but face it.... you lost this one
Alex Rodriguez you are right mat pat lost it is in a song and the other person is right it changed lots of thing and hey it's just a theory a film theory!!!🎃🎃🎃🎃
No I think he won.I THINK not you think
The first time I heard of Crash Bandicoot was 2016 when Skylanders Imaginators came out and they had Crash and Dr. Neo Cortex versions of Skylanders.
the arguments against crash are hilarious. lol. "you have to play the levels without dying to safe" mimimimimimimimimi. fkn cazul. 13:12 but those crates are suspicious, because they dont hop....i found ALL those secret pathways as a child without help.
Well I mean...It's valid
I swear to god MatPat you're treading into dangerous territory with the title of this video alone
*hate comments coming in 10 minutes*
CRASH IS BACK CRASH IS BACK
Your asking two very different questions here, was crash an influential game pushing the boundaries of its time?
absolutely without a doubt, It influenced so many games and helped bring 3D to gaming.
Does crash stack up to today's gaming standards?
Not even close, Sloppy controls, horrible gimmicks, and what today would be terrible level design.
It felt like the two of you where arguing different topics on the same games as opposed to the same topic.
On point
Crash does hold up though.
“Does it hold up?”
~~ is it still fun? Yes. Therefore, yes it still holds up.
the original games don't hold up though but the games were remastered
+Antonio Rivera
I said it doesn't hold up to today's gaming standards, however it is still fun (as any game should be) but it doesn't hold a candle to the bonfire that has become today's gaming industries standards.
The remaster is a fresh coat of paint on beloved series but at absolute best it has been downgraded from a triple A game to an indi developer sort of quality with better visual assets.
Did anyone notice that Mat talked 3 times less and they still reached a deadlock?
Because he didn't have enough counter-arguements to fight back.