Jak 1 Critique Critique

Not ND suffering from genre fatigue, the platformer consumer. Very few early 3D platformers were linear except Crash and it's well documented why and how the collect-a-thon died out due to oversaturation.

In hindsight, debatable that an interconnected world 'reinvigorates' the collect-a-thon - fair point.

Fair point that the player still has to wait even if it's not a load screen. As an aside, I like the R&C transitions, but that's a nostalgic thing.

Fair point about blue eco vents - the player isn't actually *taught* here, but later.

I too think I am reaching with the floor sound effect - did I not make that as clear as I remember?

Variety is something I'll really need to consider when writing for Jak 2. I think that everything in that game meets par, but also that the game is actually worse than the sum of its' parts, so it's something I'll be thinking about.

Agreed that a collect-a-thon where you have to collect everything would be flawed - a point implicit in that discussion. Glad you found that digression interesting.

There is not a single point in the game where so many power cells are required that you need to buy some with orbs or collect any scout flies. Given what you've said here and your affinity for speedruns, it seems like you enjoy being able to blast through levels as fast as possible, and you dislike collect-a-thons because they run counter to that, obligating you to slow down, explore and collect. Just my conjecture, obviously I don't know you better than you know yourself, but is that something you'd agree with?

Roll jumping is not a fundamental part of movement, because it's never taught or required at all, and never useful outside of those few specific power cells and getting around faster. Is rolling to get across Hyrule Field slightly faster a fundamental part of movement?
I'd say spin jumping is a more fundamental part of movement. It's not taught either, but is absolutely required. This raises its' own questions about how much the player should have to figure out for themselves, but that's a different debate.

Fair point about ice buttons. It's more that the ice *feels* like an inconvenience because the player knows how much easier it would be with the standard movement, and is therefore aggravating in context, regardless of whether the challenge it creates is a well-implemented one in a vacuum. There's this readily apparent point of comparison, leading to "ugh, this would be SO MUCH EASIER with the standard controls!", even if the button challenge wouldn't be here without ice physics.
I think the suggestion I made wouldn't have this same problem because jumping that distance wouldn't be possible at all with the standard physics, so the player wouldn't have that point of comparison, or at least not obviously.

By "decent test of skill" I guess I meant "decent test of skill *at using the base mechanics*". I thought that came across in the context of what I was talking about, but maybe not as clearly as in my own head. Could have flipped the sentence around.

Actually already talked with someone about the Jak v Mario 64 statement - I could have phrased it as "*If you ask me*, ND outdid them all on their very first try" instead of stating my opinion factually, considering that I never directly compared the two games factually.

Yep, we're going to disagree greatly about Jak 2. The last couple of paragraphs is the best basis for what I said earlier about you maybe feeling 'obligated' by collect-a-thons.

I'm going to call this one a win, if only because it didn't make me feel like my entire approach was terrible.
You are ass-blastingly harsh, Chris, and I thank you for it. Ever seen the movie Whiplash?