←back to thread

252 points tobr | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
gwbas1c ◴[] No.43551809[source]
> owing to the relative freedom it affords players

That's really not "true". The 3D games at the time let you go anywhere, view anything. Myst only let you move to predefined locations.

The difference is that you didn't have enemies trying to kill you all the time, or extremely difficult bosses to defeat in order to advance to other levels. Instead, Myst let you generally explore most of the game as you wished. You could explore quite far without technically "advancing" because you could ignore the puzzles. This made the game quite fun if all you wanted to do was look around.

It's kind of similar to the actual freedom in Breath of the Wild / Tears of the Kingdom, where you don't need to advance in the game to explore the world.

replies(3): >>43551932 #>>43553032 #>>43553036 #
1. adastra22 ◴[] No.43553032[source]
There were no full 3D games in 1993. Quake was still 3 years in the future.
replies(2): >>43553280 #>>43554605 #
2. gwbas1c ◴[] No.43553280[source]
Wolfenstein 3D came out in 1992
replies(2): >>43554239 #>>43554299 #
3. adastra22 ◴[] No.43554239[source]
Wolfenstein was not full 3D.
4. bravoetch ◴[] No.43554299[source]
Not really 3d, the map/engine didn't support a room above another room.

This was also true for doom games, and I think hexen.

Quake was fully 3d.

replies(1): >>43558451 #
5. cess11 ◴[] No.43554605[source]
Maze/Maze War, Chuck Yeager's AFT, Elite. Not as polished or fast as Descent or Quake on a Pentium chip but you'd need to redefine 3D with rather obtuse constraints to exclude them.
6. sleepybrett ◴[] No.43558451{3}[source]
Duke Nukem had some 2.5 D stuff going on that was more powerful than what doom was doing, but just barely. I think the first fully 3d game that meets your definition is probably 'Descent'