>>722935676 (OP)
Just ask yourself as this is how YOU feel.
I'm not you, and i prefer Mario 64 over this game, because i'm a different person from you.
It's an internal question, not an external one.
One that may lead to you discovering even more games you like.
>>722936935
It's a stupid comparison from the ground up.
Crash is a linear obstacle course with tight challenge.
Mario is an open sandbox with goals that result primarily from simple exploration.
Actual apples and oranges. Both are delicious. Both have a time and a place.
But Crash has Coco and the great wall of china levels so Crash is better.
>>722935676 (OP)
it was built from scratch and I think the PS1 had better hardware. Crash also had a competent soundtrack. Mario's songs have more of a legacy like dank dank docks but a few Crash songs have had a second life.
Crash also got the trilogy business model which was typical of the time until it went into spin-off world.
>>722937338
i'd need to replay the games but back then it was a lot of smaller things not even gameplay related that made mario 64 feel better to play. super short loading times, the analog control scheme, and graphics were big ones. obviously on emulators the terrible ps1 load times no longer exist and i wouldn't be stuck on a default ps1 controller that only had a dpad.
64 was a huge technical achievement, but the gameplay hasn’t aged very well. I also really don’t like how the game kicks you out of a stage once you get a star.
