In other words, I more leaning towards being an old Spyro fan than I'm a new Spyro fan. I don't hate, or loathe new series, its just not my cup of tea for Spyro. If they would have spent more time on it or just made it a movie from the start, then I wouldn't complain or rag on it so much.

But then again any gamer can see that TLOS is quite a lukewarm game trilogy...

Old Spyro rules,
New Spyro sucks.

Now look at it....the story was superb and it has spawned a world wide best selling franchise. What finally gripped me onto the story was just how well the two aspects did end up going together.....AND it was something different to boot.

I always like things that stray away from originality and such....new ideas and new concepts are usually a win in my mind.

To put it bluntly, I'm a fan of both; I like each series for different reasons. Sometimes I go back to play the Insomniac games, I literally grew up on them. I found the colors to be great, the gameplay exceptional, and overall, the games were addicting and just  plain fun. Playing them over gives me a feeling of nostalgia.

TLoS is another story. The storyline is gripping, and some of the levels were interesting. I was, however, put off by the difficulty of TEN. DotD had a decent difficulty level, it wasn't too easy like ANB, but it also wasn't frustratingly difficult like TEN. Granted the elite enemies and the waves of enemies at the one armor piece in Burned Lands were frustrating. The whole beat-em-up style isn't very exciting, though. It's not as... original, as the gameplay for the original games. The charge is useless, something I found to be obnoxious.

ratchet wrote:

You may not know, but Still 10 years ago, good storylines were rare.

Too true, few games ten years ago had storylines that people would consider "amazing." Though they were original. One of the rare games, ten years ago, that had a "decent" storyline was Final Fantasy VII, which is ironically now considered to be one of the most overhyped games. But I digress.

As I've said before many times, I'm a fan of both.

Well yeah, The only real series to Put up an actual reasonable storyline was final fantasy, and that still wasn't that good. I dont think People realise how hard it is to pull off a good story. I mean if you want to use Movie Files you need more then one disc to play it.

TLoS is another story. The storyline is gripping, and some of the levels were interesting. I was, however, put off by the difficulty of TEN. DotD had a decent difficulty level, it wasn't too easy like ANB, but it also wasn't frustratingly difficult like TEN. Granted the elite enemies and the waves of enemies at the one armor piece in Burned Lands were frustrating. The whole beat-em-up style isn't very exciting, though. It's not as... original, as the gameplay for the original games. The charge is useless, something I found to be obnoxious.

Too true, few games ten years ago had storylines that people would consider "amazing." Though they were original. One of the rare games, ten years ago, that had a "decent" storyline was Final Fantasy VII, which is ironically now considered to be one of the most overhyped games. But I digress.

As I've said before many times, I'm a fan of both.

I never said anything about the voice acting, I liked the voice acting on the old ones too.

Ok cool, But I class Voice Acting with Storyline

They did have many cutscenes, but many of them weren't really anything special, in Spyro 2 + 3, they had random cutscenes at the beginning and end of each level, and the beginning and end of each zone. Only the ones at the beginning and end of each zone had meaning to them. Sure, the ones per level were funny, but they didn't merge together.

The backstories per level were nice small touches, but nothing really special. We never learned "why" Sparx needs to go into the holes and defeat bugs and crabs, he just does...[/Quote]

He had to go in their because It was too small for Spyro. And He had to get the  egg which was in the place. The bugs and crabs were Hired/Created by the Sorcerouss to kill Spyro and Sparx.
And i know The originals storyline wasn't the very best, But to say it was "terrible" is wrong. You may not know, but Still 10 years ago, good storylines were rare.

On the contrary, I find this the other way round. The originals, playing the first time, Each took around 10 hours for most people to beat the first time. But Now It only takes me around 2 hours to beat Spyro 1, An Hour to Beat Spyro 2 (With Glitches, Without around 2 hours) and Spyro 3 say around 6 hours. TLOS, on the otherhand is much quicker. ANB took me 5 hours and a half the first time (Thats what the time counter said...) TEN 6 hours and DOTD 7 hours. I've only played ANB a second time around because I cant be bothered with the other 2 but Once played again it ony takes around 4 hours, at most.

Kind of Debatable this, I agree, The graphics do take somewhat longer these days. but remember that companies dont just Spend a while doing the graphics THEN move on the gameplay. They have different people working on different things.
Also, back then, the graphics WOULD take the same amount of time to make, Due to the technology. For example, 20 years ago, Super Mario Bros 1 was hard to make, an Awesome, and extraudinary Breathrough. While these days a 9year old can make it i gamemaker!

Also Neotyguy40, graphics don't factor the amount of time the game can be played and such.  It all depends on how long the creators stick to making the game.  Technology was rather limited at the time the first 3 Spyro games were around.  Even now, it could take the same amount of time, even with all the enhanced graphics and what not.  If Activision makes a new Spyro sequel (to the Legend series), I would expect really long gameplay and such if they stick to making the game for 1.5 to 2 years.

Sorry, but i cant fight the urge to debate.
THe storylines are very simple, but the voice acting was some ofd the best for the day, and atleast Spyro 2 and Spyro 3 has around 20 cutscenes and a twist. Not to mention every level and every minigame had a backstory. Also, While You coould beat Spyro 1, 2, and 3 in 6 hours each, not 100%, you can easily beat each TLOS game in 6 hourseach TOO! and they should be longer as they were made later.

Look here:
http://www.spyroforum.com/topic-3912-13 … =originals

I never said anything about the voice acting, I liked the voice acting on the old ones too.

They did have many cutscenes, but many of them weren't really anything special, in Spyro 2 + 3, they had random cutscenes at the beginning and end of each level, and the beginning and end of each zone. Only the ones at the beginning and end of each zone had meaning to them. Sure, the ones per level were funny, but they didn't merge together.

The backstories per level were nice small touches, but nothing really special. We never learned "why" Sparx needs to go into the holes and defeat bugs and crabs, he just does...

Let me put the longetivity in each game in different terms. When you just started playing the old ones, you could beat them in 6 hours because they were so easy. The new ones? Sure, you could beat them in 6 hours if you knew what you were doing, but I doubt anyone could beat the games in 6 hours if they never played them before. TEN was most likely the hardest game in either series, because of the hard bosses and the fights.

I laugh at when you said they should be longer because they are newer... Yes, they would be longer if they made it with bad graphics like the old ones (not saying the old ones had bad graphics for their time), but you need to think of the type of detail they put into their games for the newer ones...

But anyway, I liked the old ones, they gave nice games, but it had horrible story-lines and were WAY too easy... I can play them all in 6 hours each from start to finish, maybe not get 100%, but yes from start to finish...

The new games imho are much better. Sure, many people disliked them, but I don't care, I find that the newer games own the older ones in hundreds of ways...

Sorry, but i cant fight the urge to debate.
THe storylines are very simple, but the voice acting was some ofd the best for the day, and atleast Spyro 2 and Spyro 3 has around 20 cutscenes and a twist. Not to mention every level and every minigame had a backstory. Also, While You coould beat Spyro 1, 2, and 3 in 6 hours each, not 100%, you can easily beat each TLOS game in 6 hourseach TOO! and they should be longer as they were made later.

Look here:
http://www.spyroforum.com/topic-3912-13 … =originals

But anyway, I liked the old ones, they gave nice games, but it had horrible story-lines and were WAY too easy... I can play them all in 6 hours each from start to finish, maybe not get 100%, but yes from start to finish...

The new games imho are much better. Sure, many people disliked them, but I don't care, I find that the newer games own the older ones in hundreds of ways...

Same.  They were alright and had their quirks, but they didn't hold my interest long enough to actually beat the games unlike the ones from A Hero's Tail -> Dawn of the Dragon (exclude any GBA Spyro games).  If I can find some copies of Spyro 1-3, I might give them one more shot to actually play and beat them to give a full opinion.  But for now...yeah, I prefer the new series.