Ugh.

Reo690 · Sep 18, 2008 4:36 AM

**WARNING, RANT AHEAD**

10 Years... It's been 10 whole years since I first started playing Spyro the Dragon. Looking back, I never would have even dreamed about how much the series could have crashed and burned like it had. I was a much more naive person back then.

Oh, where to begin, ETD. When this game came out, I was stunned, to say the least. After some thought, I realized that Check Six had only wanted to make a quick buck under the Spyro name. *sigh* I gave up on Spyro. I never picked up another Spyro game until ANB after this tremendous piece of crap.

Which brings me to my next point, ANB. I picked up this game after I saw on the label that Krome Studios had made it. I loved the Ty games, after all, and I thought that they could do something good with Spyro. Oh how wrong I was, when I popped the game into my PS2.

After playing it to the end, I was about as stunned as when I finished ETD. I was stupid enough NOT to look at the back of the box or the instruction manual, which probably would have saved me from playing this...game.

*sigh* I couldn't, and still can't believe that Krome would have the gall, the guts, to tear apart, and remake my favorite game series. Spyro is a goody-goody two shoes, Cynder is your average angsty character that EVERY movie or book needs /sarcasm. Sparx is an annoying twit. Ignitus is basically the only character I could even stomach (and barely at that.) Nice original name for the antagonist too, "The Dark Master" I'm shaking in my shoes.

Oh, and the plot sucks too, as all it is, is another rehash of the whole "Chosen One" thing I thought I was done with after the Matrix. Oh wait, it's "Chosen Dragon" now, that makes it totally original /sarcasm.

Not only that, but they messed with the gameplay too. Gone is the platforming of the earlier days. No, move aside for an action focus! Now, don't get me wrong, I love a good action game, but looking at the previous games, I think it's BS of the highest magnitude that Krome could do this.

Now, I know what you're thinking: But it's a reboot!11010110! But, a reboot should at least keep the gameplay and the general personality of the characters intact, not this. I could use the same argument for a GTA-clone reboot of Zelda. It would still suck though.

Spyro is dead to me. Insomniac shot the first bullet by giving up development of the games. Check Six shot the second. Eurocom added it's bullet too. Finally, Krome Studios shot it for the last time. It took six years for it to finally bleed out.

**END RANT**

Happy Birthday, Spyro.

ontels · Sep 18, 2008 4:30 PM

deep man

however I don't think that Spyro is dead. Shure the new games can't hold a candle to the old one's but I still like them.

Kazoobie64 · Sep 18, 2008 7:30 PM

I agree with most of your points. The first time I saw ANB, it was in some magazine, probably Nintendo Power, and at the time I thought it looked cool despite how ugly they made Spyro look. They kept stressing the fact that they wanted to bring back the Spyro series and re-establish everything, add some plotline, which was actually A-OK with me as long as I had my old kick-butt attitude Spyro and platforming with sheeps in UFOs. I suppose I was a little naive with the way the media world works at this point. The thing is though, despite the combat-oriented screenshots, I had no idea the game was actually going to be combat-oriented, nor did I suspect they were going to completely ignore the old timeline and add another universe, then acting like if it was the truerer universe. (IE. "The whole point of this trilogy was to re-establish these characters" Or something like that. JESUS CHRIST NO, DON'T.) Of course, then more screenshots and information started coming out, and my hopes diminished. Where is the platforming? Oh, one screenshot of Spyro gliding to some empty platform in the middle of some uninteresting dream-like realm, of course. Then the plot synopsis came out, then the trailer showing off nothing but Spyro's combat abilities, and that was enough for me. I knew exactly what it was going to be like, but I ended up renting the game anyway, and I was right. Whenever an FMV came on, I wanted to tear my skin out slowly with a spoon.

Of course, there's always Dawn of the Dragon, but even if that game turns out to be fun for me, which I doubt, (I like the flying but honestly, it just looks like it's going to have Spore syndrome. Which is "oh this is pretty neat and fun" for the first few minutes and then you get sick of doing it.) I still don't want the future games to be like that because I am never, ever going to like these characters the way they are. You already described how they are, except Cynder only moped like one time, she basically has the exact same personality as LoS Spyro, which is a bad thing. Sparx just shouldn't talk, but I can't even remember that he's even still there most of the time in these new games. Ignitus is alright but I have no freaking clue why they couldn't have just brought back an old Artisan dragon like Nestor or Lindar who share a similar personality and way of talking. Hunter, I haven't seen much of in Dawn of the Dragon but I already know I'm going to like the old one ten times more. Hunter just isn't Hunter without his sarcastic I'm-so-much-better-at-you-than-everything-even-though-you-always-beat-me attitude.

Though very little, I still have the hope that Sierra or some other company would finally go "my God, why are we doing this? Let's sit down and do this for real" and make a good Spyro game again. And I mean a SPYRO game, not some game about a purple dragon that shares his name and flies around being all noble and heroic because he's the chosen one DUHR DUHR DUHR.

Also, quite frankly, I don't know why tLoS fans are so threatened by the fact that it's possible they might consider going back to the old timeline. It could be a way better game than this trilogy, even for them. If they're just threatened by their favorite characters never appearing again I don't really see why that should happen, especially since Cynder's so popular. They could just change her character a bit, which would do her good and would match the old timeline, and she can still be in the game no problem. Remember how the first game had all these different dragons for each world? Well, maybe they could create another world, I don't know maybe dark-themed, where all the dragons are very evil-looking and Cynder could be a friend of Spyro's from that world. It's very simple, really. As for Ignitus and the other guardians, it can be the same thing, they're dragons from a certain corresponding world that guide Spyro. etc. etc.

So yeah, that would be my take on it.

Happy 10th Spyro!

Gwenio · Sep 18, 2008 11:58 PM

Reo690 wrote:

**WARNING, RANT AHEAD**
10 Years... It's been 10 whole years since I first started playing Spyro the Dragon. Looking back, I never would have even dreamed about how much the series could have crashed and burned like it had. I was a much more naive person back then.
Oh, where to begin, ETD. When this game came out, I was stunned, to say the least. After some thought, I realized that Check Six had only wanted to make a quick buck under the Spyro name. *sigh* I gave up on Spyro. I never picked up another Spyro game until ANB after this tremendous piece of crap.

It was, ans is why games must improve, not say the same.

Reo690 wrote:

Which brings me to my next point, ANB. I picked up this game after I saw on the label that Krome Studios had made it. I loved the Ty games, after all, and I thought that they could do something good with Spyro. Oh how wrong I was, when I popped the game into my PS2.
After playing it to the end, I was about as stunned as when I finished ETD. I was stupid enough NOT to look at the back of the box or the instruction manual, which probably would have saved me from playing this...game.

They did so something good on the PS2, they found a formula for a purple dragon that can save a franchise that pretty much is one failure away for ending.

Reo690 wrote:

*sigh* I couldn't, and still can't believe that Krome would have the gall, the guts, to tear apart, and remake my favorite game series. Spyro is a goody-goody two shoesCynder is your average angsty character that EVERY movie or book needs /sarcasm. Sparx is an annoying twit. Ignitus is basically the only character I could even stomach (and barely at that.) Nice original name for the antagonist too, "The Dark Master" I'm shaking in my shoes.

We have seen next to nothing on Cynder, so nothing can be said there. A "goody-goody two shoes" is infinitly better than the insufferable arogance that was found in previous games. At least the new Sparx has half a reason to exist (health meter is -1,000,000 on to his importance score in the others, a health bar is to be prefered). That is not the villain's name, his name is Malefor.

Reo690 wrote:

Oh, and the plot sucks too, as all it is, is another rehash of the whole "Chosen One" thing I thought I was done with after the Matrix. Oh wait, it's "Chosen Dragon" now, that makes it totally original /sarcasm.
Not only that, but they messed with the gameplay too. Gone is the platforming of the earlier days. No, move aside for an action focus! Now, don't get me wrong, I love a good action game, but looking at the previous games, I think it's BS of the highest magnitude that Krome could do this.

And they took time to work some platforming into the next game.

Reo690 wrote:

Now, I know what you're thinking: But it's a reboot!11010110! But, a reboot should at least keep the gameplay and the general personality of the characters intact, not this. I could use the same argument for a GTA-clone reboot of Zelda. It would still suck though.
Spyro is dead to me. Insomniac shot the first bullet by giving up development of the games. Check Six shot the second. Eurocom added it's bullet too. Finally, Krome Studios shot it for the last time. It took six years for it to finally bleed out.
**END RANT**
Happy Birthday, Spyro.

Except that it was decided that it philosophy and gameplay of the previous games was not conductive to a long term series.

Gwenio · Sep 19, 2008 12:04 AM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Also, quite frankly, I don't know why tLoS fans are so threatened by the fact that it's possible they might consider going back to the old timeline. It could be a way better game than this trilogy, even for them. If they're just threatened by their favorite characters never appearing again I don't really see why that should happen, especially since Cynder's so popular. They could just change her character a bit, which would do her good and would match the old timeline, and she can still be in the game no problem. Remember how the first game had all these different dragons for each world? Well, maybe they could create another world, I don't know maybe dark-themed, where all the dragons are very evil-looking and Cynder could be a friend of Spyro's from that world. It's very simple, really. As for Ignitus and the other guardians, it can be the same thing, they're dragons from a certain corresponding world that guide Spyro. etc. etc.
So yeah, that would be my take on it.
Happy 10th Spyro!

Were not afraid they will loose their minds and go back (lets see, the old way loses customers and the new gains customers. Which would any company choose?), we are more tired of people ranting about how they should go back.

Paranoia · Sep 19, 2008 12:13 AM

I agree with most of what you're saying Reo690. It's just that you really can't have an argument about this without someone getting angry. Some people prefer different games. I don't think shouldn't have turned Spyro into one of those games, but hey, it happened. I always liked the original series. Some people say that "gaming evolved", but I think that's just a bunch of crap. I'm sure that if developers gave old style games another chance many people would like them, and they would make a good amount of money from it. I know there isn't really any hope of the Spyro series turning back to the way it was.

That's my two cents.

Kazoobie64 · Sep 19, 2008 12:42 AM

Gwenio wrote:

(lets see, the old way loses customers and the new gains customers. Which would any company choose?)

LOL.

Enter the Dragonfly got Greatest Hits you know.

There's more people who hate this trilogy than you think. I think a logical choice would be to please the entire audience. Honestly, Spyro being a dragon is enough of a money-maker as it is; any Spyro game is going to attract the kids and less critical audience as long as it's not a complete disaster. Unfortunately, Sierra doesn't seem to care.

Gwenio wrote:

we are more tired of people ranting about how they should go back.

You can't speak for everyone, you know. I have seen actual people go "THEY BETTER NOT BRING THE OLD ONES BACK, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OLD CHARACTERS. CYNDER CYNDER CYNDER." Also, this guy said he was going to rant, why read it if you're tired of it?

Mad guns22 · Sep 19, 2008 1:53 AM

People stay in the past too much. like this... music... just about everything! I say Look forward to whats coming, and if your not, FACE IT!

Gwenio · Sep 19, 2008 2:13 AM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Gwenio wrote:
(lets see, the old way loses customers and the new gains customers. Which would any company choose?)
LOL.
Enter the Dragonfly got Greatest Hits you know.

That just means a lot of people bought it, not that a lot of people liked it.

Kazoobie64 wrote:

[There's more people who hate this trilogy than you think. I think a logical choice would be to please the entire audience. Honestly, Spyro being a dragon is enough of a money-maker as it is; any Spyro game is going to attract the kids and less critical audience as long as it's not a complete disaster. Unfortunately, Sierra doesn't seem to care.

There are more who like it than you think. And no, being a Spyro game is not enough. That is the reason for the change. And the games never focused on him being a dragon until ANB.

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Gwenio wrote:
we are more tired of people ranting about how they should go back.
You can't speak for everyone, you know. I have seen actual people go "THEY BETTER NOT BRING THE OLD ONES BACK, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OLD CHARACTERS. CYNDER CYNDER CYNDER." Also, this guy said he was going to rant, why read it if you're tired of it?

"We" means the majority on the forum that the people making the games look at.

Stormy · Sep 19, 2008 2:23 AM

[sub]And you know what I'm sick of? People telling me to "accept change." It's the same both ways, Gwenio.

The original Spyro fans are just as sick of hearing "Cynder this, Cynder that, SpyroxCynder, accept change, elemental fury combos, blah blah blah" as you are of hearing us talk about why we liked the old games better. [/sub]

Kazoobie64 · Sep 19, 2008 5:13 AM

Gwenio wrote:

Kazoobie64 wrote:
Gwenio wrote:
(lets see, the old way loses customers and the new gains customers. Which would any company choose?)
LOL.
Enter the Dragonfly got Greatest Hits you know.
That just means a lot of people bought it, not that a lot of people liked it.

And... We were on the subject of sales so thank you for proving my point.

Gwenio wrote:

There are more who like it than you think. And no, being a Spyro game is not enough. That is the reason for the change. And the games never focused on him being a dragon until ANB.

There are too many things wrong with this statement.

First, I KNOW there are a lot of people who like it, I'm on this forum, you know. However, since people who dislike the trilogy don't come on forums, most of you don't see just how many people actually dislike this series. Somethingawful forums, for example, look all you want, but you will not find a SINGLE person who likes it, I swear to you. The Let's Play Spyro thread has nothing but people talking about the old games and how awful the series are now. In lots of other places, people don't even remember that Spyro still exists beyond the first original games.

Second, being a Spyro game is not enough but it certainly helps. See: Sonic series and heck, see: Nintendo. Some people will buy any crap they give them just for the visual aspect or name. What is often the argument is that going back to the old timeline and evolving the old games to continue them will not produce good writing and a better game, which is totally far off from the truth. Look at how clever and great Sly Cooper's writing is, it has a clear unclichèd story, well-developed characters, yet the series still has an infantile and cartoony tone. What's the problem?

Third, hahaha what? Breathing fire and using his wings is not enough dragon for you? Freeing other dragons? What about all that "oh we used to have dragons here and now they're all gone and we need them to come back for magic" stuff. And oh yes, Elora and Hunter were totally not wanting a DRAGON to help them out of their predicament in Alavar, right?

Kazoobie64 wrote:

"We" means the majority on the forum that the people making the games look at.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but there's still people out there who are threatened by revertion to the old timeline, my point still stands.

Black dragon · Sep 19, 2008 7:22 AM

There will never be character like Cynder agin,she is one of the best
female dragons there are.Plenty of games have changed since they first
began the series.Sparx can somewhat help in TEN by sometimes showing you which way.

ontels · Sep 19, 2008 3:38 PM

Black dragon wrote:

There will never be character like Cynder agin,she is one of the best
female dragons there are.Plenty of games have changed since they first
began the series.Sparx can somewhat help in TEN by sometimes showing you which way.

I disagree the female dragon in drakengaurd had much more persaonality

Stormy · Sep 19, 2008 8:10 PM

Black dragon wrote:

There will never be character like Cynder agin,she is one of the best
female dragons there are.Plenty of games have changed since they first
began the series.Sparx can somewhat help in TEN by sometimes showing you which way.

[sub]Well... I don't really like Cynder. Pretty much for this reason:[/sub]

Cynder is your average angsty character that EVERY movie or book needs /sarcasm.

[sub]It's true.... She's just so... emo.... And she doesn't do anything. =/

As for the "plenty of games have changed" thing: That doesn't mean I have to like it. -__-[/sub]

Kazoobie64 · Sep 19, 2008 8:27 PM

There will never be character like Cynder agin,she is one of the best
female dragons there are.

Cyyyyyynderrrrrrrrr

--Ah! Um, what? Crap. Sorry, lost my train of thought there.

Gwenio · Sep 20, 2008 12:09 AM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

First, I KNOW there are a lot of people who like it, I'm on this forum, you know. However, since people who dislike the trilogy don't come on forums, most of you don't see just how many people actually dislike this series. Somethingawful forums, for example, look all you want, but you will not find a SINGLE person who likes it, I swear to you. The Let's Play Spyro thread has nothing but people talking about the old games and how awful the series are now. In lots of other places, people don't even remember that Spyro still exists beyond the first original games.

Chris Wilson wrote:

There are a lot of different people that like to chime in on Spyro. And you get a lot of critics over the past couple of years. They have often been very critical of the games because they have played Spyro in the original Insomniac games and they are really quick to point out any flaws that exist in the new direction. But they were not necessarily going to buy it anyway. We really wanted to have something that was going to have a lot of appeal to what our target was, and to help establish a new fanbase. It is very difficult to maintain a fanbase over the years.

Michael Graham wrote:

And knowing that, knowing that it had lost some of its original fanbase over the years, it was not a matter about trying to get them back. That was sort of a lost cause we were feeling. And so it made more sense to really start to appeal to a new fanbase. And what has been great is that there have been many fans, who have chimed in via the fan forums, and they have stayed on board and liked the new direction. In fact some of them even prefer it, even though they have still been a bit polarized. They enjoyed the story. We are hoping that with this year’s game we are able to not only deliver on the story, but the gameplay as well

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Second, being a Spyro game is not enough but it certainly helps. See: Sonic series and heck, see: Nintendo. Some people will buy any crap they give them just for the visual aspect or name. What is often the argument is that going back to the old timeline and evolving the old games to continue them will not produce good writing and a better game, which is totally far off from the truth. Look at how clever and great Sly Cooper's writing is, it has a clear unclichèd story, well-developed characters, yet the series still has an infantile and cartoony tone. What's the problem?

But selling "any crap" clearly does not work for Spyro, as he was at the point of having to choose between change or extinction.

Michael Graham wrote:

Quite honestly, you know, based on the history and the way that Spyro was doing, it was either do that or we were not going to be seeing anymore games.

Chris Wilson wrote:

So basically we were faced with the choice to retire the character, or we knew we had to do something.

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Third, hahaha what? Breathing fire and using his wings is not enough dragon for you? Freeing other dragons? What about all that "oh we used to have dragons here and now they're all gone and we need them to come back for magic" stuff. And oh yes, Elora and Hunter were totally not wanting a DRAGON to help them out of their predicament in Alavar, right?

Flying UFOs... nope. That does not sound like a dragon to me.

Chris Wilson wrote:

So yeah, that was largely it, and we had a very clear idea that he is a dragon, and that we needed to focus on creating a world for a dragon. No more riding in tanks or flying a UFO.

Source

Stormy · Sep 20, 2008 12:42 AM

[sub]So basically, you're judging the games because Spyro isn't enough of a dragon for you. I see.

"Epic dragon" stories just kind of seem nerdy and annoying to me; it comes off in TLoS especially as trying too hard. I liked the originals because they had just the right level of seriousness versus sillyness, if that makes any sense. They didn't put any emphasis on things like Spyro being a "chosen one" or a "special purple dragon" or anything like that.

And as for Spyro "having to change," there wouldn't have been any need for that had it not been for games like ETD. T___T[/sub]

Kazoobie64 · Sep 20, 2008 12:49 AM

Gwenio wrote:

But selling "any crap" clearly does not work for Spyro, as he was at the point of having to choose between change or extinction.

Mostly because everyone else gave up on it, these guys didn't let it rest in peace. To some, it is already extinct. These games are nothing like Spyro, so why should they be considered revivals of the "Spyro series?"

"A change" has endless possibilities, and a lot of them don't require completely exterminating the previous timeline. To me, whoever doesn't take the time to find a way to work with they already have and instead decide to completely reboot everything is just being lazy and disrespectful to what the other company established. I can already come up with something that could have been done to continue from Year of the Dragon, and it doesn't need all these things that we've seen a million times before in other videogames. Just that, a basis, then you sit down and work with it. Let's take Pixar. At the time of coming up with Ratatouille, they were probably in an elevator and thought "hmm, how about a movie about a rat that can cook?" What a crap-sounding basis, right? But they knew how to sit down and execute that idea and made it great.

Also, A Hero's Tail wasn't change? It seemed incredibly different to me. Spyro didn't even have the same personality. Not even the old one was that smug. Not that it was a good change or anything, I found it just as awful but at least more bearable than ANB and TEN. Button-mashing doesn't hold an interest to me for that long.

Gwenio wrote:

Flying UFOs... nope. That does not sound like a dragon to me.
Source

Do I really have to read that again? I already got sick reading it the first time.

So of course, we have to ignore every other dragon-like quality that Spyro had just because he does other silly things that based on only your interpretation, aren't dragon-like? Hey, a blue hedgehog that runs at the speed of light and wears shoes and gloves aren't very hegehoggy to me, maybe they should change that.

The fact that Spyro was a dragon back then was purely for the gameplay aspect. They wanted you to control something that glides, charges, breathes fire and the works. To match the fact that we're controlling a dragon we have to go into a fantastical sort of game and art direction.

I actually found it a lot more refreshing and unique that the Spyro back then wasn't treated as the typical MAJESTIC AND GRACEFUL creature that is the dragon. No, he's short, so he's at a disadvantage, but somehow, he's still a hero. He is treated as a normal being in a realm full of equally bizarre creatures, such as a flying penguin. Unfortunately, dragons themselves are a typical cliché, so making it like this sort of satirical cartoon-like game involving all the creatures you see a billion times in fantasy stories was a clever move. The game's attitute was "oh yeah, dragons, we get enough of those in literature. But as we can see in this game, they're just like you and me! See? That dragon there is being interviewed for a news show by some other dragon, look at the microphone and everything" and I loved it.

ratchet · Sep 20, 2008 1:09 AM

Flying UFOs... nope. That does not sound like a dragon to me.

Just because Spyro is a dragon, doesn't mean you have to make a game Resembling the stereotypical Dragon world.
This is what agrovates me, Everyone thinks cause Spyro is a Dragon "OMG TIZ A GAME BOUT A DRAGON IN A MEDI3V1L FANT4SY W0RLD", SPYRO WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE THAT.

LIVE WITH IT!

Dont worry, there are 1000s of Spyro fan out there that share your opinion, but many say "Well you can expect change cause its a rebbot" blindly, but hello, THE BLOODY REBOOT IS THE THING WE'RE ANGRY ABOUT!
Many Games Change: Yeah, But they dont completely destroy what they originally were, creating a whole different thing is what different series are for. I mean, Just immagine that after the next Conker game they said "Ok, the series is gone to the crapper, why dont we make a game about a cute squirrel who lives in a forst and collects nuts and helps his fellow forest critters, i mean THAT WOULD SUIT THE WORLD FOR A SQUIRREL. I mean c'mon, A Dragon is a bloody creature of myth, how are we supposed to know what its world would be like! Mario has changed but has still kept What Mario was, they've kept all they're characters, the same storyline, the same items, the same enemies etc. I absolutely sdispise people who says things like "mario changed, but people still like him" because face it, he hasn't changed. The same goes for people who say "Spyro has grown up, you should too". I dont find TLOS "Grown up", its way to cliche for most adults to actually like the storyline, and the whole thing about "Spyro and Cynder trapped in time for 3 years and grow" is just plain silly, How can Someone grow in Ice, And they're trapped in TIME for god's sake.
Some people call The originals kiddy, but thats just cause they are searching of ways to ridicule the originals but fail miserably. I ask you to play something like Banjo Kazooie, the 3rd highest rated 3d platformer of all time that has a huge fanbase and then call Spyro Kiddy. Spyro was a game that appealed to all ages, many adults liked it, so did kids and teenagers.

So of course, we have to ignore every other dragon-like quality that Spyro had just because he does other silly things that based on only your interpretation, aren't dragon-like? Hey, a blue hedgehog that runs at the speed of light and wears shoes and gloves aren't very hegehoggy to me, maybe they should change that.
The fact that Spyro was a dragon back then was purely for the gameplay aspect. They wanted you to control something that glides, charges, breathes fire and the works. To match the fact that we're controlling a dragon we have to go into a fantastical sort of game and art direction.
I actually found it a lot more refreshing and unique that the Spyro back then wasn't treated as the typical MAJESTIC AND GRACEFUL creature that is the dragon. No, he's short, so he's at a disadvantage, but somehow, he's still a hero. He is treated as a normal being in a realm full of equally bizarre creatures, such as a flying penguin. Unfortunately, dragons themselves are a typical cliché, so making it like this sort of satirical cartoon-like game involving all the creatures you see a billion times in fantasy stories was a clever move. The game's attitute was "oh yeah, dragons, we get enough of those in literature. But as we can see in this game, they're just like you and me! See? That dragon there is being interviewed for a news show by some other dragon, look at the microphone and everything" and I loved it.

Thank you!

But selling "any crap" clearly does not work for Spyro, as he was at the point of having to choose between change or extinction.

How would you know.
People bought TLOS not knowing what to expect and dispite bad reviews, For what we know they could've thought that it was a game like the old spyro, just a prequel. I'm basicly saying that if they did release another console Platforming Spyro, It WOULD of sold well, as long as it was good.
Just cause ETD and AHT sucked pheces, doesn't mean other spyro games would.

It was, ans is why games must improve, not say the same.

TLOS is not what i call "improve"

We have seen next to nothing on Cynder, so nothing can be said there. A "goody-goody two shoes" is infinitly better than the insufferable arogance that was found in previous games. At least the new Sparx has half a reason to exist (health meter is -1,000,000 on to his importance score in the others, a health bar is to be prefered). That is not the villain's name, his name is Malefor.

1.Face it, someone has to have atleast one bad quality, lets see, TLOS Spyro has absolutely none.Atleastr Original Spyro had Something wrong.
2.Sparx has completely switched, he used to be Mainly for gameplay and small bits of narrative buts now all narrative. But anyhow, Sparx wasnt just a health bar, he also collected gems, you culd teach him abilities, he would host the speedway levels, and you can play as him in Spyro 3. To be honest, Sparx as he was in in the originals wouldn't work with TLOS as you defiently need a health bar, the same couldn't be said for the originals.
None the less, Sparx having a more in role does not say why the reboot happened, If the original spyro came back, i'm sure that they would take something from TLOS and make Sparx more involved.
3.Which we only learnt a few months ago. He's always been THe dark Master, only handful of TLOS fans called him Malefor.

HAPPY 10TH BIRTHDAY, SPYRO!

Fletch_Talon · Sep 20, 2008 5:07 AM

*imagines a world where every video game dragon has to live in a dark dreary world under siege by an evil force. where every space marine has to kick the *bleep* of lots of small aliens, a few medium aliens and 1 big alien, preferably in that order. every happy cheery video game world is for kids. every mmorpg is world of warcraft in a world that isnt necessarily warcraft*

*sheds a tear because that world is now*

but on a brighter note i will now do my impression of the average tLoS fan (its a stereotype, if its not you then dont be offended)

"youre stupid, it changed get over it"
"NO THEY WONT CHANGE BACK! THEY WONT THEY WONT THEY WONT!"

now, for all you people who seem to believe the series had to change to survive... think harder. the original series was declining because the quality of sequels was declining, that had nothing to do with the type of gameplay or the story, it had everything to do with the people responsible for the games after spyro 3 being incompetant careless morons, if they had put in as much effort to enter the dragonfly as has gone into tLoS then we'd still have spyro the way he was meant to be

heres the thing people, the change was stupid for this reason
it took away what made spyro unique, there wasnt really another platformer like it, still isnt in my opinion, mario galaxy would be closest, and whilst it has the bright happiness and to some degree the game play of the original spyro series, but it still hasnt captured the humour.

so to wrap up, heres a metaphor

original spyro
he goes to school and comes back fresh and happy, you cant help but love him cuz he's bright and cheery and cute

EtD
he's growing up but his not quite there yet, his awkward and clumsy and his voice is cracking

tLoS
hits puberty, slaps on the dark makeup and stays in his room 24/7, responds to anything resembling humour with "what-evar" and consistantly tells his birth parents (mr and mrs insomniac) that he hates them and he'll never grow up to be like them because "youre not the boss of me", and i guess thats fair enough since they did abandon him when he was kind of young

Gwenio · Sep 20, 2008 4:43 PM

ratchet wrote:

1.Face it, someone has to have atleast one bad quality, lets see, TLOS Spyro has absolutely none.Atleastr Original Spyro had Something wrong.

Off the top of my head: rashness (going into Mt. Malefor to save Cynder).

There may be other things, but they have not come out in an obvious way yet.

More will come later, but that is all I have time for at the moment.

Stormy · Sep 20, 2008 5:35 PM

now, for all you people who seem to believe the series had to change to survive... think harder. the original series was declining because the quality of sequels was declining, that had nothing to do with the type of gameplay or the story, it had everything to do with the people responsible for the games after spyro 3 being incompetant careless morons, if they had put in as much effort to enter the dragonfly as has gone into tLoS then we'd still have spyro the way he was meant to be

[sub]Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!

Also, who says the franchise had to "survive" at all? In my opinion, new Spyro is a completely different franchise that ripped off the name "Spyro", anyway. It's not that important that a character lives on; they could have just as easily created a new "special chosen dragon" to star in TLoS. Or then again, maybe not, because like Kazoobie64 said, all it has to do to sell is be a "Spyro" game. I wouldn't have looked twice at ANB had it not been titled "Spyro".

And for those of you who say that original Spyro was "childish".... Look around. The average age of TLoS fans on this forum would have to be about 12 or 13, and there are quite a few kids under 10 who like it. Which is the age of most people on this forum when they first played the originals. Hmmm. [/sub]

Kazoobie64 · Sep 20, 2008 7:12 PM

Gwenio wrote:

ratchet wrote:
1.Face it, someone has to have atleast one bad quality, lets see, TLOS Spyro has absolutely none.Atleastr Original Spyro had Something wrong.
Off the top of my head: rashness (going into Mt. Malefor to save Cynder).

Huh? That's not a fault, it's a quality that fueled his nobleness. "Oh Spyro, you're going to put yourself in danger to save someone else, you're soooooooooo noble!"

Time to read up on Mary-Sues!

Swaffy · Sep 20, 2008 7:41 PM

Stormy wrote:

And for those of you who say that original Spyro was "childish".... Look around. The average age of TLoS fans on this forum would have to be about 12 or 13, and there are quite a few kids under 10 who like it. Which is the age of most people on this forum when they first played the originals. Hmmm.

→ You are right. The 'children' on this website... some may have never played the original series, just the new. So when little kids play a game, and they like it, they say it's better than other games trying to prove a point. Yet, they should not be saying anything, because they have nothing to prove. It works just like teenagers and cell phone companies. Teenagers have a cell phone company that they have been using for a long time, and they say their company is better than everybody else's, even though they didn't try the other companies.

→ I say that some of them need to play the original series, so that they could find out why the series had a better storyline, why it had better gameplay, and see that it had more characters with completely different personalities that fit the character models. The makers of the original Spyro games seemed to have taken much more time making their series than the newer games.

→ But the Legend of Spyro series shows that all of the companies who created the games didn't take much time making them. Yes, the graphics and worlds may have taken time to make, but the gameplay was a kick in the face. I admit, though, I did like the cutscenes from the Legend of Spyro series, but killing endless amount of monkeys got very boring after a short amount of time. I also liked, in the original series, that I had to play the game for a very long time before beating it. In addition, the creaters of the old Spyro games put much more creativity into their games than what Krome and the others put into their new games.

→ When Dawn of the Dragon comes out, I hope it will be geared more towards an older audience than the Legend of Spyro series was. We know that in the pictures of Dawn of the Dragon, Spyro looks more like a dragon in his teenage years. But when it comes to gameplay, I don't want to have to kill a million monkeys to advance another 10 feet through the level.

→ Another aspect of The Legend of Spyro series, was the four elements that Spyro ends up mastering. In the old Spyro games, it was pretty fun to flame the enemies. Now, with the four 'elements', there is not much fun to killing enemies. It kind of destroys the dignity of a dragon who always breathed fire.

→ Don't take me wrong, because I still love Spyro. Like a brother.

Sonic Wrath · Sep 20, 2008 9:05 PM

Is there anything I don't agree with in that post?

Absolutley not.

#1 Sep 18, 2008 4:36 AM

Ugh.

#2 Sep 18, 2008 4:30 PM

Re: Ugh.

#3 Sep 18, 2008 7:30 PM

Re: Ugh.

#4 Sep 18, 2008 11:58 PM

Re: Ugh.

#5 Sep 19, 2008 12:04 AM

Re: Ugh.

#6 Sep 19, 2008 12:13 AM

Re: Ugh.

#7 Sep 19, 2008 12:42 AM

Re: Ugh.

#8 Sep 19, 2008 1:53 AM

Re: Ugh.

#9 Sep 19, 2008 2:13 AM

Re: Ugh.

#10 Sep 19, 2008 2:23 AM

Re: Ugh.

#11 Sep 19, 2008 5:13 AM

Re: Ugh.

#12 Sep 19, 2008 7:22 AM

Re: Ugh.

#13 Sep 19, 2008 3:38 PM

Re: Ugh.

#14 Sep 19, 2008 8:10 PM

Re: Ugh.

#15 Sep 19, 2008 8:27 PM

Re: Ugh.

#16 Sep 20, 2008 12:09 AM

Re: Ugh.

#17 Sep 20, 2008 12:42 AM

Re: Ugh.

#18 Sep 20, 2008 12:49 AM

Re: Ugh.

#19 Sep 20, 2008 1:09 AM

Re: Ugh.

#20 Sep 20, 2008 5:07 AM

Re: Ugh.

#21 Sep 20, 2008 4:43 PM

Re: Ugh.

#22 Sep 20, 2008 5:35 PM

Re: Ugh.

#23 Sep 20, 2008 7:12 PM

Re: Ugh.

#24 Sep 20, 2008 7:41 PM

Re: Ugh.

#25 Sep 20, 2008 9:05 PM

Re: Ugh.

Board footer