So three years?

Spyro Master · Feb 05, 2009 9:44 PM

Thx trasher258!! bt yeh uve gt a good point there i guess it would of taken some time to check everything over and if they did that and found errors tehy woudl hav to go bak and change them then if they cheked again and founf more errors well basicly it would go on 4 some time we must accept human error or plain laziness lol

Razz · Feb 07, 2009 8:54 PM

Does anyone have a screenshot of the old "coming soon" page that was in the "characters" section at the DotD official site? That right there is the proof that Spyro and Cynder did not age physically while in the crystal. It shows the shadows of the characters as they appeared in Krome's design style.

Spyro Master · Feb 08, 2009 12:00 AM

no i dnt bt i wished i did now uve said that oh well nvr mind its gone now sad

Sora · Feb 10, 2009 3:06 PM

I think they only changed them because they finally realized how hideous they looked in TEN. XD

What I'd like to know is why Cynder came out of the crystal and suddenly had that jewelry on again. Before I played the game I read somewhere online that she wore them to face her fear of her old self, but WHERE did she get them? And why didn't they say anything about it in the game?!

Spyro Master · Feb 10, 2009 6:26 PM

its one of the many plotholes of DOTD if u want to talk about it more i will try and get reddragon on here he usually ahs a good point to say about plotholes

Razz · Feb 10, 2009 6:38 PM

I liked the ANB/TEN character designs more than the DotD ones, personally.

As for Cynder's jewelry returning, chock it up to a plot hole induced by a change in art style (another one). Mike Graham said she put them back on to face her past but I think he was just trying to cover his bases. The way I see it, if it can't be explained in-game, it's a hole. Also, it makes no sense for Cynder to face her past by wearing symbols of imprisonment. If they'd shown her wearing them at the end of TEN, it might have made sense, but they didn't, so it doesn't.

Spyro Master · Feb 10, 2009 9:50 PM

Exactly or perhaps mabye they were left their by the grublins, as they might of taken them with them so she saw them, and mabye put them on might be a possible solution to it.

jellyspyro · Feb 14, 2009 12:59 PM

lol good qusetions! i thought at the start when they wake up in that areina place where u have to fight for the first time on the game, they should of said wow u have grown or u have changed something like that!

Spyro Master · Feb 14, 2009 2:46 PM

Yeah i supposed but i think they were more worried about where they were and where sparx had gone i think.

Razz · Feb 14, 2009 7:57 PM

And that's continued proof that they did not physically age. If they had, both of them, at some point in the game, would have acknowledged how weird it was to have gone through/started puberty.

Jackson117 · Feb 15, 2009 8:29 AM

Shows how much sierra doesn't care about stuff

Hell they made tiny gay from Crash WTF?

Razz · Feb 15, 2009 7:58 PM

Why would Sierra care? They're a defunct distribution company. big_smile Activision is now the distributor of Spyro and it's not up to them how the story works. That's the job of the people on the Spyro team and whatever developer they choose next to make their game.

T3h0v4llu · Feb 15, 2009 8:07 PM

Ive played some really awesome games published by activision... i hope they give some medical attention to spyro!

Spyro Master · Feb 15, 2009 8:31 PM

Hang on Activison is doing it? YES!!! Spyro might live through this reccession yet, thats great news to hear smile im happy now.

Razz · Feb 15, 2009 9:18 PM

Pay attention to DotD's opening credits. They bought Sierra over a year ago.

Spyro Master · Feb 15, 2009 9:28 PM

Oh year now that you have said that i remeber now, ok sorry for shouting yes there XD

#151 Feb 05, 2009 9:44 PM

Re: So three years?

#152 Feb 07, 2009 8:54 PM

Re: So three years?

#153 Feb 08, 2009 12:00 AM

Re: So three years?

#154 Feb 10, 2009 3:06 PM

Re: So three years?

#155 Feb 10, 2009 6:26 PM

Re: So three years?

#156 Feb 10, 2009 6:38 PM

Re: So three years?

#157 Feb 10, 2009 9:50 PM

Re: So three years?

#158 Feb 14, 2009 12:59 PM

Re: So three years?

#159 Feb 14, 2009 2:46 PM

Re: So three years?

#160 Feb 14, 2009 7:57 PM

Re: So three years?

#161 Feb 15, 2009 8:29 AM

Re: So three years?

#162 Feb 15, 2009 7:58 PM

Re: So three years?

#163 Feb 15, 2009 8:07 PM

Re: So three years?

#164 Feb 15, 2009 8:31 PM

Re: So three years?

#165 Feb 15, 2009 9:18 PM

Re: So three years?

#166 Feb 15, 2009 9:28 PM

Re: So three years?

Board footer