darkSpyro

Before we start this, can we please try to keep this topic away from discussion about which series is better? That's not what this is about and we have tons of other topics to talk about that anyway.

Anyways...

Often during original verses LoS debates, fans of the original games will claim that the new games are "not the true Spyro." Sometimes LoS fans will respond by saying things like "I'll like anything as long as it's Spyro" and "They're really the same games."

Despite all the differences in the series, such as...

• Characters
  
• Atmosphere
  
• Gameplay
  
• Storyline
  
• Graphics
  

...some people will still try to claim that the new Spyro is still "the same purple dragon we all know and love." On the other hand, those that say LoS isn't really Spyro lose points due to the fact that "Spyro" is, in fact, written on the cover of the games.

So on to the questions...

1. What do you guys think is the definition of Spyro?
   
2. At what point, if any, would Spyro (based on your definition of it) be so different that you would no longer consider it Spyro?
   
3. Do you think it make sense to follow the Spyro franchise and love every game no matter what direction it takes?
   

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

1. Greatest thing ever
2. I will not think of spyro the same way when spyro is evil or he is mean
3. I probably would buy every game no matter what, but I won't really love the game no matter what

What I think the definition of Spyro splits into two categories: Genre of the game and Character personality.

These are what define Spyro to be Spyro, IMHO. He started out as a very energetic kid dragon, who didn't like doing chores, or going to school, or doing anything responsible (just like a kid would behave). Yet, he was always eager to kick, roast, and charge bad guy booty when he got the chance. At this time, he didn't do it because it was the right thing to do, he did it because it fit his needs, and it just so happen to help everyone else around him. Now, we can say that Spyro felt some responsibility fall upon him, when the dragons where trapped in STD, and especially YOTD, but judging by his character in the Origins of his games, he would've probably had some fun with elders before releasing them, or do some speed runs or whatever.

This is what I grew up with, and honestly this is how I recognize Spyro to be. Others who are new and play LOS, will follow the same logic. They played LOS first and recognize Spyro to be like Gary (TLOS Spyro). However, Gary and Spyro are not the same dragon just because they share the same name, both are purple dragons, and both were destined to be something great. Their personalities are so different that its not even a 180° from each other. Because if it was, then that would mean that Gary is Anti-Spyro while Spyro is Anti-Gary. To me, both Gary and Spyro's personalities are of two different spectrums of character.

As such, they are not the same dragon, nor character. Although both might share some traits, such as willing to help those in need, both take different approaches in doing so. Spyro wouldn't act all serious, and "destiny driven", he would do it his own way, or do so with some feeling. Gary would do it because he is suppose to do it, not because he feels the need to do it, or does it because its the right thing to do. Now that can be argued but I'll leave it at that for now.

Now for Game genre. . . This is too easy to tell that TLOS is not Spyro the Dragon. Both are two completely different genres, both have different ways to obtain the goals, finish the level, and how to play the game. While the Origins of Spyro (First trilogy in case those of you who are lost) had you collect, and explore through a simple, yet at times very challenging, atmosphere of enemies, puzzles, and platmforming. While LOS simply has you on a path that you can either go forward or back, and fight waves, after waves of enemies in order to advance.

The Origins did have you fight enemies with the clever idea of having enemies be gems, or spirit particles, something that you needed to collect to advance. Now if your aiming for 100% then you need to get all of these little suckers, if not, no prob, you can skip them and come back later. Because of that fact, the enemies couldn't be too hard (aimed at kids). They had to be simple yet at times funny to kill. In LOS you can only do that so rarely. Now true, you can run away and come back, but you can't advance until you defeat all the waves of enemies. IMHO, The Origins made Spyro lovable, and for those of us who been with him for that long, and we see TLOS, we take a step back and are dumbfounded and puzzled by the title on the front cover.

Spyro in terms of game wise, is no longer Spyro if what made him lovable is no longer recognizable or simply there to be there. If it has no heart, no soul, no feeling, no essence to it, then its just another cookie cutter game with a beloved and well know character slapped in there for no good reason but to try to make a quick buck. Because of that fact, I will not buy a Spyro game just because Spyro or "Spyro" is in it or is on the title. I don't have any of his GBA games because I don't like hand-held games to begin with, and simply put. . . well I don't like they way it looks (Story or purpose of the game) and . . . I just don't like hand-helds.

I don't think it will be wise to follow Spyro wherever he goes. For I loved Spyro because he gave me something that I can cherish as a part of my childhood. But for those who have control of Spyro no longer rekindle or bring that back, or do better for Spyro, then I see no need to give them what they want, money. Its the simple, Supply and Demand. I demand Spyro go back to his origins, then I'll supply you the goods to keep making them. If my demands are not met, then I'll go elsewhere. That simple.

Quote: RubyWings91

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

Agreed. Spyro is always cool IMO, but they're two different Spyro with different world, two different games. So I think that this is why people can not say "if somone like one, dislike the other"

Anyway, I agree with Ruby, Spyro is only a name of two little dragons, very different, that have two different own series.

Quote: Zackeio

What I think the definition of Spyro splits into two categories: Genre of the game and Character personality.

These are what define Spyro to be Spyro, IMHO. He started out as a very energetic kid dragon, who didn't like doing chores, or going to school, or doing anything responsible (just like a kid would behave). Yet, he was always eager to kick, roast, and charge bad guy booty when he got the chance. At this time, he didn't do it because it was the right thing to do, he did it because it fit his needs, and it just so happen to help everyone else around him. Now, we can say that Spyro felt some responsibility fall upon him, when the dragons where trapped in STD, and especially YOTD, but judging by his character in the Origins of his games, he would've probably had some fun with elders before releasing them, or do some speed runs or whatever.

This is what I grew up with, and honestly this is how I recognize Spyro to be. Others who are new and play LOS, will follow the same logic. They played LOS first and recognize Spyro to be like Gary (TLOS Spyro). However, Gary and Spyro are not the same dragon just because they share the same name, both are purple dragons, and both were destined to be something great. Their personalities are so different that its not even a 180° from each other. Because if it was, then that would mean that Gary is Anti-Spyro while Spyro is Anti-Gary. To me, both Gary and Spyro's personalities are of two different spectrums of character.

As such, they are not the same dragon, nor character. Although both might share some traits, such as willing to help those in need, both take different approaches in doing so. Spyro wouldn't act all serious, and "destiny driven", he would do it his own way, or do so with some feeling. Gary would do it because he is suppose to do it, not because he feels the need to do it, or does it because its the right thing to do. Now that can be argued but I'll leave it at that for now.

Now for Game genre. . . This is too easy to tell that TLOS is not Spyro the Dragon. Both are two completely different genres, both have different ways to obtain the goals, finish the level, and how to play the game. While the Origins of Spyro (First trilogy in case those of you who are lost) had you collect, and explore through a simple, yet at times very challenging, atmosphere of enemies, puzzles, and platmforming. While LOS simply has you on a path that you can either go forward or back, and fight waves, after waves of enemies in order to advance.

The Origins did have you fight enemies with the clever idea of having enemies be gems, or spirit particles, something that you needed to collect to advance. Now if your aiming for 100% then you need to get all of these little suckers, if not, no prob, you can skip them and come back later. Because of that fact, the enemies couldn't be too hard (aimed at kids). They had to be simple yet at times funny to kill. In LOS you can only do that so rarely. Now true, you can run away and come back, but you can't advance until you defeat all the waves of enemies. IMHO, The Origins made Spyro lovable, and for those of us who been with him for that long, and we see TLOS, we take a step back and are dumbfounded and puzzled by the title on the front cover.

Spyro in terms of game wise, is no longer Spyro if what made him lovable is no longer recognizable or simply there to be there. If it has no heart, no soul, no feeling, no essence to it, then its just another cookie cutter game with a beloved and well know character slapped in there for no good reason but to try to make a quick buck. Because of that fact, I will not buy a Spyro game just because Spyro or "Spyro" is in it or is on the title. I don't have any of his GBA games because I don't like hand-held games to begin with, and simply put. . . well I don't like they way it looks (Story or purpose of the game) and . . . I just don't like hand-helds.

I don't think it will be wise to follow Spyro wherever he goes. For I loved Spyro because he gave me something that I can cherish as a part of my childhood. But for those who have control of Spyro no longer rekindle or bring that back, or do better for Spyro, then I see no need to give them what they want, money. Its the simple, Supply and Demand. I demand Spyro go back to his origins, then I'll supply you the goods to keep making them. If my demands are not met, then I'll go elsewhere. That simple.

I couldn't have said it any better. :D

I agree with this completely. ;D

Quote: DarkCynder_543

Quote: Zackeio

What I think the definition of Spyro splits into two categories: Genre of the game and Character personality.

These are what define Spyro to be Spyro, IMHO. He started out as a very energetic kid dragon, who didn't like doing chores, or going to school, or doing anything responsible (just like a kid would behave). Yet, he was always eager to kick, roast, and charge bad guy booty when he got the chance. At this time, he didn't do it because it was the right thing to do, he did it because it fit his needs, and it just so happen to help everyone else around him. Now, we can say that Spyro felt some responsibility fall upon him, when the dragons where trapped in STD, and especially YOTD, but judging by his character in the Origins of his games, he would've probably had some fun with elders before releasing them, or do some speed runs or whatever.

This is what I grew up with, and honestly this is how I recognize Spyro to be. Others who are new and play LOS, will follow the same logic. They played LOS first and recognize Spyro to be like Gary (TLOS Spyro). However, Gary and Spyro are not the same dragon just because they share the same name, both are purple dragons, and both were destined to be something great. Their personalities are so different that its not even a 180° from each other. Because if it was, then that would mean that Gary is Anti-Spyro while Spyro is Anti-Gary. To me, both Gary and Spyro's personalities are of two different spectrums of character.

As such, they are not the same dragon, nor character. Although both might share some traits, such as willing to help those in need, both take different approaches in doing so. Spyro wouldn't act all serious, and "destiny driven", he would do it his own way, or do so with some feeling. Gary would do it because he is suppose to do it, not because he feels the need to do it, or does it because its the right thing to do. Now that can be argued but I'll leave it at that for now.

Now for Game genre. . . This is too easy to tell that TLOS is not Spyro the Dragon. Both are two completely different genres, both have different ways to obtain the goals, finish the level, and how to play the game. While the Origins of Spyro (First trilogy in case those of you who are lost) had you collect, and explore through a simple, yet at times very challenging, atmosphere of enemies, puzzles, and platmforming. While LOS simply has you on a path that you can either go forward or back, and fight waves, after waves of enemies in order to advance.

The Origins did have you fight enemies with the clever idea of having enemies be gems, or spirit particles, something that you needed to collect to advance. Now if your aiming for 100% then you need to get all of these little suckers, if not, no prob, you can skip them and come back later. Because of that fact, the enemies couldn't be too hard (aimed at kids). They had to be simple yet at times funny to kill. In LOS you can only do that so rarely. Now true, you can run away and come back, but you can't advance until you defeat all the waves of enemies. IMHO, The Origins made Spyro lovable, and for those of us who been with him for that long, and we see TLOS, we take a step back and are dumbfounded and puzzled by the title on the front cover.

Spyro in terms of game wise, is no longer Spyro if what made him lovable is no longer recognizable or simply there to be there. If it has no heart, no soul, no feeling, no essence to it, then its just another cookie cutter game with a beloved and well know character slapped in there for no good reason but to try to make a quick buck. Because of that fact, I will not buy a Spyro game just because Spyro or "Spyro" is in it or is on the title. I don't have any of his GBA games because I don't like hand-held games to begin with, and simply put. . . well I don't like they way it looks (Story or purpose of the game) and . . . I just don't like hand-helds.

I don't think it will be wise to follow Spyro wherever he goes. For I loved Spyro because he gave me something that I can cherish as a part of my childhood. But for those who have control of Spyro no longer rekindle or bring that back, or do better for Spyro, then I see no need to give them what they want, money. Its the simple, Supply and Demand. I demand Spyro go back to his origins, then I'll supply you the goods to keep making them. If my demands are not met, then I'll go elsewhere. That simple.

I couldn't have said it any better.

I agree with this completely.

I second that :0!

Quote: Kimbia28

Quote: DarkCynder_543

Quote: Zackeio

What I think the definition of Spyro splits into two categories: Genre of the game and Character personality.

These are what define Spyro to be Spyro, IMHO. He started out as a very energetic kid dragon, who didn't like doing chores, or going to school, or doing anything responsible (just like a kid would behave). Yet, he was always eager to kick, roast, and charge bad guy booty when he got the chance. At this time, he didn't do it because it was the right thing to do, he did it because it fit his needs, and it just so happen to help everyone else around him. Now, we can say that Spyro felt some responsibility fall upon him, when the dragons where trapped in STD, and especially YOTD, but judging by his character in the Origins of his games, he would've probably had some fun with elders before releasing them, or do some speed runs or whatever.

This is what I grew up with, and honestly this is how I recognize Spyro to be. Others who are new and play LOS, will follow the same logic. They played LOS first and recognize Spyro to be like Gary (TLOS Spyro). However, Gary and Spyro are not the same dragon just because they share the same name, both are purple dragons, and both were destined to be something great. Their personalities are so different that its not even a 180° from each other. Because if it was, then that would mean that Gary is Anti-Spyro while Spyro is Anti-Gary. To me, both Gary and Spyro's personalities are of two different spectrums of character.

As such, they are not the same dragon, nor character. Although both might share some traits, such as willing to help those in need, both take different approaches in doing so. Spyro wouldn't act all serious, and "destiny driven", he would do it his own way, or do so with some feeling. Gary would do it because he is suppose to do it, not because he feels the need to do it, or does it because its the right thing to do. Now that can be argued but I'll leave it at that for now.

Now for Game genre. . . This is too easy to tell that TLOS is not Spyro the Dragon. Both are two completely different genres, both have different ways to obtain the goals, finish the level, and how to play the game. While the Origins of Spyro (First trilogy in case those of you who are lost) had you collect, and explore through a simple, yet at times very challenging, atmosphere of enemies, puzzles, and platmforming. While LOS simply has you on a path that you can either go forward or back, and fight waves, after waves of enemies in order to advance.

The Origins did have you fight enemies with the clever idea of having enemies be gems, or spirit particles, something that you needed to collect to advance. Now if your aiming for 100% then you need to get all of these little suckers, if not, no prob, you can skip them and come back later. Because of that fact, the enemies couldn't be too hard (aimed at kids). They had to be simple yet at times funny to kill. In LOS you can only do that so rarely. Now true, you can run away and come back, but you can't advance until you defeat all the waves of enemies. IMHO, The Origins made Spyro lovable, and for those of us who been with him for that long, and we see TLOS, we take a step back and are dumbfounded and puzzled by the title on the front cover.

Spyro in terms of game wise, is no longer Spyro if what made him lovable is no longer recognizable or simply there to be there. If it has no heart, no soul, no feeling, no essence to it, then its just another cookie cutter game with a beloved and well know character slapped in there for no good reason but to try to make a quick buck. Because of that fact, I will not buy a Spyro game just because Spyro or "Spyro" is in it or is on the title. I don't have any of his GBA games because I don't like hand-held games to begin with, and simply put. . . well I don't like they way it looks (Story or purpose of the game) and . . . I just don't like hand-helds.

I don't think it will be wise to follow Spyro wherever he goes. For I loved Spyro because he gave me something that I can cherish as a part of my childhood. But for those who have control of Spyro no longer rekindle or bring that back, or do better for Spyro, then I see no need to give them what they want, money. Its the simple, Supply and Demand. I demand Spyro go back to his origins, then I'll supply you the goods to keep making them. If my demands are not met, then I'll go elsewhere. That simple.

I couldn't have said it any better.

I agree with this completely.

I second that :0!

I third it!

Quote: RubyWings91

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

I completely agree.

Quote: Darby

Quote: RubyWings91

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

I completely agree.

I agree as well.

Quote: Aura24

Quote: Darby

Quote: RubyWings91

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

I completely agree.

I agree as well.

Same.

hahaha its a quote war

Quote: RubyWings91

I consider both Spyro's equally real but two totally different identities. For me, each exists within his own series and cannot be compared to the other.

As for whether or not I think we should love every Spyro game that's made: No, I don't. It's like saying we should love every flavor of ice cream, just because alot of them are great. The quality of each game is different and sometimes people don't get what they expected. People have favorites and least favorites but are always on the look out for the next game, waiting to find out if they'll like it.

ya know i definately agree w/ you. As for me I would actually enjoy any Spyro game they make because......well.......its Spyro and I cant say that I have a favourite or least favourite cause they are all equal in my eyes. To me the only thing that makes classic Spyro different from LoS Spyro are the character models and the use of air and ground combat and fury attacks. Thats just my oppinion. Everyone has their own opinions.

Heck the only Spyro I consider, "the true Spyro" are the games made by Insomniac, and ETD, because that game is the closest to the first three games.

Quote: Spyroo

Quote: Kimbia28

Quote: DarkCynder_543

I couldn't have said it any better.

I agree with this completely.

I second that :0!

I third it!

Z-Zackieo... That was... perfect! Honestly, I literally could not say that any better or add more to it! Bravo! BRAVO!

too much tl;dr in this topic.

to me, its basically the existence of a young purple dragon protecting various worlds. I don't really mind how they change him, unless they turn him into a complete tard or something like that

1. The Definition of Spyro - a Short childish Purple Dragon who has magical adventures, travelling in different worlds in amazing areas.
   
2. In my opinion, that would be tLoS form me. It's got different story, gameplay and stuff. Not Spyro.
   
3. No. It's not right to follow it just because it's Spyro.
   

This is my opinion of course. Don't want an argument here.

Quote: Ghakimx

too much tl;dr in this topic.

to me, its basically the existence of a young purple dragon protecting various worlds. I don't really mind how they change him, unless they turn him into a complete tard or something like that

^This. I completely agree.

Quote: Aura24

Quote: Ghakimx

too much tl;dr in this topic.

to me, its basically the existence of a young purple dragon protecting various worlds. I don't really mind how they change him, unless they turn him into a complete tard or something like that

^This. I completely agree.

I second that agreement...

Spyro; A purple dragon.

Yeah, that's pretty much my definition of it. The first game also has the definition of "Mario, but inversed", and the second, "Mario, but...ah, whatever", but that's a topic entirely different.

Quote: Malefor0001

1. The Definition of Spyro - a Short childish Purple Dragon who has magical adventures, travelling in different worlds in amazing areas.
   
2. In my opinion, that would be tLoS form me. It's got different story, gameplay and stuff. Not Spyro.
   
3. No. It's not right to follow it just because it's Spyro.
   

This is my opinion of course. Don't want an argument here.

I agree. And especially with the last point. If you're only following now because it's Spyro, then that must mean you don't truly like the knew games, because you're only playing them because it has SPYRO in the title, or the main character happens to be a purple dragon.

If you like the new games, that's great!

But I do think if you're only following him because it's a purple dragon called Spyro..... It's kinda naive. And it's how companies believe people are 'stupid' enough to follow whatever they do, so games can go downhill because of it.

what is spyro? interesting question... i think that, imo, spyro is that carefree little dragon that we all love! he was a hero to me and many others in the original game when i was younger. young, feisty, ignorant, and just plain awesome, he was someone most people could relate to.

tlos, on the other hand, was hard. i was confused at first, wondering who this new dragon was, and how he ended up with the same name as my favorite game character. once i got to know this legendary dragon, i came to the conclusion that this dragon wasn't spyro, but a caring, respectful, destiny-driven dragon on a mission to save the planet and teach strange lessons.

tlos is not spyro. he is a purple dragon with the same name. that is the only reason that i even play tlos; because of the name. and, because i remember the old games, and my hero when i was six, i hold on to spyro, but have to live with the fact that spyro is gone and a new dragon with the same name has taken his place.

so i would still play any new spyro game, but respect that this new spyro is a stranger. i will always play any new spyro game, but i can't gaurantee that i'll like it.

and sorry for no caps! i'm using one hand and it's really hard to capitalize a letter!

1. Spyro is the purple dragon that saves the world, kicks whatever stupid enemy's butt that tries to kill him, and breaths random stuff out of his mouth.

2. Spyro would stop being Spyro if he: One: Stopped being purple. Two: Actually LIKED Ember. Three: Failed. Four: began to show severe signs of ageing. Five: His attitude changed so that it was totally NOT the funny purple dragon we all know and love for one reason or another. Six and final: Didn't breath random stuff out of his mouth.

3. No. That's not that smart. Unless you plan on having the full collectors set, just go with the games that you like. Ad if you find that you don't like one, just return it. Don't try to convince yourself that you actually love it, just because it has Spyro in it. I love the AHT game, and I love the TLoS Games, even though i can't seem to get past thegiant monkey creep in the second game...........

um... what do people think of my opinion? (i don't mind if people dissagree)

I think you have a good point. but I personally like the newer Spyros better. They look more regal, like the purple dragon is actually going to SAVE the world, not just crack jokes for a lot of the time. Y'know? And you do agree that if Spyro wasn't purple, he wouldn't be Spyro, right?

Yes, non-purple Spyr just wouldn't be spyro. :nod: And I can understand that you like tlos better (i'm not someone who argues over which is better). I completely respect your opinion, and tlos isn't that bad. It's fun to play at times, actually.

Personally, I just don't like the ETD game. I found it hard to play, with to few abilities, and just plain old didn't like the way Spyro looked. I took that game back. I respect if you love that game, but I personally couldn't play it. Literally, I couldn't play it, and I'm 14.

Spyro is the same dragon in both series but has a different upbringing, storyline and environment in the two.

either that or

Quote: Queen_Cynder

what is spyro? interesting question... i think that, imo, spyro is that carefree little dragon that we all love! he was a hero to me and many others in the original game when i was younger. young, feisty, ignorant, and just plain awesome, he was someone most people could relate to.

tlos, on the other hand, was hard. i was confused at first, wondering who this new dragon was, and how he ended up with the same name as my favorite game character. once i got to know this legendary dragon, i came to the conclusion that this dragon wasn't spyro, but a caring, respectful, destiny-driven dragon on a mission to save the planet and teach strange lessons.

tlos is not spyro. he is a purple dragon with the same name. that is the only reason that i even play tlos; because of the name. and, because i remember the old games, and my hero when i was six, i hold on to spyro, but have to live with the fact that spyro is gone and a new dragon with the same name has taken his place.

so i would still play any new spyro game, but respect that this new spyro is a stranger. i will always play any new spyro game, but i can't gaurantee that i'll like it.

and sorry for no caps! i'm using one hand and it's really hard to capitalize a letter!

That's what I think. To me, Legend Spyro is a completely different dragon, but he just has the same name as the dragon we all love.

Quote: Queen_Cynder

what is spyro? interesting question... i think that, imo, spyro is that carefree little dragon that we all love! he was a hero to me and many others in the original game when i was younger. young, feisty, ignorant, and just plain awesome, he was someone most people could relate to.

tlos, on the other hand, was hard. i was confused at first, wondering who this new dragon was, and how he ended up with the same name as my favorite game character. once i got to know this legendary dragon, i came to the conclusion that this dragon wasn't spyro, but a caring, respectful, destiny-driven dragon on a mission to save the planet and teach strange lessons.

tlos is not spyro. he is a purple dragon with the same name. that is the only reason that i even play tlos; because of the name. and, because i remember the old games, and my hero when i was six, i hold on to spyro, but have to live with the fact that spyro is gone and a new dragon with the same name has taken his place.

so i would still play any new spyro game, but respect that this new spyro is a stranger. i will always play any new spyro game, but i can't gaurantee that i'll like it.

and sorry for no caps! i'm using one hand and it's really hard to capitalize a letter!

i will agree w/ you on.....well.......pretty much everything so far. I mean the TLoS games are fun to me because they are chalenging but the older games fit Spyro better. The new ones do to in some cases but I have been playing these games ever since the first one came out which was i think 1998. I could be wrong but anyway I have played the games since I was five years old. It was the very first video game I had ever played and I stuck with it ever since. As for the new ones.....they are ok I will give them that. but what you said was well said. good job.

Lolness, thanks. And Spyro was my first video game