darkSpyro

well i guess it is..

I still recall hearing somewhere on this site that the LOS producers said they were focused on the younger kids as opposed to the older fans, as in the fans who were there since day one.

Quote: TheWereCat

Quote: SuperSpyroFan

I thought Jeff was being pretty ignorant, but then again, the haters are being ignorant by not giving the game a small light of chance. But then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and what they can say.

I supposed he wanted to tell the fanbase to go away so that they can make money on the people who don't know about Spyro? Perhaps they really can't be bothered with the fanbase anymore, like they want to discard it now, and start a fresh.

Makes me quite sad, truth be told...

What was the message at the end of DotD? Thanks to all the fans who stuck by our purple dragon. And yet, just one game later, the same fanbase is basically being told to go away. *Dramatic voice* Us fans helped keep the Spyro franchise alive! Was DotD really our last nod? Was its ending our ending?

Jeff wasn't talking about the long-time fans who aren't raging with negativity on Skylanders like the haters are.

"Lastly, the whole idea of bringing content via figurines and Toys for Bob’s approach to Spyro has garnered some negative reaction from longtime fans and hard-core gamers. There’s no denying that. Poffenbarger acknowledged the issue saying, "We’re not blind to that. You can read what they’re saying. But it’s not our demographic. … You have to have pretty thick skin in the industry.""

Quote: Aura24

Quote: TheWereCat

Quote: SuperSpyroFan

I thought Jeff was being pretty ignorant, but then again, the haters are being ignorant by not giving the game a small light of chance. But then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and what they can say.

I supposed he wanted to tell the fanbase to go away so that they can make money on the people who don't know about Spyro? Perhaps they really can't be bothered with the fanbase anymore, like they want to discard it now, and start a fresh.

Makes me quite sad, truth be told...

What was the message at the end of DotD? Thanks to all the fans who stuck by our purple dragon. And yet, just one game later, the same fanbase is basically being told to go away. *Dramatic voice* Us fans helped keep the Spyro franchise alive! Was DotD really our last nod? Was its ending our ending?

Jeff wasn't talking about the long-time fans who aren't raging with negativity on Skylanders like the haters are.

"Lastly, the whole idea of bringing content via figurines and Toys for Bob’s approach to Spyro has garnered some negative reaction from longtime fans and hard-core gamers. There’s no denying that. Poffenbarger acknowledged the issue saying, "We’re not blind to that. You can read what they’re saying. But it’s not our demographic. … You have to have pretty thick skin in the industry.""

I don't understand what they are trying to say.

Jeff said that he is aware of the fan's negative reaction to Toy's for Bob's approach for Spyro with toys and gaming, and stated that the long-time Spyro fans who are raging over this game aren't their main concern, since Skylanders is aimed to kids who don't know who Spyro is.

He's trying to say the haters are not the game's demographic. Which should be obvious, considering the fact they are extremely put off by every little thing about it.

^ Exactly.

Isn't there a chance that Toys for Bob will lose money since it won't be an 'everyone' type of game? Surely by ignoring the fans, aren't they going to lose money from a large fanbase? I know they'll be a few that will like the idea of it, but probably not as many as the original, and even LoS, because at least some people like myself was interested to get the game to try it out. Now for this game the majority of the fanbase doesn't even think like that, but then again, for the people who don't know Spyro, they're a lot that don't, so they still may make enough profit.

In a sense it is kind of unfair to ignore the fans in the first place with LoS. I was only interested in it at first bcause I thought it was a prequel to the first game.

I see many similarities between this and Classic, or at least I thought I saw in game collectables, and minigames and side quests. However, I think they would do well to add more previous characters.
At least Sparx, Hunter, all the playables from Spyro3, Flame, Ember, Cynder without the elaborated figure, and maybe the Guardians. They could even release design variations on Hunter and Sparx, one for classic and one for LOS.

Quote: NEW_SpyroLUVA

I see many similarities between this and Classic, or at least I thought I saw in game collectables, and minigames and side quests. However, I think they would do well to add more previous characters.
At least Sparx, Hunter, all the playables from Spyro3, Flame, Ember, Cynder without the elaborated figure, and maybe the Guardians. They could even release design variations on Hunter and Sparx, one for classic and one for LOS.

I see a few similarities too, but with all these gimmicks it has, it doesn't interest me.

No ones making you buy all the toys. You could spend the money on the game and stick with only those. Not to mention that with the inclusion of four periphereals, the Portal and three toys, and that it is only $10 more expensive than a reglular game, it's a fair deal. But if you've made up your mind, you've made up your mind. I was only say all that because it sounded to me as though you were put off by the notion that ALL the peripherals (or gimmicks as you call them) were needed to play/beat the game.

Quote: NEW_SpyroLUVA

No ones making you buy all the toys. You could spend the money on the game and stick with only those. Not to mention that with the inclusion of four periphereals, the Portal and three toys, and that it is only $10 more expensive than a reglular game, it's a fair deal. But if you've made up your mind, you've made up your mind. I was only say all that because it sounded to me as though you were put off by the notion that ALL the peripherals (or gimmicks as you call them) were needed to play/beat the game.

The initial game package is pricier in the UK, where SSF lives.

Quote: NEW_SpyroLUVA

No ones making you buy all the toys. You could spend the money on the game and stick with only those. Not to mention that with the inclusion of four periphereals, the Portal and three toys, and that it is only $10 more expensive than a reglular game, it's a fair deal. But if you've made up your mind, you've made up your mind. I was only say all that because it sounded to me as though you were put off by the notion that ALL the peripherals (or gimmicks as you call them) were needed to play/beat the game.

Thank you for explaining it to me, but for the most part, the price puts me off the most, but then again I'm sure by at least two years that the game would have come out, it maybe at a more reasonable price, but then again, there are other games that I am interested more in than this type of game at the moment, the gamplay in the trailer looks mediocre to me, nothing special. Meh, I don't know.

To address at least one thing: Activision would lose a lot of money if they pandered to Spyro fans. The honest truth is that this is a small, niche fanbase full of cantankerous people. It's a much wiser use of their resources to create a game that targets a large portion of the population (which is exactly what they're doing). As for the price...why the heck are you guys still whining about this? A normal game today costs $60. Skylanders is only $10 more and it comes with extras included that are worth a lot more than that.

Hey now, nobody's complaining. I simply pointed out how it's pricier in the UK. That price could be subject to change though, of course.

And they can't go back to the movie, since it would end up being a box office bomb, and would cost them even more money.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

He's trying to say the haters are not the game's demographic. Which should be obvious, considering the fact they are extremely put off by every little thing about it.

Which is why people should calm down and focus on other games in their demographic.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

Hey now, nobody's complaining. I simply pointed out how it's pricier in the UK. That price could be subject to change though, of course.

The 3DS' price in the US is also pretty expensive compared to the standard price of 3DS games.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

Hey now, nobody's complaining. I simply pointed out how it's pricier in the UK. That price could be subject to change though, of course.

I don't think anywhere is charging the RRP in the UK. Everywhere I've seen it it's been £50, which is only £10 more than a normal game and is understandable because of the cost to manufacture the portals/toys. Where as COD is usually £50 and all you pay for is the standalone game.

Oh wait....I was thinking of euros....
I remember it being listed as 75 euros or something, somewhere.

A normal brand new game costs 45 euros over where I live. So it is kinda steep if that's the case.

I was talking about the people who are complaining about the price, SB (and boy are there a lot of them :/ ). Over here, the average price of a game is $60, so people whining about an extra $10 (which really isn't much money) is quite pathetic.

It is silly to seriously complain about a small bit of extra money.

But those people should not be confused with another group, who would like to get the game and experience it fully. Those people have a good reason to complain a bit about the price.

I still don't think those people have any reason to complain. If they want to get the 100% experience (and I mean really want it), then they're aware that it'll cost extra. Nobody gets their panties in this kind of a bunch over DLC levels that cost money for other games, and this is the same thing. And, to put the cherry on top, the only people I've ever seen complain about this are the same whiners who don't want the game anyway. They phrase it to look like they're concerned (sort of) for other gamers when it's really just another flimsy reason they're using to complain.

Yes, but DLC levels are very cheap sometimes (they have been for my games). But in the case of Skylanders, it's not just one or two small add-ons. It's things that should be on the game disc. In my case, I see the toy thing as completely unecessary, because I can already bring my save files from pretty much any game from console to console, as can anybody else, with less complication and cost (no cost, to be exact) compared to Skylanders' method. They're basically just taking something that we can all already do, and making it more complicated, and making it costly.

True, but most DLC isn't a physical toy you can play with outside of the game, either. And most of the toys are priced at a bit cheaper than your average toy in the US already. And I can't really agree with you on this one. You're arguing on the side of older gamers who are just playing the game and nothing else. Skylanders is being aimed at kids who like toys, not teens/adults who are only interested in the game proper and nothing else.

From what I can tell, you don't even need all 32 figures to get 100% of the game. Everything that's been mentioned officially so far implies that you only need one from each element to open all of those gates.

Though not every fan can afford the main game of Skylanders due to its high price.

I can't afford Skylanders right now, myself. It's called saving up, or getting a summer job, or asking for it for a Christmas/birthday present, or doing chores until you have enough allowance. If you want anything badly enough, you've got to work for it most of the time. That's how life goes.

Fans can also get the game on their birthdays if their birthdays are around the game's release date.

You can't really play with them. They're models stuck to a stand. The only thing I can think of doing with them that classifies as playing is throwing them around.....but that could lead to them breaking.

I'm not arguing on the side of older gamers. Any kid can literally bring their save games, characters, or whatever kind of data, to their friend's house these days. And kids these days don't really go for still models on a stand, unless they are designed for personalized painting. They go for the poseable action figures and what not. The Skylanders toys don't look like kids toys at all to me. They remind me more of Warhammer, which is meant for teenagers.

That's not what I meant. It's just that, in any game with a ton of characters, I always like to try everyone of them, so I can find my favourite (can't know your favourite until you play as them). Skylanders makes that a difficult task.

Sez you. All the toys my friends and I had as kids didn't move, either, and we got tons of use out of them. I rather hope imagination hasn't atrophied so far that nobody can think of adventures to have with their figures just because they don't have moveable joints.

Do you know that for sure? Because, so far, the kids this game is aimed at are loving it according to the testing (and the developers, who have mentioned bringing their own kids in to play the game).

Maybe you could find some friends who have different figures and try playing with them to see how it goes. Or it's not impossible that a trade system on-line will start up where people mail figures to each other to try (like the paperback exchange, only with Skylanders toys).

I played with toys that didn't move.....buuuuuuuut I won't get into the crazy things I done with them..... *cough*Marioheadtiedtoaballoonandsendingitout thewindow*cough*
And with the technology inside the toys, it's like giving a kid a Playstation Memory Card with important data on it, and telling them to play with it....you'll regret it.

As far as I know, they love the game itself. And they test a very small portion of what are probably AMERICAN children. Try those same tests on Irish kids, and.....things will be VERY different.

.....How is that possible when nearly everyone I know thinks these games are for babies? Oh, and it will be like that in a lot of other areas too.
But you're really just proving my point about the toys being unecessary. I shouldn't have to go through online trading just to try out a character. I should be able to just select them on a menu screen. The toys are just making basic things more complicated. Which is ironic, because the game is supposed to be aimed at young kids. Shouldn't we be going for simplicity when making a kids game?

Haha! That sounds pretty epic. As for the toys, I imagine they've been designed to be durable. I've got a machine that's basically a laptop for kindergartners, and it's almost ten years old, so I'm sure they can make the toys able to take a beating now.

Yeah, but America is the biggest audience for this game, so the testing is still doing what it needs to. Activision is an American company, as is Toys for Bob, and Spyro is and always has been an American game (except for those recent times when they had it developed by Australian and French teams, and we all know how that turned out).

Bah. It honestly looks like you're hunting for trouble before anything is even known for certain. As for games being simple just because they're for kids...you should have seen some of the stuff they made when I was young (Mousetrap, anyone? Or that game with several hundred dominoes to set up). Skylanders is an experiment of sorts and the idea is pretty sound. Kids like games and kids like toys (so do many adults). The dev team thought it'd be a good idea to combine the two, so did Activision, and it's thus far proving successful in terms of testing and marketing. You may not like the concept personally, but a lot of people wanted toys just like this as kids and those people are pretty excited to be able to either finally get toys like this for themselves or give them to their own children.

Quote: Razz

I still don't think those people have any reason to complain. If they want to get the 100% experience (and I mean really want it), then they're aware that it'll cost extra. Nobody gets their panties in this kind of a bunch over DLC levels that cost money for other games, and this is the same thing. And, to put the cherry on top, the only people I've ever seen complain about this are the same whiners who don't want the game anyway. They phrase it to look like they're concerned (sort of) for other gamers when it's really just another flimsy reason they're using to complain.

To me this is like you're saying that other fans who are not bothered or dislike the game is not allowed to have an opinion. It just sounds like you're being completly biased towards fans that like it and that's all. And so what if fans want the original nostalgia back, I know that Aura has mentioned it, and she likes to say as if it were the terrible thing ever, making it seem like it is a big problem when it is not. Some people just like one type of gameplay, and one style of game I guess.

And anyway, I still think that they would make a large sum of money, just from simply remaking the original games, just look at how many people who so wish to have one, and look at Aura complaining about how fans want nostalgia back, well then, look at how many fans want it back, there's enough of them.

At this point, I am biased towards the actual fans. There are maybe three of them. The haters have been having their say non stop since February. It's gotten pretty old and I am, frankly, sick of hearing it (especially when they almost always say the same thing every time).

Nostalgia isn't a bad thing. Frankly, I'd be much happier myself if they just remade the Insomniac games. But that's not the reality we live in. If you're going to stick with Spyro, then this is what he is now whether you like it or not. Being hateful towards its fans and creators doesn't make anything better, it just makes the entire fanbase look bad.

I agree with you on that one, though I don't think they'd make enough money on the remakes to make all that effort and cost worthwhile, alas. It'd be awesome if that happened, though.

Quote: Razz

At this point, I am biased towards the actual fans. There are maybe three of them. The haters have been having their say non stop since February. It's gotten pretty old and I am, frankly, sick of hearing it (especially when they almost always say the same thing every time).

Nostalgia isn't a bad thing. Frankly, I'd be much happier myself if they just remade the Insomniac games. But that's not the reality we live in. If you're going to stick with Spyro, then this is what he is now whether you like it or not. Being hateful towards its fans and creators doesn't make anything better, it just makes the entire fanbase look bad.

I agree with you on that one, though I don't think they'd make enough money on the remakes to make all that effort and cost worthwhile, alas. It'd be awesome if that happened, though.

Well, everyone is entitled to their say, and I've seen a fair share of the haters and fans of Skylanders, but not enough from types like me and SB, who are just neutral towards it, I haven't seen many fans like that, and I've got a feeling that if we try to post anything, it will either sound too biased towards it, or sound like we're hating it straight away, that's because to the fans, or haters they don't seem to be open minded enough to the neutral fans.

I've seen lots of remakes of video game series and what gets me is that they aren't even as old as Spyro, I've seen an ICO remake, Splinter Cell, Tomb Raider, a couple of others, so I think Spyro should have it's time to be remade and shine once again, but that is from my point of view, it's unfair to see all these other games get remade, but Spyro get completly ignored.

It would definately be awesome, I wouldn't mind at all forking 40/50 pounds on a remake of the originals, and I bet a lot of other fans wouldn't either, see what I mean? How well it can do?

Well, fan is short for "fanatic". Neutral parties aren't usually in fandoms, so it only makes sense (sadly) that either side will read what they want in what you say.

Splinter Cell and Tomb Raider are both quite a bit older than Spyro. I can't speak for Splinter Cell, but Tomb Raider wasn't remade, just rebooted (twice now) and the anniversary game was just that: an anniversary edition. But Spyro doesn't have even an iota of the fame and status that the Tomb Raider franchise has, let alone the money. Maybe if Skylanders somehow saves this long-dying franchise, Activision might consider another reboot (of which we've had two, now) but they'd be just as likely to can it for good if it fails (honestly, I thought they had after DotD did so poorly).

I'm still with you, but like I said, this is a tiny fanbase and, let's face it, we haven't exactly done anything to make Activision want anything to do with us. They threw us a few bones in LoS, but it wasn't enough for the fans nor was it enough for the company, so they're just starting over and ignoring us for now (which we have admittedly earned at this point).

Also, in regards to the PS2 game remakes like Ico and God of War: it's very easy and cheap to slap HD graphics on a PS2 game and shove it onto a Bluray. It's very expensive to totally reconvert and update a PS1 game and get it off a game disc and onto a DVD/Blueray. In the games industry, it all boils down to money. So far, it's more cost effective to just churn out buggy digital copies of old Spyro games through the PSN, unfortunately.

Quote: Razz

Well, fan is short for "fanatic". Neutral parties aren't usually in fandoms, so it only makes sense (sadly) that either side will read what they want in what you say.

Splinter Cell and Tomb Raider are both quite a bit older than Spyro. I can't speak for Splinter Cell, but Tomb Raider wasn't remade, just rebooted (twice now) and the anniversary game was just that: an anniversary edition. But Spyro doesn't have even an iota of the fame and status that the Tomb Raider franchise has, let alone the money. Maybe if Skylanders somehow saves this long-dying franchise, Activision might consider another reboot (of which we've had two, now) but they'd be just as likely to can it for good if it fails (honestly, I thought they had after DotD did so poorly).

I'm still with you, but like I said, this is a tiny fanbase and, let's face it, we haven't exactly done anything to make Activision want anything to do with us. They threw us a few bones in LoS, but it wasn't enough for the fans nor was it enough for the company, so they're just starting over and ignoring us for now (which we have admittedly earned at this point).

Also, in regards to the PS2 game remakes like Ico and God of War: it's very easy and cheap to slap HD graphics on a PS2 game and shove it onto a Bluray. It's very expensive to totally reconvert and update a PS1 game and get it off a game disc and onto a DVD/Blueray. In the games industry, it all boils down to money. So far, it's more cost effective to just churn out buggy digital copies of old Spyro games through the PSN, unfortunately.

I sometimes wonder if I should bother coming back here again, since I'm now a neutral fan, and like you say, we don't really get a 'say' in anything, as it can go one way or the other.

The Tomb Raider remakes are of Legend, Anniversary & Underworld all on one disc on the PlayStation 3, I can tell thatthe graphics for Underworld haven't been updated, and just added onto the disc. But Legend, and Anniversary, do look great, and the controls are a lot more responsive to me then they used to be, plus you can hear the sound effects a lot clearer. I don't know when Splinter Cell came out, I thought it was just on the PS2.

They only listened to the LoS fans, not the original fans.

I honestly think that Activision would have more than enough money to remake the Spyro games from the PS1. They should have the technology to do it, they just don't want to for some strange reason. If they have enough money to make billions of toys, then they should have enough money for a project like this.

I've left in the past and it seemed to do me some good. Skylanders kind of sucked me back in, alas. One of these days, I'll find something else to hold my interest that I also want to talk with other people about.

That's a good endorsement for the collection, then. I've thought about getting it, but I got all the new TR games on Steam instead.

Alas, it's probably true. :/ Which is a shame, because few, if any, of the LoS fans have money, while the classic fans are usually adults with incomes and kids they might want to introduce to Spyro. And there's that bit about LoS having attracted some truly insane fans (and I mean that literally) who have pretty much tainted it for everyone.

It's not getting the money that's the issue. Activision has the money, but what they are concerned with is whether that amount of time and effort will be repaid. Given how small the Spyro fanbase is (especially the classic fans) and how few sales there are of remakes when compared to new properties, they're probably thinking it's not worth it. There's also the fact that Activision really hasn't been paying attention to the older fans since....ever. So why would they start now? Their last attempt to reboot the series failed, so they're putting more effort into another try.

But, who knows? For all we know, maybe they are remaking the classics with Skylander graphics and they'll release an Avalar adventure pack next year. *shrug*

Quote: Razz

I've left in the past and it seemed to do me some good. Skylanders kind of sucked me back in, alas. One of these days, I'll find something else to hold my interest that I also want to talk with other people about.

That's a good endorsement for the collection, then. I've thought about getting it, but I got all the new TR games on Steam instead.

Alas, it's probably true. :/ Which is a shame, because few, if any, of the LoS fans have money, while the classic fans are usually adults with incomes and kids they might want to introduce to Spyro. And there's that bit about LoS having attracted some truly insane fans (and I mean that literally) who have pretty much tainted it for everyone.

It's not getting the money that's the issue. Activision has the money, but what they are concerned with is whether that amount of time and effort will be repaid. Given how small the Spyro fanbase is (especially the classic fans) and how few sales there are of remakes when compared to new properties, they're probably thinking it's not worth it. There's also the fact that Activision really hasn't been paying attention to the older fans since....ever. So why would they start now? Their last attempt to reboot the series failed, so they're putting more effort into another try.

But, who knows? For all we know, maybe they are remaking the classics with Skylander graphics and they'll release an Avalar adventure pack next year. *shrug*

No, I think Activision would benefit a lot from remaking the original Spyro games. If you think about it, it managed to help Insomniac out in the first place, so I'm sure it can do the same once again, and people like to see graphics in games nowadays, well it seems like it, so I'm sure that there will be a majority of people that would be interested.

You can't exactly say that it would be a waste of time because Activision have taken nearly two years just to create Skylanders, it's just a matter of opinion if it really is a waste of time or not, I just find it strange on how a developer can literally ignore a fanbase, I've never seen that happen before in gaming. Maybe this fanbase really is bad, but then again it is Universal's fault for rebooting it in the first place, we wouldn't have all this confusion we have today.

It's also a bit strange to reboot a platformer into an action genre, people who enjoy platformers played Spyro for that reason, not for action. If I wanted an action game, I'll play Tomb Raider, lol.

I think it would, too, I'm just saying why they probably never will. Activision hardly needs help at present if their yearly earnings of several billion dollars is any indication.

Oh, I've seen it happen all the time. Outspoken fanbases are a new thing, after all. And some companies care more about established customers than others. Nintendo panders to their fans so much that it's driving some of them away, while other companies completely ignore the fans and succeed wildly. Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that this is all far more complicated than anyone on these forums takes into account. I know people who work in the industry and even the simplest Facebook game dozens of people and hundreds of hours of work that costs thousands of dollars just to make.

Agreed with you there. LoS was a combat game and worse fit for Spyro is hard to find (barring the ridiculous M-rated ideas people like to throw around; I am so glad Toys for Bob didn't go that route).

I find Mousetrap and dominoes simple, and did when I was a kid.

I want to clarify though, again, that I'm not trying to make trouble or hate the game or anything. Heck, I haven't even been discussing the game itself. I've been discussing the concept of the toys, as a business strategy. I'm being critical.

As someone with some understanding of marketing strategies and demographics, the toys are extremely flawed, even for something marketed at kids. There are too many barriers and a lot of potential consumers won't have the money for the toys.

As a potential consumer myself, the toys are an unecessary barrier, blocking me off from a lot of the game's content, which I would normally expect to be there when I buy the game. Not only that, but the toys do something that I can already do on all of my consoles, that anyone else can do, except they make me pay for it (TFB even know this, see the E3 ScrewAttack interview). As a consumer, I don't gain a thing, and I buy things so I can get something out of them. These toys don't do that. They just want to eat out my wallet. Realizing this, I would be extremely put off by the toy concept, and I know many people will think the same, such as the parents of kids who might be interested in the game.

The scam Activision is pulling with the toys is not the flawless master plan everybody seems to think it is. It's an extermely flawed plan, and I am simply pointing that out. I'm not hating, I'm being an unbiased critic.

Point, but since when has anyone since the Insomniac days been any good at all with marketing Spyro? It seems that Activision can afford to gamble and that's pretty much what they're doing here.

Again, true, but you're not their target audience and the devs for this game have stated many times that they essentially don't give a whit what anyone outside their demographic thinks. It's not smart (sticking to demographics to the exclusion of all other potential consumers costs both the film and game industries billions of dollars every year) but it's a strategy that's been in use for decades and isn't likely to go away anytime soon (alas). As for the toys doing nothing for you, it may be true of you, but it's not true of a six-year-old with no money or the parents who don't do their research (which is most of them). If it resonates with the kids, it's going to wind up in their homes and make the money Activision wants whether anybody likes it or not.

An unbiased critic wouldn't use inflammatory words like "scam" or word the obvious like a conspiracy theory. Just sayin'.

From the one Kotick review I read, it looks more like Activision is taking a strategy that did work very well in the past (interactive toys) and bringing it into the modern era to see if it will work now. The 80s was before your time, but trust me, Teddy Ruxpin was pretty big, and every single cartoon on the air existed to sell us toys (which was pretty much as interactive as things got, but we ate it up anyway). Skylanders looks to me like a permutation of that old "make cartoons to sell toys" schtick, only using the video game platform. I'm curious to see how it fares ultimately.

i like how the prodducers of the game are all like and doesnt give a daym about the raging fanbase

Me too. It's no less than exactly what we as a fanbase had coming.

Just because I'm not the target demographic, doesn't mean I can't put myself in their shoes. I was a kid at one point (and if you wanna be technical and get into law and all, I still am a kid). And I am part of their demographic, in a way. They put Spyro in it for a reason, remember?

It may resonate with some kids, but it's not like the kids are loaded, or their parents for that matter. They'll probably just opt for something tried and tested, like Pokémon, Mario, or even shooters, seeing as it will cost them less money than Skylanders.

No, it's true for everyone. I'm sure kids know how to remove the hard drive from an Xbox 360, and take it to their friend's house. That's just one example for one console. Also note how the Skylanders toys only save the data pertaining to the individual characters. Using the methods we already have, such as taking a hard drive to a friend's house, you can bring every single piece of data related to your game to your friend's house, rather than just the data of one character.

.........I didn't phrase anything like it was a conspiracy theory. And scam is not an inflammatory word. It's used in circumstances where there is money grabbing going on. Such is the case here. Even if you like the idea, you should be able to admit that they are kind of overdoing it, especially with the Legendary packs.

The Legendary packs are rather silly, but this is still nothing. You forget which decades I grew up in. At least it's only 32 characters as opposed to, say, 250.

Meh. We're chasing each other in circles again. You don't agree with what I'm saying, I don't agree with what you're saying, and all this talk isn't going to change that on either side, so I'm done with this conversation (which I swear is at least the third time we've had it ).

It's not really the quantity of the toys that bothers me. I'm all for huge toylines. But was it really necessary to let this toyline become a barrier to experiencing a game's full potential? I wouldn't mind if it was just a few, but they are going kind of crazy with it, considering that it hinders the experience.

Nobody forced you to talk with me.

Well, you did reply, and it's instinctual, what with that being the purpose of a forum.

It honestly doesn't look like you miss much by not having the whole toy line. Did you see the video where they showed you exactly what you can open up with other characters? It was one island with a hat in a box and that was it.

I was impressed to hear that the big toys (like that pirate ship thing) are apparently levels (I think, anyway). I won't buy anything that isn't directly interesting, mind, but Skylanders looks like something that's more customizable to the individual player than anything else, which interests me quite a bit. I doubt there are going to be many completist Skylander fans anyway and, if there are, they know what to do about it (the same thing I did to get my Spyro collection; it takes some work, but if you want bad enough, you'll get it).

tl;dr
It's gimmicky and money-grubbing, but I always wanted Spyro toys and I'm curious to see how this whole scheme will play out when it hits store shelves. The end.

I'm replying because I'm a no life, and I've got nothing better to be doing. Nothing to do with instinct on my side!

That's just one level. Who knows what magical secrets I will miss without certain toys in other parts of the game! D:

They are levels. They come with other toys too (such as a treasure chest and two clashed swords in the Pirate Adventure Pack), which currently have an unknown function. As for customization, Skylanders isn't very strong compared to tons of other games out there.

I've had Spyro toys in the past. But these don't feel like Spyro toys. It's not like I've ever seen these characters before, and Spyro looks very different. But the toys do look nice in their own right, despite that.

Hee, I know how that goes. Why do you think I'm still in Spyro fandom at all after 2008?

There are so many hats you might not ever get to wear!

Oooo, that's way cool! I hope they have some non-pirate levels in the future. And I meant customizing in terms of experience. Essentially, everyone who plays could have a completely different experience in a way that's somewhat unique.

I've got a pair of Spyro plushes and...that's it. I've only ever seen one other potentially official figure-like Spyro toy and it was a handheld tie-in. For me, this is still the first time I've ever seen an official Spyro figure and that in itself counts for a lot in my book.

...You're clingy?

The funny thing about that is, not too long ago, I became obsessed with weraing funny hats in real life!

There is another Adventure Pack called "Darklight Crypt", which is a level with a spooky theme.
Oooooooooooooooooooooh, I get ya now...sorry...

I had a Spyro toy from a cereal box. When you rolled it along a flat surface, he flapped his wings. I loved that little thing. I still have it, but I broke the wheel. I still think it looks cool, though. The only thing wrong with it is that the wings are completely yellow.

Quote: Razz

I think it would, too, I'm just saying why they probably never will. Activision hardly needs help at present if their yearly earnings of several billion dollars is any indication.

Oh, I've seen it happen all the time. Outspoken fanbases are a new thing, after all. And some companies care more about established customers than others. Nintendo panders to their fans so much that it's driving some of them away, while other companies completely ignore the fans and succeed wildly. Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that this is all far more complicated than anyone on these forums takes into account. I know people who work in the industry and even the simplest Facebook game dozens of people and hundreds of hours of work that costs thousands of dollars just to make.

Agreed with you there. LoS was a combat game and worse fit for Spyro is hard to find (barring the ridiculous M-rated ideas people like to throw around; I am so glad Toys for Bob didn't go that route).

@bold part: It can't be that much for them, because otherwise they wouldn't even be able to attempt to do that type of thing in the first place.