darkSpyro

So knowing how different this game is from the other 2 made by Insomniac, I am curious to know if anyone else wished Spyro 2 and Spyro 3 had the charm this game had. I know this game is much different that the other two games, for instance, in the other two games there are a wide amount of new characters, different voice for Spyro, brighter colors, new quests, a bit of a different personality for Spyro, and in Ripto's Rage and Year Of The Dragon, you never feel alone. Spyro 1 in my opinion was a very lonely game in the sence where you don't get to interact with many characters, but it lets you focus much more on the environments and music in this game than the other two, if that makes sence. Also, this game did feel darker in color, the next 2 games were filled with bright colors. Personally, I liked the colors in this game better, but that's my opinion. If any of you guys don't understand what I'm saying, please do tell, I'll try to explain it better. What I'm trying to say is, did you like the change from how this game evolved much more in the next 2 games by Insomniac, or did you prefer the way this game was made, and wish the other two were made more like this?

I prefer the environments and color of this, but the characters and gameplay of the others.

maybe faun is an outlier here, but this game never seemed very different from the other two. they were just the logical progression of the story/technology/series/etc. faun doesn't feel lonely playing this one, either. somehow, the enemies, environments, balloonists and dragons seem to people the landscapes nicely. it's only lonely after all the dragons have been rescued, but even so, not nearly as lonely as the other two games since the fairies and chatty enemies are still around (whereas all the friends spyro made in the other two games vanish completely after certain points and one must restart the game to talk with them; faun has always found that eerie).

I like the simplicity of this game compared to others, I suppose the other two was extended, detailed versions of the first one, I'm not sure which I prefer really. I think I like both styles of gameplay just the same.

Yeah, it's simple which is great and I can see exactly where your coming from, because I feel the exact same way about the game, it has some kind of.. charm that the other 2 don't have. Although I do prefer the other two by just a tad, Spyro 1 is a really unique and strangle alone game like you said. But I think the change of Spyro 2 and 3 was for the best.

I'm with SuperSpyroFan. I love both styles of the games and I can't choose a favorite. I'm just happy they both were made. They're all amazing game styles IMO.

I haven't ever thought about all these differences. Now, seeing this discussion makes me think about that. They really are different, but whole trilogy is awesome

This title has such strong atmosphere and lore, you feel truely immersed. You are free to explore without having constant discussion with townspeople and being given quests. Spyro's personality is evident in this game and each level emits personality. The entire game feels like pages ripped out of some wonderful fantasy book or collection of illustrations. Overall I find this to be the most memorable and offers myself the most fun. Bosses, however, were lacking. I feel that the wonders of exploration more than made up for this though. The focus you can put on the environments and music in this game compared to the others wins me over every time. Such variety and beauty is seldom combined in such a way. The original Spyro the Dragon is and will remain one of my absolute favourite video games of all time!

I like the first one but I prefer the other two, because as you said, StD is lonely But Spyro's facial expression is so cute/funny when he's trying to be cocky

I'm going to have to agree - I think that the first Spyro game has the most "mystical" quality to it, in a sense. The next two games are great in their own regard, but they're games.
Not to sound pretentious, as they're wonderful in that right. But Spyro 1 really felt like 3D art that you could explore, and the gem-collecting mechanic gave that push to look in all the hidden corners and just really experience every part of the level instead of breezing through the necessary parts. The architectural design gave it a certain "lived-in" quality without any of the hustle and bustle of NPCs sending you on quests, and the desolate feeling just put more emphasis on that.
The disconnected nature of the level design in the next two games allowed for more interesting gimmicks, at the expense of a certain cohesiveness. It was a host for many different NPCs but, other than the rare incidents like the war, they didn't really interact with each other.

It's not particularly better than if it was more game-focused, so I hold no disregard to people who think the next two are better or even more fun - they're far more "playable" in that sense, and I'll reach to them first if I actually want to play a game rather than live in another world. But Spyro the Dragon is so unique as a game, and it has many qualities that are elusive in mainstream gaming.

^This.

For me, Spyro the Dragon it's a bit lonely game because you don't find a great variety of characters to talk about other stuff like the other two games, but it helps you A LOT to stay focus in your main quest and you have to explore every single place to success and find every dragon, gems and thiefs, and while you are focus in your quest, you can see the wonderful environment, and feel the beautiful and mystical music of the world. In Spyro 2 you have to talk to EVERYONE to success, because you have to collect the orbs, making the game a bit easier because they give you the instructions about their problem or challenge. And Spyro 3 it's like the same thing as Spyro 2 but with the difference that you can obtain a lot of Eggs without talking to anyone (From the Homeworlds for example) and the challeges was a bit repetitive with the difference of the difficulty.

After all, the three games are different, and that is one of the reason why this is a Great and Awesome Trilogy, just my opinion.

I completely agree. The other two games are fantastic for what they do - I just happen to be more fond of the first one because it offers an experience unique to platforming. Variety is important, and contrast even more so, so having the next two games as a counterbalance is a wonderful experience and really brings out each game's values.

Lateef is on fire, you've got the games down pat! I agree with everything you've said!

Quote: Nibelilt

I prefer the environments and color of this, but the characters and gameplay of the others.

this is what i think

Eh no, I prefer the other 2

Its nostalgic to me.

The first Spyro has a big sense of mystery to it for me.

The rest of the games had a lot in terms of story and plot development, whereas this game you had the beginging cutscene, but then the rest is a mystery until you defeat Gnorc and then the ending cutscene.

I've always found Spyro 1 to be a bit creepier than the other two. I can't pinpoint exactly why, but I'd say it's a mix of the darker colours and the design of the baddies. Take Dark Passage - those dogs that grow huge when the lights are off still scare me, and I'd say Jacques is a highly atmospheric level too. Compare that to, say, Rhynocs, who are more comical villains than scary ones.

Quote: Tynesider

I've always found Spyro 1 to be a bit creepier than the other two. I can't pinpoint exactly why, but I'd say it's a mix of the darker colours and the design of the baddies. Take Dark Passage - those dogs that grow huge when the lights are off still scare me, and I'd say Jacques is a highly atmospheric level too. Compare that to, say, Rhynocs, who are more comical villains than scary ones.

What about the Riptocs? lol.

Riptocs officially didn't exist until Enter the Dragonfly. I...sincerely doubt that they're scary to anyone.

Anyway, this game does have a bit of an ethereal tone compared to its sequels, doesn't it. To me, it's possibly because it actually feel like you're exploring *their* world, unlike in the later games where portals will fling you through to worlds that seem like they could be in different times and dimensions compared to each other.

Quote: Burning Gnorc

Riptocs officially didn't exist until Enter the Dragonfly. I...sincerely doubt that they're scary to anyone.

Anyway, this game does have a bit of an ethereal tone compared to its sequels, doesn't it. To me, it's possibly because it actually feel like you're exploring *their* world, unlike in the later games where portals will fling you through to worlds that seem like they could be in different times and dimensions compared to each other.

I thought Riptocs was in Spyro 2?

I guess? I suppose all of the worlds within the main world in Spyro 1, all sort of relate to each other in some way.

Nope. Ripto used local native Avalarian populaces to cause trouble, none were Riptocs. The word wasn't used at all.

^Right!