darkSpyro

The only source is still Liam Robertson?

Quote: Akseyomiht

The only source is still Liam Robertson?

Yes. Liam is the only one to come out and confirm this

sry to say this, but im happy.
slanders has been a large series but has lost its point. they are clearly runnin' out of ideas, and the whole point of slanders was creativity.
half the figures in SSC were reposes, and pretty lame ones too, and gameplay isnt fun. sry atvi, but your game has officialy become boring....

Bunch of bull****, PopFizzMagic, sorry for the wording. "Running out of ideas" is not a real thing. You not liking the figures doesn't cause that either. People mostly liked the Sensei lineup too.

Also this isn't Superchargers, this is Imaginators.

I really enjoyed the gameplay of Imaginators. Both of my kids enjoy this game, as well. Most of the characters and their attacks were done really well too. I am looking forward to the rest of the characters.

Quote: PopFizzMagic

half the figures in SSC were reposes

That was an intentional design decision. Every element except Light & Dark got both a brand new unique character and a reimagined Series 1 or 2 character with all new powers. This was done largely for the brand recognition of their more popular characters and directed at younger players. And I don't have numbers on this, but my understanding is that the reposes sold pretty well comparatively (given that sales were low for this series in general).

They did something similar with the Senseis in Imaginators--every element got a playable Trap Team villain figure and 2 new, unique characters (excluding Light & Dark again, which got 1 villain and 1 new character each).
Quote:

pretty lame ones too, and gameplay isnt fun.

Completely subjective opinion. I happen to agree with you on this, but it serves no point in an argument if you can't point out why it was bad or how it could have been better.

It's also harping on the 5th game in the 6th game's forum... but since SuperChargers was the first game where Skylanders clearly didn't sell as well as expected, complaints about it have merit in this thread, if nowhere else.

PopFizzMagic's argument is that he's happy it's ending because SC wasn't good. But Imaginators was good according to most fans. Kinda counterproductive.

Yeah, if Imaginators was as flawed as Superchargers was, then I'd understand (granted that's not saying Imaginators is perfect, it's got it's own share of flaws). I think Imaginators sold better than Superchargers, if only because I think character creation is a more interesting selling point than vehicles.

As of now, Imaginators sold way less than SuperChargers. Obviously this can change with time, but...

Quote: Buuzer

Quote: Crash10

As of now, Imaginators sold way less than SuperChargers. Obviously this can change with time, but...

Remember, no Wii and 3DS version this year.

Yes. Also, VG Chartz doesn't count digital sales, so SuperChargers might have even bigger sales than we think.

The sales were most likely worse, but that's because people wouldn't come back after being disappointed once. This isn't a franchise anyone would have the willpower to go "yeah I want to spend 1000 bucks on this and gamble for a good game again" after deciding it's not worth it once.

But to be be fair we dont know how much it really made till now, the knowledge we have now its from some posts, we cant jump to conclusions from so little amount of info. Besides its Christmas now, which its a good day to buy the game in reasonable price.

Not postings, I got this from VG Chartz, which is a official sales calculator. They may not be always exact, but it's pretty close.

My point is that we are not even know what "no skylanders in 2017" really stands for, we still dont now enough to say that skylanders will officely die or just takes a brake.

lol check the spoiler

Popfizzmagic destniy have nothing to do with skylanders fate, as i said before: death or hitus.

Quote: omer1698

My point is that we are not even know what "no skylanders in 2017" really stands for, we still dont now enough to say that skylanders will officely die or just takes a brake.

Though Liam said that there's no game in production at all.

Quote: Crash10

Quote: omer1698

My point is that we are not even know what "no skylanders in 2017" really stands for, we still dont now enough to say that skylanders will officely die or just takes a brake.

Though Liam said that there's no game in production at all.

I repet: death or haitus
It dasent mean they will not made game in other year. They made imagnitors in one or two years, they can make more in other time. And besides i would not this liam a 100% lagit source.

Well, I hope for the best. My fear is that they'll end up creating a half-backed game just to keep the IP.

Quote: PopFizzMagic

lol check the spoiler

And? We knew you had done no research.

Quote: Crash10

[...] VG Chartz, which is a official sales calculator.

No. Just no.

I think it wasn't even one page since I said 'no matter what side you're in stay calm' in other words.

I said they're not always 100% accurate, but it's good enough.

Quote: Crash10

I said they're not always 100% accurate, but it's good enough.

What are you doing here? You made clear before you don't want skylanders to continue, neither a remaster, so it's obvious you are not interested in the franchise anymore...then why are you still here? You want to spread your negativity no matter what? Bringing up VG chartz seems a bit desperate honeslty. If you keep bringing VG chartz as a reliable source I'll start saying "Santa told me" as a legit one as well.

Angelg, you're not making this any better by trying to pick a fight.

Generally, we know SC underpermed, and we know from Metro.co.uk that Imaginators did 40% of SC's physical sales by a month or so ago. And that's the thing - SC dragged down SI with it. The series as a whole is about investing a lot of money, but if you feel betrayed, you'll find something else and most importantly something cheaper.

I know Bifrost, but I'm tired of this user trying to spread negavity without backing up his arguments with reasonable speculation. He hasn't even played any of the games apart from SSA...

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with each ones experience with the franchise, but when you come here and talk trash about the franchise without having a reliable experience/argument, then it becomes my problem.

No no no, you don't got it, angelg. I said I don't want a remaster, but I only don't want an actual new game if it was half-backed just so Activision could keep the IP. Sorry if I sounded so negative. I have a negative look at the franchise's future, but it's not like I want it to end.

And, what's the deal people have with VG Chartz? If I knew it wasn't a good source, I wasn't going to use it. I want to know to make sure.

Also, saying that I shouldn't talk about the future just because I'm so far is... Kinda prejudicial. It's not like I don't want to play more, I just... Don't have the money...

^Yeah but he's still around discussing the games except when it comes to spoilers. Again, you're going to burn bridges with someone who's always been cool to talk to just because of what they think will happen?

Quote: Crash10

No no no, you don't got it, angelg. I said I don't want a remaster, but I only don't want an actual new game if it was half-backed just so Activision could keep the IP.

thats what i meant too! i dont want another ssc and i know thats wats gunna happen

Quote: PopFizzMagic

Quote: Crash10

No no no, you don't got it, angelg. I said I don't want a remaster, but I only don't want an actual new game if it was half-backed just so Activision could keep the IP.

thats what i meant too! i dont want another ssc and i know thats wats gunna happen

Makes sense, but, personally, SuperChargers looks great to me. Need to play it though.

Quote: Crash10

Quote: PopFizzMagic

Quote: Crash10

No no no, you don't got it, angelg. I said I don't want a remaster, but I only don't want an actual new game if it was half-backed just so Activision could keep the IP.

thats what i meant too! i dont want another ssc and i know thats wats gunna happen

Makes sense, but, personally, SuperChargers looks great to me. Need to play it though.

don't. gameplay is absolutely aweful.

SSA and SG remasters wouldn't be that bad even with minimal effort, since a lot of the level design in those games just needs higher ledges to prevent jumping - and a lot of them are there already. We also know they have some of the stuff imported to the new engines too because several characters that disappeared after Giants have Imaginators assets - Octavius comes to mind. The meat of the issue is making SSA's corridors less likely to get anything bigger than a Trap Master stuck on hazards, and then maybe there's room for remaster laziness shenanigans.

Quote: Crash10

No no no, you don't got it, angelg. I said I don't want a remaster, but I only don't want an actual new game if it was half-backed just so Activision could keep the IP. Sorry if I sounded so negative. I have a negative look at the franchise's future, but it's not like I want it to end.

And, what's the deal people have with VG Chartz? If I knew it wasn't a good source, I wasn't going to use it. I want to know to make sure.

Also, saying that I shouldn't talk about the future just because I'm so far is... Kinda prejudicial. It's not like I don't want to play more, I just... Don't have the money...

Well I don't want to burn bridges, so now that you cleared it up, we are cool.

Skylanders games are really cheap now, like incrediby cheap ( specially if you are in the US). I remember people postings pics of SC for two bucks at gamestop, so maybe you should give it a chance ( to all them, not onlt SC).

angelg, I live in a country in a pretty big economic crisis (with no good signs of improvement). Plus I need to get a Wii U before continuing. So yeah...

My problem is that people want remakes because the games are "outdated", but I think they're outdated since the day they were released. 3DS stuff of that time looked better. But the actual aesthetics are good. The scenario is creative and well-crafted, and knew how to use the outdated graphics. Jumping and balancing the only gameplay aspects they could improve.

Quote: Bifrost

Again, you're going to burn bridges with someone who's always been cool to talk to just because of what they think will happen?

Aw, that's too nice of you...

Me too, Spain was severely hit by the crisis, but that doesn't prevent the used old generation consoles and games for being incredibly cheap. Yesterday I saw a ps3 for 20 bucks at game. Plus if you have a Wii right now, you can still enjoy SG and SF for only a few dollars each if you know where to look. BUt still, I won't go into an econoic debate, to each their own.

IMO it's still too early for remakes as well.

Yeah, I just want to give more priority to buy the console, then the games. The Wii versions of old games aren't expensive, but I want to focus on saving for what's most important.

Is it wrong that I still have some faith that the series isn't over...?

It isn't over as long as Activision wants to keep the IP. It'll just not have games for a long time and, unfortunately, a future release might have a very low quality, since they'll just do it to get a quick buck and maintain the IP.

Quote: AdamGregory03

Is it wrong that I still have some faith that the series isn't over...?

Nah, I still have faith too, friend.

Quote: Crash10

It isn't over as long as Activision wants to keep the IP. It'll just not have games for a long time and, unfortunately, a future release might have a very low quality, since they'll just do it to get a quick buck and maintain the IP.

Well... That would depend on a couple of factors. Such as how long whichever team (assuming TFB, since I'm not sure if VV is still sticking with the series or if they're too busy with other projects) would be given to make it, whether or not there's a lack of advertising, stuff like that.

Quote: Crash10

I said they're not always 100% accurate, but it's good enough.

I agree that VGChartz is good enough for casual conversation, but calling them 'official' anything... just no.

Quote: UncleBob

Quote: Crash10

I said they're not always 100% accurate, but it's good enough.

I agree that VGChartz is good enough for casual conversation, but calling them 'official' anything... just no.

Though you still didn't said why. The only problem I see with the site as of now is that they don't count digital sales, just retail ones. If there's something else, please tell me.

Quote: AdamGregory03

Quote: Crash10

It isn't over as long as Activision wants to keep the IP. It'll just not have games for a long time and, unfortunately, a future release might have a very low quality, since they'll just do it to get a quick buck and maintain the IP.

Well... That would depend on a couple of factors. Such as how long whichever team (assuming TFB, since I'm not sure if VV is still sticking with the series or if they're too busy with other projects) would be given to make it, whether or not there's a lack of advertising, stuff like that.

I agree with you, but we have to remember of past similar cases by Activision, such as Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk. Things didn't turned out well.

Quote: Crash10

It isn't over as long as Activision wants to keep the IP. It'll just not have games for a long time and, unfortunately, a future release might have a very low quality, since they'll just do it to get a quick buck and maintain the IP.

I stated this on the previous page of this thread, but given that 2-3 people on this page are still mistaken, I guess I need to point it out again. Activision does NOT have to make a Skylanders game in order to maintain rights to Skylanders, as Activision is the OWNER of those rights. They do not have to use the property every 3 years, or five years, or ten years to maintain anything. Skylanders belongs to Activision until either a) Activision sells the rights to another entity, or b) Activision goes out of business, and the rights get sold to pay off debts. Unless one of those two things happens, Activision never has to make another Skylanders game, ever, and no one else can, either.

Actually, if, in the course of a certain period of time, a company doesn't use a franchise, it isn't their property anymore. Nintendo made a new Eternal Darkness because of this. Same with Activision and Tony Hawk. That's if I'm not mistaken.

Those are special cases, Tony Hawk is licensed for example. Skylanders is 100% Acti, but, say, if we weren't in the darkest timeline and were in a world it was co-developed with Nintendo as the initial plan, they'd have to do something I believe.

Quote: Crash10

Actually, if, in the course of a certain period of time, a company doesn't use a franchise, it isn't their property anymore. Nintendo made a new Eternal Darkness because of this. Same with Activision and Tony Hawk. That's if I'm not mistaken.

Again, see my previous post. You are confusing licensing rights with intellectual property rights. Tony Hawk has to sign a contract with Activision granting them his likeness rights, for "X" period of time. If they use his likeness, that contract remains in effect. If "X" period of time goes by, and they do not use it, the contract lapses. Tony Hawk, in this example, owns the likeness rights to himself, you know, being Tony Hawk and all. Activision owns Skylanders, it belongs to them, period, forever. They do not have to make a game, or use the name, or renew a contract, as there is no contract, it is their intellectual property to begin with.

A quick Google search reveals via Wikipedia that Nintendo owns the trademark to "Eternal Darkness," to which there was never a sequel. A trademark must be renewed every set number of years, in this case, Nintendo has renewed the trademark to Eternal Darkness 5 times, and Nintendo, as such, is the only company that can make a game called Eternal Darkess. Skylanders is trademarked, as well. After reading a bit more on Wiki, it sounds as though it works much the same way as the Eternal Darkness example. So long as Activision keeps renewing the trademark, which they DO NOT have to use or make anything with, then they keep the rights to Skylanders basically forever.

Quote: Crash10

Though you still didn't said why. The only problem I see with the site as of now is that they don't count digital sales, just retail ones. If there's something else, please tell me.

Because they're not official, the only time they get official numbers is when a publisher releases a press release.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/...he_Game_Biz.php

Quote: Crash10

Actually, if, in the course of a certain period of time, a company doesn't use a franchise, it isn't their property anymore.

That is, quite simply, not how it works. Period.

Sorry, I mixed names. I meant Fatal Frame, not Eternal Darkness. It seems you're right, LordElohim. Fatal Frame is owned by booth Nintendo and Tecmo Koei. If they didn't made a game, Nintendo would loose their rights, making the series owned by only Tecmo Koei. Since Skylanders is all Activision, they don't need to make a game to keep the rights.

Hm, you're totally right. Sorry for doubting you.

And yes Bifrost, if they had the contract with Nintendo, someone would loose the rights.

Quote: UncleBob

Because they're not official, the only time they get official numbers is when a publisher releases a press release.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/...he_Game_Biz.php

You got me. Sorry for doubting you too.

Happy Holidays Everyone!!!

If we're honest with ourselves we need to ask this important question, does the series need a change? I believe that answer is yes (and I'm not alone). I was actually starting to feel the apathy back in Super Chargers but told myself it was just a lack of end game content. Usually when I beat the newest entry I go straight into Nightmare mode. This time I haven't. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why. Then it hit me...These games aren't as fun as they started out to be. Now it's no secret that Swap Force is my fav. Trap Team put a sour taste in my mouth that Super Chargers just didn't rinse out. I had fun with the campaign but went onto other things. Then Imaginators hit, had a blast then found myself not going back. Now I did thoroughly enjoy the story mode for Super Chargers and Imaginators but with little to no end game there's little reason to come back. I also feel that what they've done to Legacy Skylanders is down right unforgivable to the point of wondering why they bothered porting them in at all since they aren't even playable (in hard and nightmare). I realize that some of these issues come down to personal preference but I know I'm not alone.

I want Skylanders to succeed. I am heavily invested in this franchise (like many others) and feel this is more than just another video game franchise. SSA was something special. I believe it still is. I think they need to step back with the toys and really focus on the game. I'd be so happy if they announced a two year game cycle going forward and expanding the universe with other projects that didn't rely on toys. RPG's, Fighters, RTS but mainly RPG's. How many times has Paul stated that this franchise was heavily inspired by D & D? Where's that influence today (I will give them super props for the character creation in Imaginators, it's really second to none)? So to sum up, I'm hopeful for the franchise if they want to change it up but I am losing interest (to the point of not caring) if they just want to do more of the same until they have Atari E.T. round 2. I will remain hopeful that they feel like this franchise still has something to offer.