darkSpyro

Bry took too long to post it. Interviews with anonymous TFB devs about various controversies in the game.

Do not watch if you don't want your sodium levels to be really high before the nintendo direct. I'm not even done and I'm already pretty angry.

edit: I'm done, I'm really mad now. OLD. GRAPHICS. OPTION. BUILT INTO THE GAME.

Sorry, I’m definitely not in the mood of getting salty right now, what do you mean by “old graphics option”?

Was it something asked by Activision to stop people from complaining about the new game’s art-style (similarly to the soundtrack), or was it truly something the devs were aiming for...?
Because if it’s the second option then I have no idea how they could have pulled it off, since it’s a remake we are talking about: they couldn’t have just added a switch to toggle between the Reignited graphics and the PS1 ones... right...?

Also, did they mentioned anything about an upcoming patch?
I’m not even sure if they specifically know anything, but it’s worth asking.

Quote: Drek95

Sorry, I’m definitely not in the mood of getting salty right now, what do you mean by “old graphics option”?

Was it something asked by Activision to stop people from complaining about the new game’s art-style (similarly to the soundtrack), or was it truly something the devs were aiming for...?
Because if it’s the second option then I have no idea how they could have pulled it off, since it’s a remake we are talking about: they couldn’t have just added a switch to toggle between the Reignited graphics and the PS1 ones... right...?

Also, did they mentioned anything about an upcoming patch?
I’m not even sure if they specifically know anything, but it’s worth asking.

In response to the first part, the graphics toggle was something the devs had already succeeded in having done seamlessly, they used it for accuracy and was a tool that was a part of Spyroscope. They removed it from the final release.

Secondly, Toys for Bob has promised a patch, but that was last year.

Quote: BroGuy

Quote: Drek95

Sorry, I’m definitely not in the mood of getting salty right now, what do you mean by “old graphics option”?

Was it something asked by Activision to stop people from complaining about the new game’s art-style (similarly to the soundtrack), or was it truly something the devs were aiming for...?
Because if it’s the second option then I have no idea how they could have pulled it off, since it’s a remake we are talking about: they couldn’t have just added a switch to toggle between the Reignited graphics and the PS1 ones... right...?

Also, did they mentioned anything about an upcoming patch?
I’m not even sure if they specifically know anything, but it’s worth asking.

In response to the first part, the graphics toggle was something the devs had already succeeded in having done seamlessly, they used it for accuracy and was a tool that was a part of Spyroscope. They removed it from the final release.

Secondly, Toys for Bob has promised a patch, but that was last year.

Thanks for the answers.

I’m frankly speechless.
Not that I wanted it, even though it would have been a great addition to the game and would have basically removed any complaint regarding the aesthetics... I’m just utterly shocked it was possible in the first place.

Up to now I though the Spyroscope used only a very basic structure for each level to get the geodata and item placement right, I had no idea they could run the original games’ “bodies” over Reignited’s “skeleton”.
I thought the remakes differed too much in terms of animations, control’s smoothness and designs.

Wow... Seriously, WOW.

Regarding the patch, I must have missed TfB’s statement last year, but I was hoping for more recent confirmations from Sanzaru.

All I can say is **** Activision. They've been sitting on the Spyro IP (and no I don't count Skylanders as Spyro) for ten years doing nothing with it, and when the time comes to actually do something, they rush the development time for an Anniversary release, which is always the worst thing to do. It should've been like Crash, they should've announced it in 2018, and then released it in 2019. But, you know, Activision has no logic.

Even if it did come out this year, it would have had competetion with Crash, but that wouldn't be a bad thing since the company owns both, and people would buy it just the same anyway. So they would have made a more successful 2019. They would've had competetion with MediEvil, but I don't think that would be a big deal considering they would have released 2 popular games they own in one year.

Quote: SuperSpyroFan

All I can say is **** Activision. They've been sitting on the Spyro IP (and no I don't count Skylanders as Spyro) for ten years doing nothing with it, and when the time comes to actually do something, they rush the development time for an Anniversary release, which is always the worst thing to do. It should've been like Crash, they should've announced it in 2018, and then released it in 2019. But, you know, Activision has no logic.

Even if it did come out this year, it would have had competetion with Crash, but that wouldn't be a bad thing since the company owns both, and people would buy it just the same anyway. So they would have made a more successful 2019. They would've had competetion with MediEvil, but I don't think that would be a big deal considering they would have released 2 popular games they own in one year.

Don't you know? Those men in suits with trillions of cash lining their pockets need them outstanding financial quarterly results! Get Spyro out, and be quick about it as long as it seems outwardly functional enough!

I think we all agree we wished Sierra would still be there and publishing both Spyro and Crash.
Both franchises wouldn't have wait 10 years for a next game.

Spyro and Crash always had releases in the same year till Activision came ... I don't see the problem why it shouldn't be like it used to be.

i just wanna see the option to include the og graphics in some way

(edit: pshh, I wrote "incorporate" like 2 times. must be tired or smth)

Quote: XSparxX

Spyro and Crash always had releases in the same year till Activision came ... I don't see the problem why it shouldn't be like it used to be.

I think we can do better than "like it used to be", as in what Sess says; give the games the time they need, and make more original ones rather than repeating the process of burning people out on (remakes/remasters/rethingies of existing) platform games and consumers moving en masse to another genre that isn't as oversaturated. I know what you mean though!

Also, gib ohgee visjuls plz.

Quote: XSparxX

Spyro and Crash always had releases in the same year till Activision came ... I don't see the problem why it shouldn't be like it used to be.

Its really easy to understand Activision just doesn't want to risk the possibility of Crash and Spyro competing for sells. I do think they should have given Toys for Bob more time, but it's Activision and I do understand from a business side why they're handling the releases for N. Sane to Reignited and now Nitro-Fueled like they have.

Honestly, considering I wish there were more rushed products the quality of the Reignited Trilogy around, I can’t really be that mad at Activision for this specific matter.

I sure wish they let the devs take more time not only to let them work in less stressful conditions, but also to implement everything they originally intended to and overall release a much more polished product, of course, in fact I do hope they will allow future games to have longer production timeframes.

Still, I appreciate the final result so deeply that I simply cannot get too angry thinking about what it could have been, especially with the possibility of a patch coming relatively soon.

Quote: Drek95

Honestly, considering I wish there were more rushed products the quality of the Reignited Trilogy around, I can’t really be that mad at Activision for this specific matter.

I sure wish they let the devs take more time not only to let them work in less stressful conditions, but also to implement everything they originally intended to and overall release a much more polished product, of course, in fact I do hope they will allow future games to have longer production timeframes.

Still, I appreciate the final result so deeply that I simply cannot get too angry thinking about what it could have been, especially with the possibility of a patch coming relatively soon.

Generally, I concur. Personally I'd rather not have companies rush in the first place, no matter how good the game is in the end. As much as I love Red Dead Redemption 2 (seriously, there's so much I could gush over), I'm repulsed by the fact that there were hundred-hour weeks during crunch periods, and I cannot (psychologically) justify that. I could wait, especially when stress in the workplace leads to depression and sadly worse. There's not a game in existence that's worth that much to me, and y'all know how fervent a fanboi I can be. Buying the game used means those hours were in vain, but buying it new means I'm OK with such working conditions.

In the case of Spyro, it's good enough. I'm not angry nor disappointed about any missing content or tweaks that would've been desirable, unless the delays were wasted (granted, they didn't do what they were publicly intended to, but so long as that time went to use and possibly gave TfB a breather I'm OK with that). If there's to be a patch, I want that patch to be done in the developers' own time and enthusiasm. I find work is often only as good as how its creator feels.

I hope I didn't come off too strongly toward you, Drek95! It's the industry fat cats I find disagreeable, not your good self (or any poster here!)