darkSpyro

As you saw in my other topic, I said that the Legend series was a big mistake, I might of been wrong. The problem was that Spyro might of been of been passed to the wrong publishing team and developing teams, so really my consern was not the series or story, it was the gameplay. How would you guy feel if Insomniac gave Spyro to THQ, Ubisoft, Activision (years ago), or any other, so my whole thing was the gameplay noth the story. The other topic I started will be closed, as soon there's no more posts. Im sure Activision will, make Spyro better in the next couple of years cause by the looks of [PROTOTYPE], Tony Hawk's RIDE, and the Music (Guitar, DJ, Band (not Rockband), etc.) Hero series, Spyro may not reach up to or pass the Insomniac games, but will be better, than before. Sorry for the other topic.

My opinion is that TLoS was cool, but I still miss the Spyro series.

Uh, Sierra > Activision by far. Much like Maxis > EA, or Rare > Micro$oft.

Activision is jerkass company who'd sacrifice artistic quality for the sake of money. Sierra was actually decent of a company (You know, games like Space Quest for instance?) who'd be able to make you strike up a laugh or be immersed into the game with their music.

Same with Malefor0001, I think Tlos is cool.
I think it's better than the origanals.

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

Uh, Sierra > Activision by far. Much like Maxis > EA, or Rare > Micro$oft.

Activision is jerkass company who'd sacrifice artistic quality for the sake of money. Sierra was actually decent of a company (You know, games like Space Quest for instance?) who'd be able to make you strike up a laugh or be immersed into the game with their music.

Sierra made cash cows of there franchises same as Activision, also why are you claiming that Maxis are better than Rare? Pffftttt

Quote: Blackholes_Wolf

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

Uh, Sierra > Activision by far. Much like Maxis > EA, or Rare > Micro$oft.

Activision is jerkass company who'd sacrifice artistic quality for the sake of money. Sierra was actually decent of a company (You know, games like Space Quest for instance?) who'd be able to make you strike up a laugh or be immersed into the game with their music.

Sierra made cash cows of there franchises same as Activision, also why are you claiming that Maxis are better than Rare? Pffftttt

And they did games that brought in novel concepts for gaming such as syncronizing voices with lip movements amongst other things. The only problem is Sierra was almost dead by the time they got Spyro, and that is not conductive to creating top quality games now is it?

TLOS=WIN Regulars=PHAIL

Quote: Phantom 69

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

Uh, Sierra > Activision by far. Much like Maxis > EA, or Rare > Micro$oft.

Activision is jerkass company who'd sacrifice artistic quality for the sake of money. Sierra was actually decent of a company (You know, games like Space Quest for instance?) who'd be able to make you strike up a laugh or be immersed into the game with their music.

We are in the late 00's, Activision is supposed to do that, and economy is messed up like emos and gay people. Besides, Activision is in the mainstream gaming business, and Obama can't fix the economy faster.

Why a random attack against Homosexuals? Personally I find that offensive.

ALL video game companies are in it for the money. It's just a matter of which can make good games while still aiming for that money.

For bit of clarification:

I wasn't saying that Rare is worse or better than Maxis; they're both really good companies (besides, Rare does more the platformers/action games while Maxis is more the Simulator/Sandbox games; those are two different things).

Here's the Wiki article on Sierra: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Studios

For laughs, the TVTropes article on Sierra: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Sierra

Turns out Sierra was a pretty decent company, much like Rare and Maxis, that had it's ups and downs.

As for the money thing, yeah, everyone is in it for the money (IT PRINTS MONEY!), but some people actually try to make a innovative product or idea.

I just hope that Activision doesn't try to screw up any of their recently acquired companies anymore.

Quote: Phantom 69

As you saw in my other topic, I said that the Legend series was a big mistake, I might of been wrong. The problem was that Spyro might of been of been passed to the wrong publishing team and developing teams, so really my consern was not the series or story, it was the gameplay. How would you guy feel if Insomniac gave Spyro to THQ, Ubisoft, Activision (years ago), or any other, so my whole thing was the gameplay noth the story. The other topic I started will be closed, as soon there's no more posts. Im sure Activision will, make Spyro better in the next couple of years cause by the looks of [PROTOTYPE], Tony Hawk's RIDE, and the Music (Guitar, DJ, Band (not Rockband), etc.) Hero series, Spyro may not reach up to or pass the Insomniac games, but will be better, than before. Sorry for the other topic.

LISTEN! INSOMNIAC DID NOT GIVE THE SPYRO LICENSE AWAY. THEY WERE BOUGHT BY AND BECAME A SUBSIDIARY OF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT. BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY A PART OF VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, THEY NEEDED TO DROP THE SPYRO LICENSE. >.>

Anyway, Sierra was doing perfectly fine with LoS. It was once Activision stepped in that they were screwed. Activision is just as bad as EA and Microsoft.

I can see what you're saying about Activision, though, it seems more money oriented than the rest are. At least other companies, Nintendo, for example, actually makes their games good while still trying to achieve the money with the Wii.

Well...not trying much anymore, really just easily succeeding in blowing everyone else off.

Quote: HIR

Quote: Phantom 69

As you saw in my other topic, I said that the Legend series was a big mistake, I might of been wrong. The problem was that Spyro might of been of been passed to the wrong publishing team and developing teams, so really my consern was not the series or story, it was the gameplay. How would you guy feel if Insomniac gave Spyro to THQ, Ubisoft, Activision (years ago), or any other, so my whole thing was the gameplay noth the story. The other topic I started will be closed, as soon there's no more posts. Im sure Activision will, make Spyro better in the next couple of years cause by the looks of [PROTOTYPE], Tony Hawk's RIDE, and the Music (Guitar, DJ, Band (not Rockband), etc.) Hero series, Spyro may not reach up to or pass the Insomniac games, but will be better, than before. Sorry for the other topic.

LISTEN! INSOMNIAC DID NOT GIVE THE SPYRO LICENSE AWAY. THEY WERE BOUGHT BY AND BECAME A SUBSIDIARY OF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT. BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY A PART OF VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, THEY NEEDED TO DROP THE SPYRO LICENSE. >.>

Anyway, Sierra was doing perfectly fine with LoS. It was once Activision stepped in that they were screwed. Activision is just as bad as EA and Microsoft.

You wrong for that, the only thing Sierra had was really good was The Incredible Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. They weren't all that as I thought.

Activision > Sierra

I may not like either company that much, but I like Sierra a heck of a lot more than Activision.

Activision > Sierra

This I consider an insult. No megacorp game developer except maybe Nintendo is ever any good. Why do you think people got ticked off when Rare was bought by Micro$oft? Because it would ruin Nintendo as a whole. Now look at what kind of stuff Rare is making. Same thing with Maxis and EA; once EA bought Maxis out, a lot of the titles just flopped over (Sim City 4 was good though, but that's when they still had a lot of the Maxis staff still together).

What I fear from Activision is that they're gonna put a cap on Spyro and not making anymore, because Activision only makes what will be popular, and in popular opinion, ALL DRAGONS MUST DIE! DX

Sierra would be the best by a longshot either way you look at it.

To be honest, That little Sierra logo in the corner of DotD, was the reason why I bought it, then got into the Spyro games altogether.

KQV is my fav adventure game. ...Sorry I had to say that.

Okay, where in the world did you get this idea that the world hates dragons? Ever heard of a VERY popular book, something called Eragon? Hm...Now what is that about...dragons, is it? And wasn't that book on the bestsellers list for a few years?
And lemme think...Go pick up a fantasy book, any book. Look inside, what will you find? Dragons.
If dragons were hated as much as you say, then they wouldn't exist, seeing as their just a made up fan theory.

Now, Spyro is also a pretty popular series. Not as popular as things like Mario, Zelda, Final Fantasy, etc, but he's still has a decent sized name in the business. It's one of those things; Most people can at least recognize the name and identify Spyro as a dragon. Like I said, he's not as widely known as some others, but he's a strong enough character in the gaming industry that it'd go against common sense for Activision to quit making Spyro games.
Now, as for how many people and how much work they put towards a Spyro game, that number is probably going to be low and short. But they'll still be making more games, no doubt. Spyro now is just...more of a side project as Activision focuses on other, larger, games.

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

For bit of clarification:

I wasn't saying that Rare is worse or better than Maxis; they're both really good companies (besides, Rare does more the platformers/action games while Maxis is more the Simulator/Sandbox games; those are two different things).

Rare did make a simulation game and it was badass. Its known as Viva Pinata.

Quote: Phantom 69

Activision > Sierra

It is clear you never played any games by Sierra before they were first bought out and stripted down.

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

Activision > Sierra

This I consider an insult. No megacorp game developer except maybe Nintendo is ever any good. Why do you think people got ticked off when Rare was bought by Micro$oft? Because it would ruin Nintendo as a whole. Now look at what kind of stuff Rare is making. Same thing with Maxis and EA; once EA bought Maxis out, a lot of the titles just flopped over (Sim City 4 was good though, but that's when they still had a lot of the Maxis staff still together).

What I fear from Activision is that they're gonna put a cap on Spyro and not making anymore, because Activision only makes what will be popular, and in popular opinion, ALL DRAGONS MUST DIE! DX

Activision stated that the only reason they were keeping Spyro was because it was capable of "adequately meeting sales standards." More classic Sierra franchises bit the dust as a result of the merger. For all we know, games like King's Quest may never see the light of day again unless they find a new publishing company.

DON'T BE MISLEAD. ACTIVISION HAS THE POTENTIAL TO RUIN THE SPYRO SERIES. IT WOULDN'T BE THE FIRST TIME A CASH COW COMPANY RUINED A GAME SERIES. <.>

Quote: Gwenio

Quote: Phantom 69

Activision > Sierra

It is clear you never played any games by Sierra before they were first bought out and stripted down.

Maybe if Sierra took more time on their games, maybe they would be better, one year is not enough time.

I think its more important, that the games make fun and that surely doesnt depends on the realness of the game

Would you rather have Spyro never being continued, doomed to lay in the basement in the box labeled
"Old,dusty video games" forever?
If you think about it, if the orignal company didn't sell over, they might have never found another company willing to continue Spyro.

that wasnt what I mean surely its important, that the spyro games are improoving in their quality but the makers of the games are getting more and more lazy. for example: I needed over 3 months to collect all the gems of the first Spyro game and it made a lot of fun because there were lots of different levels, enemies and a cool story with bonus levels. but It just took me 1 day to play through the DotD surely it also was fun and its a pretty cool game, but it is to short! you're playing one level after the other and if you've defeated Malefore the game is over... no hidden bonus levels or gems just some special enemies that are pretty easy to find-.-

do you know what i mean?

Yeah I know what you mean...

You know, if the Spyro games started in the 8 bit era, they might have been doing incredibly well now because the series would have been able to mature into something well.

jeah but they didnt... it seems like they just cared about the quality and totally neglected the story.

Quote: Phantom 69

Quote: Gwenio

Quote: Phantom 69

Activision > Sierra

It is clear you never played any games by Sierra before they were first bought out and stripted down.

Maybe if Sierra took more time on their games, maybe they would be better, one year is not enough time.

Please research the subject. It is not as though they were calling all the shots at that time. Infact, the company had just been practically raise from the dead.

Piece of trivia: Sierra was resposible for the first computer adventure game to incorporate graphics. It was there first game Mystery House. It was a best seller at the time.

Quote: BlackDragonAJ89

Yeah I know what you mean...

You know, if the Spyro games started in the 8 bit era, they might have been doing incredibly well now because the series would have been able to mature into something well.

XD *tries to imagine an 8-Bit Spyro adventure* ^.^b

You know, I know might actually try to make that with Game Maker 7... XP

Good I'm not the only one whos used that.

I've had an attempt in the other route. Using AGS, (Adventure Game Studio). To get the same style as the point and click adventure games. KQV

Quote: Gwenio

Quote: Phantom 69

Quote: Gwenio

It is clear you never played any games by Sierra before they were first bought out and stripted down.

Maybe if Sierra took more time on their games, maybe they would be better, one year is not enough time.

Please research the subject. It is not as though they were calling all the shots at that time. Infact, the company had just been practically raise from the dead.

Piece of trivia: Sierra was resposible for the first computer adventure game to incorporate graphics. It was there first game Mystery House. It was a best seller at the time.

That was then, this is now. They had to get with the program. You know people are slaves for a good game. Maybe if DotD was sandboxed, it might would of got some popularity.

I like TloS but I also loved the old series, they were so much fun finding dragon eggs, colllecting gems, finding treasure and not knowing what was going to happen next. But because the old series do not existe any more, I just make up my own Spyro game and make comics about them.

Quote: HIR

Quote: Phantom 69

As you saw in my other topic, I said that the Legend series was a big mistake, I might of been wrong. The problem was that Spyro might of been of been passed to the wrong publishing team and developing teams, so really my consern was not the series or story, it was the gameplay. How would you guy feel if Insomniac gave Spyro to THQ, Ubisoft, Activision (years ago), or any other, so my whole thing was the gameplay noth the story. The other topic I started will be closed, as soon there's no more posts. Im sure Activision will, make Spyro better in the next couple of years cause by the looks of [PROTOTYPE], Tony Hawk's RIDE, and the Music (Guitar, DJ, Band (not Rockband), etc.) Hero series, Spyro may not reach up to or pass the Insomniac games, but will be better, than before. Sorry for the other topic.

LISTEN! INSOMNIAC DID NOT GIVE THE SPYRO LICENSE AWAY. THEY WERE BOUGHT BY AND BECAME A SUBSIDIARY OF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT. BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY A PART OF VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, THEY NEEDED TO DROP THE SPYRO LICENSE. >.>

Anyway, Sierra was doing perfectly fine with LoS. It was once Activision stepped in that they were screwed. Activision is just as bad as EA and Microsoft.

Insomniac Games is and always has been independent.

But your right, Insomniac never gave the rights to Spyro away because they never owned them in the first place.

Quote: xSPYROTHEDRAGON

that wasnt what I mean surely its important, that the spyro games are improoving in their quality but the makers of the games are getting more and more lazy. for example: I needed over 3 months to collect all the gems of the first Spyro game and it made a lot of fun because there were lots of different levels, enemies and a cool story with bonus levels. but It just took me 1 day to play through the DotD surely it also was fun and its a pretty cool game, but it is to short! you're playing one level after the other and if you've defeated Malefore the game is over... no hidden bonus levels or gems just some special enemies that are pretty easy to find-.-

do you know what i mean?

You got a point there.
Sure there was neat features in Dotd, but a think ANB was the longest of the trilogy. Dotd was the shortest, but thats just my guess. I haven't played to the very end to TEN.
Its too hard.

Quote: InsomDog

Quote: HIR

Quote: Phantom 69

As you saw in my other topic, I said that the Legend series was a big mistake, I might of been wrong. The problem was that Spyro might of been of been passed to the wrong publishing team and developing teams, so really my consern was not the series or story, it was the gameplay. How would you guy feel if Insomniac gave Spyro to THQ, Ubisoft, Activision (years ago), or any other, so my whole thing was the gameplay noth the story. The other topic I started will be closed, as soon there's no more posts. Im sure Activision will, make Spyro better in the next couple of years cause by the looks of [PROTOTYPE], Tony Hawk's RIDE, and the Music (Guitar, DJ, Band (not Rockband), etc.) Hero series, Spyro may not reach up to or pass the Insomniac games, but will be better, than before. Sorry for the other topic.

LISTEN! INSOMNIAC DID NOT GIVE THE SPYRO LICENSE AWAY. THEY WERE BOUGHT BY AND BECAME A SUBSIDIARY OF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT. BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY A PART OF VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, THEY NEEDED TO DROP THE SPYRO LICENSE. >.>

Anyway, Sierra was doing perfectly fine with LoS. It was once Activision stepped in that they were screwed. Activision is just as bad as EA and Microsoft.

Insomniac Games is and always has been independent.

But your right, Insomniac never gave the rights to Spyro away because they never owned them in the first place.

Just a thought: if they are independent why didn't they have their own booth at E3? Why were they instead displayed at Sony Computer Entertainment's booth? Also, if they're independent why did they never consider making a game for a Microsoft or Nintendo console?

I'm pretty sure they're a part of Sony nowadays. <.<;

Yeah, I'm sure they're a part of Sony myself...

Come to think of it, the only Insomniac games I've ever seen HAVE been on Sony consoles.

Quote: Miles Tails

TLOS=WIN Regulars=PHAIL

So you wouldn't off liked Spyro if they never made TLOS?

activisions talent is shooting games
i liked DOTD but it was to short u can't make a HD game with a brilliant long story line in 1 year if they spent 2 years they might off but it would of been....

ANB-2007
TEN-2009
DOTD-2011

a)long wait for a gd game
b)short w8 for a alright game
but should they of done A instead of B?

Quote: HIR

Quote: InsomDog

Quote: HIR

LISTEN! INSOMNIAC DID NOT GIVE THE SPYRO LICENSE AWAY. THEY WERE BOUGHT BY AND BECAME A SUBSIDIARY OF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT. BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY A PART OF VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, THEY NEEDED TO DROP THE SPYRO LICENSE. >.>

Anyway, Sierra was doing perfectly fine with LoS. It was once Activision stepped in that they were screwed. Activision is just as bad as EA and Microsoft.

Insomniac Games is and always has been independent.

But your right, Insomniac never gave the rights to Spyro away because they never owned them in the first place.

Just a thought: if they are independent why didn't they have their own booth at E3? Why were they instead displayed at Sony Computer Entertainment's booth? Also, if they're independent why did they never consider making a game for a Microsoft or Nintendo console?

I'm pretty sure they're a part of Sony nowadays. <.<;

Sony Computer Entertainment publish their games which is why Ratchet & Clank is displayed at their booth.

If Insomniac wanted to make games for Microsoft or Nintendo consoles then they would have to change publishers, which they are able to do because they are independent. But Insomniac are happy enough with SCE publishing their games so they don't feel the need to change.

Well... they definitely lost the license to Spyro. <.<;