darkSpyro

i can,t believe everyone complains about Spyro changing in a new beginning and now you doing the same because they changed him back almost all they changed is the eyes and body and wings and tail , horns. not that i want to start a flame war i just can,t believe some Spyro fans complain over nothing

I'm complaining, but I have very valid reasons, mostly to do with the gameplay.

These fans don't seem to understand that in order to get Spyro's old design, Insomniac has to make the games. And they already claimed that they aren't going back. They have no more ideas for the franchise, which is why they let it go in the first place.

Insomniac never owned the Spyro franchise. Universal had.

^That's pretty obvious. Insominac developed the games, therefore came up with the designs. And the only way to get the old designs is to get Insomniac to make the games. That's what I was saying.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

I'm complaining, but I have very valid reasons, mostly to do with the gameplay.

No one can complain about the gameplay truly when the game is still in production. Saying 'from what I've seen' isn't really a complaint beyond 'I'm judging by appearance'.

Some people are already judging it by saying it's going to be amazing, and others are judging it by saying they don't like the looks of it. But since those people are judging it more negatively, they're told they're judging it too soon..

I have good reasons for not liking the looks of this so far. I'm not making any final judgements untill I see more info, but I just hope this game isn't going where I think it is going.

It's one thing to look on the positive side, but it's another to look at it negatively.

Quote: CAV

^That's pretty obvious. Insominac developed the games, therefore came up with the designs. And the only way to get the old designs is to get Insomniac to make the games. That's what I was saying.

But some fans are still clueless that Insomniac should go back to owning Spyro. When Insomniac never even owned Spyro.

Quote: Darby

Some people are already judging it by saying it's going to be amazing, and others are judging it by saying they don't like the looks of it. But since those people are judging it more negatively, they're told they're judging it too soon..

Exactly. That's like saying I can't make a decision to not buy the next Call of Duty game.

Quote: Spyroo

It's one thing to look on the positive side, but it's another to look at it negatively.

But it's still the same thing. It's still judging the game from what you've seen, way before the game is even released, and probably completed. I don't see a difference. Some people love the looks of it, and others hate the looks of it.. :S So why do the people who look at it negatively get bothered?

Quote: Darby

Quote: Spyroo

It's one thing to look on the positive side, but it's another to look at it negatively.

But it's still the same thing. It's still judging the game from what you've seen, way before the game is even released, and probably completed. I don't see a difference. Some people love the looks of it, and others hate the looks of it.. :S So why do the people who look at it negatively get bothered?

Because on this particular occasion, there's too much negativity on a game that hasn't even gotten to a final stage.

I know what people say, but I guarantee that if this game was Legend or Classic, and had Cynder in it, there would be hardly any complaints. People can disagree, but it's the truth.

I don't even hate it, I just don't see much in it.

Quote: Aura24

But some fans are still clueless that Insomniac should go back to owning Spyro. When Insomniac never even owned Spyro.

For the most part I believe that they know they didn't own Spyro, but they want them to make the games again.

Every person more or less has a different reason for liking/disliking it.


Just stating the obvious..

But really, a lot of people have better reasoning than you're giving them credit for.

But then there's a lot of people who won't listen to any reason, like the people saying "Spyro is dead!" and "Activision killed Spyro!" It's like, really guys? They're introducing him to a new audience with a game that will appeal to younger children before they make a purely Spyro game to build up more fanbase. Lets face it, Spyro's not that popular, at least not anymore. He's no Mario or Sonic. He needs to be assimilated back in with a game that's going to get a lot of attention, and this is it.

As for the positive/negative, what's wrong with being exited about it? Sure, no one can claim it's a good game, and no one can claim it's bad. To me, it looks fun. Especially the platforms that spit you into the air, I think I'll enjoy that quite a bit. I also love memorabilia so I'll probably want to buy many of the figures. The eight year old in me went "OMGTOYS!" as soon as I saw the new game.

I guess I'm just fed up with the over-negativity. If you don't like the game... Why talk about it? Why purposely seek out something you DON'T like? And why make countless pictures of murdered Spyro with "Activision" carved into him? I feel like way too many people are over reacting to this.

^Activision hasn't killed Spyro.....yet. If the game is terrible, then he may be dead. But the game isn't out yet, so nobody can say that it's a bad game, nor can anyone say it's a good game. I know I'm basically saying what you just did, but it can't be stressed enough.

I'm fed up with all of the people that claim the franchise is dead just because of his design. It's Sonic 4 all over again. Another complaint I'm tired of is how *insert character here* isn't in the game. But it's still not as bad as the design excuse.

And do you want to know a franchise that DID get murdered by Activision? Guitar Hero. Want to know a franchise that is ABOUT to get murdered? Call of Duty. Spyro is nowhere on the list. And another thing. How can Activison kill Spyro when this is the first game they fully sought through (since DotD was partly finished by the time Sierra got absorbed by Activision)?

Quote: Spyroo

Quote: Darby

Quote: Spyroo

It's one thing to look on the positive side, but it's another to look at it negatively.

But it's still the same thing. It's still judging the game from what you've seen, way before the game is even released, and probably completed. I don't see a difference. Some people love the looks of it, and others hate the looks of it.. :S So why do the people who look at it negatively get bothered?

Because on this particular occasion, there's too much negativity on a game that hasn't even gotten to a final stage.

I know what people say, but I guarantee that if this game was Legend or Classic, and had Cynder in it, there would be hardly any complaints. People can disagree, but it's the truth.

That's not true at all. If this was Legend or Classic, I still wouldn't like it because the gameplay looks like a huge step backwards from what I have come to expect from Spyro. And Cynder has a ton of haters anyway, and most of her fans don't even talk about her that much(meaning, they are now obsessing over something else). That's like saying ETD would get less hate if Elora was in it.

If anything, this game being Classic or Legend could make people hate it more, as they would feel it disgraces their favourite side of Spyro. This game isn't even a Spyro game, and since people figured that out, the hate has died down.

I can't believe that Activision failed.

Everyone is allowed to state their opinion.
In life people always judge the book by it's color.
It's humans nature it can't be helped.
People always want to believe that their opinion is more valid than others and they will make almost any excuse to justify themselves.

^Everyone is allowed to state their opinion. Everyone is also allowed to object to one's opinion, and has the right to call bull**** on the opinion. That's what I do.

It's not human nature. If it is human nature, then that means I'm not a human. Aura24 isn't human. Brawler isn't human.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

I'm complaining, but I have very valid reasons, mostly to do with the gameplay.

How can you criticize gameplay before you play the game? or do you just not like platformers or the whole 30 playable characters thing?

Yeah, I didn't judge this game from first sight. I waited and watched.

Quote: NEW_SpyroLUVA

Quote: sonicbrawler182

I'm complaining, but I have very valid reasons, mostly to do with the gameplay.

How can you criticize gameplay before you play the game? or do you just not like platformers or the whole 30 playable characters thing?

He says the gameplay looks simple.

Quote: CAV

Quote: NEW_SpyroLUVA

Quote: sonicbrawler182

I'm complaining, but I have very valid reasons, mostly to do with the gameplay.

How can you criticize gameplay before you play the game? or do you just not like platformers or the whole 30 playable characters thing?

He says the gameplay looks simple.

Well what's wrong with simple?

I think that using simple commands like square to "attack" or x to "jump" is much more managable and easy to remember than when the controls get far to complicated and redundant to even remember where what does what.

No, I said TOO simple.

You see, simple platformers and simple action games are two different things.

Platformers can generally be as simple as they want. Rather than having a lot of moves at once, you usually get power-ups. They also rely on precision and reflexes. Fighting is child's play in a platformer.

Action games tend to rely a bit more on strategy when fighting. They have hoards of enemies, but strategic placement of these enemies is crucial. Giving the player a variety of moves is also crucial.

So far, Skylanders has only shown hoards of enemies to fight with extremely basic platforming, and we have been told that characters will only have a primary attack and a secondary attack. This is not a good formula, as showcased by Sonic 06.

I don't think Skylanders will be terrible, but it looks forgettable.

Quote: CAV

^Everyone is allowed to state their opinion. Everyone is also allowed to object to one's opinion, and has the right to call bull**** on the opinion. That's what I do.

It's not human nature. If it is human nature, then that means I'm not a human. Aura24 isn't human. Brawler isn't human.

So you are saying that you don't think the game is going to be good or bad?

You don't have an opinion of the game yet?

And if you have an opinion about the game, how did you get that opinion?
You had to look at what they have released so far about the game in order to get an opinion or at least hear of it.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

No, I said TOO simple.

You see, simple platformers and simple action games are two different things.

Platformers can generally be as simple as they want. Rather than having a lot of moves at once, you usually get power-ups. They also rely on precision and reflexes. Fighting is child's play in a platformer.

Action games tend to rely a bit more on strategy when fighting. They have hoards of enemies, but strategic placement of these enemies is crucial. Giving the player a variety of moves is also crucial.

So far, Skylanders has only shown hoards of enemies to fight with extremely basic platforming, and we have been told that characters will only have a primary attack and a secondary attack. This is not a good formula, as showcased by Sonic 06.

I don't think Skylanders will be terrible, but it looks forgettable.

Or maybe you're just used to playing other games that have different ways of platforming...

you guys cant complain about this game. This is not a reboot. We dont even know the story yet and word from activision is it is in the original series of games. Which means they finally listened.

Actually, it is confirmed to be another reboot, with Spyro being based on his PS1 counterpart.

I play many types of platformers - Mario, Sonic, Banjo, Crash, Conker, LBP, etc(notice how I did not say Spyro....I don't consider Spyro to be strictly a platform game. If anything, that's one thing it least is, except AHT).

Where was that comment coming from anyway?

The first three Spyro games were Platformers, and the other Classic Spyro games were too.

I don't consider them platformers, I consider them Adventure games.

Seriously, play levels like Stone Hill, Summer Forest, Skelos Badlands, etc, and tell me with a straight face that it's a platformer.
AHT is kind of a platformer though.

The games are still platform games, sonicbrawler, whether you view them as one in your point of view or not.

I only consider a game a platformer if it has over 50% of platforming elements in it, which the Classic Spyros do not have(except AHT). If they are platformers, then Zelda and Final Fantasy XIII are.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

No, I said TOO simple.

You see, simple platformers and simple action games are two different things.

Platformers can generally be as simple as they want. Rather than having a lot of moves at once, you usually get power-ups. They also rely on precision and reflexes. Fighting is child's play in a platformer.

Action games tend to rely a bit more on strategy when fighting. They have hoards of enemies, but strategic placement of these enemies is crucial. Giving the player a variety of moves is also crucial.

So far, Skylanders has only shown hoards of enemies to fight with extremely basic platforming, and we have been told that characters will only have a primary attack and a secondary attack. This is not a good formula, as showcased by Sonic 06.

I don't think Skylanders will be terrible, but it looks forgettable.

Once again, you just described Mario and LoS.

Quote: Jasher

So you are saying that you don't think the game is going to be good or bad?

You don't have an opinion of the game yet?

And if you have an opinion about the game, how did you get that opinion?
You had to look at what they have released so far about the game in order to get an opinion or at least hear of it.

What in my post told you I don't have an opinion of the game? But you want it? Ok then.

Skylanders looks like it can be revolutionary. The toy idea is something that hasn't been done before. Gameplay and design looks very much like LoS and Classic Spyro put into a blender. It's simple, yeah, but then again, so is Mario. And we know how much of a hit he is. The music is going to be fantastic with Hans Zimmer composing, and I believe story could work when the writers are the people that made Toy Story.

My only problem is the developer, Toys For Bob. They only made one notable game in their history, and that was years ago when they were under different management and other employees were around. Toys For Bob isn't the right developer for the job. Radical, Treyarch, or Raven Studios easily could've made a better Spyro game. Putting the fate of the franchise in the hands of Toys For Bob is like giving the Mario franchise to Sega.

Skylanders looks like a stepping stone for something bigger in Spyro's comeback. If the game sells well, Spyro may be able to make his long awaited return. If not, then the franchise will be laid to rest and Spyro will be but a distant memory. I want this game to work, and I think it will get decent reviews. Toys For Bob is trying to put together both Classic Spyro and LoS. They are trying to get everyone to look forward to this game. But because of Spyro's design or because a certain character isn't in there, they don't want to give it a second thought. And that's sickening to know that the one fanbase I'm a part of is acting even worse than the Sonic fanbase when Sonic 4 came out. We are getting the game we've always wanted, but becasue Spyro has spots, fangs, and red eyes, the game is dismissed before people even get their hand on the damn controller.

Altogether, I'm looking at this with an open mind, and I'm hoping it turns out well. And unlike half of the fandom, I'm not letting the design determane what I think of the game. Hell, I actually like the design. I want the game to be good, but Toys For Bob is what scares me.

What about you?

Quote: CAV

Quote: sonicbrawler182

No, I said TOO simple.

You see, simple platformers and simple action games are two different things.

Platformers can generally be as simple as they want. Rather than having a lot of moves at once, you usually get power-ups. They also rely on precision and reflexes. Fighting is child's play in a platformer.

Action games tend to rely a bit more on strategy when fighting. They have hoards of enemies, but strategic placement of these enemies is crucial. Giving the player a variety of moves is also crucial.

So far, Skylanders has only shown hoards of enemies to fight with extremely basic platforming, and we have been told that characters will only have a primary attack and a secondary attack. This is not a good formula, as showcased by Sonic 06.

I don't think Skylanders will be terrible, but it looks forgettable.

Once again, you just described Mario and LoS.

Quote: Jasher

So you are saying that you don't think the game is going to be good or bad?

You don't have an opinion of the game yet?

And if you have an opinion about the game, how did you get that opinion?
You had to look at what they have released so far about the game in order to get an opinion or at least hear of it.

What in my post told you I don't have an opinion of the game? But you want it? Ok then.

Skylanders looks like it can be revolutionary. The toy idea is something that hasn't been done before. Gameplay and design looks very much like LoS and Classic Spyro put into a blender. It's simple, yeah, but then again, so is Mario. And we know how much of a hit he is. The music is going to be fantastic with Hans Zimmer composing, and I believe story could work when the writers are the people that made Toy Story.

My only problem is the developer, Toys For Bob. They only made one notable game in their history, and that was years ago when they were under different management and other employees were around. Toys For Bob isn't the right developer for the job. Radical, Treyarch, or Raven Studios easily could've made a better Spyro game. Putting the fate of the franchise in the hands of Toys For Bob is like giving the Mario franchise to Sega.

Skylanders looks like a stepping stone for something bigger in Spyro's comeback. If the game sells well, Spyro may be able to make his long awaited return. If not, then the franchise will be laid to rest and Spyro will be but a distant memory. I want this game to work, and I think it will get decent reviews. Toys For Bob is trying to put together both Classic Spyro and LoS. They are trying to get everyone to look forward to this game. But because of Spyro's design or because a certain character isn't in there, they don't want to give it a second thought. And that's sickening to know that the one fanbase I'm a part of is acting even worse than the Sonic fanbase when Sonic 4 came out. We are getting the game we've always wanted, but becasue Spyro has spots, fangs, and red eyes, the game is dismissed before people even get their hand on the damn controller.

Altogether, I'm looking at this with an open mind, and I'm hoping it turns out well. And unlike half of the fandom, I'm not letting the design determane what I think of the game. Hell, I actually like the design. I want the game to be good, but Toys For Bob is what scares me.

What about you?

You have done what all humans do. You have judged the book by it's color but in a positive way.

But anyways I have to admit that I had negative judgments when I first saw this game but I have soften up a little to the idea.
I am 18 and a game like this seems a little childish for me.
At the same time this game has some features that I have always dreamed of in a Spyro game. This game seems like it's going to be a Spyro RPG slash platformer. I have always wanted a spyro game like this but the art design isn't very appealing to me.
I know it can be said to be shallow but in my defense I must say that everyone has a different taste in art.
In a way video games are pieces of art and this type of art doesn't exactly fit my taste.
I don't completely hate the art style but as I said before it's not my taste in art.
Now I might get this game if it is for PS3 and if it gets good reviews.
If this game turns out to be a success I may come to tolerate the art style.
Well that's my opinion.

Quote: Jasher

You have done what all humans do. You have judged the book by it's color but in a positive way.

To me, judging a book by it's cover is to judge the game and deem how well it is simply by looking at the design/box art/poster/book cover. I frankly don't know what to expect.

Quote: CAV

Quote: Jasher

You have done what all humans do. You have judged the book by it's color but in a positive way.

To me, judging a book by it's cover is to judge the game and deem how well it is simply by looking at the design/box art/poster/book cover. I frankly don't know what to expect.

Ok I understand.

Ya if you used the term the way I was using it, you might as well say that your judging the book by it's cover in almost every aspect of your life LOL.

But I guess judging a book by it's cover actually means your making assumptions about something based on what you see on the surface.

But enough about that.