(please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

Mad Dragon · Jan 20, 2011 5:29 AM

I think both games have good points.

I like the Original Series because it's more open. And while you are aiming for an overall objective you can keep going back to levels you can enjoy etc and do everything over again. Sure you can do that in DotD but the monsters etc don't respawn and it isn't as fun as going through the first time. The Original Spyro's had Minigames to play (From Spyro 2 onwards) which keep you mildly entertained..... and sometimes they bring you to the verge of throwing your console out the window lol. But Fun nevertheless.

There are alot of things however that I like about the Legend of Spyro Games. For one. The in-depth Storyline, Cutscenes, Graphics and possibly even the music are purely magical to me. They stepped up a notch in presentation of the game and I enjoyed the new approach to battle with the combos and the full implementation of all 4 elements. In other games, they were just secondary elements that weren't used often but they have managed to fully implement them in and I love the game for that.
I wouldn't say the game is 'dark' as you say but it just has a more mature storyline. Face it, the people that played the old Spyro when they were young are at least 17, maybe a little bit younger and SOME of them probably are looking for a more mature game. I'm 16 and while I would have loved for a game to come out mimicing the old series, I am completely happy with the games that they have produced over the last 5 or so years in the LoS Storyline.

Clock-La: Here is some advice. Move on. Stop attacking everyone who likes it. Sure, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you don't have to go out dismissing everyone else's opinion of the game just because you don't like it. Because there are most definitely some, if not alot of people on this forum that like the game. I have gotten into some pretty large arguments myself on other forums with the approach you are taking at the moment.

Nickasam: I'm sure that you have probably already bought them as you posted over 5 months ago but if you haven'i I would recommend buying all 3 of them. They have a great storyline to go along with them. Maybe not as simple as the original series where you just went around collecting things and playing mini-games, but more battle to keep you entertained. It's completely different from the original series in the aspect of linearity where in this you have a set path of where you have to go, but like the original however, the levels are quite open environments and with the addition of free-fly in Dawn of The Dragon. It will ensure for some fun times.

dragon protector x · Jan 20, 2011 5:41 AM

Personally I like both equally. To me it depends why kind of game play im looking for. Puzzles and looking for gems would be the first few games, if im in a fighting mood then the Legend series. I like aspects from both kinds of games. How ever i wish they could meld the Fighting from Legend and the good old visiting the world and searching for gems from the classics. I like things to have a bit more health then one fire breath from the classics.

Clock-la · Jan 20, 2011 3:58 PM

Game_Girl_2007 wrote:

Clock-la wrote:
Swaffy wrote:
Hey, Miss Pessimist, I was talking about the young people. Not you. You're
semi-young. So just calm down about the bloody hatred.
NEVER im here to shear my opinion on the old and the new XD its not my fault DOTD is been brought up 24/7 i MUST show my hate for it. just incase somone thinks i like it lulz
I can't take anyone who spells 'share' as 'shear' seriously...
MUST show your hate? Really? Thats...your goal in life? Your ultimate objective? To waste your time and energy showing how much you hate a game?
Wow....Just....Wow....and here I thought the rabid section of the Sonic fanbase was pathetic.

and here you are hating on the haters.

HA HA sutch a wonderfull thing you've got going hunnie.

shade105 · Jan 20, 2011 9:59 PM

I swear. This site is going down the gutters with the under aged trolls that have infested it.

Man, can't we all really agree that both games are great in one way or another. I mean, think about it:

Without the originals, there would be no Spyro at all. The series was developed that way and went that way for a while. Even if I don't like those games as much as the new ones, I still think they're fun, and you can always have a crazy time with them. I mean, hell I don't like Spyro's attitude from the first games, but whatev.

The new games have something that is ideal and quite entertaining as well: a more serious plot. No matter how much you deny it, most modern games now that make a hit require a serious and and interesting plot. I, as a sucker for good plots, love this game for this; and despite the fact that this game does not have the best game-play out there, it's plot covers well.

Yes, i know everyone here is capable of repeating what EVERY critic has said about the plot as well: "It takes too much inspiration off other stories, especially from Tolkien's "The Lord of the Ring'." Hell, it's quite evident, but that doesn't change everything. Tolkien is the father of Modern Fantasy after all; as such anything that is within the genre of Modern Fantasy will have characteristics similar to this. I'm not joking guys, check out any Modern Fantasy game, book, or movie, and see how I'm right.

The point is, yes the plot has weaknesses, but the plot for the other games are a joke, so no one that's a decent Spyro fan should be trolling about it (Yes, you have all the rights to criticize, but trolling is a whole other thing).

We should seriously see the good things about both games, and give up this stupid trolling that has been going on for a good while now.

As for the suggestion for the first post and the reason this thread started. If you want to fool around, play the first, but for something more chuck-full of plot, get the second. Be cautioned though, the new trilogy is very inconsistent with game play, and small things like such; the new series was very experimental, after all.

Stormy · Jan 20, 2011 10:36 PM

Original fan here. Instead of mindlessly bashing, why not give reasons for why you like or dislike something?

What I don't about LoS*:

Cliche, predictable story
Repetitive gameplay and levels
Annoying enemies
Linear levels
Levels are way too long
Save points. These sucked because there were so few of them.
Requires little skill and no thinking (button mashing)
Spyro's design. Seriously, wtf.
The characters. They're flat. If they had interesting depth and personality, I could forget everything else and still enjoy the story and the game. But there was nothing special about them. This is my problem with a lot of movies that other people love.
Some tasks had no point in relation to the plot
Annoying fans (although this admittedly isn't the games' fault)

What I do like about LoS:

It's sort of mindlessly entertaining.
The fact that it's story centered. It may not have been the most original story, but it was somewhat entertaining nonetheless.
Evil Cynder. She was pretty cool.
Sparx at some parts. He talks a lot and gets annoying, but he had quite a few redeeming funny lines.
Voice acting was good.

*"LoS" in this post is referring to ANB and TEN, since I still haven't played DotD.

As for the plot of the originals being a "joke," well, you're right. But this doesn't bother me because I didn't expect a good plot for them. What I expected was fun characters, fun gameplay, and an all-around fun environment. It's kind of like Mario: no one cares what the "plot" is; people buy the game to play it, not to watch a movie. (I also think it's kind of a silly argument to say everyone should like the originals because there would be no Spyro without them, but that's a rant for a different time.)

Now with LoS, I complain about the story not just because it wasn't very good, but because it tried to be good and failed. And since I consider the characters, gameplay, and environment mediocre, well... I'd expect a story-centered game to redeem itself with a good story.

shade105 · Jan 20, 2011 10:46 PM

I actually thank you for giving out a well thought response. Three cheers!

You're right, no one seeks the old Spyro games to be blown out of their minds with the plot. Lol it's just for the pure entertainment.

You also have a point with the plot of LoS. It has its weak points, i agree. I blame this to the lack of consistency they had all throughout. I mean every game was something else. Lol, and yeah, it's kinda cliche, and I guess I'm a sucker for that too. I mean it's completely made with that mind-set, i believe. Haha! They were not aiming for the whole "Assassin's Creed level of bad-ace and way out there conspiracy thing", I'm pretty sure.

ratchet · Jan 20, 2011 10:58 PM

Ive probably been ranting about this for 5 years, and I even mentioned it in my latest Spyro LP part on youtube, but the Originals (Not Spyro 1 though) DID have story, and it wasnt just a joke of one. Spyro 2 had more cutscenes than any LOS game. It had a cutscene telling the story of every level and after Spyro exits the level. It had about 10 long cutscenes with some kind of humour. There is less in Spyro 3 but there is still around 8 cutscenes and the story has a twist too. I really get sick of people saying that the originals had no story when Spyro 2 and 3 had some of the best story and voice acting for games back then. Mario, Crash, Croc, Gex, etc usually only had 1 or 2 long cutscenes when the spyro games had 4 fold as many.

shade105 · Jan 21, 2011 5:05 AM

Well yes, they naturally had to have a story, but it was not serious at all, and it was placed mainly to humor the audience.

Stormy · Jan 21, 2011 5:12 AM

Eh, I'd say Spyro 2 and especially 3 had a pretty good stories. It wasn't the entire focus of the games, and it wouldn't stand too well on its own as a movie or anything, but I wouldn't say it was just to humor the audience either.

shade105 · Jan 21, 2011 5:22 AM

Well, I guess you can be right. IDK, the stories in the old game were rather dull in my point (and just before everyone get's on my back, I'm only talking about the plot. I mean be honest, you don't really play the old Spyro games simply to see the plot).

dragon protector x · Jan 21, 2011 7:59 AM

To shade: Honestly from what i have learned with a sister thats just turned 16, its kinda natural for younger ones to act as so because i think Reality really doesn't hit them till either A. They get a job and see how the world runs. B. They have a life changing event that opens there eyes to see how they behave is sophomoric at many times and some time they will have to start acting much more mature. Yes some times the younger they are the more free spirited, they tend to seem to post like(im almost 19 and after haveing a job at Mc Donalds really opens your eyes to how people act. Iv observed both the adult and kids while working there and it is surprising). I can think of the name of one who was the worst when on the Chat but i wont say their name. As for going down the drain... i wouldn't say that. Some posts you may like but so long as the rules are followed and order is kept for those who break them then its fine.

Back to topic:
After thinking about my post earlier i forgot to add that I REALLY didnt like the armor system in Los and if they where to merdge what i liked about both i would REALLY want a better armor system IF it was to be put in. Though i dont think it would work well, it would be a nice though. And alot more armor choices would be nice to.

ratchet · Jan 21, 2011 12:22 PM

shade105 wrote:

Well, I guess you can be right. IDK, the stories in the old game were rather dull in my point (and just before everyone get's on my back, I'm only talking about the plot. I mean be honest, you don't really play the old Spyro games simply to see the plot).

Back in the late 1990s, you played NO game to see the plot. But Spyro DID have a plot. It had no HD Movie like cutscenes because you had to fit a game on a 700mb disc back then. As for being "not serious at all", I think that speaks for other games where they just say "anything goes" for a plot, "who cares". Spyro had a direction, humour, love interests (which they were easy to support or just laugh at), twists and SOME personality for the characters.

It wasnt like Insomniac quickly rushed a story together, they spent time on their stories, not as much as the LOS developers, but still some time. Look at other 3d platformers made around then and tell me that spyro 2 and spyro 3 didnt have a decent story.

riverhippo · Jan 21, 2011 5:18 PM

ratchet wrote:

shade105 wrote:
Well, I guess you can be right. IDK, the stories in the old game were rather dull in my point (and just before everyone get's on my back, I'm only talking about the plot. I mean be honest, you don't really play the old Spyro games simply to see the plot).
Back in the late 1990s, you played NO game to see the plot. But Spyro DID have a plot. It had no HD Movie like cutscenes because you had to fit a game on a 700mb disc back then. As for being "not serious at all", I think that speaks for other games where they just say "anything goes" for a plot, "who cares". Spyro had a direction, humour, love interests (which they were easy to support or just laugh at), twists and SOME personality for the characters.
It wasnt like Insomniac quickly rushed a story together, they spent time on their stories, not as much as the LOS developers, but still some time. Look at other 3d platformers made around then and tell me that spyro 2 and spyro 3 didnt have a decent story.

That is definately over-looked. Probably the kind of over-look that gave Spyro for ps3 a bad review too.

ratchet · Jan 21, 2011 10:11 PM

Spyro for the PS3? huh?
And again, I know Spyro 1 had a crap story, I am only talking about Spyro 2 and 3

shade105 · Jan 22, 2011 12:05 AM

Well yeah, I guess for the time it probably had a good plot. Things have changed though, and that kind of story style does not work anymore.

ratchet · Jan 22, 2011 5:57 AM

"Not Work" anymore? Mario still has the same plot. That still works. It will still be a mediocre story (And decent-great back then). Also Who said that the originals would have a mediocre plot if they were made today?

riverhippo · Jan 22, 2011 7:34 AM

ratchet wrote:

Spyro for the PS3? huh?

Playstation Network made it available to download. It's $6. I think they only re-rate released like that so that consumers can compare them with new original downloadable games, like Flower and Noby Noby Boy. Spyro the Dragon got mediocre reviews.

ratchet · Jan 22, 2011 8:08 AM

Spyro the Dragon got a 7. And they werent ranking it as a 1998 game, they were ranking it as a game you could get these days.

Link:
http://au.ps3.ign.com/articles/839/839801p1.html

Clock-la · Jan 22, 2011 2:13 PM

ratchet wrote:

Spyro the Dragon got a 7. And they werent ranking it as a 1998 game, they were ranking it as a game you could get these days.
Link:
http://au.ps3.ign.com/articles/839/839801p1.html

hmm makes sence in a way but still pritty stupid XD

I don't know because of corse its going to be worse next to this genarations games dispite the memorys.

Stormy · Jan 22, 2011 7:03 PM

Games don't need to have a story to be good. They don't today and they never had. More games are coming out that have cinematic stories and cutscenes, yeah, but that doesn't mean any game without that automatically can't "work" in some way.

Stories are nice, but gameplay is the main thing to worry about. You can watch a movie or read a book for a good, in depth story.

RedDragonX · Jan 22, 2011 10:14 PM

Give me something that makes me forget about stuff I don't want to think about and I'm happy with a game.

riverhippo · Jan 23, 2011 12:28 AM

RedDragonX wrote:

Give me something that makes me forget about stuff I don't want to think about and I'm happy with a game.

Actually one of the best responses to the argument.

I'm giving you 200 gems for that, even though as a mod you could probably just give yourself gems, lol.

cynderfan · Jan 23, 2011 12:46 AM

Swaffy wrote:

Hey ... I like glitches. Especially Halo 2 with all of the super jumps and
getting outside of the map; it was all fun. Sometimes my friends on Xbox
Live and I spend hours trying out new glitches and exploring outside of the
maps and getting inside of solid objects where you can shoot out but not in.

Glitches are awesome.

Latias fan · Jan 23, 2011 2:48 AM

cynderfan wrote:

Swaffy wrote:
Hey ... I like glitches. Especially Halo 2 with all of the super jumps and
getting outside of the map; it was all fun. Sometimes my friends on Xbox
Live and I spend hours trying out new glitches and exploring outside of the
maps and getting inside of solid objects where you can shoot out but not in.
Glitches are awesome.

Go play any of Bethsodas games and see if you belive that.

shade105 · Jan 23, 2011 5:32 AM

I disagree with the story thing. I think if any game wants to make it big nowadays it needs a good and well developed plot. The reason the mario games don't require that is due to the fact that they are classics, and as such things have to be kept that way. Spyro lparted from the whole "It's a classic game" idea, and moved to something large.

I seriously don;t think a game without a decent plot can make it out there anymore.

#26 Jan 20, 2011 5:29 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#27 Jan 20, 2011 5:41 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#28 Jan 20, 2011 3:58 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#29 Jan 20, 2011 9:59 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#30 Jan 20, 2011 10:36 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#31 Jan 20, 2011 10:46 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#32 Jan 20, 2011 10:58 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#33 Jan 21, 2011 5:05 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#34 Jan 21, 2011 5:12 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#35 Jan 21, 2011 5:22 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#36 Jan 21, 2011 7:59 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#37 Jan 21, 2011 12:22 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#38 Jan 21, 2011 5:18 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#39 Jan 21, 2011 10:11 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#40 Jan 22, 2011 12:05 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#41 Jan 22, 2011 5:57 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#42 Jan 22, 2011 7:34 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#43 Jan 22, 2011 8:08 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#44 Jan 22, 2011 2:13 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#45 Jan 22, 2011 7:03 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#46 Jan 22, 2011 10:14 PM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#47 Jan 23, 2011 12:28 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#48 Jan 23, 2011 12:46 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#49 Jan 23, 2011 2:48 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

#50 Jan 23, 2011 5:32 AM

Re: (please read) original trilogy or new trilogy???

Board footer