Spyro the Dragon: Reignited Trilogy - November 13th, 2018 (PS4, Xbox One)

[Blueknight V2.0]

Okay 1st up those Steam requirements aren't final. As their placeholders, same would go for the Switch port cover. It's a placeholder, plus some regions don't have this download  required text.

Plus Nintendo will be releasing their 64GB Switch cartidges this year. So let's just wait & see, we'll see more final info much closer to release. And also possible DLC.

[Tornado]

STEAM RELEASE!

[Blue Blood]

Never played Spyro before (unless the Seasons games count?), so I'm looking forward to trying this out on Switch. Crash didn't mesh with me at all, but Spyro looks much more like my deal.

[Graystripe2000]

15 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Spyro is literally nowhere near as big to warrant it, and the idea they couldn't lessen it down further is fucking ridiculous. Case in point, Doom 2016 is 80GB on PS4, and that was ported to Switch with no issues.

Yeah, but that still required a download.

[Marcello]

Plenty of games require downloads on Switch, because carts are more expensive than discs, so a lot of publishers don't want to spend the extra money on larger carts.

1 hour ago, Blue Blood said:

Never played Spyro before (unless the Seasons games count?), so I'm looking forward to trying this out on Switch. Crash didn't mesh with me at all, but Spyro looks much more like my deal.

Spyro is better than Crash in every way.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

15 minutes ago, Operationgamer17 said:

Yeah, but that still required a download.

And Spyro still isn't anywhere near big enough to justify needing a download. I can't believe this needs to be constantly said time and again - a HD remake of PS1 ERA GAMES should not justify 70GB worth of data, larger than GTA V, Spider Man PS4, or whatever else. Case in point, an update later pushed the data to 30GB. So again - the idea that Spyro is somehow magically too big to optimise is a load of nonsense.

[Blue Blood]

@Marcello In my mind, that's not a high bar at all.

[Tornado]

5 hours ago, Blue Blood said:

Never played Spyro before (unless the Seasons games count?), so I'm looking forward to trying this out on Switch. Crash didn't mesh with me at all, but Spyro looks much more like my deal.

Spyro 1 is the PSX equivalent to Banjo-Kazooie. The level design philosophy is a bit different, because of the differences in character abilities, but the general gameplay concept is pretty Rare-y. The main difference is the camera in all of the Spyro games was much better than anything Rare ever came up with.

 

2 and 3 are much closer in design to SM64; and other than being a bit short and having a section near the 2/3rd mark where the difficulty is briefly rather unreasonable, the former is pretty damn close to being just as good.

[Marcello]

15 minutes ago, Blue Blood said:

@Marcello In my mind, that's not a high bar at all.

Believe me, it isn't for me either. I was glad to be done with each Crash game, but Spyro, I finished each 100+% and got all the Trophies and wanted more. They're all great, but I'd say 2 is the best of the 3.

Crash seems to be getting a 4th game, so I hope Spyro is, too.

[TheOcelot]

39 minutes ago, Blue Blood said:

Never played Spyro before (unless the Seasons games count?), so I'm looking forward to trying this out on Switch. Crash didn't mesh with me at all, but Spyro looks much more like my deal.

The more open-stage design of the original Spyro trilogy compared to the linear-stage layout of the Crash trilogy are a lot of fun to play through and graphically the stages look fantastic in the Reignited triogy. So I hope you'll like it.

In terms of difficulty, Spyro 1 (as Tornado said) is more designed like Banjo-Kazooie. The PS1 version had some very tricky platforming sections which can be frustrating. Thankfully the Reignited version improves over the orginal-makes it easier to navigate some of the tricky sections (accept for the double jump-gliding to long-distance platforms which is slightly harder to pull-off).

Spyro 2's level design is quite different from Spyro 1. More closely-knit layouts with a bit more backtracking (unlock abilities later in the game to be able to access areas you couldn't reach in earlier stages etc). Spyro 2 has the least amount stages compared to the 1&3 but take longer to beat due to more complex challenges. Spyro 2 has best story.

Spyro 3 is basically Spyro 2 but with a weaker story, a lot more padding and more playable characters which adds a bit more variety, their different play styles being hit and miss.

Once you get good you can 100% Spyro 1 in under 5 hours, and bit longer for 2&3 respectively.

 

 

[Graystripe2000]

Okay, what’s going on? The Nintendo US page’s cover shows no indication of the game requiring a download yet the UK one does? 

https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Nintendo-Switch/Spyro-Reignited-Trilogy-1576500.html

[Ryannumber1gamer]

Not strictly related to Reignited, but I don't think we've got a general Spyro topic either, but also more importantly, I feel like it relates to the issues Reignited faced in development, and it's own rushed developmental cycle, someone made this 2 hour documentary surrounding the rushed development of Enter the Dragonfly, complete with interviews directly from the dev team detailing the shitshow it was: 

 

[Jango]

As we approach the Switch and PC release of Spyro, I keep wondering if the other two versions will get a patch that fixes the still present issues the game has, and also fixes Spyro 3 as a whole...

[Harkofthewaa]

@Jango Well Crash N.Sane got a patch on PS4 when it went multi-plat, so I don't see any reason why Spyro won't get a patch as well. Unless of course they made no fixes to the new ports that is.

[Jango]

Well, that was my optimism speaking... but who knows. I trust Toys for Bob with all my heart. But they definitely needed more time to finish those games, as it became clear that it shouldn't have come out in November either, as much as the final product is still fully playable, enjoyable and beautiful. They just needed an extra time to iron the tech part, like the issue with the ridiculously large file size, motion blur and shitty frame rate in Spyro 3. But since time is money, and Activision loves money... well, you know the story.

The situation I see is that this "extra year" wasn't spent in fixing Reignited Trilogy, since anything they had to work on the game post-launch is still work, and if you work you wanna get paid, right?... and since Activision pulled that dick move and put Toys for Bob on a crunchy state back then, it's clear that they thought the work the studio had invested in the game was already more then enough. Heck, if Toys for Bob didn't fighted Activision back, they would've release the game in the original date, which was September 21st. And since Actvision haven't changed a bit, I wouldn't doubt if they have said something like: "- Let it go, move on to the our next project". Apparently, it isn't even Toys for Bob doing the ports, and according to their Twitter, they indeed moved to the next project already, so... Spyro just might end up never being fixed

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

On 7/29/2019 at 3:16 PM, Operationgamer17 said:

Okay, what’s going on? The Nintendo US page’s cover shows no indication of the game requiring a download yet the UK one does? 

https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Nintendo-Switch/Spyro-Reignited-Trilogy-1576500.html

Ah yes, this.

Reduced game file size as well as the removal of "download needed" highly suggests that whoever is porting this is miraculously getting enough time to actually get these games properly on one cart without the bugs and lag hopefully.

As was stated before, makes sense if they're given the proper time and optimization. Spyro is not really one to be pushing a system's hardware. 

[Graystripe2000]

Switch version requires update. Apparently for the cutscenes. 

 

[Jango]

6 hours ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

Ah yes, this.

Reduced game file size as well as the removal of "download needed" highly suggests that whoever is porting this is miraculously getting enough time to actually get these games properly on one cart without the bugs and lag hopefully.

As was stated before, makes sense if they're given the proper time and optimization. Spyro is not really one to be pushing a system's hardware. 

Right.....!!!......

 

6 hours ago, Operationgamer17 said:

Switch version requires update. Apparently for the cutscenes. 

 

Or not....? Damn. Why is this game so... un-optimizable (that's a word)?!

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

49 minutes ago, Jango said:

Or not....? Damn. Why is this game so... un-optimizable

That's not the case. As is commonly known, if something's not optimized properly we have the hard-headed nature of big wings not allowing their respective porting companies the time and effort.

Especially when they're working for someone like Activision.

[Jango]

Yes, the point that they still didn't had enough time to optimize the game remains. I'm not an expert in the area, but porting should be something fairly easy and quick, especially because Spyro uses the Unreal Engine, which the Switch supports IIRC. The process of porting the game to a weaker hardware should by extend demand some optimization already. Is 10 months not enough time then? Or Activision only gave them like 2 months and the game is simply waiting for the most profitable release date? CTR came in June, makes sense for Activision to release Spyro in September, so both games won't compete with each other.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

3 minutes ago, Jango said:

Yes, the point that they still didn't had enough time to optimize the game remains. I'm not an expert in the area, but porting should be something fairly easy and quick, especially because Spyro uses the Unreal Engine, which the Switch supports IIRC. The process of porting the game to a weaker hardware should by extend demand some optimization already. Is 10 months not enough time then? Or Activision only gave them like 2 months and the game is simply waiting for the most profitable release date? CTR came in June, makes sense for Activision to release Spyro in September, so both games won't compete with each other.

The PC version has to be taken into account, and that arguably muddies the water. One necessitates porting the game to be much more graphically and technically powerful, while the other requires lessening it on a graphical and technical level.

That said, if you want my honest guess - the original ports seemed to be a shambling wreck already, especially 3. It wouldn't surprise me if the time was squandered into trying to polish up 2 and 3 again, as opposed to doing a proper optimisation job.  

[Jango]

Yeah, that could be it. I recall a similar case with the PS3 ports of the Jak & Daxter trilogy. Mass Media Games said in an interview that porting Jak & Daxter to the PS3 was painfull because the original Naughty Dog code was a complete mess. I imagine Blue Point Games used Mass Media's port to re-port it to PS4 instead of ND's.

Well, if they at least fix Spyro 3 I would be happy. Sure a better optimization would be ideal, but that doesn't look like it's gonna happen, at least not on Switch.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

2 hours ago, Jango said:

Sure a better optimization would be ideal, but that doesn't look like it's gonna happen, at least not on Switch.

What on earth makes you so dead set on that opinion?

[Multikaris]

On 1/4/2019 at 11:31 AM, Almar said:

I wonder if the next game could serve as something of an Ultimate Universe for Spyro. Like:

-Going with the idea that Spyro being a purple dragon makes him special.

-Cynder and/or Malefor coming back.

-Hunter having his village in Shadow Legacy (which in many ways came off as a predesccor of the Legend games) and Legend.

Maybe throwing in Skylanders stuff, too? Or would that be too weird? 

[Graystripe2000]

New trailer.