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

[Ryannumber1gamer]

Found this on Reddit: 

Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/Spyro/comments/cy1hjf/something_arrived_a_few_days_early/

Put simply - someone got the game a few days early, which confirms that a download is still required to play the game (earlier, it was speculated, but not 100% confirmed to be the case).

So yep, 1 year later, here we are with the game not fully on disc. Considering the usual issues with publishers and game preservation, there is a very good reason present to be very angry that this bullshit is still a thing.

[Jango]

On PS4 the game has 30 or so gigabytes (after a patch, on release it was like, 60 or more). One can argue and with good reason that "this is Activision". But what if they (Toys for Bob) really couldn't reduce the game more to fit on a single Switch cartdridge? I know Spyro isn't The Witcher 3 levels of detail, but it has like a hundred levels with many many characters, cutscenes and things to animate which I believe (believe, not know) should take a bunch of disk space. I can't point my finger at Toys for Bob and call them incompetents as I don't know nor have evidence that more optimization was possible to fit all three games in a Switch cartdridge. I doubt they or Activision will ever tell that too, and unlike CTR's microtransactions scheme (which was predetermineted), I don't see the financial point of putting half of the game in the cloud. In fact, Activision would be loosing money doing this, because if in the future the game's servers go offline, there will be no reason to buy it brand new...

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

35 minutes ago, Jango said:

One can argue and with good reason that "this is Activision".

Anyone with common sense and especially those well versed with video game programming and porting would know that it's Activision. 

Especially when the Switch already has far bigger titles than Spyro Reignited Trilogy under its belt, properly optimized. 

And if Spyro 3 ends up running better on the Switch, that'll just be all the more sign that ajy of these problems in the first place are due to Activision rushing things.

I know you yourself don't like to say positive things about the Switch, but take it from folk who know how this works. And are aware of Activision's skullduggery.

42 minutes ago, Jango said:

I don't see the financial point of putting half of the game in the cloud. In fact, Activision would be loosing money doing this, because if in the future the game's servers go offline, there will be no reason to buy it brand new...

You assume Activision are going to care about this game after console severs go down. Especially considering how that's no where near to happening. Also, you're implying that they're gonna let something dumb like that even stop them when they've done worse and continue to do so.

Your faith in Activision is quite unyielding, I see.

The financial goal is obvious.  They want to cheap out on development akin to the PS4 and Xbox One ports and only have to put money into putting a fraction of the game on the cartridge.  Something a lot of scummy developers do these days.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

8 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

Anyone with common sense and especially those well versed with video game programming and porting would know that it's Activision. 

Especially when the Switch already has far bigger titles than Spyro Reignited Trilogy under its belt, properly optimized. 

And if Spyro 3 ends up running better on the Switch, that'll just be all the more sign that ajy of these problems in the first place are due to Activision rushing things.

I know you yourself don't like to say positive things about the Switch, but take it from folk who know how this works. And are aware of Activision's skullduggery.

You assume Activision are going to care about this game after console severs go down. Especially considering how that's no where near to happening. Also, you're implying that they're gonna let something dumb like that even stop them when they've done worse and continue to do so.

Your faith in Activision is quite unyielding, I see.

The financial goal is obvious.  They want to cheap out on development akin to the PS4 and Xbox One ports and only have to put money into putting a fraction of the game on the cartridge.  Something a lot of scummy developers do these days.

Furthermore, the servers don’t affect them. Because by the point it gets to the point of a server shutdown, the discs will likely be out of print, and at that point, Activision have made their money and couldn’t give half a shit.

In short, they cheap out on production costs by doing this shit, make them money, and damn the consequences.

But yet again, I can’t believe this is coming up again, there is tons and tons of more powerful games on Switch, it isn’t a weak piece of kit that is unable to run a fucking PS1 remake. It is at least on par to the Wii U power wise, if not above it. The Witcher 3 is being released on it for goodness sake, one of the most developed open world games in recent years. And on top of that, it has no data download, why? Because the devs aren’t skimping out on production costs.

The point regarding 30GB is also a load of nonsense because Nintendo have already established 32GB and 64GB carts now. In fact, Witcher 3 is making use of those carts. There’s no reason why Spyro should require a 32GB cart, but due to Activision’s rushed bullshit, that’s the situation it’s in. And now that it risks costing them additional money for their rushing tendencies, they’ve damned the consequences and left the consumers to deal with their shit yet again.

[Jango]

39 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

Anyone with common sense and especially those well versed with video game programming and porting would know that it's Activision. 

I see a point, but like I stated, I can't prove it because I don't know about game programming. Untill someone come out and show a ported version of the game that fits and runs entirely on a Switch cartridge, you're just assuming the worst case scenario basing your speech on the pre concept you have about the company in question, which doesn't hold much weight TBH. It's something Activision is likely to do, but just because it could happen, you have no right to push this conception that "I have too much faith" or "I am protecting the company", I'm just giving my view on the subject. But I expected no less from you, you always do that. 

 

48 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

Especially when the Switch already has far bigger titles than Spyro Reignited Trilogy under its belt, properly optimized. 

Far? Like which?

49 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

And if Spyro 3 ends up running better on the Switch, that'll just be all the more sign that ajy of these problems in the first place are due to Activision rushing things.

This was already known, they rushed Spyro 3 back then and people from production admitted this. There's a video explaining a few pages back.

51 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

I know you yourself don't like to say positive things about the Switch, 

I'm not even gonna respond to this. Assuming stuff about others as usual. But go on, keep playing this game. If you find evidence to support this claim of yours, I'll give you an answer. But I doubt you will.

55 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Ogilvie Maurice said:

The financial goal is obvious.  They want to cheap out on development akin to the PS4 and Xbox One ports and only have to put money into putting a fraction of the game on the cartridge.  Something a lot of scummy developers do these days.

Wait, so putting a less of the game in a cartridge is cheaper (less disk space = lower price? Even with the added digital part added?). I believe you're saying rushing the port would be cheaper because they wouldn't have enough time to fully optimize it and fit it whole in a single cartridge, ergo why it happened again. If that's it, fair enough, but they had perhaps about as much time to port this game than actually creating it (unless they had a shorter deadline of course). They never made it clear when development started, but we know the porting started at least in November last year, so that gives roughly 10 months to port. Maybe that's just not enough in the end, or Activision only gave then half of this and hold the release to a more profitable month.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

22 minutes ago, Jango said:

I can't prove it because I don't know about game programming.

Like I said.  Take it from folk who do know a thing or two about game programming then.

24 minutes ago, Jango said:

Untill someone come out and show a ported version of the game that fits and runs entirely on a Switch cartridge,

You do know that there exists 64GB cartridges for the Switch right? Your claim was that Spyro Reignited Trilogy started off as 60GB and even then got lower.

You don't need to see it work to know that the cartridges have enough space to fit the game. 

Therein lies the proof of a matter that was obvious with or without such, given Activision's track record.

27 minutes ago, Jango said:

Far? Like which?

Smash Bros Ultimate which has far more to it. Oh, and Witcher 3 just to name a few. And that's only a few that I've just mentioned,  research will show you quite a lot more at hand. 

The Switch is not as underpowered as you'd like to think it is.

30 minutes ago, Jango said:

Wait, so putting a less of the game in a cartridge is cheaper

Unfortunately so, in both finances and the time put into it. Something scummy developers operate around.

[Celestia]

4 hours ago, Jango said:

In fact, Activision would be loosing money doing this, because if in the future the game's servers go offline, there will be no reason to buy it brand new...

From what I gather, publishers generally care more about the first few week(s) of sales above anything, which makes sense really. Lifetime sales aren't going to be the majority of a game's profit for a very long time, if ever.

That's the explanation I've seen for why companies will, say, sometimes remove Denuvo but only after the initial launch period, but I think it's safe to say that applies to stuff like this too.

[Jango]

Some reports from Reddit saying the Switch port is not too good...

An user already found a bug in Molten Crater (Spyro 3). A bug that existed in the PS4/Xbox One versions... No sign of day one patch for Switch nor a patch for the other versions, but...

There's this happening today.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

It also seems that none of the glitches or issues with the PS4/Xbox One versions have been addressed, so we can throw out the idea that they spent this entire time fixing the abundant issues with the game.

I’ll be picking up the Switch version at some point today, since it apparently runs decently in handheld, which is primarily what I want the Switch port for, so I’ll probably give impressions of it later.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

46 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

It also seems that none of the glitches or issues with the PS4/Xbox One versions have been addressed, so we can throw out the idea that they spent this entire time fixing the abundant issues with the game. 

Makes you wonder what they even spent time on doing aside from simply porting it. Ugh. It reeks of laziness.

[Jango]

None? Oh shit. Which studios were responsible for the ports? Steam says Iron Galaxy (same as Crash N.Sane) but I don't know about the Switch.

[Echidna Adventurer CC14]

Toys for Bob developed the Switch port inhouse.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

56 minutes ago, Jango said:

None? Oh shit. Which studios were responsible for the ports? Steam says Iron Galaxy (same as Crash N.Sane) but I don't know about the Switch.

Toys For Bob were the ones behind the Switch port. This doesn't reflect positively on them, having already had the technical issues with the first installments of the game.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

Just got the Switch version, but haven’t played proper since I’m waiting for it to download the patch.

That said, there’s a big change from the PS4/Xbox One versions and it’s worse.

The original ports last year had Spyro 1 on disc, as well as parts of 2 and 3, and the rest required a download. Spyro on Switch however also requires a download to access all of Spyro 1’s levels, it says on the main menu that additional download is required for some levels.

I legitimately don’t know how anyone can defend that honestly.

[DarkRula]

If that's the case, I'm surprised they didn't just put a code in a box to go full-on cheap.

[NegaMix]

Yeesh! Sounds like I'll be better off sticking with the PS4 version. Shame, since I was pretty interested in getting Spyro on Switch.

Though I am curious to see how the PC version turns out.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

33 minutes ago, NegaMetallix said:

Yeesh! Sounds like I'll be better off sticking with the PS4 version. Shame, since I was pretty interested in getting Spyro on Switch.

Though I am curious to see how the PC version turns out.

I wouldn't rule out the Switch version just yet. Now, I haven't done extension testing of it yet, but I have cracked it open and run through the first speedway level, and Stone Hills on Handheld mode.

If you're like me, and you really want a portable version of Reignited Trilogy, it's an excellent port, with even some mildly impressive feats. Some of the visual effects are in-tact, including particle effects, and even Spyro burning blades of grass as he uses his flame breath. Some other features have been removed, albeit, minor features - such as grass reacting to Spyro's tail as he runs.

In terms of the gameplay, it runs fairly smoothly, managing consistent 30, although dipping a bit more than the PS4 version. That said, it's not horribly bad. It's noticable when it happens, but not unplayable, or even that bad. 

Haven't tested it docked yet, but undocked at the very least is a very good port, and definitely worth a look if you want a Spyro fix on the go. Me personally, I'm kind of geeking out over the fact that much like Crash, we finally have a proper portable Spyro experience on the go that isn't massively downgraded.

[NegaMix]

@Ryannumber1gamer Hmm, I dunno then. If I were playing it, it'd be primarily in docked mode, so as long as the frame rate dips aren't too noticeable, then I may be tempted.

Have you tested all three games in the trilogy?

[Ryannumber1gamer]

5 minutes ago, NegaMetallix said:

@Ryannumber1gamer Hmm, I dunno then. If I were playing it, it'd be primarily in docked mode, so as long as the frame rate dips aren't too noticeable, then I may be tempted.

Have you tested all three games in the trilogy?

Not yet, as I said, I've only jumped into Spyro 1's opening levels. I'll update the topic when I've played a bit of 2 and 3.

[Conando]

On 9/1/2019 at 7:09 PM, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Found this on Reddit: 

Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/Spyro/comments/cy1hjf/something_arrived_a_few_days_early/

Put simply - someone got the game a few days early, which confirms that a download is still required to play the game (earlier, it was speculated, but not 100% confirmed to be the case).

So yep, 1 year later, here we are with the game not fully on disc. Considering the usual issues with publishers and game preservation, there is a very good reason present to be very angry that this bullshit is still a thing.

As with before, it's probably because Activision is cheap as fuck. They didn't want to compress the game and print it on a dual layer BD for Xbox One and PS4, so no way in hell are they going to pay for a 64 GB Switch Card, since compression is too difficult apparently.

[Jango]

Usually when I wanna compress something, say, in Photoshop, I just reduce the number of pixels. Couldn't they just do that with all the textures? :V

[NegaMix]

2 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Not yet, as I said, I've only jumped into Spyro 1's opening levels. I'll update the topic when I've played a bit of 2 and 3.

Got it. My main concerns with the port are with those games, tbh, due to their differing quality in the other console versions. (Well, Spyro 3 mainly.)

[Ryannumber1gamer]

1 hour ago, Jango said:

Usually when I wanna compress something, say, in Photoshop, I just reduce the number of pixels. Couldn't they just do that with all the textures? :V

Textures are already compressed, especially when it comes to Dragon outfits, quite a few are blurry.

Furthermore - and easily the biggest technical issue so far - the shadows in the game are buggy as hell, and have artefacting, leaving strange visual bugs on the dragons and environments. 

[Jango]

Did they at least got rid of the invisible rock in front of Ice Cavern's portal? XD

[Ryannumber1gamer]

1 hour ago, Jango said:

Did they at least got rid of the invisible rock in front of Ice Cavern's portal? XD

Haven't got there yet, but will let you know when I get there.

If there's anything else anyone's curious regarding the Switch port, give me a shout and I'll let you know when I get to that point of the game.

-------------

On another note, I just discovered the overall file size of the game is 15GB, which is half the size of the PS4/Xbox One ports atm. But more important than that - 16GB cards are readily available on Switch, unlike the 32/64GB carts that were only recently introduced by Nintendo. So it is most definitely Activision cheaping out on build quality.