Spyro in 1998 had no precision jump and no memorable villain. It had 12,000 gems and a glide that forgave almost everything. Is that what puts it above many “serious” 3D platformers?
Spyro is my favorite video game franchise even during the eras where he was getting just whatever and the years he got nothing. I love the little guy and his new game is easily the most excited I’ve been for a game in years.
Spyro wasnt really about difficulty. It was about collecting shit.
My favorite.
May I remind you of that level with the slides … trying to 100 percent that was a motherfucker
I was actually going to mention this. I think Spyro 2 really perfected this because I can 100% that one in about 1-2 weeks of casual play. The first one always looked and felt a bit unrefined and had a few too many rough edges compared to the second imho.
Third one was my jam, played that for years until my console finally died. Spyro was the shit, might have to give it another run through lol
The remastered trilogy is true to form if you haven’t played it. Visuals are truly “as you remember it in your head”. Also fully remixed soundtrack you can choose to turn on or off. I loved the original and still prefer the new soundtrack.
Mine is the one with the supercharge roundabout to superglide to the opposite side of the castle.
Tbh I got through maybe two levels and noped out of this game. I really don’t see the appeal. It does not seem like it holds up today.
2018/2019 Reignited release: 82/91% positive reviews on Playstation/Steam.
It might not be your kind of game, but I think it’s safe to say it holds up.
from a nostalgia perspective, Spyro was possibly the greatest (console) game of its time, especially among 3d performers. insomniac had virtually perfected tight controls on a 4-legged character, along with a memorable soundtrack, and graphics/colors that no other game could compete with at the time. to this day, Spyro 2 is my favorite 3d platformer (i havent played the remake yet)
Gex > Spyro
Its tail time.
That’s a pretty big claim considering Super Mario 64 predates Spyro by 2 years. I’ll admit I’m biased, since I had an N64 and not a PS1 growing up. However, when I went to play Spyro recently, the levels just seemed bare and collecting the gems and freeing the dragons felt very inconsequential. In comparison, collecting a star in SM64 felt like a real task that you were rewarded for completing by further unlocking doors in the castle. It’s possible that I did not let the game “settle in” before dropping it, but the game just didn’t seem to have an alluring gameplay loop.
You might like the sequels more since they lean more into the objective based structure of Mario 64. Spyro 1 was more a kind of vibes game that was fun to just run around in while grabbing stuff. It felt a lot more like a sandbox compared to the sequels which feel more tightened up and give more definitive goals.
I like it, but propose a counter-point: most Mario games. They have some skill checks in the main game, but not many – most of the difficulty lies in completely optional challenges. Often, you get to pick and choose your own difficulty by picking which stars/moons/etc. to collect to progress, only requiring that you get i.e. 5 out of 10 total.
I personally prefer the option of going for harder goals, but FWIW I did enjoy the Spyro remake (didn’t play it as a kid).
Inb4 summoning salt
