necromanzer52 said:
No love for Spyro anywhere? Yeah, the first one is pretty bare-bones when compared to the sequels, but I think this works in its favour. You're completely on your own. The only friendly faces you see are the dragons you rescue. It makes it feel like more of an adventure than the sequels.
And, I don't think I need to go into what makes the sequels so good. I'll just say that I adore these games. I've played them many times before. I'm sure I'll play them many more times, and never get tired of them.
This. I don't hold a huge amount of love for the 1st game, but I certainly respect it; it's a good game that acts as a focus point for the next instalment to build upon and refine.
I still stand by the second game being one of the best platformers I've ever come across, in terms of gameplay, design and art direction. It's scope feels really big thanks to the high level count and the physical size of the homeworlds, it has a fantastic sense of exploration and world-building, and its consistently fun and inventive gameplay-wise.
The third takes everything that worked for the first two and refines it further, although I will say the art style and general design cohesion takes a step back.
But yeah this, (as with the naughty dog Crash Bandicoot series, which I'd actually probably put on equal footing with Spyro - even down to the 1st being a tad odd, the second being a marked jump in quality and the third being a refinement with a slightly worse design aesthetic than the last) is really one of my favourite classic era trilogies because of its sense of development over the three games; you can see the developers trying to evolve and refine their works, which is really quite cool.
So, yay, all the nostalgia points for PS1 platformer trilogies!