Rumour: Spyro Fans Spot Potential 25th Anniversary Tease

They can start by updating the Spyro Trilogy to run at 60fps on PS5, would be glorious.

I hope so but didn't Spyro's ownership come under MS recently? If so I imagine it will be exclusive.

No ducking way 😭😭😭
Spyro> Crash

@The_Moose not yet, not until the acquisition closes.

God, I would love a new Spyro game.

No thanks, I don't "buy" things from Activision.

@Americansamurai1 Ah I thought it was already a done deal. Cheers.

@ShogunRok This. The Trilogy is really good at 60 fps on PC.

Anyways, I really hope we get to see more with Spyro.

@The_Moose with all the drama going on it might not close until next year.

@themightyant that's true , who knows I just want to see a PlayStation showcase. Don't care about Activision.

Spyro remastered remastered

Fingers crossed for a new title but don't Toys for Bob only work on Call of Duty now? Such a waste of talent.

@Rob3008 Yeah, that's why this seems unlikely. I doubt Bobby granted them autonomy to go back to Spyro after he shut down the Spyro stuff when the trilogy under-performed and added them to the CoD corpse fire with the other victims. Even if the change of heart was recent due to the buyout, it wouldn't be enough time to have a game ready. Maybe they had something canned for the anniversary before they got moved to the CoD chain gang?

@themightyant It'll close, but it's going to kill following either PS or XB for another year while they both fall all over themselves to tell everyone "Our platform is the worse one! Honest!"

@ShogunRok could do with a few more bugfixes too. Sort out CTR's online while they're at it... who am I kidding...

@NEStalgia @Rob3008 Their current project is Crash Rumble, so no.

@Orpheus79V It's criminal that CTR never got any major software updates. The core game is so good but being locked to 30fps on console is such a downer, and like you say, the online was flawed from day one and never really got fixed. Such a waste.

Gonna get an "Enter The Dragonfly" remake aren't we? 4K bubble breath!

Jokes aside, would love for a proper "4th" entry/sequel to Year of the Dragon.
I really enjoyed the Reignited Trilogy! being a muppet and double dipping, having it on both PS4 and Switch.

I bought the Spyro trilogy on a steam sale for a fiver in addition to my PS4 copy due to the 30 fps cap. However, a fps upgrade for PlayStation consoles would be very welcome for me.

As much as I love me a new mainline Spyro game I'm not getting my hopes up, and while I'm pretty fond of Crash I always liked Spyro more.

Binged the Reignited Trilogy over Christmas and by the Year of the Dragon, I was begging it to end. This is coming from someone who loved Spyro way back when, but the over abundance of gimmicks and extras in that game was fatiguing. That being said, Toys For Bob are a phenomenal team.

If we did get another game please god no more mini games.

The third one had so many it didn't even feel like I was playing a Spyro game at all.

@GreatAuk exactly my issue. Crash 4 was really good at keeping the focus on the platforming so I’m hoping a Toys For Bob helmed orignal Spyro would do the same.

I would love some new spyro

I'd love to see a new Spyro, but I don't think it'll happen.

@Orpheus79V I forgot about Rumble. I remember they were moved to Warzone, but something must have changed in there. That's good.

Announce Spyro 4 and update the Reignited Trilogy to run at 4K60 on PS5 and Series X. That’ll make me very happy.

I hope so but I'll wait patiently. Then again the Year of the Dragon Platinum says 2024 so if they want it to line up smartly like that I wouldn't be surprised. I remember that trophy well once I beat it in 2018.

Party like it’s 2024
Win all trophies in Spyro 3 [Platinum]
Earn all other trophies in Spyro 3: Year of the Dragon to unlock Platinum.
https://www.powerpyx.com/spyro-3-year-of-the-dragon-trophy-guide-roadmap/

With how Microsoft treated Blinx (yes I know Banjo and so on exist too but Blinx 2 and Halo 2 which sold better it's easy to guess and we can't have Blinx 2 on backwards compatibility both times 360 and Xbox One thanks Microsoft why not? It would sell better if you actually made it clear it was a duology then 1 game and an audience would pick it up digitally if they knew about it and saw it on the Xbox Store but no why do that. What is the licensing reasons for it I swear) and Voodoo Vince got a remaster so better handled I don't have high hopes for Microsoft's side of things. I can take Japanese support being third parties on Gamepass then the OG/360 era it not working out even though I like what came out there a lot of cool stuff. But their 'we want kids games' yeah I don't see it. Psychonauts 2 is something and others may exist out there but it isn't the same as other titles on the platform. It's like saying 'we have a Kung Fu Panda 360' yeah and...... I mean Super Lucky's Tale (while I hate the camera angle) it being not VR was fine I didn't mind it but it's such a rare occurrence that most people either forget, don't care or don't usually count it as enough effort and I can see both sides of that. It's just not the same thing that's all. I know they try but it's not clear what their messaging and actions are being so different. Nothing wrong with a mature audience for your console so people buy it the adults have the money after all (even if is mostly a third party graphics powerhouse and shooter/racing/sports machine more likely seen for most people then other types of games but I use my Xboxs sometimes for different things outside that vibe and don't have enough backwards compatible titles for it to be useable for that just yet) but if they want first party kids games like the very few Sony has these days and Nintendo covers that easily then yeah they need to show it then just third parties as the more likely and not deals just bundles or available.

I'll never get a Pitfall sequel/remake of Lost Expedition aka Big Adventure but still it's Activision (same with a Red Steel 2 VR version Ubisoft come on most work is already done in the Wii version a new audience on PC/PSVR it will be like Borderlands 2 VR a cellshaded shooter to enjoy on such hardware, but anyway) I don't care for their few games they release and dodgey business practices and lacking content on the disk so I have to keep Spyro reignited on my console.

I haven't seen new print copies either with 'all on the disk' ones if they did exist or not later on as new revisions do exist for games I know besides updates but still you never know with some companies these days with the internet being so easy to abuse for things in game development and ignoring physical more and more for their pockets.

I have wondered what Toys for Bob and Beenox are doing. Since they were told to support Warzone, Vicarious moved to the Blizzard side more with Dialbo 2 besides Tony Hawk 1+2 and N Sane Trilogy before that besides Skylanders on and off, Toys did Crash 4, Spyro and Skylanders to start with before Vicarious assisted other entries.

Beenox I assume are doing Rumble unless another company and Beenox did the content updates and support of Crash Team Racing Nitro Fueled so either of Beenox or Toys working on stuff besides COD support when High Moon, Infinity Ward, Treyarch and Raven work on them so much that the other 3 studios making Skylanders/Crash/Spyro always was an 'uh I guess they may have teams working on them but depends on how many do COD and how many do the other games in the mean time'.

@NEStalgia It's far too big of a deal for Microsoft to fairly claim in a monopoly. If the commission is going to do the job they are supposed to they will say No. While Microsoft has a stake in the console market there is going to be corporate biasm no matter what they claim and they stand to benefit from that more than ever with the Game Pass.

Bigger fan of Crash but enjoyed the Spyro remake trilogy and would welcome a new entry.

@SoNico89 That's really off topic, but I'll say that in terms of the legalities there, there's no monopoly there, and MS's market share with or without ABK is still dwarfed by Sony. No regulator could cite "monopoly" when the company in question still isn't even close to the market leader, and the market leader isn't exactly a small potatoes company. It's always difficult when two megacorporations go at it. Our instinct is side with the underdog. But who's the underdog here? MS is a wealthier corporation that Sony Group Corp. But in the gaming market they're the small fry with no market share and Sony is the established leader that has a virtual monopoly in gaming. How do we chose sides in a battle between a company that's "too big and rich" but that money comes from a different industry, vs a company that's "also too big and rich but less so" but is virtually unchallenged in the market in question? The console market is a tiny part of "gaming", and Sony pretty much runs it single handedly. Maybe we need the KFC Console after all!
People do have a knee-jerk reaction to just see dollar amounts and go "that company is too big!" and not look at what actually is involved in the transaction or how different divisions or subsidiaries really function within these big organizations.

With ABK specifically, what really changes if the deal closes? Question about a Spyro game that was never going to set the market on fire and if it will be on PS. Microsoft gets a big stake in mobile gaming they never had a presence in before and none of us care. CoD basically goes unchanged until it inevitably dies anyway, but Sony's investors lose value (play tiny violins.) Some PC games that were never going to be on PS will still never be on PS and may or may not get an XB port. And some dead IPs Acti abandoned a decade ago may or may not be revived as XB exclusives. And Sony still dominates the console market with a heavy hand and a disdain for their customers. What ACTUALLY changes in the landscape for players other than that Sony has to be somewhat more competitive which is a good thing?

I'm much more worried that if it would lead to Sony buying Square for example as that would seriously affect the variety of games produced and for various platforms by Square, they'd turn it into an FF factory and assign western overseers to run the company, and shut down most of the variety, which, unlike ABK still actually makes and publishes many varying games on many varying platforms. Financially it doesn't look like as much of a "big bad" thing as "70 billion dollars!" But in terms of the real on the ground effect for games enthusiasts in the console market, it actually would have a more chilling effect. At the same time I don't want to see Sony able to keep expanding their unchallenged dominion in consoles without MS being able to increase the competitive pressure against them. Someone needs to keep Sony honest....and it's not going to be Ubisoft.

That's not to say I disagree about consolidation in general and all markets in all industries consolidating from dozes of regional and local industries to everything merging into markets of 2-3 global competitors and that's the end of it, our new corporate hegemonic feudalist-sociaist global society. But that's a whole other conversation/rant outside of gaming, nor is it one that I think can be solved without WWIII. We're too far over the cliff now.