Talk:Spyro Reignited Trilogy

theyre remakes, not remasters
one does not mean the same as the other. it seems even the developers have failed to notice the difference.KRISHANKO (talk) 19:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * We go with what the majority of sources say, not people's individual opinions. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

It's not an opinion that these are remakes, it's a fact. They are being referred to as remasters for marketing purposes because they want to keep the games as close to the originals as possible. A remaster is when you take an existing game and just improve the visuals to be HD, this trilogy was completely remade from the ground up. Blsupr (talk) 00:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes it is an opinion, since majority of sources call them remasters. Otherwise it's original research unless there are sources supporting it. TheDeviantPro (talk) 02:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

No, it is a fact. It's not complicated. Blsupr (talk) 03:57, 13 November 2018 (UTC) Sources can be wrong, they are not remasters, they are REMAKES — Preceding unsigned comment added by N-Sane Maniac (talk • contribs) 11:02, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sources disagree. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 05:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually the linked Polygon article quotes the devs saying it is a "ground-up remake" and the writers of the article are contradicted in the same article. I will go with what the devs and WP:COMMONSENSE says and change it to remake.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:10, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

/* Development info */
PlayStation Lifestyle staff member Chandler Wood wrote about his tour in Toys for Bob's studio where he was given some insight on the development of SRT. Could be good for some future references. Source: https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2018/10/30/toys-for-bob-nostalgia-spyro-reignited-trilogy/

92.244.24.162 (talk) 06:58, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Inconclusive source for reliability, per WP:VG/RS. I'm assuming this is this an original report? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:07, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Activision actually paid for several well known YouTubers and other sites to visit Toys for Bob and meet with Peter Kavic the senior producer so this is legit. In this instance I don't think there would be an issue using this as a reliable source with consensus if there is valuable info that would be helpful to the article.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  14:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, would a more reliable source have covered it? If not, then I guess it's fine to use this one. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:26, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Sanzaru Games
They are a co-developer. They are shown on the back of the case of the game and are the lead developer for the third game in the collection. There's no website to source this from because game journalists are a joke. The source is the credits in the game. Is the Wikipedia article supposed to suffer because of this? Blsupr (talk) 04:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Where is your source that they are a lead developer of the third game then? ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 05:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Took a look of a playthrough of Year of the Dragon on YouTube to look at the credits, no Sanzaru Games is not lead developer, Toys For Bob is always at the top of the credits therefore they are lead developer on the trilogy. TheDeviantPro (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So the user claims games journalists are a joke and then appears to have either made up or exaggerated a claim of their own? ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 22:39, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * EDIT: looking at the credits myself, Sanzaru Games are credited for helping with Spyro 3 (does not state they were the lead devs or anything), so they should be mentioned somewhere in the dev section. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 22:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

They are listed as the "Spyro 3 team" in the credits, it's directly under the name of the studio. Blsupr (talk) 01:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC) Except it isn't an assumption. Blsupr (talk) 07:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * But nowhere does it state that Toys for Bob had nothing to do with Spyro 3 as well, which is the assumption you are making. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 19:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Twitter can't be used a source but someone that worked on the game claims that Sanzaru handled "all" work on Spyro 3. Blsupr (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Who is "someone"? If it's somebody actually reliable, such as one of the staff members on the game, then it could possibly be used as a reliable source for your claims. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 21:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Are you just being purposefully dense now? The link is right there at the end of my last post for you to see for yourself. Blsupr (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No I wasn't, I missed the link because you didn't make it obvious by placing it into the actual sentence. Anyway, despite this person just being a contracted animator who worked with Sanzaru, it should work as a citation for the claim. I'll add Sanzaru's contribution under a note since the credits specifically point them out as well. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 01:22, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I disagree, the Twitter post shouldn't be used as a source. It's a rank and file employee's offhand claim, which has not been proven at all and could just be to the best of his knowledge. A reliable source is a reliable source. If a studio actually takes credit for the work, that's another matter entirely. See also: WP:MOTHERSGRAVE.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:10, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * But they are still sourced in the game's credits, so this isn't some baseless claim and would still probably have been added eventually regardless. Also, the actual tweet isn't cited anywhere in the article. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 18:50, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Larger images
There's a nice over-under image in the article comparing a screenshot of the same scene in both the classic game and the Reignited game, but the image is very very small. Can someone recreate that one in a larger size? Especially since the modern version is for high definition displays, there's a lot of detail — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.37.120.97 (talk) 12:40, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No because they are both non-free use images, and therefore can't be used in high quality as a compromise. See WP:IMAGERES. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 19:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Stephan Vankov as an arranger
Is it ok to put in Stephan Vankov as an arranger? I know that he didn’t compose anything new in the game. Gorilli09 (talk) 02:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , we don't put arrangers or music producers in the infobox. His contributions are instead noted in the dev section. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 05:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Why does rearranging the soundtrack not warrant at least a note? If the assistant dev teams, original dev teams, and porting teams get a clarification note, I don't see why Vankov shouldn't at least get that much. 2603:6010:F2F0:7A00:8CFF:74BD:1E42:9DDB (talk) 01:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * People could think Copeland directly worked on this, I agree. I also made the prose flow better as a single sentence. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 07:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

References to content "no longer considered appropriate"
The gameplay section refers to "changes to content in the originals that was no longer considered appropriate." As far as I can tell, no source has ever stated that the reason for these changes was what is considered "appropriate." The source referenced in that paragraph links to a comic con panel, which I watched, that never seems to reference these changes at all, let alone reasons for them. The changes undeniably happened, and the reasons for them is very possibly changes in what is considered appropriate, but without any sources citing that as the reason, using that phrasing is speculation. I recommend changing that sentence to simply read, "The remaster also made a few changes to content in the originals." XandoToaster (talk) 08:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)