In the year 2011, Activision decided to give a completely new concept for a character they owned the rights to. This character was Spyro the Dragon, the hero of games such as Spyro the Dragon, Spyro: A Hero's Tail, and before this newest series, a trilogy under the franchise name of The Legend of Spyro. This new series was named Skylanders, and it started with Skylanders: Spyro's Adventure. The idea was that Spyro, and every other playable character in the game, was usable by placing a toy onto a device (called a portal) that would read the chip in-bedded in the bottom. These games were aimed for children, and at the time of release, I did not think it would be something I'd be interested in. I'll also be the first to admit that a bit of my teenage arrogance had yet to shake off, I had only just gotten into college, and at the time I was simply nothing more than mad that a franchise from my childhood was receiving another reboot that was not enough like what I was used to. A completely unfair mindset I am glad is long gone from my personality.
In hindsight I can easily call this a genius bit of marketing. Children already hound their parents to buy them toys and action figures, and in today's age, video games are hardly the niche crowd they used to be. I'm willing to bet most children today now own a gaming console or handheld, or at the very least have parents who are willing to let them use theirs with the parental controls turned on or maybe even off. Plus, aside from Spyro and Cinder (another The Legend of Spyro character), all of the games characters were new and unique to the game (and that has held true until the inclusion of Crash Bandicoot characters from this year's installment and the brief cross-over with Nintendo characters Donkey Kong and Bowser). Any child who enjoyed the game would want to get more of them, without needing prior knowledge to all but two characters. This was a completely new game franchise, and they had nice advertisements as well. Ones that showed you just how many unique characters you could collect and play as.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yYMw0TnZRY
The games ended up becoming a success. Activision has even admitted the franchise has, by this point, earned them over a billion dollars in sales. As with any major success, there are always those who decide to try their own hand at it. Enter the Disney Corporation, and their toys-to-life game, Disney Infinity.
Infinity's goal was to let you play with your favorite Disney and Pixar characters, and once the second game came around they added in Marvel, and the third game added the Star Wars franchise. Disney Infinity 2.0 was the first toys-to-life game I played. I randomly decided it was time to give this genre a chance, and I figured I might have fun collecting the toys.
I was more right than I thought. I immediately fell in love with this style of game. I'm the kind of person who has always liked collecting things, but many times I ended up getting rid of my collection because I came to the conclusion that I never used them for anything. I understand why many people my age will buy toys or figurines and place them on their shelves, but for me, I always just sat there wishing I could actually use them for something. Disney Infinity solved my problem, and I could now collect very impressive looking figures, and I could use them with something, in this case an addictively fun video game.
I have heard from some that they do not like this genre, without remotely trying it for themselves, as they believe it is the gaming industry succumbing to greed. I have always been a realist, and this outlook makes it a little easier to counterpoint this kind of idea: finding smart way to charge customers for more money was not remotely new when the original Skylanders came out. I will even be the kind of person to argue that this formula is kinder to the customer than others ways.
This is far kinder than buying an extended warranty for something that some makers have intentionally made sure will have an issue just after the regular warranty will run out. This is far kinder than paying up to two to five dollars for an extra outfit your character can wear in a game, or for an extra weapon for them to shoot. Toys-to-life had to pay roughly fifteen dollars for an action figure or well designed figurine, that you could use with a game you've bought or just something you could look at. You never had to buy the game if you just wanted some of the figures, and fifteen dollars for a toy is fairly average a price when you see what some collectibles are selling for today. Especially since whenever they released a variant, they tended to be the same price as the usual toy. Infinity had crystal versions of eight characters that were exclusive to Toys-R-Us (supposedly the variant for Mickey Mouse was not exclusive, but I never saw him in a store other than Toys-R-Us), and would later take their Star Wars figures and release a version where their lightsabers would glow when placed on the portal. Skylanders on the other hand took their most popular characters and would release several different paint jobs for them.
My personal experience for Skylanders only goes as far as the most recent game; Imaginators. It has made me wish I'd given one of the older games a chance, as I really enjoy the beat 'em up style, and I think the humor and writing is very solid. It reminds me a lot of the Ratchet & Clank games, it's made for children and you can tell, but they make the characters unique from their first word, and there are several jokes smarter than you'd expect. As for Infinity, I have played all three games in the franchise, and I love each one for exactly what they are. Infinity 1 is a fun sandbox game that lets me play very fun stories set in Disney worlds, Infinity 2.0 is a very in-depth builder that lets me create whatever I want and then some, and Infinity 3.0 is an even better mix of both.
Now, there are other games of this genre. (Heads-up but even with the new editing I’m doing in 2019, I haven’t played Starlink: Battle for Atlas or Lightseekers. I own a Lightseekers toy and I want to play Starlink, but i can’t comment on what I know far too little about)
- Amiibo -
The one to release after the first two was Nintendo's example, the Amiibo. I only have six of these little guys myself: Kirby, King Dedede, Metaknight, Wedding Suit Bowser, and Pac-Man. They mostly sit on the shelf because the idea was they are useable in any game with Amiibo support and not just select games, but when I have used them I’ve loved what they do. I did in fact get every purple coin in Super Mario Odyssey thanks to Bowser, and I don’t regret. They may mostly be decorations, but they did help bridge the gap for me maybe more than Infinity did for buying collectible figures. I still have less non-toys-to-life figures than other people my age, but I get the appeal now and it’s probably because of Amiibo.
- Lego Dimensions -
I was very excited when this one was announced, as I have been a fan of the LEGO video games since LEGO Star Wars, and I had already started playing Infinity 2.0 by that point. Having played it, it does feel a little too close to a LEGO game than a Toys-to-Life game, if that makes any sense, but it also features some of the greatest levels and game play moments that I have ever seen in a LEGO game. I also assume they made some decent money from LEGO collectors, who can now buy single characters plus a vehicle, versus the hundred or so dollars per building set. Especially with some characters/franchises who are exclusive to the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGT9PrwRHdY
And now, for the other part of this posts title.
Earlier this year, Disney Interactive made an announcement that to many, myself included, hit very hard. Disney Infinity, for reasons they would later reveal, would be cancelled. The company behind the game was going to be closed, and Disney Interactive would basically be shut-down, the only games from the studio would now be licensed out to other companies. At the time, it was hard to see where the complete sense came from. I could not kid myself that they had to still be making enough money, cancellation would mean they weren't making enough in some fashion. Part of me felt like they should at least release the rest of the intended figures for 3.0, but I give them my respect for deciding to release as many as the did, as the original deadline for those chosen was so close to the cancellation announcement. We still got Alice, the Mad Hatter, Time, Nemo, and Dory, even if Peter Pan and other announced and soon-to-be-announced figures will not see the store shelves.
They have since explained more. Basically they could not keep up with how many extra characters they had unsold, as they put that duty on themselves versus another company. These are still the best looking Toys-to-Life toys, so I can easily look at them and believe that were too expensive to make for them to allow these problems.
But it was also no secret that Disney Infinity still managed to top the charts (when compared to competitors) before it's cancellation, even with Lego Dimensions stealing that spot on it's release date. The death of the strongest led many to question the entire genre's demise, but at the time Activision and Warner Bros. attested that they were not leaving the scene. LEGO Dimensions currently had a four-year plan, they will release toys for the game for four years, and then after that, they either create a sequel or they continue with just the first game, depending on what audiences crave after the time limit. But, since the original post, Dimensions was cancelled after their final character packs. Unlike Infinity, they left the game with all promised characters, but, unlike Infinity they did not give a compelling final playset, making the end still hollow when if it was some of their best characters. Beetlejuice, the Teen Titans, and the Powerpuff Girls were still great even if they had nothing much to show for it, even counting their fairly robust worlds and an exclusive episode of Teen Titans GO!.
As I said earlier, Activision has now released the sixth installment of their franchise.
And it has sold worse than the last year's game. If that sounds bad, I have a tweet that is unfortunately far more worrying.
I found it through a retweet from the Toys for Games Twitter, so both Twitters are good sources for further information.
Skylanders had already spawned off into Skylander Academy on Netflix. With no irony I can say it was one of my favorite exclusive shows on the platform, and as of 2019 the show has ended after three fantastic seasons. Activision is currently no longer keeping it a secret that they are trying new things to stay on top, the last Skylanders game was only on mobile, and Spyro was given a remaster/remake for the original three games. I feel it is safe to say the series is dead, but, I can’t shed too many tears as this finale felt more like a finale than the others got. Dimensions and Infinity tried their best to end on great notes, and both did and didn’t. Skylanders had a great last game, and a TV show with a finale that while did feel open enough to expand did in fact conclude the themes and story.
As for myself, I will of course still play the games I have bought, and am still going to buy more of the toys. I have earned the Platinum trophy for Infinty, Infinity 2.0, Infinity 3.0, Lego Dimensions, and Skylander Imaginators, and I even got the DLC trophies for 3.0 and Dimensions. I even got a second copy of both Infinity 1.0 and 2.0. Toys-to-Life started, for me, as a way to get collectibles I could justify owning. Now, it's a genre I have had countless hours of mindless fun in, and if its future depends on me spending a little more of my money, I won't complain. It may have been a fad, kind of like pogs, but I’ll be damned before even feeling remotely upset that I found my personal equivalent of pogs!
Many of us have a weakness when it comes to our money. Some of use shill out for fun mobile games, some of us like bar-hopping, expensive cars. For me, I have no problem admitting I am a grown man who likes buying video games where you can place toys on a device to play as that same character.