View Full Version : Sonic's Future
Kool Chao
26-02-2009, 20:45
This article (http://retro.ign.com/articles/955/955741p1.html) has spawned a discussion about what Sega did wrong with Sonic and his future. I'm moving these posts because they didn't fit into the "What are you thinking" thread. Unfortunately, the board doesn't allow me to make a first post and then put the messages posted earlier below it, so I will have to use this posting - sorry KoolChao.
Please discuss everything here now!
-Sherlock
They may have a point, but that doesn't convince me.
There are some truthful words in that article. But I guess there's some Mario-fanboysm involved too. And who said the level design for Sonic 3 was crap? :ohmy: The maps were huge and full of alternative routes and replay value.
Tails_1986
26-02-2009, 21:08
Sonic 3 has some of the best levels I ever played. And considering the source (IGN) I wouldn't give the article much credit.
Sherlock
27-02-2009, 00:34
Hey, I liked Lava Reef Zone. =/
But yea, it was starting to get worn out. I agree.
Killer French Bread
27-02-2009, 09:42
What a load of revisionist shit that article is. They even try to criticise Sega for not taking a risk (lol) like nintedo did with Mario 2! So now it's got to the point where Nintendo fan boy dick heads think they can tout the 'positives' of one of the laziest cash ins on a licence ever above Sonic 3 and think they have a right to be taken seriously? Fuck off.
What a load of revisionist shit that article is. They even try to criticise Sega for not taking a risk (lol) like nintedo did with Mario 2! So now it's got to the point where Nintendo fan boy dick heads think they can tout the 'positives' of one of the laziest cash ins on a licence ever above Sonic 3 and think they have a right to be taken seriously? Fuck off.
Holy shit, calm down.
Did they actually say Mario 2 was a risk? That's bullshit, Mario 2 was just a reskin of a piss easy game that would never sell without Mario characters because Nintendo thought Mario 2 would be too hard for people outside of Japan.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 12:37
I don't like the way the article was written but at the same time I can't really disagree with the overall point they were trying to make. Ahh screw it were on a Sega site.
DOWN WITH IGN!
Killer French Bread
27-02-2009, 12:50
Mark Ryan Sallee, Editor-in-Chief of IGN Guides sums up the design flaws of Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (http://cheats.ign.com/objects/006/006475.html) this way: "The level design started going downhill, ....
...Was Sonic already starting to spin his wheels this early? By Mario's third Super Mario adventure, the series had already taken one major detour in the second game due to Nintendo of America's desire to not release a me-too sequel to the 1985 smash Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. 2 was a major departure for the franchise, primarily because it's based on a non-Mario game.
Okay, maybe I could be reading too much into things, but as far as I can tell that is criticising Sega for not making any major changes in the Sonic 2D games and citing Mario 2 of all things as an example of how to do it. It's almost like criticising the Godfather 2 for being too samey whilst whistfully wishing Coppola had been as daring as whoever made Halloween 3.
I am being far too bothered by this, but it feels like game by game the whole Sonic legacy is being rewritten in the most unsympathetic way by a new generation of gamers who have little emotional attachment to the games going back from when they were released. Before it was the recent 3D games that were always deemed some unworthy paraiah, then the Adventure games were discredited, now they seem to think Sonic 3 and the DS games are fair targets. Victors justice in a sense I suppose, Nintendo still have so much fan service around in games like Smash Brothers, their zillions of Mario games and first party stuff all rubbing people's noses in how great their history is it's bound to polish up a bit better than Sega's now. It's only time before Sega are forever condemned to be the Richard the III of gaming, lol.
Wow that's so incredibly wrong. Mario 2 was almost identicle to Mario 1 but with improved graphics and harder difficult. Nothing really changed till Mario 3.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 13:09
Hey Killer you're so wrong. Nintendo are well the most original games company ever. Have you not played Mario 34 or Pokemon 412? or any of the new great games out like Carnival funfair or sports island. Every game they make is an instant classic;)
Killer French Bread
27-02-2009, 13:15
It amazes me how they rack up so many sequels yet there never seems to be any games actually coming out for their current console at a given time. Yet more of that Nintendo magic I presume.
It amazes me how they rack up so many sequels yet there never seems to be any games actually coming out for their current console at a given time. Yet more of that Nintendo magic I presume.
It's because most of them were on the NES and SNES.
Killer French Bread
27-02-2009, 13:20
Doesn't excuse the dog shit on the persian rug of gaming that is Mario Party though.
Sherlock
27-02-2009, 13:20
I do kinda disagree with that article.
I mean, they are right that Sega never changed the formula, but why should they? Sonic Unleashed DID sell 2 million copies, and I doubt that everyone of those 2 million did hate it.
There's two reasons why Sonic is mostly bashed lately.
a.) Sonic Team is actually fed up with making Sonic games, resulting in, of course, games of less quality. They are pressed by Sega to create more and more games starring the blue blur. When a Mario game is made, extremely much of Nintendo's resources get poured into it, involving many developers working on it and as many as needed to make the game a worthy continuation of the series. But I doubt this is the case with games like Mario Party or similar games, which don't need as much developing effort as Super Mario Galaxy.
Why am I saying this? Because Nintendo is milking Mario too, just that they have far bigger resources than Sega and are actually able to experiment a lot - hence we got so many spin-offs and changes of formula, not only for Mario, but also for Kirby, Metroid, Pokemon, and many other big series. Sega does not have these resources. For them, only one game failing horribly in sales can break them.
After the flop of the Mega Drive Add-Ons and the Saturn, and the PlayStation killing off the Dreamcast, Sega is in dire need of sales. They still haven't recovered from that blow, they never were an especially successful company to begin with. They now try to change the formula because of the fanbase ranting that they should change the formula, and because games otherwise wouldn't be long enough to be qualified as real games. 2.5D downloadable WiiWare/XBL ? Haha, I really lol'd. But since we are talking about the fanbase, let's go to reason 2.
b.) The vocal basher fanbase. No other fanbase is as vocal and loud as those hating on Sonic for that he is Sega's only real money source. Look, what other games has Sega made lately which have sold a lot? That's correct, none. Hardly anyone knows the extremely good Sega games such as Space Channel 5, Jet Set Radio, the classic Golden Axe series, Ecco... The list can go on, as there are many games Sega obviously did correct.
But... did they sell? No. They didn't. Although those games were great and several of my favourite game series of all time spawned from Sega, they only had Sonic. Drawing the line to Nintendo again, practically every of their series is well known, many of them even in the Top 10 Best Selling franchises, with Mario and Pokemon even leading the Top 3. The Legend of Zelda, TouchGenerations!, Metroid, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Smash Bros... Those are so many HUGE (in terms of popularity and sales) series that it's almost unbelievable. Almost every Nintendo series which has been released outside of Japan is doing very well. I hardly see any games which really have horrible sales.
Sega can't be compared with Nintendo anymore. They were comparable in the 16-Bit days, but now? Now Sega is a software developer who has only one name to get them money, and that is Sonic. You can't blame Sega for wanting to make sales. If they didn't make money, they'd go into insolvency and were gone. If they would sell Sonic to Nintendo as some people suggest, they'd have no more chance to survive...
Back to the fanbase, what they don't realize is what they really want. At least those angry fans (or anti-fans) which are complaining for the sake of complaining. There are so many people who say the new Sonic games suck and how Sonic goes downhill, but noone actually knows a reason why exactly. I mean, the games still sale. That's the main reason why they are made. Of course, you could argue that they made several mistakes and in most games the controls aren't that good, but...
Look at it this way: Sega tries their best to include the speed even in 3D worlds. Of course, in 2D it's so much easier to generate that speed in a platformer, in 3D it's far harder. Of course, you could argue that they didn't need to introduce characters like Big or Silver, but I honestly see no problem with that. Sega does what many fans wanted: Expand the Sonic formula to other things, not mere speed. Now many fans want them to go back to the old speed stuff. Why, lookie here, we have Sonic and the Secret Rings! Why is never anyone mentioning this game? It is exactly what people cried for, and yet it is considered being just as "bad" as others, although it HAS the speed, and actually does it well.
Is it because of the storybook-plot? I don't care about the plot, seriously. It's a platformer. Also, Sonic always has been a platformer, he's a fast hedgehog, not a racing car. I don't see how speed only can make a platformer - if there was speed only, I'd rather have a racing game (like Sonic Riders, which, by the way, is one of my favourite Racer series). They tried a lot of things with Sonic, and are experimenting how to please all fans, but instead, everyone still rips them a new asshole because of how much they hate Sonic nowadays.
Oh, and speaking of hate... Raging Sonic anti-fans actually are even prejudging idiots. Why? Because if someone says "But I liked [insert new Sonic game here]...", you will get the respond that you're a blind Sonic fanboy who has no idea how a good game works. Granted, there is only one Sonic game I really didn't enjoy, and that was Sonic 06 - and even that I did kinda enjoy.
I haven't played Unleashed or Chronicles yet, but I did like Heroes, for example. Or Shadow. Shadow the Hedgehog is in fact one of my favourite newer Sonic games and if it is only for trying to be more mature. In fact, Shadow was just another try of Sega to appeal gamers, they added stuff people loved from Halo and GTA and shit, shooting people with guns, explosions, riding bikes, etc. Obviously, it didn't work as well.
What I want to say is... The hating people don't know what they want. Sega does know what they want, though, and that is money. And Sonic brings them money. So they continue making Sonic games. Because they mean money. Understand WHY Sega does so. If you want Sega to make other games, buy them. They're not there to be stared in awe in the videogame store.
That is all.
Doesn't excuse the dog shit on the persian rug of gaming that is Mario Party though.
In fairness to Nintendo it's Hudson who develop that.
Edit: Woah. I though I subconciously posted in a thread I didn't know about.
Sherlock
27-02-2009, 13:43
Edit: Woah. I though I subconciously posted in a thread I didn't know about.
Haha.
I just made this thread and moved all posts only addressing this topic into it. ;P
Dr Shaneman
27-02-2009, 13:59
Everyone's starting to hate Sega, bah. Maybe if you look at some of their other games instead of Sonic IGN >_>.
Sherlock
27-02-2009, 14:03
Everyone's starting to hate Sega, bah. Maybe if you look at some of their other games instead of Sonic IGN >_>.
^
Basically the essence of my wall of text in a nutshell.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 14:07
Sega really do have a few good games out there that aren't Sonic that not enough people seem to pay attention to. Condemned, HOTD etc.
Dr Shaneman
27-02-2009, 14:11
Sega really do have a few good games out there that aren't Sonic that not enough people seem to pay attention to. Condemned, HOTD etc.
Problem is that most of them are Saturn and Dreamcast games.
Sega really do have a few good games out there that aren't Sonic that not enough people seem to pay attention to. Condemned, HOTD etc.
Yea SEGA are doing a pretty decent job as publishers, and even some of their own games are pretty decent.
Sherlock
27-02-2009, 14:12
Yea SEGA are doing a pretty decent job as publishers, and even some of their own games are pretty decent.
Problem is, as long as there is no "Sonic" in the games' name, it won't sell more than a few thousand units.
Dr Shaneman
27-02-2009, 14:13
Problem is, as long as there is no "Sonic" in the games' name, it won't sell more than a few thousand units.
As very few people know Sega by company like us, they just know them by Sonic.
As very few people know Sega by company like us, they just know them by Sonic.
That's abit elitist, I'm sure lots of people know SEGA as more than "those dudes that made Sonic" considering their popular sports and arcade titles. Not to mention the film licenses they're now getting.
Dr Shaneman
27-02-2009, 14:33
That's abit elitist, I'm sure lots of people know SEGA as more than "those dudes that made Sonic" considering their popular sports and arcade titles. Not to mention the film licenses they're now getting.
I dunno, I think you'd be surprised these days. I mean, look how downhill the gaming industry has gone.
I dunno, I think you'd be surprised these days. I mean, look how downhill the gaming industry has gone.
Uh, gaming is more popular now than it ever was. Other than the recession gaming seems to be doing fine. Thanks to the popularity of downloadable games developers are given more freedom. Just look at Noby Noby Boy or Flower.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 15:22
Loads of company's have gone under in the past year and loads more are on the brink. Originality is becoming scarce in games for fear of lackluster game sales. It was only the other week Sega themselves were posting big losses. Gaming isn't doing half as well as it should be.
Loads of company's have gone under in the past year and loads more are on the brink. Originality is becoming scarce in games for fear of lackluster game sales. It was only the other week Sega themselves were posting big losses. Gaming isn't doing half as well as it should be.
That's hardly fair, the same can be said about any industry at the moment. Originality is hardly dead either, heck I can even look at EA's current games now and see something original, or XBLA, PSN, WiiWare.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 15:53
The online games are great for original games because there cheap to produce. Try and get a developer to pour money into an original idea these days. Just doesn't happen. And my respect for EA is steadily growing but there new ip's are pretty much just original for by EA's standards. Which isn't really saying alot. And now I think about it, how long that even keeps up for I don't know. The sales figures for Dead space and Mirror's came in and they weren't anywhere near they were hoping. Can't blame the developers really though for not releasing original games. 95% of the time lately when they do risk an original game, it bombs.
Dr Shaneman
27-02-2009, 16:26
Uh, gaming is more popular now than it ever was. Other than the recession gaming seems to be doing fine. Thanks to the popularity of downloadable games developers are given more freedom. Just look at Noby Noby Boy or Flower.
I wasn't on about popularity, I was counting the amount of moans you made in the past few months. I gave up at 50.
I enjoy IGN's articles, they always make me laugh.
And they're always friggin fanboys, through their gears of war 2 review they constantly compared it to Call of Duty 4 even though they play differently and ended up taking points off essentially because it wasn't Call of Duty 4.
Nearly all retrospective articles I've read are coded secretly to say Nintendo effing pwned everything and half the time they don't know what they're talking about.
Anyway.
The future of Sonic, in my eyes? Simple.
It'll continue the way it is. We get so wrapped up that we forget that there's legions of young children actually enjoying playing as a Werehog or doing little mini-games. Sega enjoy decent sales from each title and even if all the Sonic fans of old jumped ship, they would still sell enough to be considered a success.
I don't expect Sega to change the Sonic formula and to be frank, I don't care anymore. What I would love to see is them doing a Mega Man 9, go back to basics and do a 2D side scrolling Sonic game on XBLA, VC and PSN. Would we care if it lasted 40 minutes? No! XD We'd love it so please Sega....pleeeeeeeeeease.
richarddavies
27-02-2009, 16:57
It really does baffle my nuts that they haven't done a new 2d or 2.5d game on there. I'd love to see one.
Well, in relation to Rayne's comment about kids loving Sonic games these days, IGN noted the other day that Sonic Unleashed has sold 2 million copies worldwide.
Zackmaiden
28-02-2009, 01:22
I think Sonic would make a comeback if SEGA did a 2.5D remake of Sonic 1, Sonic 2, and Sonic 3 and Knuckles.
Killer French Bread
28-02-2009, 14:46
The whole scoring system ruins originalty in gaming, objectifying the quality of what is a very ecclectic art form as reviewers take preconcieved ideas of what a game should be and include and then, concsiously or subconsciously, rate them on some sliding scale.
I suppose it works when reviewing the grillionth FPS or you happen to have the same outlook on gaming as the reviewer, but how do titles like Nobi Boy, Flower or E4 fit in this? They just get put down as some abstract idea, a diverting footnote in gaming only worth a few minutes of your time, and are lost in the dingy abyss of the dullards favourite site: Metacritic.
Zackmaiden
28-02-2009, 21:06
The whole scoring system ruins originalty in gaming, objectifying the quality of what is a very ecclectic art form as reviewers take preconcieved ideas of what a game should be and include and then, concsiously or subconsciously, rate them on some sliding scale.
I suppose it works when reviewing the grillionth FPS or you happen to have the same outlook on gaming as the reviewer, but how do titles like Nobi Boy, Flower or E4 fit in this? They just get put down as some abstract idea, a diverting footnote in gaming only worth a few minutes of your time, and are lost in the dingy abyss of the dullards favourite site: Metacritic.
Uh... what...?
Uh... what...?
Basically he's saying that the 10/10 review scoring system is a load of shite. Not very relevant here though, I think. the games mentioned got good scores.
Zackmaiden
01-03-2009, 04:45
Basically he's saying that the 10/10 review scoring system is a load of shite. Not very relevant here though, I think. the games mentioned got good scores.
I'm not so sure that a sliding scale is going to work on scoring games.
Adam Novagen
02-03-2009, 17:58
I think Sonic would make a comeback if...Sonic doesn't NEED to make a comeback. As a major DeviantART user, I can guarantee that the Sonic world[s] still have a HUGE fanbase. Granted, this may just mean that Sonic's very artistically inspiring & not have much to do with the gaming world, but whatev.
So, I wanna know: what is it about the new STH, good ol' Sonic Next-Gen, that made so many people hate it?? I've only ever played the demo, so I really wanna know. I've seen videos of the cutscenes, and it seems that the story/script/acting is as bad as ever, but what made people say it was a bad game?
Sherlock
02-03-2009, 18:15
Added to the insanely horrible plot, it's also horrible controls. Worse than in any Sonic game I've played. =/
Plus its terrible camera, glitchy gameplay and appaling load times.
Zackmaiden
02-03-2009, 19:10
I was scarred for life when playing Next-Gen...
BluePuyo
02-03-2009, 19:12
@Adam Novagen: What Sherlock and Reknoc said, the game is bad technically.
On-topic, I havenīt bothered to read, Itīs always the same thing once again. I agree with bread, it seems theyīre trying to change the history. If theyīre talking how bad was Sonic 3 this time, the next time theyīll say how bad Sonic 2 was, and then how Sonic was the worst step that SEGA made. Perhaps Iīm exagerating, but itīs really a stupid way to destroy not only the Sonic reputation, more than is now, but also the SEGA reputation.
And Sherlock, I agree completely with your post (http://www.radiosega.net/forum/showpost.php?p=40553&postcount=13).
Zackmaiden
02-03-2009, 19:18
So what your saying is, that SEGA thinks that the old games are worse than the new ones?
Sherlock
02-03-2009, 19:25
So what your saying is, that SEGA thinks that the old games are worse than the new ones?
No. Absolutely not. Sega themselves acknowledge that what they did in the last few times wasn't actually an excellingly good game.
Sonic Team doesn't want to make Sonic games anymore, but they have to. That's the main problem.
Adam Novagen
02-03-2009, 21:32
What Sherlock and Reknoc said, the game is bad technically.Ah, I get it. It's the same thing that happened when Insomniac Games finished the Spyro trilogy, then it got picked up by someone else who had the nerve to create Enter the Dragonfly. I will N-E-V-E-R play that game again. What a pity; from the one level of Sonic Next-Gen that I played in the department store demos, I thought it really had potential, not to mention the fact that it looked gorgeous and moved really fast. Ah well.
Sonic: What have they DONE to me?! I need a chili dog... And a hug... WAAAAAH!!!
:laugh::wet::boring:
The thing is, all Sonic Team need to do is stop putting in silly gimmicks, and just make a game similar to Sonic's levels from Sonic Adventure 1 and 2, and fix the camera. No more stupid side characters, no more gimmicks to sell the game, just pure Sonic in 3D.
It's all we fans have ever wanted since way back in 1999, and in the past 10 years they haven't satisfied us once, with Sonic and the Secret Rings possibly being the closest it's gotten.
Kool Chao
02-03-2009, 21:49
Everybody keeps talking about Sonic's speed but the thing is when they get the speed right, they lose the platforming elements that made Sonic the best in its day. What do you have in the better Sonic levels? Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed and try to jump at the right time and learn the level so you don't fall into that bottomless pit again.
Better level design, less characters, nice enough speed and tight controls, that's the stuff they need.
Sonic's speed seems to be an excuse for developers to get lazy with level designs. Dimp's are guilty of this, with their straight line levels, and the 3D games with the obsessive use of rails and control removing spring segments.
Gecko.Guy
02-03-2009, 22:21
Everybody keeps talking about Sonic's speed but the thing is when they get the speed right, they lose the platforming elements that made Sonic the best in its day. What do you have in the better Sonic levels? Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed and try to jump at the right time and learn the level so you don't fall into that bottomless pit again.
Better level design, less characters, nice enough speed and tight controls, that's the stuff they need.
Correct, sometimes when you really get down to it some of the levels are really just pressing a few buttons and the game does the rest, Its just to much Automated Gameplay, when they should make it more Manually, To "Aagain" keep the player wanting more.
Sonic's speed seems to be an excuse for developers to get lazy with level designs. Dimp's are guilty of this, with their straight line levels, and the 3D games with the obsessive use of rails and control removing spring segments.
Yes often times I notice when I'm playing one of the newer Sonic Games, that all I do is press foward and jump..... cuz all you do is grind on rails, and springs, and rings, and pressing buttons at the right time. And I feel like I'm watching a CG Film rather than actually playing the game. hey should make the game with more use of the Controls, something that will keep the player stuck to the game.
Sonic 06 wasn't a bad game :blink: and certainly not the worst Sonic game ever.
Unleashed was worse, as was Heroes & Shadow
Tails_1986
02-03-2009, 23:48
Sonic 06 wasn't a bad game :blink: and certainly not the worst Sonic game ever.
Unleashed was worse, as was Heroes & Shadow
Unleashed and Heroes really depended on the console you played them on. Shadow wasn't as bad as some people try to make it, but had some terrible levels designed on. Unfortunately too many bad levels take out most of the fun you could have.
They really should stop putting so many bottomless pits. Maybe they could try making another 2D Sonic game inside the style of Wario Land: Shake Dimension or even use the 2,5D style of the Klonoa games.
Very true Tails.
The whole thing about Sonic is Speed, one hit kill traps you can't see are not fun -_- I'm sure the ign article about the state of Sonic said that about Sonic 3, its only gotten worse with each new game.
Have to say I enjoyed Shadow and Heroes :P though I was a lil younger back then
BluePuyo
03-03-2009, 04:17
Ah, I get it. It's the same thing that happened when Insomniac Games finished the Spyro trilogy, then it got picked up by someone else who had the nerve to create Enter the Dragonfly. I will N-E-V-E-R play that game again. What a pity; from the one level of Sonic Next-Gen that I played in the department store demos, I thought it really had potential, not to mention the fact that it looked gorgeous and moved really fast. Ah well.
Sonic: What have they DONE to me?! I need a chili dog... And a hug... WAAAAAH!!!
:laugh::wet::boring:
Donīt take the words as "Donīt play this game".
So far I enjoyed every Sonic game because Iīm very neutral with them, I donīt look into details like many people and ruining the experience. I think it happens the same with Spyro, fans who canīt accept the new entries, simple.
If you enjoyed all of them, Iīm pretty sure this wonīt be an exception. For me, I never Played 2006, but I imagine I will not have problem. Altough I donīt deny itīs a bad game.
Take these issues mentioned as a warning.
If youīre of those gamers who wants perfect controls, perfect camera, perfect gameplay, perfect-perfect-perfect, or if youīre very attached to the classic, donīt play it, youīll fall in disappointment easily.
Sonic 06 wasn't a bad game :blink: and certainly not the worst Sonic game ever.
Unleashed was worse, as was Heroes & Shadow
Heroes is way better than all of them. =P
Zackmaiden
03-03-2009, 05:14
Donīt take the words as "Donīt play this game".
So far I enjoyed every Sonic game because Iīm very neutral with them, I donīt look into details like many people and ruining the experience. I think it happens the same with Spyro, fans who canīt accept the new entries, simple.
If you enjoyed all of them, Iīm pretty sure this wonīt be an exception. For me, I never Played 2006, but I imagine I will not have problem. Altough I donīt deny itīs a bad game.
Take these issues mentioned as a warning.
If youīre of those gamers who wants perfect controls, perfect camera, perfect gameplay, perfect-perfect-perfect, or if youīre very attached to the classic, donīt play it, youīll fall in disappointment easily.
Heroes is way better than all of them. =P
You wanna tempt playing 06? Be my guest, you'll regret it.
BluePuyo
03-03-2009, 05:28
You wanna tempt playing 06? Be my guest, you'll regret it.
No, of course not.
He must do what he feels better. I pointed this because I had the feeling that I ruined his hopes.
Iīm not anybody to say "Play this and donīt play this".
To do it clear, Adam Novagen, I didnīt play it, so I canīt recommend it to you.
Zackmaiden
03-03-2009, 05:37
No, of course not.
He must do what he feels better. I pointed this because I had the feeling that I ruined his hopes.
Iīm not anybody to say "Play this and donīt play this".
To do it clear, Adam Novagen, I didnīt play it, so I canīt recommend it to you.
But I DID play it. It was Sonic's 15th birthday blowout. Critics were offended, and consumers were offended, including me...
BluePuyo
03-03-2009, 06:24
But I DID play it. It was Sonic's 15th birthday blowout. Critics were offended, and consumers were offended, including me...
I donīt have much to say.
I know itīs a bad game, and was a total failure since it was in the 15th anniversary of the hedgehog. I want to play it because Iīm really curious how is inside. <_<
And about critics/reviewers, all of them are failures as Sonic 2006 itself.
If youīre of those gamers who wants perfect controls, perfect camera, perfect gameplay, perfect-perfect-perfect, or if youīre very attached to the classic, donīt play it, youīll fall in disappointment easily.
Or if you want acceptable controls, acceptable camera, and acceptable gameplay. Sonic 06 isn't bad for perfectionists, it's just plain bad.
Not sure what's wrong with bottomless pits, platformers have had them since the dawn of time. Better a bottomless pit than a trap pit you can't get out of and have to wait to die.
richarddavies
03-03-2009, 12:56
I've just recently tried 06 for the first time and it did indeed suck donkey nuts for all the reasons stated above and more.
Dr Shaneman
03-03-2009, 12:59
"Learn Maths with Sonic the Hedgehog"
That's Sonic's future XD.
I've just recently tried 06 for the first time and it did indeed suck donkey nuts for all the reasons stated above and more.
I think we're all being alittle unfair on Sonic '06...
...
It does have good music, though the best track I've heard was basically a Flashman remix
richarddavies
03-03-2009, 18:08
The music was good. And I thought some levels were ok. I actually DESPISED the levels where Sonic ran automatically and you had to dodge crap. I could spend the rest of my evening listing whats wrong with that. And I almost ripped my eye's out with the constant loading. Why does it have a loading screen to load a speech bubble for a character in the town just so they can tell you what to do for a side mission to then have another 10 second loading screen to get back to the town. Some of the levels even had loading screens during the level. Drove me insnae.
Adam Novagen
03-03-2009, 18:58
I actually DESPISED the levels where Sonic ran automatically and you had to dodge crap.Oh my GOD, it has RAIL-ACTION LEVELS?! (As in "rail shooter") What were they THINKING?!
Some of the levels even had loading screens during the level.Hmm, more-than-semi-automatic gameplay, constant loading, bad acting, bad story, coupled with great graphics & soundtrack...
... I get it...
SONIC '06 IS A DVD GAME FOR THE PS3 & 360!!!:wacko:
"Learn Maths with Sonic the Hedgehog"
That's Sonic's future XD.You do know that that's already a reality, right? I'm not kidding; there is actually an edutainment game for kids based on Sonic X. That teaches math. Yeah. :blink:
Better a bottomless pit than a trap pit you can't get out of and have to wait to die.Here here. I LOVE bottomless pits, personally, and I hate trap pits. I think anyone who ever played as Super Sonic in Mystic Caves Zone in Sonic the Hedgehog 2 remembers... THAT pit. XD
~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~
With regards to this thread's original topic: personally, I don't feel that SEGA's to blame here anywhere near as much as Sonic Team, but then I don't really know what's going on inside the industry. Also, I have to admit, like Mum said to me recently, it IS just a game & a fictional character I'm in such a flap about. SEGA could stop issuing Sonic stuff altogether tomorrow, and the world wouldn't really suffer much. Fans would be outraged & heartbroken, but the world itself would continue as before.
It's not really Sonic himself I care so much about in that sense, it's the nostalgia formed from being raised on the good ol' 16-bit Sonic games. Which is not to say that every one of THOSE was a success; I personally feel that Sonic 3D Blast was the beginning of the end. If only... If ONLY Sonic X-treme had made it through... Based on what I read about it on Wikipedia, it might have completely saved Sonic's future from its current state. Still, what's done is done; there's no going back. Unless of course Christopher Lloyd shows up in front of my house in a certain 4-6-0 steam locomotive... :biggrin:
I guess the thing that really ticks me off is the arrogance of Sonic Team (and/or SEGA?) If they really cared or bothered to listen to ANY of the people who actually PLAY their games, they wouldn't keep making the same mistakes.
I mean, seriously; I can easily forgive them for Sonic Adventure. It was their first serious attempt (Sonic 3D Blast and Sonic Jam don't count here) at a 3D, story-based Sonic game with actual dialogue. It was a whole new level of development & complexity for them, and wasn't anywhere near a total failure, so no problem.
Sonic Adventure 2, however, is a little tougher to forgive. Marginally better acting, marginally better plot, better framerate & graphics, and a WHOLE LOAD of new bugs. Anyone who's ever tried to get an A on Hard Mode in Pyramid Caves knows what I'm talking about. The good ol' stuck-on-the-wall glitch. Ouch. And the camera flaws on levels like Final Rush, where you have to grind on rails that you can barely see... NOT good. They should've been able to improve a lot. They didn't. All told, it came out about on par with SA1.
NOW we have Sonic '06. Heck, even the TITLE was a mistake; no one can use the real title, because it's so easily confusing, so we have to call it Sonic '06, Sonic Next-Gen, Sonic 360, Sonic PS3, or even THAT game. I can't understand how any company could be stupid enough to make constant mistakes that get worse every time!
Oh wait... I forgot about Vista. Which is really XP with a few more features & a few more bugs. And is already being phased out for Windows 7. It was created too fast, released too soon, and now it's being replaced too soon. In the timeline of computer history, Vista is simply a tiny dot labeled "Woah, that was random."
Oh well... At least all the Sonic games have SOME redeeming feature. Like the music, which is always awesome. And certain levels. You know, I bought a Dreamcast specifically so that I could play Sonic Adventure, and I bought THAT specifically so I could play Windy Valley. Still one of my favorite levels. It's Metal Harbor Zone all the way for SA2, with the odd kart race thrown in. Yeah, I love the kart races, though I don't see why Sonic needs to DRIVE... Whatev.
Basically, I guess I'm ultimately saying that if I give 'em half a chance, and if I'm only talking about my personal enjoyment, I love almost all the Sonic games I've played so far. Always will. It's just that most of the newer ones are not, honestly, good games, and they're SO MUCH LESS than what they could and should be.
C'mon, SEGA, c'mon Sonic Team, what's the problemo?! Get it together, slowmos! :guitar:
Adam! Shut up XD you made my eyes bleed, walls of text kill on a regular basis you know.
*ahem* I kid
On the rails? Have any of you played Unleashed?!
Gecko.Guy
03-03-2009, 19:20
Adam! Shut up XD you made my eyes bleed, walls of text kill on a regular basis you know.
*ahem* I kid
On the rails? Have any of you played Unleashed?!
Yes I have Played Unleashed, and there is Rails..........and Springs(:wacko:), and rings you go through.
Yes I have Played Unleashed, and there is Rails..........and Springs(:wacko:), and rings you go through.
On the rails means a section where you have very little control over the character, which was essentially the entire Sonic section of Unleashed -_-
Adam Novagen
03-03-2009, 19:29
On the rails means a section where you have very little control over the character, which was essentially the entire Sonic section of Unleashed -_-Ouch, that stinks. No, I haven't played unleashed... Nor am I likely to. The whole Werehog thing is too much of a weird spinoff idea for me.
Adam! Shut up XD you made my eyes bleed, walls of text kill on a regular basis you know.Heh, sorry... I always put a lot of thought into things like that... I can't help it. I needed a rant & needed to air my feelings. :biggrin:
Ouch, that stinks. No, I haven't played unleashed... Nor am I likely to. The whole Werehog thing is too much of a weird spinoff idea for me.
Heh, sorry... I always put a lot of thought into things like that... I can't help it. I needed a rant & needed to air my feelings. :biggrin:
Hehe, t'was a joke :P I actually read through it and I agree, very few people would care if Sonic suddenly disappeared, which is sad really.
Yeah, well Unleashed in my opinion is even worse than 06 was -_-
On the rails means a section where you have very little control over the character, which was essentially the entire Sonic section of Unleashed -_-
It's funny though, cause Sonic literally has rails dohohoho. They were a terrible feature and I blame Sonic Adventure 2 for adding them for no good damn reason.
Edit: Might aswell just rename this thread "Whine about Sonic".
Gecko.Guy
03-03-2009, 20:15
On the rails means a section where you have very little control over the character, which was essentially the entire Sonic section of Unleashed -_-
Yes the Day Stages of Unleashed were Stages where once you completed a little amount of you YOURSELF! actually playing and contributing to the game, it then goes on into a stage or section where you jsut sit there and wait till you are done running the 100 mile stight road, or done riding the insanely long rails. The only part that I found was a great add to Unleashed was the 2D sections that were still 5D. My Point is that Unleashed has alot of Automated Gameplay which the player only contirbutes very little.
Hehe, t'was a joke :P I actually read through it and I agree, very few people would care if Sonic suddenly disappeared, which is sad really.
Yeah, well Unleashed in my opinion is even worse than 06 was -_-
If a Sonic/SEGA Game was Bad I still buy it anyways(And keep it) I sorta' collect them relentless of the replay value.
It's funny though, cause Sonic literally has rails dohohoho. They were a terrible feature and I blame Sonic Adventure 2 for adding them for no good damn reason.
Edit: Might aswell just rename this thread "Whine about Sonic".
Heh if they never made Sonic Adventure 2, the Sonic Games probablly would have had gone down a totally different road, due to they never would of had introduced Rails into Sonic Gaming, But it would have come in later on when it was in need of a new quality in game, Since "Jet Grind Radio" had Rails they would of put that idea into Sonics Platforms.
Lol This is a SEGA forums and we are complaining about SEGA's Mascot. Might as well join RadioNintendo.net [(Not actually a real site) I think].
Adam Novagen
03-03-2009, 21:15
Might aswell just rename this thread "Whine about Sonic".Nah, more like "Whine about what Sonic Team's DONE to Sonic. XD
BluePuyo
04-03-2009, 05:21
Or if you want acceptable controls, acceptable camera, and acceptable gameplay. Sonic 06 isn't bad for perfectionists, it's just plain bad.
Perfect as sarcasm, because the perfection doesnīt exist. Maybe you can get the point.
Anyway, as you may think, this doesnīt apply to this game. If I put it here, it was to give another message.
Killer French Bread
04-03-2009, 12:09
Perfectionism is actually a term used in Psychology to describe a trait where people constantly spend disproportionate amounts of energy on tasks relative to the reward (The Pareto Principle, for example, is how most people work. Distorting that balance can lead to mental problems), and has been linked as a probable cause of M.E..
I'll assume you meant 'perfection' doesn't exist, then.
Perfectionism is actually a term used in Psychology to describe a trait where people constantly spend disproportionate amounts of energy on tasks relative to the reward (The Pareto Principle, for example, is how most people work. Distorting that balance can lead to mental problems), and has been linked as a probable cause of M.E..
I read that as a probable cause of Mass Effect.
BluePuyo
06-03-2009, 06:04
I'll assume you meant 'perfection' doesn't exist, then.
Yes, perfection.
Perfectionism is actually a term used in Psychology
I know. I wasnīt referring perfectionism in that sense, I used the word in order to describe perfect. Now I noticed I used the wrong word.
Killer French Bread
06-03-2009, 12:21
Heh, no worries mate, I was only being a smart arse.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.