At 1/29/15 01:21 AM, oobooglunk wrote: Many people dismissed this game because the storyline was virtually nonexistent, but it was a great game on its own and an especially excellent way to celebrate Sonic's 20th anniversary.

Wait what? The original Sonic Games had essentially no story other than "Dr.Robotnik or Eggman is evil, beat him".

At 1/25/15 06:16 PM, Seasons wrote: At least according to this recent article published by VICE. It's basically a bunch of paragraphs explaining how terrible the past several Sonic games have been. Since I have better things to do, I haven't actually played a sonic game since the early 2000s, but I'm wondering if there's any truth within this article.

Are sonic games really that terrible? If so, what would make them better?

Opinions, please.

Sonic doesn't need to die, he just needs to fall in the hands of a developer willing to put love into the title and listen to what fans want.

In my opinion there hasn't been a truly good Sonic game since Sonic Adventure 1. The game had hub worlds to play around in, conversation elements, cinematics, relatively solid Sonic gameplay, and bonus game features (extra characters, chao garden, etc).

Outside of that, there was the game for Gameboy Advance by BioWare which was pretty good and surprising.

Sonic Dash, although a mobile game with a pay structure to some of it's gameplay elements, is probably the best Sonic game in years sadly.

Sonic?

Who cares, these days?

Indie Games funded by Kickstarter campaigns and approved by Steam Greenlight that have lots of gimmicks to them is where it's at, baby.

At 1/25/15 08:11 PM, Valjylmyr wrote:

At 1/25/15 06:22 PM, rebellyus wrote: There's still hope and possibility for a great game to come out....but they are indeed on their last leg with the Sonic saga.

They need a RPG/action, open-world like Sonic game. That would have the potential to save him in my opinion.

What Sega needs is Sonic and the Black Knight 2

Or Shadow the Hedgehog 2. With more guns and his own human love interest. In fact, maybe making that love interest a mid- thirties pedophile with resemblence to Chris-Chan will make their demographic feel more at home.

In all honesty, though. I miss the good Sonic games. Long gone is the days of Adventure 2 and Colors. We will never see another good revival like Generations and that saddens me.

At 1/26/15 12:05 AM, Chdonga wrote: I really, really want to say Sonic gets more hate than it deserves, but with the release of Sonic Boom I cannot say that with a straight face.

The problem with Sonic is that SEGA doesn't know what the heck to do with him. Generations/Colors is boost2win, Lost World's relatively slow, and then Boom's a brawler. They should just find a good gameplay style and stick with it.

In my opinion, Colors, Generations, Advance, and Rush are the best in the series. If SEGA could pump out more of those titles, everything would be fine.

They would never go back to making Advance games. People would have a fit over the graphics being 2D. And translating the fast gameplay of Advance to 3D on a handheld with minimal story would just remind people of Sonic 4, which failed hard. I'm embarassed to say I'm part of a fanbase of petty furries who are completely disconnected with reality. They are a big part of the reason nobody can take Sonic seriously anymore.

Sonic was always for kids. At least with Mario, the lack of dialogued characters allow the player to tranpose onto the character. Those kids who loved Sonic, like myself have either grown out of him, and never even grew up.

At 1/26/15 11:06 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Sonic does not need Sega.

Nobody even wants SEGA at this point. They're gonna go the path of THQ soon enough

At 1/30/15 02:40 AM, gcalvert wrote: They need to stop rushing games, and just make a fucking video games. It's bad enough that they try to make main series sonic games into these epics, but they rush them and they come out as an unpolished, shitty mess.

SEGA is pulling the age-old mistake and series diarrhea and making their IP into a cash cow instead of keeping it like a cherished statue. Even the finest of whores become used up.

Sanic is iconic, Granted Sega has struggled to keep him relevant and with the disaster of Sanic Boo it seems Sanic is going downhill fast into spikes with 0 rangs.

I think Sega just changed Sanics' style so much they forgot about what made him famous in the first place. They are continuously jabbing him in the arm with a stick saying "Be Famous" "Be Famous". Eventually they will poke too hard and penetrate his arm making the stick go through him making him bleed to death.

Think about it. The 90s were awesome for sonic, then they wanted to make him in an Adventure game. This went okay for awhile, then an Action Adventure platformer... Odd but okay. Then finally a rushed sloppy glitchy adventure platformer not once but twice!

Don't get me started on Shadow. *shutters*

So yeah, Sanic had a good run. Stop poking him in the arm Sega.

Sonic needs to return to its roots. No racing, or new characters, or silly gimmicks.

At 2/12/15 05:03 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

At 2/12/15 01:43 AM, Toxic-Shredder wrote: Sonic was always for kids. At least with Mario, the lack of dialogued characters allow the player to tranpose onto the character. Those kids who loved Sonic, like myself have either grown out of him, and never even grew up.

you guys must be joking.. it's mario, not sonic, that was always for kids.. i cant "transpose" worth crap.. (not that i know how mathematics has anything to do with static characters) mario behaves nothing like i would care for.. he's just some eccentric foolish italian who jumps and/or flies about the place, flinging fireballs, star bits, etc at his enemies.. body language is every bit as crucial as words and character.

Sorry for just swooping in like a harpy but Toxic-Shredder just says how it is. Sega always actively markets Sonic to children. His entire design and personality are built around that.
Mario - much like Link - is a nearly-empty cockpit for you to jump in and it works because the quirky worlds and supporting characters are fleshed-out enough to be appealing for both young and old.

A lot of the newer Sonic games have been pretty bad, but there's been a few gems. The most notable one imo is Sonic Generations.

At 1/30/15 11:30 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 1/29/15 01:21 AM, oobooglunk wrote: Many people dismissed this game because the storyline was virtually nonexistent, but it was a great game on its own and an especially excellent way to celebrate Sonic's 20th anniversary.

Wait what? The original Sonic Games had essentially no story other than "Dr.Robotnik or Eggman is evil, beat him".

Really? How did SEGA sell their games then? By saying "Dr. Eggshitz iz evulz, beet his ass."? I really don't think so. SEGA sold their product by creating a continuity around their character, as a part of their advertisements.

Also, if you think story really isn't that important, think about this: every time some joke villain or some "Eggman" themed joke comes along, the motivation for beating the game is shitted upon. When a new player's motivations in a game is shitted upon, they stop playing the game. Immediately.

At 2/12/15 05:02 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Sonic needs to return to its roots. No racing, or new characters, or silly gimmicks.

If that is not a parody, I would give you an earful.

At 2/13/15 06:03 PM, JJMAJR wrote: Really? How did SEGA sell their games then? By saying "Dr. Eggshitz iz evulz, beet his ass."? I really don't think so. SEGA sold their product by creating a continuity around their character, as a part of their advertisements.

Uh I don't know maybe by selling the gameplay?

Also, if you think story really isn't that important, think about this: every time some joke villain or some "Eggman" themed joke comes along, the motivation for beating the game is shitted upon. When a new player's motivations in a game is shitted upon, they stop playing the game. Immediately.

Ok what are you talking about? This was a different age. Video games regularly shit on their players by being incredibly difficult and people liked it! Today story has a bigger part because it's easier to tell it. Gameplay has been slacking for many games especially ones with good stories where they might as well just stop making the game since it's too easy and uninteresting (i.e. Dishonored, Bioshock Infinite). The audience was different back then. But again, Sonic didn't have any real story much less a compelling one in the original Sonic games and they weren't sold on story. The Story was a mechanism to play on the stages, it wasn't the focus of the game.

At 2/13/15 08:07 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 2/13/15 06:03 PM, JJMAJR wrote: Really? How did SEGA sell their games then? By saying "Dr. Eggshitz iz evulz, beet his ass."? I really don't think so. SEGA sold their product by creating a continuity around their character, as a part of their advertisements.

Uh I don't know maybe by selling the gameplay?

Also, if you think story really isn't that important, think about this: every time some joke villain or some "Eggman" themed joke comes along, the motivation for beating the game is shitted upon. When a new player's motivations in a game is shitted upon, they stop playing the game. Immediately.

Ok what are you talking about? This was a different age. Video games regularly shit on their players by being incredibly difficult and people liked it! Today story has a bigger part because it's easier to tell it. Gameplay has been slacking for many games especially ones with good stories where they might as well just stop making the game since it's too easy and uninteresting (i.e. Dishonored, Bioshock Infinite). The audience was different back then. But again, Sonic didn't have any real story much less a compelling one in the original Sonic games and they weren't sold on story. The Story was a mechanism to play on the stages, it wasn't the focus of the game.

Motivation. The motivation for the game is shitted upon for the players. The ability of the player to complete the game is an extremely small issue compared to the motivation for the player to complete it. Why would a new player want to play a game that makes fun and ridicules their struggle against the antagonist? A new player?

Give me a counterpoint that actually is realistic.

At 2/15/15 10:25 PM, JJMAJR wrote: Motivation. The motivation for the game is shitted upon for the players. The ability of the player to complete the game is an extremely small issue compared to the motivation for the player to complete it. Why would a new player want to play a game that makes fun and ridicules their struggle against the antagonist? A new player?

Give me a counterpoint that actually is realistic.

I'm still confused as to what you're trying to say. So Sonic games have been making fun of their protagonists journey? I mean c'mon Eggman wasn't a serious villian, they tried to make him more serious in Sonic '06 which isn't ominous in any way. Or are you saying that people making fun of Sonic's attempts to defeat Eggman are what's making these games worse or something? My impression was that you're making a bigger deal out of the story of the 'good' Sonic games than they actually ever were, which I thought was ridiculous. But now you're seeming to imply that Sonic games making fun of Eggman and not sticking to a more serious atmosphere (you know like Shadow the Hedgehog or Sonic '06?) are what makes these games suck? Or maybe it's Shadow riding a motorcycle or shooting guns what kills it for you.

Just show me an example from a Sonic game that demonstrates what you're talking about.

At 2/16/15 12:21 AM, Warforger wrote:

At 2/15/15 10:25 PM, JJMAJR wrote: Motivation. The motivation for the game is shitted upon for the players. The ability of the player to complete the game is an extremely small issue compared to the motivation for the player to complete it. Why would a new player want to play a game that makes fun and ridicules their struggle against the antagonist? A new player?

Give me a counterpoint that actually is realistic.

I'm still confused as to what you're trying to say. So Sonic games have been making fun of their protagonists journey? I mean c'mon Eggman wasn't a serious villian, they tried to make him more serious in Sonic '06 which isn't ominous in any way. Or are you saying that people making fun of Sonic's attempts to defeat Eggman are what's making these games worse or something? My impression was that you're making a bigger deal out of the story of the 'good' Sonic games than they actually ever were, which I thought was ridiculous. But now you're seeming to imply that Sonic games making fun of Eggman and not sticking to a more serious atmosphere (you know like Shadow the Hedgehog or Sonic '06?) are what makes these games suck? Or maybe it's Shadow riding a motorcycle or shooting guns what kills it for you.

Just show me an example from a Sonic game that demonstrates what you're talking about.

Lost Whore's likeness beckons to you. Motivation to defeat the villain? Shitted upon coming from how stupid those guys are. The Dickass Six provide nothing for the player to work against other than "these guys are stupid enough to challenge your overpowered character, beat them up" and "ooh, they are trying some cliche and ultimately stupid plot to suck out all the energy from the world to power themselves up, even though 90% of them don't really want to do that and instead want to act like dumbasses.". Every "boss" is extremely anticlimactic and in the end acts like a way of saying "he sucks and was bribed like an idiot, beet hiz asss" to the audience.

How do you think a new player would respond to that?

At 2/14/15 09:12 PM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/13/15 06:03 PM, JJMAJR wrote: Every time some joke villain or some "Eggman" themed joke comes along, the motivation for beating the game is shitted upon. When a new player's motivations in a game is shitted upon, they stop playing the game. Immediately.

Sounds like somebody needs to stop taking his epic quest to save the world so seriously. Sonic is an inherently cartoony, comical franchise. He's like the '60s Batman to, say, Call of Duty's Christopher Nolan Batman. Different video games simply present themselves in different ways.

Seems you have no idea about the time period that Sonic was introduced in, what games looked like then, and what was the nature of video games when Sonic was developed. Your point? Incredibly invalid.

Ok what are you talking about? This was a different age. Video games regularly shit on their players by being incredibly difficult and people liked it! Today story has a bigger part because it's easier to tell it. Gameplay has been slacking for many games especially ones with good stories where they might as well just stop making the game since it's too easy and uninteresting (i.e. Dishonored, Bioshock Infinite). The audience was different back then. But again, Sonic didn't have any real story much less a compelling one in the original Sonic games and they weren't sold on story. The Story was a mechanism to play on the stages, it wasn't the focus of the game.

I would say the biggest argument to your statement is difficulty levels and The Evil Within. Games these days are made with different difficulties for this reason exactly. Because some players simply want to enjoy the story and atmosphere of a game. Other players like myself and presumably you want a challenge. I know that when I beat a hard section of game, I feel a real sense of accomplishment, and it elongates the amount of time I spend playing the game, stretching the money I paid for it. Also, a game that brings back the good old sense of difficulty along with having an engaging story, is The Evil Within. Another one is The Last Of Us. Yes, the market has changed, but there are still some mirrors from the past. In a way, the market is somewhat moving back to that.

At 2/17/15 01:42 AM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/16/15 10:11 AM, JJMAJR wrote:
Seems you have no idea about the time period that Sonic was introduced in, what games looked like then, and what was the nature of video games when Sonic was developed. Your point? Incredibly invalid.

Is that so?

1990s FPS games: Shoot demons or fight midgets with deadly hats!
Current FPS games: Dark, gritty story. Murky colors. Everything is war.

1980s stealth games: I FEEL ASLEEP!
Current stealth games: Assassinate everybody. Military gear (sometimes).

1980s/90s platformers: Mushrooms and floating things and physics are weird!!
Current platformers: ...Actually, not much has changed.

I'll assume you were trolling, just to be flattering.

Let me restate this again, what was Sonic originally designed to be? Someone to allow SEGA to compete with gaming giant Nintendo. Someone that would allow SEGA to compete as a console developer, against a more traditionalist company that is controlling the market it is trying to get into. SEGA didn't care about the other genres of games because they were not as developed or overwhelming as Nintendo's market in the gaming industry. They were addressing Nintendo with Sonic, not Doom, not Metal Gear, because they did not think about those games as having as much of an effect as Nintendo's platform games, and has marketed Sonic as action-based, cool, and much more mature (as in less about cartoon shit and jokes) than the other games, and it worked. Until SoJ decided to fuck up the deal with Sony for the Playstation, and that resulted in Sony pushing SEGA out of the console business.

:Until SoJ decided to fuck up the deal with Sony for the Playstation, and that resulted in Sony pushing SEGA out of the console business.

Honestly, I think Microsoft's shady betrayal of SEGA with the Dreamcast was the real nail in the coffin. In a lot of ways, Sony and SEGA could have been good allies with their mutual interest in shrinking Nintendo's chokehold.

At 2/18/15 12:46 AM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/17/15 02:49 PM, JJMAJR wrote:
Let me restate this again, what was Sonic originally designed to be? Someone to allow SEGA to compete with gaming giant Nintendo. Someone that would allow SEGA to compete as a console developer, against a more traditionalist company that is controlling the market it is trying to get into. SEGA didn't care about the other genres of games because they were not as developed or overwhelming as Nintendo's market in the gaming industry.

Well, now that you've actually explained your point, I can see that it actually contains a grain of truth. However, Sonic was SEGA's answer to Mario, specifically, and not Nintendo as a whole; for that, SEGA had other franchises like Phantasy Star and Panzer Dragoon. And although Sonic was specifically created to rival Mario, that concept became irrelevant when Sony came onto the scene, revolutionized the gaming industry, and left both SEGA and Nintendo in the dust. By that point, Sonic was drastically trying to re-invent himself to stay relevant, which explains the drastic departure from the normal Sonic formula that arose at the turn of the century.

Seriously? Well I am incredibly surprised, if you think of Adventure as a "drastic departure" from the second dimension just because it transitioned from 2D to 3D, keep your Mario 64, MGS3, and your latest Final Fantasy and Phantasy Star games, because according to you they are complete, total, inexcusable piles of shit!

If and when I become a game developer, I would create a full series of games that shit on your mentality- wait Kojima beat me to it! You know what? I am going to ask Kojima for lessons on game design and fan trolling, considering how successful he was with Metal Gear.

At 2/17/15 03:11 PM, Toxic-Shredder wrote:
Honestly, I think Microsoft's shady betrayal of SEGA with the Dreamcast was the real nail in the coffin. In a lot of ways, Sony and SEGA could have been good allies with their mutual interest in shrinking Nintendo's chokehold.

They could of been allies, but they both failed to stop Nintendo.

At 2/18/15 10:36 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

They could of been allies, but they both failed to stop Nintendo.

Nintendo has proven to be dumber than a rock recently, but still as unstoppable as a boulder

At 2/18/15 02:27 PM, oobooglunk wrote:

Sonic 3D Blast "transitioned from 2D to 3D". The relatively obscure SegaSonic the Hedgehog "transitioned from 2D to 3D". Sonic Adventure was an entirely different genre of game than its predecessors, losing the momentum-based platforming aspect of Sonic in favor of exploration and item collection.

And that's a very valid point for all modern Sonic games. Adventure and Adventure 2 were received well, Heroes had decent reception, but all the rest of the exploration-style Sonic games have been utterly hated. People liked Colors and loved Generations because they were based on speedy platforming. Then they went back to exploration with the new one, and we're back to what we all hated in the first place.

At 2/18/15 02:33 PM, Toxic-Shredder wrote:

At 2/18/15 10:36 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

They could of been allies, but they both failed to stop Nintendo.

Nintendo has proven to be dumber than a rock recently, but still as unstoppable as a boulder

What makes them dumber than a rock?
They are unstoppable as a boulder.

At 2/18/15 02:33 PM, Toxic-Shredder wrote:

At 2/18/15 10:36 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

Nintendo has proven to be dumber than a rock recently, but still as unstoppable as a boulder

What makes them dumber than a rock?
They are unstoppable as a boulder.

Their business decisions have been very... meh? They really don't understand the Western market at all. On top of this, flops like the Wii U (except for last year. They wrecked ass that year with their game lineup) and pulling shenanigans like not letting us 'muricans have the regular-sized new 3DS, and even their new YT partnership deal, more and more Nintendo is proving that their mega higher-ups are disconnected with gaming culture.

At 2/18/15 02:27 PM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/18/15 10:25 AM, JJMAJR wrote:
Seriously? Well I am incredibly surprised, if you think of Adventure as a "drastic departure" from the second dimension just because it transitioned from 2D to 3D

Sonic 3D Blast "transitioned from 2D to 3D". The relatively obscure SegaSonic the Hedgehog "transitioned from 2D to 3D". Sonic Adventure was an entirely different genre of game than its predecessors, losing the momentum-based platforming aspect of Sonic in favor of exploration and item collection.

keep your Mario 64, MGS3, and your latest Final Fantasy and Phantasy Star games, because according to you they are complete, total, inexcusable piles of shit!

I said the newer games in some of those franchises were more serious in tone, and you twisted my words into your cruel brand of bile.

If and when I become a game developer

*doesn't mention his Daily Feature collab on Newgrounds*

But seriously, have fun with that. If you have a legitimate idea about what makes a video game good, I encourage you to expand upon it with your own work.

1. Sonic 3D Blast was false advertisement. You only play in 2.5D, and to be honest I do not feel any real amounts of speed and the levels were just... not exactly open enough for your point to be valid. Do I really care? Obviously, no, but I can tell you right now that 3D Blast is just as "divergent" from Sonic gameplay as Adventure was.

2. Is that really what you think of a valid counterpoint? I applied the same basic mentality and rationale that you have directly to other franchises that were successful with gameplay that is not frozen to the temperatures of below 5 degrees Celcius. (If you take foodsafety you would get the reference.) Exactly what you are complaining about, precisely what your mentality ultimately results in going against. Fundamentally, your argument is not valid, and you cannot just demote a game just because that the ones before it have different mechanics or perspectives than the current game.

3. You think that I am some rich-ass privileged kid that can just buy Adobe Flash Editors and such? Please, keep shitting on the poor.

At 2/18/15 09:11 PM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/18/15 08:37 PM, JJMAJR wrote:

Sonic 3D Blast, regardless of your opinion, was an (unsuccessful) attempt to port the Sonic formula directly into the third dimension. Sonic Xtreme would have done this more successfully, since it was based around that same idea and didn't utilize an isometric perspective. Sonic Adventure was a different beast altogether, being an action-adventure game instead of a platformer.

I never criticized the games I mentioned; I was just illustrating that, over time, video games have become more serious in nature. There's nothing inherently good or bad about that.

1. You clearly stated that your opinion on "divergent gameplay" will not, and cannot, be changed.

2. Yeah, "just illustrating that, over time, video games have become more serious in nature."...

By that point, Sonic was drastically trying to re-invent himself to stay relevant, which explains the drastic departure from the normal Sonic formula that arose at the turn of the century.

Nice.

At 2/19/15 12:12 AM, oobooglunk wrote:

At 2/18/15 09:22 PM, JJMAJR wrote:
You clearly stated that your opinion on "divergent gameplay" will not, and cannot, be changed.

I stated the following:

Fact: Many (though not all) video games have become a more serious, dramatic medium over time.

Fact: Sonic Adventure was not of the same genre that previous Sonic games were.

Where do you see "my opinion" in the phrases above?

I clearly stated the following as well:

Fact: A new player would not care for what genre a game is identified as, they just want to play a game that is fun.

Fact: Games with stories have appeal and can be advertised effectively for profit.

Fact: A game that shits on the significance of the player's objective (difficulty does NOT do this) would make the player not have as much fun with the game.

Fact: You stated "opinion", which implies that your point is uncorruptible truth and does not have any valid counterpoints.

Fact: Sonic Adventure has been a much more accurate interpretation of Sonic games before it than the current ones. That game is not the only one-way forced direction game before 2000, as you should be familiar with the barrel, chemical plant, and even the third act of scrap brain. They had one-way segments, but paradoxically encouraged exploration through items and shortcuts hidden here and there.

Fact: Sonic Adventure's platforming is definitely momentum-based. Plenty of shortcuts and secrets in that game cannot be reached without speed.

Fact: Sonic games before Adventure tend to ambush you and be hidden in tight spots often. It forces the player to use their wits to get past these enemies, and tests their reaction times. That is rather typical for action-based games, as the majority of the time you need to have good wits in order to get past a large or subversive number of enemies. If you don't, where is the challenge?

Fact: I personally see that Adventure and the games before it other than 3D Blast to have the same genre programmed into them. 3D Blast I view as a puzzle platformer rather than an accurate representation of what earlier games were like. Not that it matters at all to me, a I just view your complaints as rather destructive, and considering the favoritism of seniority from SoJ, I am rather pissed at this attitude more than you could ever be against my desire for better stories.

Fact: You cannot sell anything that parodies the player's motivations and goals in the game without a dramatically large amount of story-based content to accompany it.