Quote:
That is the crappest analogy ever. The only way to improve upon drawing is to keep practicing and practicing by, guess what? Drawing. You don't instantly become much better at drawing from one picture to another.
Yes yes, that's true, but that's not what I meant (blame it on my bad wording whilst ranting)
I was talking about how Sonic Team seems to be ignoring the fact that theyre games suck, without actually trying to make any attempt to improve, they just keep showing us the same Sucky "Drawings" without even stopping to Practice and get better.
I'm hoping that maybe Sonic Team will actually work on developing their 3D programming skills a bit, actually work on what makes a fun game (play some Robo Blast 2 for inspiration), sit around and tinker with their designs until they finally have something worthy of being a TRUE 3D SONIC GAME! wa ha ha ha!
Quote:
But less mature sonic fans will make their parents buy a new Sonic game regardless. Just like Pokemon. I won't dare say that thats what Sonic Team is banking on.
But that's exactly what they are banking on. For example, I remember Naka saying that he was hoping that Sonic X will become as popular as the Pokemon anime.
Yeah..............I guess we're still waiting on that one eh? 
Wheras the Pokemon anime managed to spawn about 8 movies, pretty much one for every season of the Anime, and Sonic X barely got to a third series...something tells me Naka's prayers were NOT answered! ho ho ho
Still, Sonic X achieved a certain popularity among people.
Now when someone sees me drawing Sonic they know it's Sonic, but not because of the games, because of Sonic X.
That's why I partially blame Sonic X for the downfall of the franchise. Playing games like Sonic Riders, Shadow, and 2006, I felt less like I was playing new Sonic games, and more like I was playing tie-ins to Sonic X. The games have become a tie-in to Sonic X, and it should be the other way around.
... other than the thing with Shadow's wrist-rings, I really don't see that being the case. If Cosmo popped up and there was talk of Sonic hopping from another world, maybe... but there's hardly an influx of Sonic X-introduced stuff in those games.
Quote:
That's why I partially blame Sonic X for the downfall of the franchise. Playing games like Sonic Riders, Shadow, and 2006, I felt less like I was playing new Sonic games, and more like I was playing tie-ins to Sonic X. The games have become a tie-in to Sonic X, and it should be the other way around.
I think the downfall started before Sonic X with the exodus of more key members of Sega, the disappointments that was SA2 and SH, the Sammy co. takeover, and the half-arse ports/compiltations.
Wait.. I don't think SA2 was a disappointment.
I remember fairly well how everybody was hyped up and there were heated debates about Shadow, whether he lived or not, etc.
After SA2 there was a more or less long period of time with no major Sonic titles and with the announcement of Heroes the hype got really big, since everybody expected the story to be awesome; the Chaotix' return only made the hype get even bigger.
Then Heroes was released and it turned out to have a really weak story, thus creating a big disappointment among people.
People were expecting an awesome story when at the time Sega stated themselves that the story was going to not be like the SA titles? If thats' the case, they were just setting themselves up for disappointment, and had it coming.
It wasn't the story (everyone knew it was going to have a simple story) that disappointed people--it was the gameplay.
As a member of the SA > SA2 camp, I'd go with SA2 being a disappointment. It was a disappointment for me though still a tolerable game (mainly because I liked the treasure hunting a lot).
I'd say SA2's more disappointing in hindsight than it was at the time, much the same with SA1, certain problems are more noticeble than I remember, and I somehow managed to get through all of the none Sonic/Shadow levels with little complaint but when I go back now that's when it shows it's faults. The same with Big's levels in SA1, at first, I couldn't see why people were complaining about them, since I managed to get through them easily and quickly, and enjoyed them, but when going back I couldn't stand them...3D Sonic games don't age well.
Does anybody else think Sammy may take some of the blame? IMO, Sonic Heroes > SA2 > SA. They started with a bad but well polished idea and gradually made it more interactive and put in better gameplay elements (but with less polish, but at least conceptually they had better ideas). However, since Sammy took over, the 2 major 3D releases have been a GTA wannabe and a Final Fantasy wannabe. Could some executive decisions be deciding the styles of these games, rather than Sonic Team themselves (who do get blame for bad execution)? Put SA and Heroes, and to a lesser extent SA2, up to the originals, and at least you get the idea it's the same series. Shadow and STH360 are stylistically not even remotely Sonic-like.
Quote:
IMO, Sonic Heroes > SA2 > SA.
In gameplay concept, maybe, but that's quite a bold claim.
Well, I sort of agree with Vec, only that SH > SA > SA2.
I've had more trouble with SA2 than the other two put together, not to mention the fact that at least when I was playing SA and SH, I was able to find something fun about them. I despise SA2, from the day I first played it.
Consequently, I liked SA2 save for the shooter elements which failed to excite like Gamma's did.
Quote:
when at the time Sega stated themselves that the story was going to not be like the SA titles?
They failed in that regard, it certainly feels like an Adventure title. Not to mention the overall game structure. There's nothing Sonic the Hedgehog about this game, not even Sonic the Hedgehog.
Quote:
In gameplay concept, maybe, but that's quite a bold claim.
Vec is probably the biggest Sonic Heroes fan on this board. Bold, but not surprising. 😉
Yes, it was the shooting that killed SA2 for me, though I didn't like a lot of the running stages for the lack of options and forced grinding in certain stages. Lack of choices in terms of who to play as (due to the side business) didn't help matters either. I don't mind unlocking characters as much as I despised the pick a side business.
Let me put it this way.
Concept, interactivity, and ability to play in multiple ways (the stuff I keep saying Sonic Team needs more of since the too automatic SA came out):
SH > SA2 > SA
Polish & execution:
SA > SA2 > SH
Control:
SA > SH (those darn power and speed attacks that made you go forward) > SA2 (the light dash/fire spin competition that too often went with fire spin)
Smaller number of cheap pits:
SA > SA2 = SH
I like SA, but when I look back at everything I like, it's usually the presentation, music, coolness of scenes like the snake in Lost World, etc. Gamma was the best character gameplay-wise, because setting up huge combos was fun, but his game was so short. Amy's fun and also too short. After I finished the replay usually wasn't doing it for me, for most levels and characters. The bosses other than Chaos 6 and E-101 were basically invincible attack pattern/pointless weak spot exposing.
SA2 was better mostly because of the scoring system and missions that added something more than just going through the level, and the vastly improved bosses that let you attack in multiple ways. However it has more pits and control issues and the worst decision was making the shooters slower than Gamma for no reason (running into car mode was fun with Gamma).
SH gives you both speed and power (flight is sort of a stinker and should have been done differently) and you tend to be able to do things in many different ways. They even made the springs and loops a bit more interactive by making them 3-way or having multiple loops to choose from. There is usually a recommended formation, which is bad level design, but you can actually use different formations most of the time. The first 4 levels even have some decent branching, but they apparently got lazy/rushed after that, and of course the bugs are well known. But I think this is the core of what would be a spectacular game, better than S3&K, with better execution. It wasn't coincidence that this was probably the most anticipated Sonic game since Sonic 2. That summer/fall was like my Sonic 2 obsession of summer/fall 1992 all over again.
Personally, I'd rank the 3D series overall as SA>SA2>SH>Shadow>2006.
Don't forget, most of Heroes's bosses were pretty dull, with the exception of stuff like Robot Carnival, which just looked dull.
Eh, they're sort of a mixed bag. On one hand, you can fight them in a lot of different ways, and you never have an invincibility/weak spot pattern on any boss. The team battles were very badly done, mostly because of the camera that makes it almost impossible to use any actual strategy, and the storyline ridiculousness involved in Team Sonic's battles. The robot bosses were cheap, but fun. The Eggman bosses were great, and they have a modular nature that lets you attack different weapons on the boss, but I didn't like the way the first 2 ran away almost constantly. Egg Emperor is an excellent boss and the only downside to it is that somewhat too close camera on the circular arena. Metal Sonic was ok, but a bit disappointing considering it's METAL SONIC and you don't get to race him or fight his normal form. In bosses I'd say SA2 > SH > SA.
SA Character fights were better than SA2's and SH's, too.
Oh no. Oh no. Give it your bes- Oh no."
I cracked up at that the first time
that and "Get A L-Get A Load of THIS Get A Load of THIS"
OH NO, NOT SHADOW FEVER!
Bosses in Shadow were fun. Much better than Heroes. The bosses in Heroes were too cheap. They relied on explosions and robots running around to harm you rather than the boss itself.
XDXD! Oh man i've been missing out on this discussion. The boss battles and stuff. Hahaha. Oh boy...I saw Sonic Rush has the best boss battles. Well really just old school Sonic games had the best. =P
I found the few Shadow bosses I played to be rather boring and noted that they fell prey to the 'Invincible attack followed by weak period during which you can attack" pattern that is followed by all too many Videogame bosses, and is partiularly prevalent in 3D Sonic titles.
Quote:
Oh no. Oh no. Give it your bes- Oh no.
Best laugh I've had in DAYS.
...Speaking of SA1. Did anyone else get killed by the Egg Viper's kamikaze thing at the end of the fight the first time it did it?
Of course. It's kind of a shame they haven't done anything like that in ages...
I swear, that boss fight was incredibly difficult the first time you fight it. Dunno why, really, although not many Sonic bosses since can make that claim.
Not during the story mode when you get to Egg Viper. During Time Attack however... He took out two platforms. TWO...
Watching Gamer TV End of the Year look at all things great and Sony bashing today. And it starts of with Tomb Raider: Legend. Which got a 5/5 from them.
Now if you remember the game that preceded it was: Angel of Darkness and that it was critically mauled and blamed for the poor takings of Tomb Raider 2 (The Movie). But it still sold quite well. But, because of said mauling it made Eidos change the developers for the next game and bring back Toby Gard. Which lead to Legend and its all round decentness.
Now, people would argue that Sonic's Angel of Darkness moment has already happened (Heroes or Shadow) where a game is poorly reviewed but sells well. But have we just seen the next step from Angel of Darkness where a game from an established, well selling series produces another crapper of a game and it doesn't sell well?
Well as far as I know Takahasi Iizuka, who was a major part of the first 4 3D games, is not the lead designer of STH360. Jun Sunoue was also somewhat oddly taken out. So they already switched developers, but it's obvious that the people they got have none of Iizuka's talent, and copied every mistake he made. At least his games have their redeeming qualities, but I don't know of many people who would say that STH360 is better than any of them, except maybe Shadow, and I wonder how much of that is reaction to the concept and style of Shadow. I have not played either game, but the videos and info I have seen lead me to suspect that Shadow probably plays better than STH360.
Quote:
Did anyone else get killed by the Egg Viper's kamikaze thing at the end of the fight the first time it did it?
Oh yeah, I died from that a few times actually before I got good enough to have enough platforms left to survive it.
One of my fave bosses of recent memory though. ^^
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did anyone else get killed by the Egg Viper's kamikaze thing at the end of the fight the first time it did it?
Yeah, I did the first time when I was 9,LOL. If I remember corectly, I was like OMG when happened to me and I got scared
EDIT: This post is in response to whether or not Sonic Team will learn from poor sales of StH360. Yes, all the way back on the first page.
Consider this:
Sonic 369 tanks, as it deserves to do. That means what to us? That a poorly done game gets its cummupance. What does it mean to Sega though? Possibly the same, unless...
Sonic and the Secret Rings does well. What might that tell Sega? That in order to sell Sonic games, you need a gimmick, or non-stop speed, or mini-games, or to aim at a younger audience? I admit, Secret Rings doesn't look that bad as a 'spinoff,' I suppose you could call it. But what would its success tell Sega relative to StH'06's lack of sales?
Maybe nothing, but it's something to consider.
-Jake
That's what I'm a bit worried about. Secret Rings is fine as a side game if it's done well, but having the series turned into nothing but on rails target hitting would be the real jumping of the shark IMO. Sonic hasn't jumped yet (the point where you see the series is irredeemable) because the non-Sonic Team games are still good or at least decent, and the mistakes of Sonic Team are obvious, so I believe competent developers with better beta testing could still make a great 3D Sonic game.
Why would the non-Sonic Team games be turned into strictly all-rails assuming that Sonic Wii will succeed when they haven't followed the same direction as the ST games all this time?
Are you saying that there won't be anymore games in the same vein as Sonic Advance and Rush? Because that kind of thinking is silly--even for Sega.
No, but I'd like to see a great 3D Sonic game eventually, rather than a compromise that's the closest to decent SEGA can manage just because their devs or producers or executives make crappy games right now. It goes against everything I like about 2D Sonic, so in a way it would be a Sonic game in style or graphics only, and I want a 3D game that has those qualities of freedom and exploration. Not that I'd be opposed to more on rails games if it does work, but I wouldn't want them taking over the series. It's kind of like taking a comedy and making a drama sequel. Even if they're good, people who started on the comedy version would like to see something that's actually true to the comedy series.
Quote:
Not that I'd be opposed to more on rails games if it does work, but I wouldn't want them taking over the series. It's kind of like taking a comedy and making a drama sequel. Even if they're good, people who started on the comedy version would like to see something that's actually true to the comedy series.
But you can apply this anology for most of the 3D entries in this series is now. I'm sure that there are many people who have complaints about the 3D games since SA1 since they all feel different than the 2D games and I'm not just talking about the addition of a third plane. Also, I think people are getting tired of the way the 3D games are now as argueably, they have not changed for the better these 8 years, and Sonic Wii looks like a refreshing take on the franchise.
I recall one complaint I've read from a person who felt that the 3D games were lacking is that they were missing the physics momentum that were found in the 2D games. Sonic controls feel fake due to the lack of physics. He argues that Samus's ball mode in Metroid Prime gives a greater sense of the Sonic physics, the 3D games have been lacking. Although, I can't confirm it for myself seeing that I never played any of the MP games.
MP had some nice ball physics. I never really thought of how they would apply in a Sonic game... We'll add that to the improvements list, but only after improving level design, simplifying the 'mixed bag' experience, and removing bugs/glitches/poor button mapping.
-Jake
I'd also like to say F-Zero GX featured much better loops than 3D Sonic, though you are stuck to the floor with them, the camera had a much better feeling by staying behind you.
The camera issue is really invredible. I'm betting that a huge amount of their level design and polish goes into pre-programming the camera, which is absolutely insane, especially because no matter how much they pre-program it somebody will get screwed up by doing something they don't expect. Maybe if they used a following camera with user options they could actually work on the game instead of this camera nonsense.
To my mind, the only solution to giving the games a decent 3D camera is to dump them on the oc and give them mouselook.
Of course, this is hardly commercially viable, despite the fact that Sonic 3D is one of the best-selling budget pc games ever in the UK.
