Wait, what? 3D Sonic is vulnerable to water? Sure, if you jump into the Ocean in Emerald Coast you'll die, but that's not so much water as a level boundary. There's plenty of underwater shenanigans to be had in 3D Sonic games.
Printable View
Wait, what? 3D Sonic is vulnerable to water? Sure, if you jump into the Ocean in Emerald Coast you'll die, but that's not so much water as a level boundary. There's plenty of underwater shenanigans to be had in 3D Sonic games.
Not for me. I take my 3D Sonic gripe as far back as Sonic Adventure on the Dreamcast. Can't get more original 3D sonic than that, unless of course, you want to count the 3/4 perspective Sonic 3D, which I didn't think we were. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
What don't you like about it? I'd rather play Sonic Adventure than Mario 64.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay See Double You
No air meter, you just gradually loose life unless you collect bubbles or coins (too bad rings don't do that in Sonic :p ). That's also why jumping in water replenishes your health to full in SM64.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegenie
Mario Sunshine was the first to add an actual air meter and thus destroy the exploit for replenishing health via water. ;) (I forger if you drown instantly or start loosing health like Ecco when you run out of air)
I agree, not just the graphics, but the camera and general gameplay. SA1's camera may be twitchy, but at least it's easier to handle the SM64's. (they're both fun games though) I think I'd rather play SA2 than Sunshine though, it's a more linear game but also more fun for me. (the 2p mode is pretty fun too, a shame it's not 4p)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I like the 2D sonics, especially 3/3&K, and I like them a lot more than your average platformer or Mario games (and I grew up all Nintendo) due to the general game mechanics that seem to make things easier and more forgiving for some things (especially the saves and continues in 3/3&K but also the ring mechanics in all of them). One of my other big exceptions for 2D platform games is Yoshi's Island, awesome game that's fun and on a difficulty level I can enjoy without the eventual frustration of some others. (baby Mario sort of acts like rings in that you can get him back if you get hit, a forgiving mechanic that makes it far more playable than any previous Mario game even with the saves and continues of SMW)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay See Double You
3D platformers are among my favorite Genres and I really like SA1 and SA2, mainly in the form of the GC ports as that's what I've played the most. Some prefer SA1 (mainly those who like the adventure aspect -which I can see given I like that too), but SA2 does it way more for me. (the plot was more interesting and voice acting was the best -or at least most tolerable- of any of the newer Sonic games)
A lot of fun and a lot of replay value. I like Mario 64 and Sunshine too, way more than any 2D game in the series (except YI) and part of that is the difficulty system with multiple hits and coins replenishing health, the rest is simply the 3D gameplay though the twitchy camera in 64 hurts it a bit and I don't really like any of the Bowser stages (especially the long/narrow 2D like ones -the final one was more interesting but annoying at times). Mario Sunshine feels more polished though some don't like the theme (64 is darker).
However, Sonic Adventure 2 (and to a lesser extent SA1) get more replay from me and I'm up for SA2 multiplayer whenever I can get someone interested. (except one friend who insists on playing grind race with Metal Sonic... automatic wins for the opponent are not very fun and get boring pretty fast -especially when they intentionally avoid checkpoints to leave you even further behind if you die :p)
As for having the "feel" of the 2D games... I can't say Zelda or (especially) Metroid made any less drastic of a transition than Mario or Sonic, though with Zelda they have kept voice acting out (other than grunts and gibberish) which is significant and the very fact that the areal view made the older games seem more 3D anyway was less dramatic.
However, in general look/style/theme of the games, they all seem to be pretty similar in terms of 2D to 3D transition, gameplay varies drastically from the 2D games in all cases (Metroid probably the most extreme -run and gun sidescrolling action-adventure to FPS, though it also had the longest gap between releases).
The 3D sonic games also retain the feel of speed from the 2D games, but the art style and such also carries over to a fair extent.
The only 3D games in the sonic series I really don't like are Secret Rings, Black Knight (both due to the on-rails dynamic and worse with the motion controls), probably STH'06 (haven't played it to be sure, but the broken gameplay and annoying plot/characters would be enough to kill it). Sonic Unleashed is boarderline, decent enough to be playable, but not enough to really keep my interest.
Heroes was OK but the plot was a little annoying and voice acting was meh (way overused in-game too, SA1 and 2 tempered that a lot more, worse due to having 3 characters at a time), Shadow was more fun for me though I'd need to play Heroes again to be sure (the multiplayer feature adds to it), though there isn't as much replay interest as SA1 or 2.
I might try out Colors, but it really looks like they just pushed ahead with Sonic Unleashed's day formula...
If they came out with a game of the general caliber of SA2, I'd definitely be interested. (a damn shame they didn't keep to that formula going forward from SA2... instead of Heroes there could have been SA3) Shadow is the closest, but it's not nearly as polished. (the darker tone and dumbing down of some annoying elements of Heroes was nice though)
For anyone who prefers 2D platformers to 3D platformers in general, I wouldn't expect to like the 3D incarnations of the 2D games more as such, but for me I grew up with 2D platform games but 3D feels more "right" to me. (they're more fun mainly as I'm better at them ;))
On that note though I don't really like the direction Nintendo has gone... not just with the new 2D perspective games, but I don't care for either Galaxy game (the 2nd is a bit better but I still don't really like it). SM64 and Sunshine were great, but I just don't like the mechanics of Galaxy. It would have been OK for one or 2 worlds/stages to be like that (the exception), but not the whole game. :(
Actually, comparing the DC version with the GC ports, I don't see any overall flaws. The GC port does have some frame drop at points, but not to the point of compromising gameplay and the bugs are rather minor while the graphics are generally better. (still pretty equal to the DC game though -I like the controller on the GC a lot more -I haven't noticed the control lag on the DC version that Mark Bussler mentioned in his DC/XBLA reviews of it though)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Sonic Adventure 2 Battle is something else though, it seems to have taken everything that they did right in the DC version and then boosted it to the GC's added graphical capabilities with smoother, higher poly count models, more/higher-res textures, and maintaining a solid framerate with all of that.
It's basically a better looking version of the DC game with a better controller and edited Chao gardens.
However, if you want to talk about buggy 3D Sonic games, look no further than the PS2 version of any 3D Sonic released that generation. :p The Xbox versions were more mixed but the GC versions are the ones to get.
There's also Sonic R and the prototype of Sonic Adventure Saturn in Jam's Sonic World. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay See Double You
The awful part of Sonic Adventure is playing as Big the Cat. ;) That, and I didn't like the adventure areas. I'd rather play a straight platformer than spend inordinate amounts of time wandering around between stages.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
SA2 pretty much fixed my gripes with the first. It's still my favorite 3D Sonic. But it's not exactly perfect. Replaying the levels with mundane alternate goals never grabbed me.
Sonic Heroes would be better if: A) it didn't have a "level up" system, which is entirely pointless; and B) the characters would shut the fuck up. I don't want to hear their voices every two seconds! Also the Team Rose playthrough kind of sucked.
I do agree that none of these games are terrible. Sonic the Hedgehog (360/ps3) was a truly awful game, though.
I really enjoyed Sonic Adventure when it was released. I actually didn't like Adventure 2 a whole lot. I don't know why but it never clicked with me. Not being able to choose who I was playing as hurt it a bit. I know a lot of people love them but I absolutely fucking hate the Knuckles/Rouge scavenger hunt levels. I didn't like this in the original Sonic Adventure either. It's still a good game though despite my personal gripes.
I always thought the stupid side characters argument for the original Sonic Adventure didn't hold a lot of water because the other character's games were so short they weren't really that big a deal to plow through. The vast majority of play time is spent as Sonic as it should be.
I didn't like how they ignored the previous game in the series; by all means it was a fun game, but as a sequel I don't think it was as good a follow-up to the first game as it could have been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obviously
I mean, the plot's completely out there; whether it's a result of fudgy translation or not I'm not sure, but it just turned into this tangled mess. Here's Shadow; he's like Sonic, but the only character development he has is when you see him in cutscenes being angsty. Then you're off into space after a cutscene, for some reason. Something something bad military something'd Gerald Robotnik (somehow related to the bad guy of the entire series to date, hoo boy that's never brought up again!), something madness something something Ultimate Weapon, something something something Chaos Emeralds, something oh no here comes the Biolizard in the last five minutes of the game. Heroic Sacrifice, poignant moments all round, exeunt.
Even Sonic X's adaptation made a lick more sense, and that had a twelve-year-old human sidekick and was aimed at Japanese preteens. (have fun finding this thread in a Google search noow~)
Everyone had their own little coda at the end of Sonic Adventure - Sonic went on vacation, Tails saved the day by himself, Amy wanted to be more respected, and Big ... caught a big fish? By the end of SA2, Sonic's been angry at Shadow, Tails was the backup act in a walking mech, and Amy appeared in a few 'wait for meeee' cutscenes. It just feels rather schizophrenic.
[edit] Most heinous of all, it had that sloooow *chk chk chk* typewriting-onto-the-screen effect. In Comic Sans, no less.
I did the math and it's about the same for both games. In SA2, Sonic and Shadow combined is about the same portion of gameplay as Sonic in SA1. I know Shadow is not Sonic, but he plays the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obviously
I wouldn't say I "love" the hunting levels, but I thought SA2 did a much better job with them than SA1. Also I'd rather alternate than play them all in a row. Alternating gameplay types makes it less tedious IMO.
The DX versions of Sonic Adventure are god awful really. The frame rate is all over the place where as it's more stable on the Dreamcast. Then you have collision issues that cause you to randomly fall through geometry (Yes this happens in the DC version too, but not to the same extent) and it just seems to play better on the Dreamcast. Sonic Adventure 2 the polygon models are about the same really. Whats different is a lot of shadows and lighting effects are missing in the Gamecube version.Quote:
Originally Posted by kool kitty89
Though for Sonic Heroes and Shadow the Hedgehog and other Sonic games on those systems you are right with the Gamecube having the better versions as it was the lead platform for development.
I own SA2 for both Dreamcast and Gamecube and have played through both versions. I've never noticed any "smoother, higher poly count models, more/higher-res textures" in the Gamecube version. In fact I thought the textures were a little worse. The expanded two-player is nice, though, if you're into that; it was a bit gimped on DC.
SA DX just sucks. The upgrades are completely inconsistent and haphazard.
Not sure about the PC version, but SADX plays great on the GC, it is admittedly a little framey, but not anything that kills it by any margin. (I've noticed it most in Adventure field anyway, not so much in the levels)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
There's a lot of added texture and model detail (the latter more noticeable in cutscenes), though a few odd cases of removed detail like the trees on Angel Island.
I need to compare it again, but the characters do seem too shiny looking in DX, not sure if that's the case in the DC game. (might be plain satin-like gouraud shading more like SA2 on both platforms)
I haven't noticed the missing lighting effects, I need to compare them again... but I definitely noticed the smoother models (less visible facets, especially in cutscenes). That and the removal of Rouge's jiggle physics (other than the ears). ;)
The controller REALLY makes a difference though, the DC controller is a bit off compared to the GC one... if it was the Saturn 3D pad being compared it might be another story, but the DC pad is a bit funky. (the analog stick is OK, but after the initial novelty I started realizing that the nice domed top wasn't enough to make up for the lack of good grip to it, but the real problem is the damn expansion bay in the way of my fingers so I can't grip the controller comfortably -it would have been fine when I was 10, but not now -a shame since the general size and form factor would other wise be pretty good, they took the 3D pad and made it worse in almost every way :( ) Still better than the PSX or (non pro) Wii classic controller at least, save cases where dual analog is necessary.
The detail is most noticeable in the cutscenes (the texture thing is WAY more extreme for SADX than SA2B though). Check out some youtube comparison videos. (I've played them back to back on real hardware and it's pretty noticeable for cutscenes at least -save the FMV ones- yuou can much more easily see the facets in the DC game)Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
It's not as extreme as you see with some PS2 vs GC/Xbox versions of games (aside from cases where developers killed themselves optimizing the PS2 versions and did sloppy ports to the others), but it is noticeable.
In any case, SA2B seems as polished as SA2 unlike DX which has some added stuff but is a bit rough around the edges (mainly variable framerate -not remotely close to ruining it for me on the GC -not sure about PC and some people seem to prefer the 360 port even -the CGRHD reviews demonstrates that)
I disagree with those who actually think DX is definitively better, but I would hardly say it sucks, my brother and I played through it (completely, every character) more than twice, and he 100% it.
SA2 (either version) is still much more fun IMO, and in my case the added multiplayer stuff is definitely significant... we had all of it unlocked too until our Nintendo bran 8 MB card crapped out.
Here's a comparison video:
Yeah the top of Sonic's head and ears look a bit rounder, and Shadows fingers are fatter on Gamecube, however on Gamecube we also have the issue of where did all the shadows go? Texture quality looks the same to me though. And to be honest, I think the pointier ears fit Sonic better than the rounder ones on Gamecube.
they only used more detailed models in some cutscenes in GC port, partially sometimes. For example, smoother hands models are not present in every cutscene, just as rounder body if i remember right.
I wonder why they didn't used those models at prior on DC, they're around 3-4.000tris not a problem for DC, in addition Dreamcast applies that special feature for 3d models simplification on charachers and enemies(i mean the one wich removes from the scene hidden faces of 3D models by the camera), wich makes models even lighter. I wonder why they didn't applied it to the whole scene..
An other improvement on GC is farther draw distance, not so much noticeable anyway. :p
Not just rounder, but more complex polygon mesh in general and even a bit more articulation in some cases. (at least it seems to be the case with the hands -Shadow's fingers aren't so much fatter as they are curving around the emerald rather than being stiff/morphing through it -and more issues with polygons clipping in general, but not many)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
And the GC version changed Sonic's expression at 1:08
Good catch with the lighting though, actually the lighting effects make it look a bit rougher, maybe that's where I noticed the texture differences. (one drawback of dynamic lighting in general is that the shading tends to expose some flaws more while fixed shading -or more limited lighting- tends to allow more fixed optimization for model details -It's a lot more extreme with flat shaded stuff though rather than smooth shaded, really obvious if you compare some games with options to enable dynamic lighting, that came up with the PC version of Virtua fighter 2 a while back, with lighting disabled the models look much smoother and have the polygon facets hidden -of course more complex hardware/renderers could probably do both with selective lighting to optimize for smoother models as well as offering lighting effects)
On both sides it's more nit picking than anything and they're both great looking and playing versions of the game. (certainly not nearly the trade offs of DX ;) -I'm certainly glad of that, though again I don't recall any cases where it was any more than a minor annoyance on DX)
I really need to get around to burning some Dreamcast games now that I've got my own. :p (the CDI format is a bit annoying to work with though)
Maybe it was just a matter of tweaking things more beyond the in-game models. (I assume the cutscene models in both versions are different than in-game models, otherwise that might explain things more -a number of other games opt for plain game engine cutscenes rather than specialized cutscene engines, sort of a shame really, especially on N64 where you almost never got FMV stuff and the plain game engine cutscenes often looked rather rough)Quote:
Originally Posted by Yfrid
Hmm, I've yet to play the DC version extensively, but that would be interesting to compare... as I recall there are some places where draw distance was even noticeable on the GC version, though not really ever to the point of detracting from gameplay.Quote:
An other improvement on GC is farther draw distance, not so much noticeable anyway. :p
Did DX do that too? (that certainly would have added to the framerate issues)