MY question to you is why isnt SA fun anymore. The games that came after it got progressively worse. SA1 is by far the best of the 3d ones. I also dont know what offers the same experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splatterhouse5
Printable View
MY question to you is why isnt SA fun anymore. The games that came after it got progressively worse. SA1 is by far the best of the 3d ones. I also dont know what offers the same experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splatterhouse5
Personally I thought SA1 was very inconsistent. It had moments of brilliance but lots of lame parts. Amy and Big sucked, and Tails's levels didn't work very well. The adventure fields felt like pointless padding. Overall, the game suffered from a subpar framerate and awful camera; 90% of my deaths in the game were camera-induced pit deaths. I thought SA2 was a better, more focused, more polished game. They dumped the lamest aspects of SA1 and improved upon everything else. I have no idea why people prefer SA1. I always hear people complain that in SA2 Sonic and Shadow is only a third of the game, but Sonic isn't more than a third of SA1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clessy
Sonic Adventure 1 is a broken mess of a title that’s almost unplayable today. Aside from the countless technical problems (bugs, glitches, camera problems and a totally broken spin dash) SA1 doesn’t really know what the hell it wants to be and it ends up being absolutely nothing. It scraps the classic Sonic mechanics but, at the same time, it doesn’t make the step to the modern Sonic formula. The result is a game that, for most of the time, you’re just pushing forward without doing anything but watching the environments.
In reality SA1 was nothing more than a tech demo with mind blowing graphics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
Maybe we should create a new thread for Sonic Adventure 1 spanking, shaming and hatred. The little hedgehog needs help...Quote:
Originally Posted by Loggo
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...0UXRTHcF1_dunD
Or a poll: Saturn's Sonic 3D vs Sonic Adventure 1...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSPNQ82Sq4E
Sonic Adventure is one of the most boring games I've ever had the disgust of playing in my entire life.
Honestly, calling that a Sonic game is a shameful insult to the 16-bit classics.
I would like to know the genre preferences of all of these Sonic Adventure haters. I have played through this game in its entirety on the Dreamcast many times and on the Gamecube once or twice. I very rarely run into glitches unless I'm trying to do a speed run and spindash jump over level segments. I do consider the Sonic segments the showcase of the game, especially since I only had to play through Big, Knuckles, Amy and Tail's levels once. I look at those segments like menu options in a Namco game, I don't have to play them and I frequently choose not to. The other character's levels are at least as competent as mini games in any other game, and more amusing in my opinion than any fetch and quest games I have played on the N64.
The Sonic levels, especially the fast ones, are classic awesomeness with no end. In case people have forgotten, the 16-bit Sonic games all had pace breaker levels too like Casino Night or the Labyrinth Zone, not to mention the bonus stages. Sonic has never been all about constant running.
Apologies to Sonic Adventure lovers if I sounded too harsh. ;)
But that's the truth, I can't help it. This game bored me to death.
As for genre preferences -> shmups -> fighters -> racers -> puzzlers -> platformers.
As I've said in another thread, you take Sonic out of SA and replace him with some generic character and SA becomes another forgotten title on the DC. I believe Sonic fans were looking for a Sonic game to cling to with the Dreamcast, so they overlooked the ton of flaws that Sonic Adventure had and clinged to what was right with the game. Sonic Adventure isn't fun to play.
Please, express your thoughts with moderation, no flaming...
I don't like the presentation, it's just too cinema and no Sonic-like to my taste.
The new characters are lame.
The action has too many stops and slowdown moments.
Personally I find the controls awkward. 2D Sonic games allowed you to move very fast with precision. 3D Sonic games mostly gave you slow, awkward movements. I think the homing attack is very telling. Sega realized the controls were so bad it was the only way you could hit something. And then it just felt a bit like cheating.
In as few words as possible, it turned Sonic into a virtual anime.
I disagree, I think the controls are just far more precise than any other similar games. For example, I can spin dash up the mountain in the first level and land on an island on the other side that is barely bigger than Sonic. It didn't take me many attempts to land this shortcut. I think the homing attack is just to make the game more accessible and a good deal faster than it would have been otherwise.
Oh it has nothing to do with genre preferences. The platform genre is, by far, my favorite anyway.
I have nothing against the Adventure series, it’s the first Sonic Adventure that’s not good. Sonic Adventure 2, with all its faults, is actually a very good game. Not a shallow tech demo like the first one. The biggest problem in SA2 was the non-optional gameplay with the secondary characters. Thankfully, you have to get through those tedious scenarios only once. When you finish the game you can go the map and play the Sonic stages as much as you want.
The original Sonic Adventure didn’t really know what the hell it wanted to be. It implemented the homing attack in a design that tried to resemble that of the 16-bit titles. But without key gameplay mechanics like rolling, actual momentum based gameplay and the pinball physics, that’s simply impossible. The original Sonic Adventure ended up being an, empty, shallow, tech demo with no actual purpose and numerous technical problems.
Contrary to SA1, the Sonic & Shadow gameplay in SA2 is the best thing that happened in the history of 3D Sonic games. It may have little in common with the classic titles, but at least it’s an…actual game that’s full of multiple score attack based set-pieces and almost no technical problems.
Oh, and Amy Rose being a playable character. I want whoever conceived her character to be drawn and quartered.
If you are playing the game the way the programmers intended, you pretty much keep going fast in most stages. The main problem here, is that if you don't follow the intended path the game does all kinds of strange things, and you are often punished for exploration by falling through the floor to your death for no apparent reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by agostinhobaroners
I've loved the game since release, but the general bugginess has always been a major flaw in the game. Also, the rereleases on GC and XBLA didn't really fix these problems, and they just don't feel quite right compared to the DC original.
I never played Sonic Adventure, but this is a problem I have with Sonic Unleashed. The intro cutscene is too damn long and unskippable. When I finished the first level I felt that I spent more time watching the intro than playing the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by agostinhobaroners
I had no idea it was controversal. When I played it when it came out I was in awe and thought it was a successful attempt to put Sonic in 3d. Now years later its easy to point out all the faults and nitpick but most of you doing that would have loved it in 98/99.
True, it was a sight to behold in '99. Keep in mind that 2d had all but died, and 3D in the 32 bit era more or less looked like shit. Then, you get a shiny new Dreamcast, pop in Sonic Adventure, and get a gorgeous (at the time) CG intro, rock music blasting, and a high res 3D Sonic ready to kick some ass and usher in a new golden era of videogaming awesomeness!
Yeah, it didn't quite work out that way. I still get chills when I pop in SA and play the intro. Not because of the intro itself being something special, but it's more of the memory of the time.
It was very much a game of its time and era. I have no desire to play it now and then have to whine about all the flaws. Playing it in '99 as a young kid I have fond memories and Id like to leave it just like that.
The first stage looked cool. I wish that orca had eaten all the extra characters.
The Nights pinball machine was the highlight for me.
P.S. I hope Kogen's permitted back, he's an above average member.
I enjoyed it but it takes awhile for it to get going and just feels odd at first.
I don't hate SA at all. I like it a lot, actually. What amazes me about it is the fact that Sonic's physics in the game are very similar to the way they were in classic games, unlike most of the 3D games since then. They even got the rolling right, it's just stupidly difficult to control.
That said, I fucking hate Big. I hate his character, I hate his levels and I hate his controls. And Amy. Other than that, it's great, and it marks the last time Knuckles and Tails were genuinely fun to play as. Too bad it's so god damn glitchy.
It's a good game, but the glitches and poor collision detection and camera can really piss you off. And no Super Sonic in normal levels? Why they took it out during development is beyond me.
Reasons I like it.
1) Its catching up on depth. Sonic has always been shallow and a bad value. You get around 8 stages with little to nothing to do. Where as mario even as far back as super mario world on snes was vastly bigger. This was Sonic finally stepping up to mario. Still mario games are way more bang for buck.
2) People complain about the speed but honestly thats a load of shit. Sonic can go ridiculous fast in 3d and stages like speed highway show this off in way 2d never could.
3) 3d makes it a lot more in depth instead of the standard fair of hold right until you win. Sonic 2 is so simple you barely have to do more than hold right and jump every once in while.
4) At the time the graphics where cutting edge. Honestly when you play it on xbla with the higher resolution it till looks rather good.
5) More depth and actually trying to have a story. People bitch about the other characters sucking but, who cares? You already have a full length game as sonic thats longer than any 2d sonic. The rest is just extra filler.
6) Good music and your choice of Japanese or English voice acting.
My biggest problem with Sonic Adventure is how glitchy it is. Everyone complains about the sins of Sonic's newer 3D iterations... But nobody ever speaks of the ones committed by the first of them. Probably because most people look at SA with nostalgia glasses on and won't ever dare speak a bad word about it.
I have a standard copy of the game on Dreamcast and there's all sorts of problems with the game. It's very easy to get caught on something during one of Sonic's levels, or even fall through the floor, the lip "flapping" is horrendous, during the cutscenes you'll sometimes find polygonal flaws, and so on and so forth... I'd have to play the game again to be more specific, I haven't played it in quite some time.
The saddest part here is that Sonic Adventure DX for Game Cube, while containing some improvements, is still much the same mess the original DC version was. Between the two of them, I prefer Adventure 2 Battle on almost every aspect. I should pirate or buy a copy of Adventure 2 for DC though, would be nice to see what the Chao Garden was like in an earlier version of the game.
Only Sonic's gameplay was really any good. E102Y was okay. The rest pretty much sucked. With Tails I was basically just flying over most of the level, which is underwhelming and serves to highlight the limitations of the level environments. Knuckles's levels were super basic and you're not actually finding anything that's hidden, you just have to watch the radar. Amy's levels were slow and boring. Big was just dreadful. Even with Sonic, some of the levels are kind of lame. Does anyone actually like Sky Chase?
I disliked the "adventure field" aspect of the game. It brings nothing to the table. I don't like how the game runs at 30 fps. The camera is terrible and caused me many pit deaths.
I'm going to have to agree with general critical opinion and say that Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 on Dreamcast were good games regardless of the glitches.
Besides the new design, voice acting, and Big, I dont
Reasons why I dislike Sonic Adventure:
1) The other characters in the game were such a chore to play as, and the gameplay just wasn't fun. Former iterations of the Sonic franchise had you playing as Sonic, maybe Tails or Knuckles, but they all basically played the same with very minor differences. I want that same speed style of gameplay like in the first games of the series, not this junk about playing pinball, catching fish, hitting enemies with a hammer, finding emeralds, and shooting robots with lasers. I'd make an exception of the other characters were actually fun to play as, but it's just a dull way to contribute more story to the game.
2) Let's face it, even some of the Sonic levels just aren't fun to play. The first one is excellent, I really love that one, but after that the game goes downhill. Forgive me if I don't remember the full names of the levels, but The Casino Level, Ice Cap Level, Twinkle Park, were all a chore to play in.
3) The camera angles are seriously bad at some points in the game. Some notable parts like Windy Valley, the Speedway Level the final boss, and the Chaos 3 boss were really freaking annoying when you had to make jumps where you couldn't see the floor and ended up falling to your doom in a pit.
4) The story was just stupid. Rather than be like Mario and basically take the same minimalistic story with a few added touches, they decided to turn Sonic into some crazy superhero-esque figure amongst helpless humans who can't do so much as to take down some fat crazy asshole who makes robots. In Sonic's version of Earth, the army and police are helpless in every situation, and it's up to an anthropomorphic teenage Hedgehog with that late 90s surfer dude attitude and an extremely level of immaturity and his friends (Who stand out like sore thumbs in Sonic Adventure amidst the regular humans in the city) to save the world from total devastation because apparently no one else knows how to wipe their ass even. Why is there a train that just runs to tons of ancient wreckage? The Chaos Emerald keeps a total island in balance? Chaos totally floods the city and knocks down skyscrapers and Sonic just defeats him and everyone goes home happy? What the hell is this!?
On the plus side, the game had very very nice graphics for the time and decent music.
That's just my two cents anyway.
Ever since Sonic Adventure, Sonic has had all the poise and dignity of a wet fart. Yes, I think "wet fart" suits every new Sonic game I've tried since.
I hope you're including Sonic Adventure in that count, since it really wasn't that good.
Sonic Adventure 2 (Battle) may have been bad, but I have a soft spot in my heart for it. It's not as bad as the others... At least it had the best Chao Garden, which I hate to admit, but I spent far more time playing that than the main Sonic Adventure game.
I dislike Big the Cat and the occasional choppy frame rate.
But I LOVE Sonic Adventure; always have, in fact.
Also, Dreamcast version > Gamecube version
As far as glitches go... just play the game the way it's designed to be played... don't jump at dumb points and keep a firm direction on the control stick. It's not like lives are hard to come by in games like this.
Even my 10 year old who loves all things Sonic cant stand the 3D games.
One thing I remember liking about Sonic Adventure was the ability to just wander around aimlessly, between stages. For some reason, I enjoyed walking through the forest- gazing at the temple placed right in the middle of it.
As for the playable characters, Amy and Big were total bores. Sonic, Tails, and Knuckles were where it was at. Also, I didn't like Chao. Chaos was a great villain, though. And I also liked the backstory involving Tikal, that echidna from another time.
To be completely honest, the most prominent memory I have of that game is playing it while on the phone with my girlfriend, in my early teens, as she was vomiting profusely after having caught a stomach bug. Haha! It's so strange- the things we're able to recall.
But did you visit Big's shack/home and see the marijuana leaves scattered about? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pissant
I did play it 99. I bought the Dreamcast at launch, with Ready to Rumble Boxing, Soul Calibur and Air Force Delta.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkDragon
I played Sonic Adventure at a Toys R Us, when Sega was promoting it (I still have my Dreamcast dogtags) through the Sega Dreamcast Mobile tour. The demo played through the first level and you had a chance to win prizes based on your score. I thought the demo was cool, so I bought the game. Then reality hit, wtf is this roaming around to find Chaos Emeralds? I wanted to play the action part of the game, that I'd seen and heard so much about. Why do I have to do this other crap!? I soon tossed the game aside and went on to play better games.
Seriously, this was like when I'd bought Shadows of the Empire for the N64, thinking I'd get an experience close to Rogue Squadron.
I like Sonic Adventure, on the whole. It was obviously released way too soon, as evident by the many, many glitches, but I played it recently for the first time since I acquired my Dreamcast back in '03, and I had a decent amount of fun with it. It paved the way for worse things to come with all of the stupid extra gameplay styles which were mandatory for unlocking the actual ending, and it was nowhere near as good as any of the Sonic (Genesis & Sega CD) titles that came before it, but considering the time and circumstances of its release, it still impresses me. I just acquired Sonic Adventure 2 (DC version) last night so I'm gonna revisit that again, too.
I'm with StarMist on the NiGHTS pinball table being the best part of the game, though.
I had the exact opposite reaction. The biggest disappointment was when sonic adventure 2 removed those fields. Like wtf adventure is there without areas to explore. The huge open world and city just really brought the game into the next generation. Playing 10 stages in a row is very outdated and arkayic concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
Raising him right, I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastardcat
I think it was a combination of experimentation and somewhat rushed development.Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
Aside from the bugs, there are some elements (like Adventure Field) that could have worked great, but just weren't polished enough. (the same concept worked great in the castle in SM64, or even more like Adventure Field with Sunshine's much larger overworld)
The repetitive gamplay (ie many of the levels being the same for each character) of the multiple characters does get to be a chore after a while, and some of the less repetitive gamplay examples are annoying in general. (I didn't mind the fishing stages too much . . . they're not really that hard to do anyway -unless you want to get high scores or something, which I didn't do, but my younger brother did -who actually likes those levels)
That's really vague . . . no mention of 2D vs 3D or sub-genres. (like action-adventure games with platform elements, or platformers with adventure elements, etc, etc)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kollision
I for one much prefer 3D platformers to 2D, generally speaking. (you obviously can't lump "platformers" into one category like that)
If you're not a fan of 3D platform games or 3D action/adventure games, you probably won't like most of the 3D sonic games or 3D Mario games, regardless of liking 2D platform genres. ;)
2D and 3D platformers are separate genres . . . plus, you may perfer certain sub-genres of platformers. (ie ones with or without added game elements -like action/adventure, run n' gun, etc, etc)Quote:
Originally Posted by Loggo
I agree here, the 2nd game is definitely much better overall. I still enjoyed the first one (though I actually played it second), but SA2 is a much better game. (honestly, it's among my top favorite 3D platformers of all time)Quote:
I have nothing against the Adventure series, it’s the first Sonic Adventure that’s not good. Sonic Adventure 2, with all its faults, is actually a very good game. Not a shallow tech demo like the first one. The biggest problem in SA2 was the non-optional gameplay with the secondary characters. Thankfully, you have to get through those tedious scenarios only once. When you finish the game you can go the map and play the Sonic stages as much as you want.
The original Sonic Adventure didn’t really know what the hell it wanted to be. It implemented the homing attack in a design that tried to resemble that of the 16-bit titles. But without key gameplay mechanics like rolling, actual momentum based gameplay and the pinball physics, that’s simply impossible. The original Sonic Adventure ended up being an, empty, shallow, tech demo with no actual purpose and numerous technical problems.
Contrary to SA1, the Sonic & Shadow gameplay in SA2 is the best thing that happened in the history of 3D Sonic games. It may have little in common with the classic titles, but at least it’s an…actual game that’s full of multiple score attack based set-pieces and almost no technical problems.
I also think the overall gameplay mechanics and design of SA2 are the best implemented in any 3D sonic game . . . too bad none of the later games improved upon that consistently. (some improved some things over SA2, but not without screwing up other areas much more -including some non-gameplay areas like use of voices/speech, acting, story, etc)
Yes, I agree too, though the bugs were mainly a problem in SA1, not SA2. (SA2 mainly just had some minor Camera issues -way better than SA1 or SM64 though)Quote:
Originally Posted by Thenewguy
As to critical reception, it should be noted that while the DC games scored exceptionally well (especially SA2), their re-releases were largely panned as mediocre in spite of being the same games (or actually better in some respects -mainly for SA2B). From the reviews I've seen (especially IGN's), it wasn't even complaints about the games aging poorly compared to newer releases (and SA2B was even released within 9 months of SA2 on the DC -about 6 months if you go by the JP release, and reviewers do tend to go by imports), but just reviewed the games generally differently. (SA2B was criticized heavily for several things mentioned as minor annoyances, non-issues, or even positive aspects in the DC game -obviously it wasn't the same reviewers doing both versions either)
Looking at IGN alone, you've got rave reviews for the DC games with an 8.6 for SA and 9.4 for SA2, but then 6.9 for SA2B just a few months later and 5.0 for DX (albeit the latter was quite a bit later and obviously aged more poorly -and the PC version wasn't reviewed). Then you've got a 3.5 for the recent XBLA release.
This is compared to Sonic Heroes getting an 8.0 for the GC, 7.2 for Xbox, 7.0 for PC, and 6.9 for PS2.
Actually, the glitchiness/buginess comes up in pretty much every 3D Sonic discussion that includes SA1, among the more legitimate complaints about the 3D games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
(one of the stupidest complaints about SA2 vs SA1 being "SA1 lets you just play as Sonic if you want" . . . when that's actually just breaking the game by not playing as intended and only completing 1/6th of the actual game -and obviously missing a ton of the story and the final boss- whereas SA2 manages a much smoother and more consistent/linear progression of the game within its light/dark stories and final section -and unique levels for light/dark rather than largely rehasing existing levels as in SA1)
SADX on the GC and PC is actually buggier than the DC version in some areas and definitely has more framerate issues (at least on the GC -since PC would depend more on the system you're using).Quote:
The saddest part here is that Sonic Adventure DX for Game Cube, while containing some improvements, is still much the same mess the original DC version was. Between the two of them, I prefer Adventure 2 Battle on almost every aspect. I should pirate or buy a copy of Adventure 2 for DC though, would be nice to see what the Chao Garden was like in an earlier version of the game.
SA2B was a more consistent improvement by comparison, though also of a much better game in the first place (and there are a few flaws over the DC version, but I'd say it's an overall improvement -plus the GC controller is better than the DC one, especially the analog stick). The Hero/Dark Chao Gardens are definitely different in the DC game, larger and generally different from the GC ones. (that's the main reason my brother's been bugging me to burn SA2 for DC ;))
The controls aren't really a problem, just the bugs/glitches and camera issues. (albeit some of the camera issues are worse in Mario 64 -at least one thing SA does better is not cramping the PoV when you get in tight quarters, albeit sometimes the camera clips through a wall without the game making that wall transparent -which should be what's done in tight quarters IMO, clipping away parts of the scene to allow a proper camera perspective rather than cramping the PoV to unreasonable levels)Quote:
Originally Posted by sheath
I didn't play SA (the DX version on the GC) until after completing SA2B on the GC, and honestly, I didn't notice many of the bugs the first time playing through it (in spite of it being buggier/framier than the DC version at times). Playing it again more recently made me notice a lot more of the technical faults though.
OTOH, I did notice the actual gameplay differences in SA1 and SA2 the first time through, and the obvious graphical differences. (Adventure field was interesting, but the gamplay style of SA2 was/is much more fluid and consistent, much more fun in general -not to mention a better story and better graphics, maybe better music; and unlike the first game, the GC port actually got some consistent improvements in graphics and framerate, though with some added faults as well -the framrate improvment is especially obvious in multiplayer) The poor voice acting and really messed up cutscene engine (especially mouths/experessions) on SA were also really noticeable. (SA2 did the voice acting much better -same actors for the most part too, but better acting/directing, and the cutscene engine was a lot better for SA2 as well)
SA1 is definitely playable and enjoyable, maybe the second best 3D sonic game for my tastes. (Heroes might be better, the gameplay is a lot more polished, but some other things are more annoying -excessive voice acting that's poorer than SA2 but better than SA1, story isn't as good as SA1 let alone SA2, etc- and, for me personally, Shadow might be the only other 3D game in the series that would compete for second place to SA2 -most people complain about the style and story, but I liked that part of it more than Heroes or some later games, it wasn't as polished as SA2 but much more than SA and the voice acting was less frequent and annoying than Heroes and cutscenes were definitely better than SA1, the gun controls were a bit clunky at times but nothing that I couldn't get used to honestly . . . I haven't played the 2006 game, but I doubt I'd prefer that with the story, acting, and the rest I like less than Shadow and Heroes for sure -what I'd really want is something with SA2's style and gameplay, but improved upon and more polished, and that never happened -Colors and Unleashed are OK, but I don't really like either a lot, and Secret Rings and Black Knight had that stupid on-rails gamplay style like a messed up 3D version of Atomic Runner -at least Black Knight offered nunchuck controls rather than the tilt/motion controls of the first game)
I pretty much agree with Tiido's take on these games (which he's brought up in other threads). SA2 is much better overall (for the reasons I mentioned, mostly), and the one big areas where SA1 wins is having a definitive awesome final boss battle. (vs SA2's Final Hazard being a bit weak by comparison -the directly preceding Biolizard battle was a lot more challenging and end-boss like . . . Final Hazard was overly simple and weak -the only thing going for it was the epic/cinematic aspects, which Perfect Chaos had more of on top of the feel of an actual final boss)