Printable View
Maybe because Sega continues to rape poor Sonic with awful games or, at best, mediocre ones the last 15 years. New gamers who didn't grow up with 8bit or 16bit consoles have no idea how great Sonic games used to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakon
Yup. Mario is still associated with fun but sonic got severely dragged down. I wish sega had used alex kidd for all those whatever games instead of sonic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I really wish people would stop saying it's Sega that's raping Sonic, there's much worse forces out there doing that already. Additionally, last I heard, they've been picking up their game quite a bit (eg. releasing far better Sonic games than they have been in the mid '00s).Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Now if I had the will to play them. :p
AND HOW!Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The only truly bad Sonic game in the past 12 years was Sonic 2006. The rest were all fine. Of the main Sonic games these are my thoughts on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
Sonic Adventure - Great first 3D game for Sonic. The music is great, the graphics for the time are excellent, and the game is just fun to play. While the Big Stages were a bit boring, they weren't awful either. 8/10
Sonic Adventure 2 - Great sequel to the first game. The gameplay focuses more on what the first game did well and eliminated the Big, Amy, and Tails style stages to focus on the Sonic, Knuckles, and Gamma style stages. The game is a blast to play and is easily one of the best Sonic games in the past 15 years. 9/10
Sonic Heroes -While it's no Sonic Adventure 3, it's still a great game to pickup and play. The levels are laid out more like an old 2D Sonic game which gives it a nice retro feel. The game plays pretty well though a few bottomless pit stages can make the game frustrating. 7.5/10
Sonic 2006 - Here we have a disaster. The game did have some promise though. The Sonic levels were decent and the speed up sections could have been amazing if they were more polished. However the buggy boss battles, animation, missing power ups, etc. all make this game feel like a rushed beta. Though I've played far worse, I'd give it a 5.5/10 for what it is. If it ever got patched and all the bugs and glitches were fixed and gameplay tweaked I'd give it a 7/10 though.
Sonic Unleashed - This is how the speed up sections of Sonic 2006 should have played. This game is fun and well made. The only downside is the werehog stages, but I don't see these as any worse than the Knuckles stages in Sonic Adventure. 8/10
Sonic Colors - An excellent showcase for the Wii. The game plays well, it looks great, and it's a blast to play through. Anyone who refuses to play this game because it's "modern sonic" is an idiot and doesn't know what they are missing. 10/10
Sonic Generations - An excellent anniversary game that's fun to pick up and play. The only flaw is it's a bit short. Again anyone who hasn't played this because it's a new Sonic game is an idiot. 9/10
Honestly, these games aren't bad at all. After Sonic 2006 people have become so convinced that new Sonic games suck that if they see one minor thing they don't like the immediately deem the game as sucking.
You forgot a few.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Shadow the Hedgehog - Shit.
Sonic and the Secret Rings - I actually thought this one was decent enough, it's a little repetitive but I had fun with it.
Sonic and the Black Knight - Shit.
I don't count those as main Sonic titles. I consider them spin off and side games. Though Shadow the Hedgehog wasn't bad really. I enjoyed playing through it. Secret Rings was ok, but I didn't like that you couldn't stop or turn around.Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
I don't think that's a distinction people make when they talk about Sonic being in some bad games.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Sonic Heroes is shit, a mess of a game.
7.5 is delusional.
What's bad about it? And be specific.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry coeurl
I liked most of Sonic Heroes, but it had two major problems for me. Team Rose sucks, they should have made their gameplay different or something. And secondly, the characters need to shut the fuck up. You seriously get spammed with their voices.
What's bad about Sonic Heroes?
1) gameplay - the team dynamic makes everything take forever, constantly switching between characters to access their specific abilities is annoying, and it ruins the pace of what is supposed to be a Sonic game
2) level design - this game is filled to the brim with bottomless pits, coupled with the broken "lock-on" attack this leads to a lot of cheap, frustrating deaths
3) enemies - boring in design (oooh, another egg-shaped robot) and they take forever to kill (seriously whose idea was it to give these guys life bars), further hurting the pace of the game
4) special stages - these are just broken, it feels like they didn't even test them
There are other issues I have with it too (like that I paid $50 for it at release in anticipation of a good game), but those would be the most glaring issues. SH was the game that made me realize Sega didn't give a shit about Sonic anymore except as a quick payday.
I had no problems with the special stages. I found them to be quite enjoyable actually. They were one of my favorite parts of the game.
I admit some of the later levels did have a lot of bottomless pits, hence why I gave it a 7.5 instead of an 8 or a 9. But it's not insanely broken or poor like Sonic 2006. I had no problems with the enemies having life bars either. If anything it made things more challenging. And I enjoyed the team dynamic as well, it made exploring alternate routes more challenging because you had to figure out which team combination was the best to get you there.
I liked the special stages, but I thought the requirement to get into the special stages was too steep.
Well I hated them. I was never able to finish a single one, although not from lack of trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Compared to any of the mainline Sonic games on the Genesis, yes, Sonic Heroes is insanely broken and poor.Quote:
But it's not insanely broken or poor like Sonic 2006.
It doesn't make anything more difficult, it just makes the game more cumbersome. There are plenty of parts in the game when you're literally unable to progress until you clear the "room" of enemies. That just ruins the pace of the game.Quote:
I had no problems with the enemies having life bars either. If anything it made things more challenging.
I didn't hate the idea of the team dynamic, the implementation just sucks. Like most of the rest of the game.Quote:
And I enjoyed the team dynamic as well
You're complaints seem to stem more from the fact that you suck at the game and find it to be too difficult rather than the game actually being bad. The special stages were quite easy to complete.
How is this too hard?:
The enemies with health didn't bother me at all, but I usually made it a priority to get all three characters to level 3 so they did the most damage. As for parts where you need to clear a room to progress, that's what the team blast is for.
And there are plenty of examples of poor level design and layout in the early Sonic games as well. There's plenty of examples of bottom less pits in those games that people tend to overlook when being nostalgic.
The problem with modern Sonic is the hardcore fanbase has put the Genesis games on such a high pedestal that nothing can top them in their minds, so as a result every new Sonic game sucks to them.
I don't put the Genesis Sonic games on a pedestal; they're just actually really good games. The same can not be said of Sonic Heroes. I'd say the problem is more with fanboys like you who are so deluded by your love of all things Sega that you don't care about a decline in quality as long as it's got the right name on the box. People who would give an abysmal game like Sonic 2006 an average score.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Mario fans have never had to "settle" for a bad mainline Mario title, I don't know why Sonic fans should be expected to.
what bothered me the most about sonic heroes was the terrible voice acting and the fact that it couldn't be turned off, it gets pretty annoying after a while.
I gave Sonic 2006 a 5/10. It's not a good game, its horribly broken. But I can see some potential in it that could have made it a decent game had it not been rushed.
Sonic Heroes is a good Sonic game. It's not amazing, it's not the best either, but it's good. Hence a 7.5 out of 10.
The Genesis Sonic games have their level design issues as well. For example The lower routes in Chemical Plant Zone are nothing but giant bottomless pits. I rarely take those routes because of that reason. Carnival Night Zone has the infamous barrel obstacle. Metropolis Zone is pretty much a nightmare. That level is full of cheap deaths and places where it's almost impossible to avoid getting hit. Wing Fortress Zone has a few bugs in it as well as being a bit confusing on which way to go. And again one big bottomless pit. Sky Chase Zone is also rather buggy at times. I know I've had Sonic randomly run off the plane to his death when trying to just make the plane move.
The Sonic games have a history of cheap and frustrating level design, it goes all the way back to the original Genesis games. If you can give them a pass I don't see why you can't give one to Sonic Heroes. It's frustrating level design is no worse than the worst Genesis Sonic levels.
Around these parts, 5/10 seems to denote a mediocre or average at best game. That's the kind of score I would give to Sonic Heroes. Sonic 2006 would probably be more of a 3/10, not even worth the plastic it's printed on.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I disagree that it's good. It was a disappointing game on release and it still is today. I had a lot of issues with Sonic Adventure 2, but they really lowered the bar with Sonic Heroes.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
While some of these are legit complaints, none of them are as pervasive as the bottomless pit problem in SH, which features them prominently from the 4th level on. Sonic on the Genesis also didn't have to contend with a bad camera and broken 3D gameplay. But in general, I think the level design of the 2D Sonic games is quite good, and if you are honestly trying to tell me that you think the levels in Sonic 2 are as poorly designed as those in Sonic Heroes, I would have to question how much of those games you'd actually played.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I never found any of the Genesis Sonic games to be cheap or frustrating on the whole, just in specific parts. Sonic Heroes has entire stages which are cheap and frustrating, and that gets compounded by the other issues (shoddy programming and bad camera, mainly).Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Because it's not the same thing. And beyond that, Sonic on the Genesis is fun to play, SH isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I agree, it is now worse. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I meant no worse. Not now.
Anyways I had plenty of fun playing Sonic Heroes. I had no issues with the camera or the 3D gameplay either. These are the same generic and typical "baww 3D Sonic sucks" arguments that come up from time to time. I do admit the bottomless pit problem was pretty bad, but not enough to deem the game shit. That's quite honestly the only flaw I can think of in the game that really hurts it. The rest is all either opinion or flat out "I suck at the game but it's easier to blame the game for my shortcomings."
I deem 5/10 to be a bad game. That's an F if it were to be an academic grade. So 5/10 to me is a bad game but you can tell they at least tried to put some effort into it. The reason it's bad is due to things like rushed development. A 1/10 to me is horrible and not worth the plastic its printed on. A perfect example of this is Big Rigs. Sonic 2006 is an obvious 5/10 because you can tell they did try, the graphics aren't bad, the music is top notch like all Sonic games, the production value is rather high, and you can tell they had some good and interesting ideas. What hurts the game is a rushed development cycle and not having time to really polish ideas and the game itself.
A broken lock-on ability is not a shortcoming of mine, that lies squarely on the people who programmed the game. There were many times in Sonic Heroes where I would try to attack an enemy near a ledge, and Sonic would circle around the enemy once in the air and then fall off the ledge to his death without ever coming into contact with said enemy. If that's not broken gameplay then I don't know what is.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I never had that happen to me. But then again I didn't use the Sonic that much, I used Knuckles and Tails to deal with most enemies. Though when I did use Sonic I didn't find him completely broken, you just needed to time your hits properly.
Whether you personally encountered it or not doesn't excuse the fact that half the time the lock-on attack doesn't work properly. "Oh, it's not so bad, you just have to play as the other characters." Forgive me for wanting to play as Sonic in a Sonic game :?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Which version of the game did you play?Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry coeurl
I had the Gamecube version of the game.
Odd, I have the Gamecube version as well, I've never had that happen as far as I can remember. I can try it out again tonight if you want.
I know the PS2 and apparently the PC version are pretty buggy and broken though.
Yeah, the PS2 version is really really bad, which is why I asked. I have the Gamecube version and I really don't remember having that problem. The only bugs I remember are the ring dash occasionally not connecting, and enemies floating in mid-air if they were standing on boxes and you destroyed the boxes. The ring dash problem caused me to get stuck on one Team Dark level for ages as I died over and over in the same spot. That sucked.
Yeah I remember the Ring Dash Problem too, but that exists in just about every Sonic game with that feature.
And anyone saying modern Sonic games are poor needs to go play Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations. Those games are great. Unleashed is good too, but I understand peoples annoyance with the Werehog.
Yeah, I had forgotten about that, but that was another issue I had with the game (and further evidence imo of Heroes' shoddy, rushed nature).Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
The broken lock-on may have been more prominent in the PS2 version, but I definitely encountered it quite a few times in the Gamecube version. It wouldn't have been as much of a problem if there hadn't been such an abundance of bottomless pits, but it's sloppy programming either way.
Which begs the question of why the developers continue/d to insist on its' inclusion as a gameplay mechanic.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
When used well it's quite fun and useful, it just seems sometimes they use it poorly. The ones I'm thinking of are the ones where you have to jump and time it just right for it to work. Sonic 2006 is filled with ones like that. There are plenty in Sonic Adventure 2, Unleashed, Colors, and Generations that are all used quite well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry coeurl
I certainly bought into the negative perception of 3D Sonic games, but I think that had to do with the fact that I didn't find the Sonic Adventure games fun outside of the initial playthrus. At the time, I thought these games were pretty impressive, but they lost their luster (with me) after spending more and more time with other games of the generation in the following years. Personally, they aren't games that I can enjoy at the same level as when they first came out, and actually find them to be a bit of a chore to play thru now.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I remember being interested in SH before it was released, but the lukewarm reviews kept me away. My logic being that the reviews had to be at least comparable to the SA games (which had very good reviews) for me to want to drop money on it. I wanted to play a better game than the SA games, and when even fans today consider the SA games better, I didn't see a point in diving in when there were so many other games that I could throw my money at.
The reviews for following Sonic games seemed to get worse and worse, so I simply avoided the games like the plague. As much as I love Sonic, I wasn't going to support half-assed efforts - Why should I care if Sega themselves doesn't seem to.
It wasn't until Sonic and Sega All-Star Racing got good reviews that I actually picked up a Sonic game for the first time since SA2, and I loved it. Finally, Sega managed to make a better game than Nintendo's counterpart, Mario Kart. Between this, Sonic Colors, Sonic 4, and Sonic Generations, it's the first time in about a decade that I'm looking forward to playing Sonic games. It wasn't until recently that it appeared that Sega was actually making strong efforts to make very good Sonic games.
I agree completely. but doin't bother. 90% of the people here seem stuck in the early 90s. for instance generations is the best sonic game ever made imo and also gets very high ratings. it's a fantastic game by almost anyone except nitpickers hereQuote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Quote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Colors and Generations were both really great in my opinion. I feel like the Hedgehog is really back on track. They might not exactly be huge triple-A titles or anything but I don't realistically think Sonic could or should be like that these days. I'm surprised we haven't heard anything about a Generations 2 yet considering how well the game went over.
the game has also sold very well. but generations was a one time thing, because fo 20 years sonic. however the new sonic game Im sure will keep following this great new format with both 2d and 3d levels that are excellent
Generations is only good if you play it on a PC that can handle it at 60 fps. On consoles, at 30 fps everything stutters, the sense of speed is ruined and the whole thing is painful for the eyes. You know, there was a reason why almost every side scrolling game runs at 60 fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by bultje112
Even then its a decent game but not that great. And what do you mean "stuck in the 90's"? Its not our problem if you can't see why Genesis Sonic games are still better.
iSonic Generations is the greatest sonic title in years. Calling it simply good is utterly ridiculous. Generations and Colors are both examples of great games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
I like Colors a lot more than Generations, but that's just me. Generations is a bit of a rehash.
I played it on the 360 and I had not problems with it stuttering. Yeah its still 30fps but its definitely playable and fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulis
The problem is you've put the Genesis Sonic games on such a high pedestal that even the idea of a newer Sonic game matching or besting them offends you.
If I were to rate the main Sonic games I'd rate them as follows:
1) Sonic 3 and Knuckles
2) Sonic Adventure 2
3) Sonic Colors
4) Sonic Generations
5) Sonic the Hedgehog 2
6) Sonic Adventure
7) Sonic Unleashed
8) Sonic CD
9) Sonic Heroes
10) Sonic the Hedgehog 2006
11) Sonic the Hedgehog
I find the first Sonic to be the worst of them all. I honestly think it's a miracle that the series went anywhere with that as it's entry title. I'd rather play any other Sonic game than the first one. Compared to the others it's slow, the art design is lacking, and some of the music is just average at best (Marble Zone). And the Chaos Emeralds and special stages are completely pointless as well.
Sonic 2 is much better though it has some issues with it. Some of the levels have some cheap areas in them and some are just badly designed (Metropolis Zone). Though the gameplay more than makes up for those shortcomings. Sonic 3 and Knuckles is pretty much the best of the Genesis titles. It has the most complete feeling to it. Though again there are still some level design flaws.
http://i3.ytimg.com/vi/nrhDQRVlN3s/hqdefault.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118