Sally Acorn a official Sega character?

[Blackbell]

Off topic: I don't think we'll ever see an Archie/ SatAM based Sonic game- mainly because their are so many copyright laws on both sides of the market and the fact it would probably cost more to make and legalise than the game would actually make and the fact the comic is ,outside the US , just a (Very) small part to the actual Sonic franchise.

There are those who have the comic shipped over- I'm one of them- but I bet the comic doesn't have much appearance in other parts of Europe and Japan. It is very rare to get a Sonic Comic in the UK, even in comic book stores over here. Speaking to my local one, he says he only orders the ones that are pre-ordered because it's unlikely to sell many copies compared to other comics (Superman/ Spiderman etc.) And plus with the way the comic has gone in the last few years I wouldn't be surprised if it lost a few readers.

Back on topic:

No, Sally is not an offical Sega Character. Yes you could go down the line she was based off Rickey and therefore appeared first but she technically never appeared afterwards. Sega is a gaming company and Sonic Team is apart of that. Therefore any characters deemed offical on their websites or by Sega themselves is an Sonic Sega Character. If you look on all their websites you will find no reference to Sally in anyone of them, nor any reference to the Archie Sonic comic- and even further you will find no reference on their website to the Sega Sonic. If Sally was an official character she would have appeared in the games along time ago.

Now I know some of you will be thinking: wait- but Sega gives permission to Archie and therefore Sally must be a Sega character.

No.

Sega gives out licenses because it needs to protect the Sonic name brand. If you want to use that excuse then you basically say that the free Sonic games you got with Happy Meals a few years ago are offical Sonic games. The licences just entitle companies to use certain characters and allow them to do/not to do certain things. As long as the purchasing companies apply to these licenses rules they can pretty much do whatever they want outside of this- like make additional characters aka Sally.

Edited August 7, 2011 by Blackbell

[Mangoaxe5]

Off topic: I don't think we'll ever see an Archie/ SatAM based Sonic game- mainly because their are so many copyright laws.

Edited August 7, 2011 by Darkfox

[Flyboy Fox]

I don't think there'd be too many barriers legally to making a SatAM/Archie game if it was deemed lucrative to do so. However, it will never be deemed so, therefore it's a moot point =P Ah well.

[theadvisor1234]

I actually wrote a fan fic where Sally entered the world of the games. Chaos ensues.

[needlemouse-4-ever]

sadly I dont think so, but i would of liked to see her in some games because I think she makes a great addition to the sonic universe

[Dejablue]

I find myself not caring about Japanese Canon outside of what I deem cool or un cool. The Japanese don't even like Sonic as much as we do.

[XavierRussell]

She doesn't belong in the games, keep her in the comics...

[Mauro Fonseca]

Sally Acorn was a part of the franchise long before Amy. Notice however I am saying FRANCHISE, not canon, as there really was no canon at the time- SoJ constantly changed theirs, SoA constantly changed theirs (despite what was argued earlier that SatAM=/= SoA canon, they did actively try to adopt SatAM as official canon after it's success), and in the end I think only SoE kept firm on their canon, which was actually SoA's.

Also, someone here, I think Verte, complained that Sonic Spinball isn't canon because it's from SEGA Technical Institute, which he even classified as a "third-party".

1- That's thoroughly wrong- STI was first-party, just like Sonic Team.

2- STI made Sonic 2, Sonic 3, and Sonic and Knuckles. I suppose then that they aren't canon?

[Vertekins]

Sally Acorn was a part of the franchise long before Amy. Notice however I am saying FRANCHISE, not canon, as there really was no canon at the time- SoJ constantly changed theirs, SoA constantly changed theirs (despite what was argued earlier that SatAM=/= SoA canon, they did actively try to adopt SatAM as official canon after it's success), and in the end I think only SoE kept firm on their canon, which was actually SoA's.

No, RICKY was part of the franchise long before Amy, not Sally. Comparing the small animal Ricky with the talking bipedal anthrope Sally is like comparing apples and oranges, they are not interchangeable as one entity. Whilst pretty much all of Manga Amy's attributes are extremely comparable to Game Amy, including Bipedalism, ability to talk and the fact she was Sonic's GF. Manga Amy was a solid concept that was adopted into Game canon, Sally is an adaptation of a small animal that was included in SoA continuities. She didn't exist as a distinct character, because there were a lot of Ricky's.

Also, someone here, I think Verte, complained that Sonic Spinball isn't canon because it's from SEGA Technical Institute, which he even classified as a "third-party".

1- That's thoroughly wrong- STI was first-party, just like Sonic Team.

2- STI made Sonic 2, Sonic 3, and Sonic and Knuckles. I suppose then that they aren't canon?

That wasn't me Though I will say that Spinball was developed under the pretense that it's story wouldn't affect the rest of the series, pretty much confirming it as conciously non-canon. But that's besides the point, because the game is irreconcilable with the rest of the series as it contained 16 blue Chaos Emeralds and a off-model ginormous Eggman.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Verte

[Mauro Fonseca]

Thing is, until Sonic Adventure there was no Ricky in the west. There was a "Sally Acorn". They're the same entity- just translation, like King Koopa or King Bowser.

My point is, the idea of Sally Acorn- the germ of it- was in the Sonic Franchise before the idea of Amy Rose; At least until Oshima comes out and specifies she was based directly on Madonna or something.

And Verte, sorry for naming you then As for Spinball being canon, it's done in such a way it really doesn't affect the story- much like all the other games. Looking at the games, it has as much going for it as SEGASonic the Hedgehog (arcade) has.

I personally like to think both are canon, but eh.

[XavierRussell]

It doesn't matter that Ricky was localized as Sally back in 91. I say leave her out because she has never been apart of the adventures going on in the Sega games. To add her now would just clash with Amy's character, and I just feel like it'd be weird TBH...

[Skull Leader]

Thing is, until Sonic Adventure there was no Ricky in the west. There was a "Sally Acorn". They're the same entity- just translation, like King Koopa or King Bowser.

My point is, the idea of Sally Acorn- the germ of it- was in the Sonic Franchise before the idea of Amy Rose; At least until Oshima comes out and specifies she was based directly on Madonna or something.

But Bowser/King Koopa was always the same character regardless of name in both east and west. Amy was the same character from start (again same species and same name, with the slight difference that Terada Kenji actually writes the name right in katakana). On the other hand Ricky was Ricky and no one else, and frankly the theories that try a forced connection between both characters really don't have much ground because they are using whatever slight similarity they can find. I mean if I wanted to play on the same rules I could do the following:

This picture is from the Sonic 1 manga adaptation published in July 1991. By using your same logic I can say that the girl in the middle is Amy since the similarities are there (and while I am at it I'm calling the shots on the girl on the left being Cream for the same reasons). See what I did there.

[Your Vest Friend]

I think what Verte is trying to get at can be analoginised like this;

To say SatAM Sally was in the games as the Ricky dude you would also have to say that StC Sally was in the games as the Ricky dude. NEITHER were. While they share the localised name, they're both just interpretations of a game character for different media, one of which has just so happened to find a niche in said different media.

[Vertekins]

I think what Verte is trying to get at can be analoginised like this;

To say SatAM Sally was in the games as the Ricky dude you would also have to say that StC Sally was in the games as the Ricky dude. NEITHER were. While they share the localised name, they're both just interpretations of a game character for different media, one of which has just so happened to find a niche in said different media.

YES. This is what am getting at. VEDJ-F summarised it better than I did.

The majority of those who claim that Sally appeared before Amy just strike me as trying to clutch at strings in some vain effort to reinforce Sally's so-called "status" or to reinforce her importance in regard to seniority, which is a pretentious load of BS. Seniority does not equal excellence. I've been saying this for a while because I myself kinda get annoyed at people who like Sonic himself more because of his seniority instead of his personality, design, abilities etc. It's the same as people who think the likes of Tails and Knuckles are 'better' than more modern characters SOLELY because they hailed from the Classic Era.

Regarding Sally, It's almost as if they're intimidated by the indisputable fact that Amy has practically always been recognized as a "more official" character than Sally because the people who ultimately created Sonic never acknowledge Sally Acorn or her relationship with Sonic.

[turbojet]

Who the fuck is Ricky and why the fuck should I care?

[Your Vest Friend]

Who the fuck is Ricky and why the fuck should I care?

Edited August 11, 2011 by VEDJ-F

[Mauro Fonseca]

Skull Leader- I can see you either haven't read my posts or I haven't been able to clearly write them. The reason why your example doesn't work as an accurate mockery of my argument is simple- that character is not named Amy Rose. The squirrel, however, is named Sally Acorn. At least in the West, he/she was.

VEDJ-F/Verte- To be honest, I don't even like the character. And I agree with you guys- seniority means bullshit, Amy is definitely more official. But call me obsessed or autistic or anything, if something is clear in a franchise and yet is repeatedly denied, I try to clear it up.

Some points, then.

1- I am not arguing about the superiority of characters. I'm not even arguing characters- I'm talking about elements of a Franchise. Before his final form, Goofy was a cartoon dog named Dippy Dawg. Dippy Dawg looks different from Goofy, has a different personality, and a different name, but it's the same character. That's what I'm arguing here- that Sally Acorn was an element of the franchise before Amy Rose, and can and must be considered every bit as SEGA as Amy is.

2- I could really just link to them, but it's quicker to give them credit and post away. My info for all this is coming form a crossing of Sonic Retro, Saturdaymorningsonic.com, and my own reading StC.

As early as 1991, we have this official SEGA product:

In the second draft of the Sonic Bible, SEGA's internal document detailing his American story, we get the names of his animal buddies- including Sally Acorn.

Further on, there are the images I posted up there already, like proto-Satam and all that, but there's also this early SatAM storyboard:

I conclude from all this then my original point- Sally is a SEGA character, from 1991, who had various iterations and versions, most of them in alternate media other than Games.

For examples of characters like these, that belong to the company, are official, but do not belong to the main product, look no further than Disney's Duck comics. Heck, look at Scrooge McDuck until Ducktales.

So, conclusions, again?

1- Sally Acorn first appeared in 1991, in Sonic 1. She was actually the squirrel Ricky renamed from Japan to America.

2- Throughout 1991, 1992 and 1993, she evolved in design and iterations, going further away from the games, until she ended up as Princes Sally Acorn, from SatAM. Still SEGA, and technically still game-related as that was the story SEGA of America was running on with at the time- look at SEGA World Sidney for examples.

3- After SatAM's popularity vaned and the failure of Sonic X-Treme, SEGA of America lost control of the game's stories as it was all unified for Sonic Adventure. Sally became at this point a Comic-exclusive character.

4- Amy Rose did pretty much the opposite path- introduced in the manga, just like Charmy Bee, she was later introduced into the games by SEGA of Japan, and ended up surviving the Sonic Adventure unification and becoming one of the main characters of the games.

Additional disclaimer repeating what I said since I know someone will complain- I am trying as hard as I can to look impartially at this; if I weren't, my attitude would be to deny Sally even ever existed, together with SatAM.

EDIT: And after this, any other controversial subjects to handle? I'm willing to show that humans always existed in the games, at least in SoJ's story.

Edited August 11, 2011 by The KKM

[Your Vest Friend]

But if we were to consider Sally from SatAM an official form, we'd have to consider EVERY Sally/Ricky an official form too. To give an idea of just what that entails;

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation ---> That pre-proto-whoa-nelly-never-seen-that-before-squrrel thing --- Interpretation ---> Princess Acorn --- Possible redesign of the same character, as we know Princess Acorn was a beta design for a show of sorts, but not confirmed ---> Princess Sally Acorn (SatAM) --- Interpretation ---> Princess Sally Acorn (Archie)

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation --->Sally Acorn (StC)

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation ---> Ricky (Sonix X anime) --- Interpretation ---> Ricky (Sonic X comic, if he ever appeared in it)

This isn't like the different versions of, say, Amy Rose (who, while does get quite a lot of deviations from the game design, stays consistent in the fundamental concepts), there are literally numerous different Sally interpretations in different media. While it's true that A Sally Acorn existed in Western localisation, it certainly wouldn't be the same as the one seen in SatAM, or StC, or even Sonic X.

Edited August 11, 2011 by VEDJ-F

[Mauro Fonseca]

Why can't we do that?

I can concede at most considering Ricky and Sally different characters, since when West merged with East, we were left with those two names. Unless Archie renames Sally to the nickname Sally "Ricky" Acorn.

but really, in StC Knuckles looked different than in Archie, and from the games. Or even better, Amy is definitely different in Archie, StC and the Games. Why not conclude what they are- different interpretations of the same SEGA-owned character?

[Vertekins]

Why can't we do that?

I can concede at most considering Ricky and Sally different characters, since when West merged with East, we were left with those two names. Unless Archie renames Sally to the nickname Sally "Ricky" Acorn.

but really, in StC Knuckles looked different than in Archie, and from the games. Or even better, Amy is definitely different in Archie, StC and the Games. Why not conclude what they are- different interpretations of the same SEGA-owned character?

[Mauro Fonseca]

Yes, that's a Ricky. That's from what, 2005?

EDIT: Let me be more clear. (though I don't think I can be, considering the two walls of text and various visual evidence to support what I say.)

SEGA of America determined that is a Sally Acorn.

SEGA of Japan determined that is a Ricky.

Nowadays, SEGA of Japan wins.

But SEGA of America had the entire 90's to make Sally Acorn.

Sally Acorn, her Ricky-with-bow form, her SatAM form, her Archie form, her simple Ricky form those are all variations of the same character- Sally Acorn, a concept (female anthropomorphic squirrel) that SEGA created and owns.

The thread asks if Sally Acorn is a SEGA character. I say she not only is, but she can be considered a game character, even. Doesn't make her any better a character, though.

Edited August 11, 2011 by The KKM

[Tornado]

Different interpretation, yes. But they're not fundamentally different.

StC Amy and Knuckles are bipedal talking sentient 3 foot tall anthropes. Ohter incarnations of 'Sally Acorn' in the form of the Ricky's is not. There's a difference between the different interpretations of, say, Amy and Knuckles and the different interpretations of Sally.

[Skull Leader]

But if we were to consider Sally from SatAM an official form, we'd have to consider EVERY Sally/Ricky an official form too. To give an idea of just what that entails;

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation ---> That pre-proto-whoa-nelly-never-seen-that-before-squrrel thing --- Interpretation ---> Princess Acorn --- Possible redesign of the same character, as we know Princess Acorn was a beta design for a show of sorts, but not confirmed ---> Princess Sally Acorn (SatAM) --- Interpretation ---> Princess Sally Acorn (Archie)

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation --->Sally Acorn (StC)

Ricky (localised as Sally Acorn) --- Interpretation ---> Ricky (Sonix X anime) --- Interpretation ---> Ricky (Sonic X comic, if he ever appeared in it)

[Mauro Fonseca]

They quickly canceled that attempt at an adaption anyways

[Vertekins]

This is a facile argument. A subjective argument based on another subjective argument based on subjective interpretations.

One that isn't even true, strictly speaking, because the animals in the original games were always just as sentient as Sonic and Robotnik were.

No they weren't.

Not once were the small animals portrayed as being more than non-sentient animals. Western manuals may have portrayed this (Such as "Flicky the Bluebird" in the Sonic Chaos manual informing Sonic and Tails that the emeralds are missing from the "North cave", directly stating that Flickies talk and therefore have sentience) but it has no canonical basis because it is typical hogwash written by SoA. To accept that the small animals are sentient and capable of speech is like accepting the western Sonic 2's manual's rubbish that states that Tails knew Sonic since babyhood which is false.

And besides, giving the small animals sentience subsquently puts Eggman squarely into monster territory. It could be argued that whilst Eggman is very cruel in imprisoning these creatures inside robots, he doesn't explicitly step into monster territory because the creatures aren't exactly sentient. It's what seperates him from SatAM 'Buttnik.