The Sonic Generations Review Topic

[Chocolate Cookie]

Man, that 6.75 review was awful to read, D;. Did they not understand it's a history of Sonic the Hedgehog and not Sonic 3? I really don't know how this game could have been more clear about that. It's like he marked down the game because going to the stage instantly made him think it was on par with the respective game for that stage, it's ridiculous! "I didn't like Unleashed, so that level was dumb" was basically what he said. Badly communicated pitfalls? Did you play with help mode on? If you didn't, maybe you needed it, but if you did, there's fucking orange signs EVERYWHERE. The only way the game could have warned you better if it paused the game and the guy that says the "SEGA!" call in Sonic 3D Blast for Genesis screamed at the top of his lungs "THERE'S A BOTTOMLESS PIT ASSHOLE!" 6.75 is a retarded score for this game, I don't care how close to average it is. It really should be on par with an 8 or even higher.

Like many of you, I don't care about reviews personally, but they still do matter. I'm sure SEGA and friends keep an eye on these numbers, which I really hope they understand the bullshit some of these reviewers are spewing, since this reviewer acts like Sonic is stupid unless "SONIC 2 HD TURBO REMIX ULTRA" is released. I just don't understand how a video game character can progress if it stays in the past for eternity.

[/RANT]

I really don't really care about reviews either, but the thing I am scared/afarid of is that because Sega said they were listening and looking for feedback and might take some reviews the wrong way, but I hope that can tell what is legit complaints so that they can improve and not some bullshit complaints that will/can make things worse

[pppp]

I just don't understand how a video game character can progress if it stays in the past for eternity.

[/RANT]

THANK YOU! That's what i've been saying for years.

[Djawed]

The levels should be judged by how they are played and their fun factor not how they are selected. How do you know that Crisis City and Rooftop Run may not be YOUR overall favorite levels in the game?

If they are then what?

Well, I can partially agree with that because one of those stages could still indeed be the best in the game, but I still think that the visual theme and the music that accomponies them add to the experience. Sonic generations is a solid game dressed with a great amount of fan service. As the latter really plays a big role in this game I don't see anything wrong with it being taken into account. They might as well have "only" picked city themed stages or less memorable ones, end up being good levels but come on, wouldn't you question that yourself?

Some People had allready been complaining about the 4 city themed stages so that says alot.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Djawed

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

6.75 is a retarded score for this game, I don't care how close to average it is. It really should be on par with an 8 or even higher.

I'm honestly having a bit of a nitpick here, but a 6.75 is not a retarded score in itself. It's the review behind the score that's retarded.

Any reviewer who can give their thoughts as objective as they can without taking the piss on how the game contains things from past titles it didn't like for it own merits, and not actually like the game without coming off as a fanboy who hates it for that measure alone is much more competent than someone who gushes about how much they like the game without putting any actual substance to their review.

It's essentially the reason why some people here found IGN's review to be in poor taste even tho they gave it an 8 and yet they were shocked at how well-written they found Jim Sterling's review for the game even though it practically had the same score. And it's partially the same reason we're getting on GI for it...the score in this case happens to add fuel to the fire.

[krazeeKidd102]

Besides the bad Game Informer review, what's the big deal about bottomless pits? I can understand if you were always placed on a tiny strip of land suspended above a gaping pit with bad controls, but from the look at the modern stages, they look fine, especially when there are warnings for bottomless pits.

I thought this game was a platformer; you know, where bottomless pits are considered a challenge for a game specifically built around a character running and jumping. These people act like bottomless pits shouldn't exist in a Sonic game. Any platformer, 2D or 3D, without bottomless pits is like an FPS if the character was immune to bullets.

Edited October 31, 2011 by krazeeKidd102

[Soniman]

I was at school the whole day, but from what I can piece together from the last few pages, Generations won't be getting an average of 80% as of now?

That's a fucking injustice if I ever heard one.

[Voyant]

They might as well have "only" picked city themed stages or less memorable ones, end up being good levels but come on, wouldn't you question that yourself?

Of course I would man...but fanboyism doesn't belong in a professional view of a game. Knocking the game down because you didn't get you favorite levels in is indeed that.

Reviewer are to judge/rate games by their own merits not coulda-wulda-shoulda shit or "I'm but hurt because my favorite level isn't in the game so I'ma drop it to a 6 instead of its well deserved score".

Edited October 31, 2011 by V0YANT

[Badnik Mechanic]

Does this mean that Game Informer is now going to get a load of free toot from Sega?

[Voyant]

Does this mean that Game Informer is now going to get a load of free toot from Sega?

No because unlike Jim...they were being serious.

Seriously Retarded.

Edited October 31, 2011 by V0YANT

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

On the bright side, the amount of 7s and 8s this game has gotten will more than likely alert many people of how bitter the GI reviewer was being towards it. It almost sounds as if they had an agenda in favor of Classic Sonic, but that can be easily curbed by all the other scores.

"GI gave this game a 6.75, yet all other reviewers gave mostly 8s? Somethings up." will likely be the thought of number of folks, bar those who follow only GI.

Hell, I find it interesting that GamesRadar was following Sonic Team's word on the game, particularly when they knew full well that Classic Sonic was a one time thing.

Edited October 31, 2011 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Ruby Havoc]

The American version of OXM has a review: 7/10

http://www.oxmonline...erations-review

On the bright side they did say they would like a sequel to iron out some problems. Which is good I guess.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Torcano Sanctuary

[goku262002]

So are those Gamesradar: Norwad Version and Gamestopinformer Magazine reviews going to be put on metacritic? or will metacritic not acknowledge them? I know metacritic doesn't put all game site(s) reviews of games up sometimes.

Sorry Carbo btw, i deleted the status before i saw your reply. i figured it was a question better suited for this topic.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

On the other hand, they listed the Classic era representing a third of the game as a flaw. There's quite a deal of people gushing about this stuff in spite of being told that they're only going to represent a certain fraction. I'd say fanboyism here, but there's not really enough for me to use to support that claim beyond that.

So are those Gamesradar: Norwad Version and Gamestopinformer Magazine reviews going to be put on metacritic? or will metacritic not acknowledge them? I know metacritic doesn't put all game site(s) reviews of games up sometimes.

From what I heard, Gamesradar Norway will not be put on Metacritic. GameInformer will however, that's only to be expected considering that they've always been put on Metacritic.

Edited October 31, 2011 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Soniman]

Aww man, it's going to get even lower than Colors. And I can't think of one damn thing Colors has over this game.

[Stasis]

That Gamesradar Norway score is fucking bullshit.

[goku262002]

Aww man, it's going to get even lower than Colors. And I can't think of one damn thing Colors has over this game.

Losing hope already? damn dude the review flood hasn't even begun and your already packing it in.

From what I heard, Gamesradar Norway will not be put on Metacritic. GameInformer will however, that's only to be expected considering that they've always been put on Metacritic.

Good, that norway review was bull anyways. probably picked up some bum and sat him in front of a 360 for a half hour. don't see why that gamestop owned magazine review should be put on but whatever...

Edited October 31, 2011 by goku262002

[Ruby Havoc]

Well we do still need Gametrailer's, Gamespot's, Joystiq's, and 1UP's reviews so I wouldn't count out it getting a higher score just yet.

[Carbo]

GI's review is already on MetaCritic which got rounded up to a 68 / 100. The game averages on 77 / 100 now as such. There's still a ton of publications that haven't put up their reviews yet.

[Soniman]

Yeah you're right, there is still hope. I just really want this game to get an 80.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Soniman032-

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I'm sensing one other review will mark it down as a bad game, particularly 1up. I'm also seeing more 7s than 8s.

[goku262002]

GI's review is already on MetaCritic which got rounded up to a 68 / 100. The game averages on 77 / 100 now as such. There's still a ton of publications that haven't put up their reviews yet.

I'm wondering what gametrailers have to say. they really didn't like colors-wii and made it clear with their score but with colors-ds they fangushed over it.

I will bet that a similar situation will happen with generations-hd & generations-3ds.

[Totally]

This is bullshit!The game hasn't got even a one 9 and as I can remember Colors had a few and this game is tons better than it

[mclaren6]

What are the complaints that have been consistantly listed? Like the few problems that keep appearing?

[Badnik Mechanic]

Aww man, it's going to get even lower than Colors. And I can't think of one damn thing Colors has over this game.

What do you care what the final review score is.

Just about anyone who isn't following a random website like a victim of extensive properganda knows that this game is somewhere between great and outstanding. It's the loss of those idiots who scramble to be the 'first' to slap their free worthless opinions under some review of 'random website X' that will miss out, not those of us who want to try out the game and if we enjoy it 'Hooray! Told you so!'

Have you enjoyed the demo? Yes. Will you likely enjoy the game, if you answer yes then you'll probably buy the game, once you've bought it if you can still answer yes to 'did you like the game?' Then chances are, I doubt you'll care what the metacritic score is.

Not to mention, just look at the current list of reviews, theres only around 5 outlets that the majority of people care about, with regards to the two bad scores that the game has got, who the fuck still visits gamereactor for one thing? You load up their site and the first thing you have to do is pass a huge advert before anything loads, something tells me their userbase isn't that large. Gameinformer, when was the last time you heard anyone every say "I wonder what game informer will review *insert any title here!"

I suspect that what we've predicted will come to happen, the game is likely to be scoring around the high 8's/80%'s which is by itself a very very good score.

But of course theres going to be some sites that will rate it low, mainly because I suspect that many writers and sites want to be 'that one who didn't like it.' Just because it knows it'll wrattle the crowds a little.

If you look at a list of all the scores, every single one of them is 8 or 8.5. But one is 4/10 Which are you most likely to visit? Exactly.

But again, so long as you like the game, you know it's good, what does it matter to what someone else thinks?

Edited October 31, 2011 by Hogfather

[HUNTER297]

What are the complaints that have been consistantly listed? Like the few problems that keep appearing?

Mostly "Useless story", "BAWWW WHY U NO MORE CLASSIC LEVELS" and "BBAWWWWW SHITTY FRIENDS".