Attitude Adjustment

[Komodin]

Eh, while I'm fine with his current portrayal, I wouldn't at all mind if he lightened up on the jibber-jabber and mediocre jokes a tad and did more... substantial and action-y stuff. You know, stuff like in the entirety of the Adventure titles, Storybook series and Unleashed? Yeah, stuff like that would do some justice.

[Scar]

I'm going to attempt the impossible and address the issues brought up in the last few pages.

I'm not talking about Generations, because that game literally had a plot so small, that you may as well ignore it. In fact the game would have been no different if they didn't even bother to have a story.

Sonic in Colours, mainly joked around and didn't really take anything seriously. That is that, no if, ands or buts. As such one could suggest that his character in those games while expressive and lively, was rather shallow. There isn't much to contest there.You got a semblance of his character from those lines, but he showed very little emotional range beyond that.

Now, I'll try and explain why.

Colours took place in very isolated locations. Its really as simple as that. All other stories had the rest of the world involved and such and it was all dramatic and they all had a huge scope. Colours however, took place on an empty amusement park, with nobody but the Wisps in danger. When the scope of the story is so small, there is nothing much to react to in different ways.

The key moments in Colours where Sonic did show some kind of emotional range, was when something was at stake, e.g. Tails (twice) and the Wisps (the Asteroid Coaster converter thingy). In every other cutscene and every other situation, there was absolutely nothing at stake. Ok maybe Sonic himself, but he can look after himself and not really worry, its others that he gets worried about. So when there is nothing at stake, what can you have Sonic do to show emotional range....nothing. About the only thing they could have done, was make Sonic pull some jokes. Either that or have no cutscenes at all.

Besides, I doubt the writers have anything to do with how the cutscenes are coreographed. So in the end they don't have much to work with. When you don't have much to work with, you can't deepen a character.

Lets take me as an example.

If you met me on a average to good day, I would mainly be joking around and going about business in a generally unconcerned way. Does that make me an emotionally shallow individual? No, it just means that you haven't seen me in an emotionally taxing situation. In the same sense, just because Sonic didn't show any emotional range in Colours, doesn't mean he doesn't have any. You can't expect every single game to have a story which brings out Sonic's emotions.

I don't know what the future holds for narratives in Sonic games, we may or may not see a narrative to be emotionally engaging (I'd rather have one really engaging, grand, spectacular plot every other game, and between that one or two throw-away plots, balance yo), but we shall see, what we shall see.

Also, I don't really know what everyone else thinks, but I really like these writers. They know how to make a character with nothing to do, quite colourful and energetic and expressive. Yeah, so far its only been in a single direction; that is jokes and one-liners, but I don't doubt they could do more and better given an opportunity and a decent plot to work with.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moving on, Shadic, your posts are getting more and more illogical.

Comics and whatnot are irrelevant to the games. People want the games to have more engaging plots to keep them...er...engaged. To give a half-decent reason behind the events of the game. Is that not too much to ask for or discuss about? Simply dismissing it and saying, "bah, well if you want something plot-heavy, read the comics" doesn't really help at all. Plus the last thing I want is the canonisation of those comics, they are very clearly a seperate entity.

Us arguing that we want a better plot is the same as you arguing for better gameplay. Its something that will enhance the overall experience. I bet you, you wouldn't be happy, if somebody said "Well if you want Genesis physics, go and play the Genesis games" while you were discussing how SEGA should strive to replicate the Mega Drive level design and physics in 3D. Same applies here.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Scar

[Chaos Warp]

Am I the only one who puts gameplay FAR over story in terms of priorities? Not to say I would not like the stories to improve and become more serious and feature better characterization. But honestly, compared to gameplay, it's a small priority. A good story can, and most likely will, enhance the enjoyment of any game. But for me, I can't make myself give a rat's ass about the story if I don't find the gameplay enjoyable. Good story or not, good gameplay is something that HAS to be there first if I am to enjoy the game. But all this may be just me.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Chaos Warp

[Burnt Ash]

The comics are fine and all, but I'd like to see more story in the SegaSonic canon as well. Some people don't read or have access to the comics. EDIT: Or some just don't like them.

Edited March 5, 2012 by thebluehedgehog

[Scar]

The comics are fine and all, but I'd like to see more story in the SegaSonic canon as well. Some people don't read or have access to the comics.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Scar

[Burnt Ash]

Am I the only one who puts gameplay FAR over story in terms of priorities? Not to say I would not like the stories to improve and become more serious and feature better characterization. But honestly, compared to gameplay, it's a small priority. A good story can, and most likely will, enhance the enjoyment of any game. But for me, I can't make myself give a rat's ass about the story if I don't find the gameplay enjoyable. Good story or not, good gameplay is something that HAS to be there first if I am to enjoy the game. But all this may be just me.

Edited March 5, 2012 by thebluehedgehog

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Besides don't we have the comics if we want more story?

That means very little, as people happen to want to enjoy more story in the games.

I can read and enjoy the comics, but the comics tend to make me wonder why we can't do some (read: not all) of the things they have in the games. The reason why is because having more story (and a good one at that) would add more to the value of the game entertaining you, which like a comic/movie/book is what a game is suppose to do. And there's an added bonus of seeing the characters actually move instead of using still images drawn so that you can simply see that they're moving.

Or to put it in simpler terms, out of just these two things: would you want to see a picture of the character uppercutting his enemy or a video of the character doing the same thing? I tend to gravitate more towards the video. If a picture can say a thousand words, then a video can say a million more.

Edited March 5, 2012 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Komodin]

Does it really matter?

Well, my friend, considering that the comics continuity has little to do with the games continuity (outside of those game adaptation comics, and they're obviously non-canon to even the comics.), I think it's fair to say that this do indeed matter. At any rate, what these guys desire are more engaging plots in the games; why should they have to go to an alternate source to get their story/character development wants fulfilled, especially with the current technology available for games nowadays?

[Nepenthe]

Well hey, we can't put Iizuka at gun point and force him to make better stories can we? Not that I don't agree with you, but I'm not terribly upset about this as other people seem to be; the plots are simpler, does that mean the series can't be good regardless?

I can't put him at gunpoint without consequence, but I and others can keep discussing our grievances in the hopes that he'll listen.

Regardless, the series is already good again, but the sum has nothing to do with the individual variables. So the series has better gameplay and is receiving some love again; peachy. How does that negate the fact that the story is considerably lacking due in part to arguably misguided notions on how to handle it (e.g., stripping it of any fun and meaning under the guise of that's how it was in the older titles), and that story proponents shouldn't be content with settling for what we consider bad storytelling and a chink in the experience just because it's a little less kosher to entertain the Sonic Cycle nowadays?

[Soniman]

I just want the stories to at least be on SA1's level.

That being said, I appreciate Colors' story for what ir was, a day in the life of Sonic the hedgehog. The whole game feels like a breather, a fun, lighthearted romp where you don't have to worry about some God of destruction or some such shit. Sonic is goofing off, enjoying the situation he's in, it's nice to actually see him have FUN with the role he's in, and with Tails aqcting as his foil basically. All of it was in good fun, and I found it pretty dang charming.

Would I want to see this type of plot and/or Sonic's general attitude be the norm for the games? Probably not, but for what it was I enjoyed it immensely, I really did.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Groosenator032

[Scar]

Would I want to see this type of plot and/or Sonic's general attitude be the norm for the games? Probably not, but forwhat it was I enjoyed it immensely, I really did.

This is really the point.

I'd much rather have Colours-esque plots interspersed with more engaging plots, rather than just one constantly. Otherwise it will get boring. Just like Monster of the Week did.

[Nepenthe]

Am I the only one who puts gameplay FAR over story in terms of priorities? Not to say I would not like the stories to improve and become more serious and feature better characterization. But honestly, compared to gameplay, it's a small priority. A good story can, and most likely will, enhance the enjoyment of any game. But for me, I can't make myself give a rat's ass about the story if I don't find the gameplay enjoyable. Good story or not, good gameplay is something that HAS to be there first if I am to enjoy the game. But all this may be just me.

You're arguing against a strawman, especially considering this topic is more oriented towards the storytelling aspect of the series. Most people who like playing video games enjoy the actual interactive aspect of the medium and hold it in high regard, otherwise we'd probably not be playing them. This doesn't mean a person concerned about bad storytelling has screwed-up priorities, much less does it suggest that there is anything wrong with looking forward to a game's story.

Honestly, games are not just inconsequential bits of code thrown together to entertain children and man-babies who like pushing buttons. They are an art medium, they are becoming a social, cultural and financial tour de force, and they are now becoming outright experiences with the capability to tell meaningful stories that have an effect on their gameplay and world-building. Thus, this idea that games are perfectly okay with bad narratives baffles me.

If nothing else, as you said, it would enhance the enjoyment of games if their stories were better. Ergo, I don't understand throwing the story to the wayside or chastising the people who care. Improving every facet of video games, including the story, will lead to better products in the long run.

[Kuzu]

I like how I'm being viewed as the bad guy in this topic.

Moving on, Shadic, your posts are getting more and more illogical.

Comics and whatnot are irrelevant to the games. People want the games to have more engaging plots to keep them...er...engaged. To give a half-decent reason behind the events of the game. Is that not too much to ask for or discuss about? Simply dismissing it and saying, "bah, well if you want something plot-heavy, read the comics" doesn't really help at all. Plus the last thing I want is the canonisation of those comics, they are very clearly a seperate entity.

[Nepenthe]

I don't think you understand what I meant by variable in the context of my post. Variable means a component of a video game: Gameplay, art, story, etc. You can't please a variable, nor do any of the variables I listed have so much subjectivity to their execution that they cannot have some noticeable issues. There is an issue with the gameplay when Sonic loses forward momentum. There is an issue when the art style doesn't mesh well with the series or even with itself. And- yes- there is an issue when a story has an innocuous and passive middle act.

These are things worth complaining about, and I don't think we should marginalize our complaints simply because Iizuka has a hard job, a job that- I reiterate- he is primarily responsible for in the first place. And as far as I know, Iizuka's hardly been criticized in this topic anyway. The criticism was far worse (and the ad hominem embarrassing, ridiculous, and shameful) when Episode 1 was being marketed.

Overall though, I still would like an answer to my question: Why does the fact that the series has gotten better reception recently mean that people who are pointing out problems with the story should just deal with those problems?

[Kuzu]

Why does the fact that the series has gotten better reception recently mean that people who are pointing out problems with the story should just deal with those problems?

I'm not saying that people should deal, if you have a problem with the series by all means voice it. But I don't like the notion that the series needs a good story in order to be good or commendable in the slightest, and that anything less is "bad".

[Vertekins]

Separate entity or not, they're still apart of the series and, more or less, expand the universe.

No they don't expand the universe because they're not in any way, shape or form a part of the game universe. The comics are a seperate canon and you can't invest attention in it for the purpose of getting the story fix that the games lack because they're not one and the same.

Besides, it's not as if the comics are well written anyway, making use of 'important' story aspects then tossing them away like dirty diapers as soon as they can be discarded in the interests of (cheap) drama and being infested with romatic plot tumors and a level of shipping only the fandom puts to shame. And let's not forget that the game characters are shunted sideways in the interests of shoving the SatAM/Archie characters in the limelight.

[azoo]

Separate entity or not, they're still apart of the series and, more or less, expand the universe. I'm not saying you're not allowed to discuss or wish about it, but it really just comes off as self entitlement similar to the fans that want an Sa3, how they should get something and how it would help help "save the series", and notice we're very quick to put down people like that, so seeing the very same reactions towards the stories of the series puts something of a sour taste in my mouth. The games are less story driven, while the comics are the story driven ones, so complaining that one isn't like the other comes off as.....nitpicky.

The comic series has absolutely no relations to the Segasonic canon, minus the horribly implemented tie-ins in the '90s, and the additions of characters and slight Segasonic nudges since Ian Flynn took over. With all the differences in the characters and (especially) the mythos, you can not tell me to look at them if "I want story."

I wouldn't be happy about it, but I'd get over it and move on.

You'd get over it, maybe, but I wouldn't. Not because of expecting Genesis physics, but because of expecting story and character development.

What if the developers honestly don't feel like going through the effort, especially when there's already an equally important source out there. I'm not saying that games shouldn't have good or decent stories, but I don't see it as an absolute requirement like some people do, hence why I made my(admittedly not well thought) post.

There is a good couple of reasons why I have considered Sonic my favorite game franchise, and although one of the main reasons was because of how great the gameplay was in different games, the other was because it had a more complex atmosphere, and description on it's world and characters than say, Mario or some other straight-up platformer.

Because the series is divided into so many different variables, that there's honestly no way to please them all in the slightest, and it really irks me that people tend to give Iizuka such a hard time when he's simply doing his job of trying to keep the series alive.

What's so hard about hiring some people who can think up a good script, characterization of everyone, and tone for a plot outline?

[Nepenthe]

I'm not saying that people should deal, if you have a problem with the series by all means voice it. But I don't like the notion that the series needs a good story in order to be good or commendable in the slightest, and that anything less is "bad".

Has anyone here actually said this? I know I haven't, having already conceded that the series is good now. Wanting a good story in a game does not express a belief that a game with a bad story is a mediocre product as a whole. This is also a strawman that needs to drop from the discourse completely.

But in regards to your notion, my issue with it is this: if we are always to believe that a game doesn't need a good story to be good or commendable, it's also an implicit approval of Sonic 06 levels of bad storytelling. Making concessions with certain qualities in games is a terrible way to look at the issue and harmful for the long term development of games. Nothing in a game should be phoned in simply because it isn't gameplay, and what a game's story does and offers to its particular experience should be discussed on a case-by-case basis.

Really, considering the series' musical pedigree, imagine we are discussing Chronicles' trainwreck of a soundtrack. If someone said, "Why do you all care about how bad the music is? A game doesn't need music to be good; gameplay's the most important thing so who cares if the music is bad?" There would be a hell of a lot more push back.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Nepenthe

[Vertekins]

What's so hard about hiring some people who can think up a good script, characterization of everyone, and tone for a plot outline?

They already have the fella. He write the two Storybook games.

Not that I am 150,000% for that. I still think that the Colours/Generations writers have tremendous potential that is being held back by Sonic Team in the interests of 'simplicity'. You only have to look at Generations' subtleties (I laughed SO HARD at Sonic's reaction to losing his Chili Dog and smiled hugely at the SatSR and Colours references), great characterization and it's very clever timeline references especially in regard to Eggman and his technical praising of himself (XD!) and obvious respect for canon to see this (Such as Tails being unfamiliar with GHZ). And then there's the fantastic meta-references such as the purple water making Tails nervous and Tails wondering where Sonic keeps his rings.

It's a great pity. There's clearly a lot of talent there that is being stifled for such ridiculous reasons.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Verte

[Kuzu]

No they don't expand the universe because they're not in any way, shape or form a part of the game universe. The comics are a seperate canon and you can't invest attention in it for the purpose of getting the story fix that the games lack because they're not one and the same.

So this is basically a nitpick that there's a story, its just not in the medium you prefer.

Besides, it's not as if the comics are well written anyway, making use of 'important' story aspects then tossing them away like dirty diapers as soon as they can be discarded in the interests of (cheap) drama and being infested with romatic plot tumors and a level of shipping only the fandom puts to shame. And let's not forget that the game characters are shunted sideways in the interests of shoving the SatAM/Archie characters in the limelight.

Ya know, I almost took you seriously until you posted that. Now its come down to petty insults? Seriously, you act like the games haven't sucked major balls with their stories either, and I know you like the storybook games and all, but they're the only good in a pool of mediocrity or average , so I fail to see why one should be considered better than the other outside of personal preference.

The comic series has absolutely no relations to the Segasonic canon, minus the horribly implemented tie-ins in the '90s, and the additions of characters and slight Segasonic nudges since Ian Flynn took over. With all the differences in the characters and (especially) the mythos, you can not tell me to look at them if "I want story."

Like I said, personal preference. That's basically what it boils down to.

You'd get over it, maybe, but I wouldn't. Not because of expecting Genesis physics, but because of expecting story and character development.

..Well I'm sorry you feel that way, but unless you speak for the entire fanbase, you're just one out of a million, and I'm pretty sure not everyone agrees with this.

There is a good couple of reasons why I have considered Sonic my favorite game franchise, and although one of the main reasons was because of how great the gameplay was in different games, the other was because it had a more complex atmosphere, and description on it's world and characters than say, Mario or some other straight-up platformer.

Ok then, you have an investment in the series that keeps you coming back, but the thing is so does everyone else. What about the people that don't really care for a story? Or have no real investment in the series mythos? When we were young and played games, did any of that stuff matter? We're a minority.

What's so hard about hiring some people who can think up a good script, characterization of everyone, and tone for a plot outline?

Nothing really. But if they don't want to or feel motivated, they don't want to or feel motivated, you can't force somebody to do something they might not want to do.

Has anyone here actually said this? I know I haven't, having already conceded that the series is good now. Wanting a good story in a game does not express a belief that a game with a bad story is a mediocre product as a whole. This is also a strawman that needs to drop from the discourse completely.

IT was a general statement.

But in regards to your notion, my issue with it is this: if we are always to believe that a game doesn't need a good story to be good or commendable, it's also an implicit approval of Sonic 06 levels of bad storytelling. Making concessions with certain qualities in games is a terrible way to look at the issue and harmful for the long term development of games. Nothing in a game should be phoned in simply because it isn't gameplay, and what a game's story does and offers to its particular experience should be discussed on a case-by-case basis.

I fail to see how apathy towards a story is somehow praising 06, but ok. You're saying conceding to certain qualities of a game is bad, but isn't everyone here asking for them to concede and make a good story? If the story doesn't really offer anything, what's there to discuss, do you think Sega knows that the vast and vast majority of its fanbase like its stories? Based on the last five years alone, I'm pretty sure they think the exact opposite. If Sonic Team don't believe people care about their stories, why should they care about it, when everyone elses concern is something else entirely?

Really, considering the series' musical pedigree, imagine we are discussing Chronicles' trainwreck of a soundtrack. If someone said, "Why do you all care about how bad the music is? A game doesn't need music to be good; gameplay's the most important thing so who cares if the music is bad?" There would be a hell of a lot more push back.

And I'd still be standing my ground like I am now, but we're not talking about music are we?

[Your Vest Friend]

Wait, someone's arguing that Archie's just an expansion of the game canon?!

I am not going to say anything confrontational on this, I will just use my favourite misfit trio to illustrate the problem with this;

In the games; Vector; Leader of a ragtag detective agency, unknown origin, obsessed with money, doesn't particularly have any biases save for his own teammates (and even Charmy's questionable there)*.

Espio; Member of said agency, ninja of unknown background, works as a solitary ninja and has no allegience except to his work (which he takes pride in), is cool and rational even if he sometimes chooses to be a little do-lally about potential danger.

Charmy; Also a member, unknown origin, is silly and has a short attention span due to his young age, likes annoying his teammates and activity.

In the comics; Vector; A member of Knuckles' answer to the Freedom Fighters, an orphan who betrayed his friends to get away from Downunda, has no affinity for money, always supports Knuckles, has a typical motive (freedom).

Espio; Also a member of blah, Shinobi ninja who was meant to spy on Knuckles, tended towards hot-headedness until relatively recently, supports Knuckles aside from during the Iron Dominion saga (where he was loyal to his mother).

Charmy; Is an adult prince with brain damage.

While it's perfectly alright if you prefer Archie Sonic as an alternate continuity, calling it an expansion on the games is just such a simplification that it's inaccurate, and I haven't even touched on the major differences.

[Soniman]

Besides, it's not as if the comics are well written anyway, making use of 'important' story aspects then tossing them away like dirty diapers as soon as they can be discarded in the interests of (cheap) drama.

Examples? The most recent one I can think of Sally's recent transformation into Eggman's slave and made into a killing machine that is to be used against her own former friends, sounds like a pretty dramatic scenario to me

there is also the thing that happened to Bunnie and Antione, with one becoming virtually powerless and the other has apparently been blown to near death

and being infested with romatic plot tumors and a level of shipping only the fandom puts to shame.

Really? Maybe this was a thing in the Penders days (like, a HUGE thing) but now? Not really, no. Other than the recent thing with Sally, which even then it's not that big a deal, and considering what came of it in the end, it at least added tension.

And let's not forget that the game characters are shunted sideways in the interests of shoving the SatAM/Archie characters in the limelight.

Oh that is just bullshit, completely ignoring the fact that it's a comic based on Satam so it's only expected to see the characters get a decent amount of attention, saying the characters are simply "shunted" sideways is a gross overstatement. Characters like Shadow, Knuckles, Tails, Silver, Amy, the Babylon Rogues, and recently Eggman, get their own entire ARCS in Sonic Universe. Hell that's not to say all the characters Sega's forgotten like Mighty, Ray, Bark, Bean, and Fang are all apart of the comic as well. Each and everyone one of them manage play a decent sized role in the comics, saying they were all "shunted aside" is just wrong.

Keep in my mind that i'm mostly referring to issues post - Penders (160 to now) and I can't really defend anything before that...because it was pretty bad.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Groosenator032

[Tornado]

Besides, it's not as if the comics are well written anyway, making use of 'important' story aspects then tossing them away like dirty diapers as soon as they can be discarded in the interests of (cheap) drama and being infested with romatic plot tumors and a level of shipping only the fandom puts to shame.

Really?

I know you hate Archie with an unparalleled bloodlust, but you can't stand there and tell me that the games are some kind of paragon of writing quality in comparison. I was there when Iizuka was manning the crazy. Remember when everyone in the series was a one-note shitty anime cliche, interacting with each other in shitty ripoffs of equally cliched Shonen storylines? Because it wasn't that long ago, and them being better now is only in comparison to what they were.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Tornado

[Nepenthe]

I fail to see how apathy towards a story is somehow praising 06, but ok.

Implicit (or rather tacit, I meant to say) approval means by not caring about something, you are still inherently approving of it. Besides, that's the statement taken to its most logical conclusion anyway: "A video game doesn't need a story to be good" means one shouldn't care about the story in the overall context of playing a video game, which would logically include that story's quality. So indeed, if a game doesn't need a story to be good and it ends up with a bad one, that bad story still shouldn't affect the quality of a game to any significant degree. Ergo, there is nothing wrong with having a Sonic 06 story.

You're saying conceding to certain qualities of a game is bad, but isn't everyone here asking for them to concede and make a good story?

Not at all. I've not seen the proponents for story frame the issue as an all-or-nothing deal. No one here has said, "A game needs a story to be good [otherwise a game, no matter how great its gameplay, is automatically bad]." We're saying, "A good game with a bad story is worse than a good game with a good story; ergo, games should strive to tell good stories along with having good gameplay."

If the story doesn't really offer anything, what's there to discuss, do you think Sega knows that the vast and vast majority of its fanbase like its stories? Based on the last five years alone, I'm pretty sure they think the exact opposite. If Sonic Team don't believe people care about their stories, why should they care about it, when everyone elses concern is something else entirely?

Sonic Team does actually believe people care about the narrative in Sonic games, otherwise they wouldn't have hired new writers and voice actors to change the direction of it in response to continued criticism. That is a patently ridiculous question.

And I'd still be standing my ground like I am now, but we're not talking about music are we?

Whether or not we're talking about music is not the point. The point is, people expect good music despite the fact that music is wholly irrelevant to punching in some 1's and 0's to make a hedgehog run around; the fact that people complained about Chronicles' music inherently makes this so.

The point is, whether people want to admit it or not, they care about more things in their video games than strictly the coding of them, thus again, I see no reason to disparage the worth of anything that isn't gameplay as being so insignificant that everything in the game but the gameplay can be absolute crap and everything will still be hunky-dory. Everything in a game matters; the degree of purpose in each facet of a game may differ depending on the game, but nothing in a game is inherently benign. Game design matters. Physics matter. Narrative matters. Characterization matters. Music matters. Art style matters. Art assets matter. Voice acting matters. To say none of this doesn't is, simply put, wrong.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Nepenthe

[Vertekins]

So this is basically a nitpick that there's a story, its just not in the medium you prefer.

No it's not. It's a statement of fact that I shouldn't have to rely on completely seperate continuities that have no relation to the games or the games characters in order to get something resembling a fleshed out story in Sonic. And why should I invest attention in the comics as a game story substitute when they have nothing to do with the games?

Ya know, I almost took you seriously until you posted that. Now its come down to petty insults? Seriously, you act like the games haven't sucked major balls with their stories either, and I know you like the storybook games and all, but they're the only good in a pool of mediocrity or average , so I fail to see why one should be considered better than the other outside of personal preference.

Petty insult? Please show me where there is a "petty insult" in that post because, well, not only was there not a petty insult there to start with, my beef with Archie doesn't trascend into anything more than irritance and go into petty insult territory.

Really?

I know you hate Archie with an unparalleled bloodlust, but you can't stand there and tell me that the games don't pull this shit constantly as well. It's gotten better, but I was there when Iizuka was manning the crazy. Remember when everyone in the series was a one-note shitty anime cliche, interacting with each other in shitty ripoffs of cliches shone storylines? Because it wasn't that long ago.

"Unparalleled bloodlust"? Lolno. More like a light irritance at it's warping of certain games characters and SatAM characters beyond recognition, it's special snowflake-esque forcing of itself onto other continuities and it's blatant obsession with pairings.

And remember the time when entire arcs and stories revolved around stupid love dodecahedrons, when entire arcs and plot points came to fruition because a character(s) were holding onto a ginormous idiot ball and characters are paired and given particular designs for no reason whatsoever and for the hell of it?

I dislike the utter mess that was the likes of Shadow, Heroes and '06 too as I've said on multiple occasions before. Just because those sorry excuses for writing took place in the games doesn't mean I place them above the likes of Archie.

Oh that is bullshit, completely ignoring the fact that it's a comic based on Satam so it's only expected to see the characters get a decent amount of attention, saying the characters are simply "shunted" sideways is a gross overstatement. Characters like Shadow, Knuckles, Tails, Silver, Amy, the Babylon Rogues, and recently Eggman, get their own entire ARCS in Sonic Universe.

Took long enough though didn't it? And you still don't see enough of it in the main comic.

Hell that's not to say all the characters Sega's forgotten like Mighty, Ray, Bark, Bean, and Fang. Each and everyone one of them play a decent sized role in the comics, saying they were all "shunted aside" is just wrong.

"Decent sized role"? Haven't seen Mighty and Ray since they decided to take a hike in an effort to find Mighty's sister which was way back in..oh, Issue 212 I believe? Whilst Bean, Bark and Fang haven't been seen since SU 24 to my knowledge.

Really? Maybe this was a thing in the Penders days (like, a HUGE thing) but now? Not really, no. Other than the recent thing with Sally, which even then it's not that big a deal, and considering what came of it in the end, it at least added tension.

Entire issues like 222 used as a means to express Sonally leanings, The Iron Dominion arc used just as much to pimp out KhanxSallyxSonic shenanigans as it was them seeking out the clans and uniting them, Sonic pairing with Fiona to 'save' Tails from heartache. I could go on.

Examples? The most recent one I can think of Sally's recent transformation into Eggman's slave and made into a killing machine that is to be used against her own former friends, sounds like a pretty dramatic scenario to me

House of Cards arc. Amadeus incites resistance towards the Acorn monarchy despite the fact that he and his wife are the least qualified to do so considering they were on the other side of the universe for the last 11 years. The resistance is promptly stopped with no exposition whatsoever. A plot point that had potential to show why the citizens went on Amadeus' side but was discarded as soon as it was deemed unnecersary just to generate more animosity between Sonic and Tails.

Issue 215. Silver goes by the incredibly flimsy logic that because 'Boomer' "changed his name" to 'Rotor' that automatically makes him out to be a conspirator who infiltrated the Freedom Fighters in the past and led to their ruin. This unreasonably paints out Silver to be an idiot who has never heard of the concept of a nickname and sets up an idiot ball that pulls Silver into the story.