Attitude Adjustment

[Diogenes]

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

Personally, it's neither the medium nor the story I'd prefer. I've tried the comics, I don't really like them, and they certainly don't fill the niche that the games' stories have failed to fill. They're the story of a different Sonic, and different friends (many who don't exist in the games), against different enemies (again, many who don't exist in the games), in a different world. It doesn't sate my desire for a Sonic story any more than Mario sates my desire for Sonic gameplay, because the Sonic I care about is the Sonic of 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

Can I not like either of them? If someone thinks the comics suck, it doesn't matter if the games' stories also suck (or have sucked, or whatever).

What about the people that don't really care for a story?

Unless they're big whiny manchildren, having a decent story in the games isn't going to hurt them.

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.

No shit, that's why people are complaining, to give them a motivation, to say "we, the customers, want this".

[Kuzu]

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.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

..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.

[Nepenthe]

Welp, can't argue with this logic at all, you're right stories like 06 are completely unforgivable, and should not be in the game at all. But 06's only problem wasn't the story now was it? The entirety of 06 was a mess, from gameplay, to art, to narrative, and people treat it like crap as a result. But let's say 06 had the best damn gameplay in the series, but still had its abysmal story. Can it still be considered a "terrible" game then, simply because one facet of it is lacking?

[Soniman]

"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.

[Kuzu]

Ok, had my sleep.

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?

Because you expressed that you want Sonic as in the character, you never specified what medium you preferred until now. Ok, fine Archie is a different continuity but I don't see why that should be an excuse of denouncing it, simply because "its not the video game therefore it sucks"

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.

I dunno, this:

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.

What this paragraph really necessary?

Personally, it's neither the medium nor the story I'd prefer. I've tried the comics, I don't really like them, and they certainly don't fill the niche that the games' stories have failed to fill. They're the story of a different Sonic, and different friends (many who don't exist in the games), against different enemies (again, many who don't exist in the games), in a different world. It doesn't sate my desire for a Sonic story any more than Mario sates my desire for Sonic gameplay, because the Sonic I care about is the Sonic of the games.

I don't see a difference between the two aside from the fact that its a different continuity, but I can't really argue what people prefer.

Can I not like either of them? If someone thinks the comics suck, it doesn't matter if the games' stories also suck (or have sucked, or whatever).

She was clearly insulting Archie just to make the games seem better by comparison, otherwise she wouldn't have said it at all.

nless they're big whiny manchildren, having a decent story in the games isn't going to hurt them.

Not having one isn't going to hurt people either.

No shit, that's why people are complaining, to give them a motivation, to say "we, the customers, want this".

Then by all means complain, did I say you were wrong for it?

Anyone who doesn't care for a story can simply skip the cutscenes regarding the story and ignore any kind of discussion regarding them.

I know that, but why can't the people who prefer a story just get over the fact that there isn't one? If the people who don't care for story can just gloss over it being there, why can't the opposite be true? Otherwise the people who don't like the story have just as much claim as complaining about it being there as the people who complain about it not.

If you want, Sonic Team can have a mode where the cutscenes are disabled and you can get to the action. Otherwise, you're just dealing with whining children who are either mad that someone else is getting something they don't like or are just spoiled to the point they expect things to be made for them.

Isn't that most people are doing now though? Complaining that Sonic Team aren't giving enough attention to the story over gameplay and mad at the approach to it?

No, but back then wasn't how it is now, and for various reasons. Technology was limited to even provide the same kind of standard todays most basic games can deliver, whether it's a story or something else separate.

But some people's standards just haven't changed. The majority of the gaming market are over 18, and they grew up in the period where story wasn't really a big deal, and I'm pretty sure a lot still feel the same way.

But I'll tell you what DID matter, and that was enjoying the game. I don't see how having a story can keep someone from enjoying the game if they can very well skip it and get to the action. Those who think we should do without are simply denying those who want more for the series, and you can trust me that we're not in the minority here. We may not be the majority, but you can belittle us as the minority either.

I don't see how not having a story can keep someone from enjoying the game either, but eh.

Are you playing Devi's Advocate here, dude?

Yeah probably, I felt like taking a different stance on the argument for a change because I recently got into an argument with someone over this very fact, and he did make a few good points that I considered.

"Story does not make or break a Sonic game for me and presumably everyone else here; it either enhances or detracts from the overall experience of playing the game."

So: If SatBK's story was worse but the gameplay the same, the game would be inherently worse than what we have now. If Sonic 06's gameplay was good but the story was the same, it would be a good game with a crap story. Regardless, both games need serious improvement with their stories, so I'm going to complain about their stories. Sonic 06 would not get a free pass from criticism of its story just because its gameplay was good.

But how does not having a story detract from the game in anyway? You can complain about the story sucks all you want, but if the game plays good, the game will be good. Having a good or bad story won't make or break a game, it would probably help it feel complete but being complete won't help it sell at all, and that's basically the goal of video games in general other than to entertain obviously.

And I disagree with said approach and with some facets of the prior criticism, nor do I agree that the story has improved significantly anyway, so I'm going to rail against this continued direction until it changes to my liking. Regardless, this doesn't disprove the fact that Sonic Team cares about story, the complete opposite of what you said earlier. =/

They care more about gameplay than they do the story is what I said, and people like Chaos Warp agree with that approach.

Look I understand story, character, and the overall narrative is important, it helps make the world more complete and feel alive, but in a video game that takes a backseat to the gameplay, whether we agree with it or not. The primary point of a video game is to play it, not watch it. Does that mean good stories aren't allowed to exist? Well no, if they can put one in they should at least try making it as complete as possible, but I doubt the collective media would loose its shit if Sonic never has a decent story again.

[Diogenes]

I don't see a difference between the two aside from the fact that its a different continuity,

And that's a pretty fucking big difference, especially when they've been given nearly 20 years to grow apart from each other. The comics exist in a different world with different rules and a different history filled with different characters which lead to different events which leads to different characters even if one of them is still a fast blue hedgehog.

She was clearly insulting Archie just to make the games seem better by comparison, otherwise she wouldn't have said it at all.

Or, she was pointing out that "if you want a good story, go read the comics" doesn't work if you 1: Don't think the comics have a good story and 2: Want a story based on the games' universe and characters, which the comics are not.

Not having one isn't going to hurt people either.

It hurts the people who want to see a story with these characters, in this world.

Let me see if I can clear this up:

If there is a good story:

People who don't want a story: Can skip it

People who want a story: Are happy

If there is a bad story:

People who don't want a story: Can skip it

People who want a story: Are not happy

If there is no story:

People who don't want a story: Would have skipped it anyway

People who want a story: Are not happy

Which one of these satisfies the largest number of people?

Isn't that most people are doing now though? Complaining that Sonic Team aren't giving enough attention to the story over gameplay and mad at the approach to it?

Not all complaints are equally reasonable. If you're going to lump all complaints under the "whiny manchildren" banner, you should be berating people for complaining about '06.

They care more about gameplay than they do the story is what I said, and people like Chaos Warp agree with that approach.

Caring more about gameplay doesn't require neglecting the story.

[JezMM]

The idea that Sonic will somehow benefit from a lack of story over a good story is ridiculous.

So is the "gameplay is more important" arguement. Games are an experience. EVERYTHING is important. The games with the greatest stories are the ones that intergrate them directly into the gameplay.

You even get some that catch the player off guard by challenging what they take for granted. Sonic Colours (brilliantly) did this in how it handled the entire zone of Terminal Velocity, and I would love to see more of that.

All mediums are fantastic and have their own things that only they can do, but there are certain story experiences that can only be done to their full potential in a game, and people want those out of Sonic.

[Exploder]

I'm just gonna finally jump into this.

I'm detecting some sort of fear that putting in a story in a Sonic game will somehow come at the expense of gameplay, which is pretty strange considering both things are handled by completely different teams and people. And if they are really unable to do both at once, then well, it's be incredibly pathetic of Sonic Team, wouldn't it?

[Kuzu]

I'm just gonna finally jump into this.

I'm detecting some sort of fear that putting in a story in a Sonic game will somehow come at the expense of gameplay, which is pretty strange considering both things are handled by completely different teams and people. And if they are really unable to do both at once, then well, it's be incredibly pathetic of Sonic Team, wouldn't it?

You suck at detecting because I didn't say that at all.

[Carbo]

I'm detecting some sort of fear that putting in a story in a Sonic game will somehow come at the expense of gameplay, which is pretty strange considering both things are handled by completely different teams and people.

The irony is that you pretty much described SaTBK in a nutshell.

Man I really don't remember much from that game.

And if they are really unable to do both at once, then well, it's be incredibly pathetic of Sonic Team, wouldn't it?

To be fair, it'd be a lie to claim that Sonic Team are one of the brightest developers.

[Nepenthe]

This may be beating a dead horse considering the amount of replies, but regardless:

But how does not having a story detract from the game in anyway? You can complain about the story sucks all you want, but if the game plays good, the game will be good. Having a good or bad story won't make or break a game, it would probably help it feel complete but being complete won't help it sell at all, and that's basically the goal of video games in general other than to entertain obviously.

They care more about gameplay than they do the story is what I said, and people like Chaos Warp agree with that approach.

Look I understand story, character, and the overall narrative is important, it helps make the world more complete and feel alive, but in a video game that takes a backseat to the gameplay, whether we agree with it or not. The primary point of a video game is to play it, not watch it.

I don't know why you keep saying and implying that I believe story "makes or breaks a game" or that it's the most important thing in a game amidst the several times I've said this is a complete misrepresentation of my argument as well as elaborated on my actual position. Once again, my argument is this, in bold for x-treem emphasis:

A bad element of a game will inevitably detract from the experience just as much as a good element will enhance the experience, thus it would be in a game's best interest to have every included element shine. This includes having a good story if the designers decide to have a story.

What about the above do you not understand, or at least, what do you find so controversial about this? I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm genuinely curious, because we're going nowhere and this merry-go-round's getting frustrating.

Does that mean good stories aren't allowed to exist? Well no, if they can put one in they should at least try making it as complete as possible, but I doubt the collective media would loose its shit if Sonic never has a decent story again.

I don't care about the collective media; me and the collective media have wildly different interests and tastes that makes most of what they say irrelevant to my personal gaming. If anything, the collective media doesn't really give a rat's ass about Sonic beyond trolling the fan base, so whatever they will or won't lose their shits over has no impact on my stance that everything in a Sonic game should be good.

[Kuzu]

This may be beating a dead horse considering the amount of replies, but regardless:

I don't know why you keep saying and implying that I believe story "makes or breaks a game" or that it's the most important thing in a game amidst the several times I've said this is a complete misrepresentation of my argument as well as elaborated on my actual position. Once again, my argument is this, in bold for x-treem emphasis:

A bad element of a game will inevitably detract from the experience just as much as a good element will enhance the experience, thus it would be in a game's best interest to have every included element shine. This includes having a good story if the designers decide to have a story.

What about the above do you not understand, or at least, what do you find so controversial about this? I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm genuinely curious, because we're going nowhere and this merry-go-round's getting frustrating.

I don't care about the collective media; me and the collective media have wildly different interests and tastes that makes most of what they say irrelevant to my personal gaming. If anything, the collective media doesn't really give a rat's ass about Sonic beyond trolling the fan base, so whatever they will or won't lose their shits over has no impact on my stance that everything in a Sonic game should be good.

[Vertekins]

She was clearly insulting Archie just to make the games seem better by comparison, otherwise she wouldn't have said it at all.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I know that, but why can't the people who prefer a story just get over the fact that there isn't one? If the people who don't care for story can just gloss over it being there, why can't the opposite be true? Otherwise the people who don't like the story have just as much claim as complaining about it being there as the people who complain about it not.

Edited March 6, 2012 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Scar]

The comics or any other narrative media existing is not a valid argument against wanting or stimulating improvement of the stories of the games. Just thought I'd get that out there. Sorry if I'm bringing up a long dead issue, but I can't keep up with the pace at which this thread seems to be moving.

[Nepenthe]

I'm getting pretty tired of this, I think neither one of us are going to come to an understanding, and I'd rather not waste my time playing ping pong with people over the internet, and I'm pretty sure you don't feel like going on for another 5 pages either.

[Kuzu]

I said I'm done guys, I think its pretty obvious we're not going to come to an understanding, and I'd rather not waste my time fighting a battle I can't win.

I don't mind continuing; it just seems that you keep misrepresenting my argument. Of course we're not going to get anywhere under these conditions, hence why I've continually clarified. If you want to drop it I'll understand, otherwise I'd still like to know what's the ticking point of my actual argument if we're to gain any ground. xP

[Diogenes]

I say we just agree that all parts of a video game are important and should be developed to the best of their ability, and that some parts just aren't going to be up to par.

[Vertekins]

Why?

[Soniman]

So yeah guys, about Sonic's attitude.

[Kuzu]

Why?

Edited March 6, 2012 by Shadic Claus

[Scar]

Because apparently the prospect of getting writers who can write a good story or at least do so without Sonic Team holding their leash is such an impossible one that we might as well not get our hopes up

Edited March 6, 2012 by Scar

[Chaos Warp]

Hey, just wanted to jump in here and clarify myself.

I do care about story in Sonic games, just not as much as gameplay. As in, I can forgive a bad story if the gameplay is good, but I would like it more if it had a good story. I'd say I'm story: %20, Gameplay: 80%.

[azoo]

Because you ever think, they just don't have the resources? Or time? or creative freedom?

It's a professional team. They can hire the people who have resources, time, and creative freedom.

Sure, it would require working the story production team side-by-side with the game developers, but considering it's a professional production, this shouldn't be too big a stretch of the imagination to pull off, right?

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

Anyways..

So yeah guys, about Sonic's attitude.

Personally, he felt most "himself" in Sonic Adventure, although there was bad writing involved.

Of course, when I say that he felt "himself", I mean that he was a generally chill dude that was mildly friendly but could be rather the impatient hot-head. He also ran around and did cool things while adventuring, occasionally letting out a corny line. And even then, his corny lines were much snappier than most of them are nowadays.

In other words, SA1 kind of set the standard for how I see Sonic's personality; and every game since then hasn't really been the same. For as "bland" as everyone says he was, I think Unleashed Sonic was the closest we've had to that personality in ages; because although he wasn't really as irritable, he was a mixture of adventurous and being very laid back. Plus, he had some lively cartooniness in his expressions that I really enjoyed, and they also integrated into his personality.

And although it wasn't anything too special on its own, his morals and principles shown in the Storybook games, when applied to his personality in SA1 & Unleashed, make an incredibly interesting character.

I'm personally really annoyed that Knuckles was given the "hot-headed" trait over the past couple of years. Wasn't that Sonic's thing, while Knuckles was usually more calm-like (although stern and demanding)? Sonic was generally laid back and easy-going but had a bad case of impatience and a pushy temper. That helped make an interesting dynamic between the two from earlier in the series, but now because they switched traits, their interactions seem much more.. bland.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Azukara