Sonic 4 Episode 2 Reviews

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

As for the "this is a sequel to Sonic 3! It needs to meet and exceed the previous titles.", I guess some still hold onto that notion and some don't. I look at the gaming world NOW and I do not see the gaming world that existed at the time of the Genesis originals. Back then, Sonic 1-3&K were the big budget AAA titles. Now, stuff like Generations and Colors are the big budget AAA titles. Something like Sonic 4 just would not work as a AAA big budget title. SEGA *could* pour the time and money it takes to make a game like Unleashed or Generations into a long 2D Sonic 4, but I think that's just not something the company would do and I think it's something they can't do. It's unfortunate that SEGA can't take these gambles, but its true. Especially after their recent restructuring.

Why can't SEGA take these gambles? If Sonic 4 was like Generations with only the 2D levels and make them long, it will be highly praised.

If they can't make Sonic 4 like that, then they deserve to get all the criticism it's getting. I want to play high quality AAA games, not a cheap ass crap game like Sonic 4. I still can't believe they are charging us $15 for this.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Ming Ming Love

[Barry the Nomad]

I partially agree. I think it is possible to have forces outside the game itself not play such a major role in dictating a review, unfortunately it seems that a lot of the harsh Episode II reviews have gone with having a majority of their opinion dictated by the franchise as a whole, rather than the game itself. I'm not saying that reviewers need to clear their heads to the point of going into a game with no preconceived notions of the franchise, but I'm finding the best reviews (even Retro's negative review) were written with less of an emphasis on shitting on the game because of what happened two years ago, and are far more focused on the game itself.

Aaaaaanyway. All that is my two cents. So, uh, when is Gamespot sharing their review? Taking long enough for a site that played host to trailer debuts for the game.

Why can't SEGA take these gambles? If Sonic 4 was like Generations with only the 2D levels and make them long, it will be highly praised.

If they can't make Sonic 4 like that, then they deserve to get all the criticism it's getting. I want to play high quality AAA games, not a cheap ass crap game like Sonic 4. I still can't believe they are charging us $15 for this.

Thats your answer right there, it's a gamble. SEGA is not looking to make gambles right now. Generations worked for them, I think, because it was a mix of 3D and 2D. 2D was played up more as a special 20th anniversary "remember the good ol days!?" concept than a promise that the series is making a return to full 2D titles. I also don't think SEGA would want to release a AAA Sonic title that drops the 3D gameplay.

I don't think SEGA deserves high levels of criticism in this sense, because they can't take these gambles. It's like bitching out SEGA for not making Shenmue III. I'm sure there are a lot of staff that want to, but the budget and positive projections just aren't there. And thats where we disagree (and agree to disagree?).

[Blue Blood]

> dat feel when you're in the middle of typing a really good response, and then there's a powercut

Please excuse the fact that I can no longer be bothered to cohereantly structure this post and will instead just be incredibly lazy. EDIT: I also apologise for this accidental wall of text. To avoid boredom, please skip this post.

I'd argue that a few of those bullet points don't even apply to the game itself, which is one reason the low scores are pissing me off. They should review the game itself, not the duration between episodes or Generations or other downloadable titles (because to be honest, there are very few downloadable platformers that compare to Sonic games. Rocket Knight, maybe?)

There's a number of reasons whe the time between episodes is relevant. People simply didn't expect to wait this long for something so small. In late-2010 audiences were given the bitesize first installment in the Sonic 4 series, and it wasn't until mid-2012 that they were finally granted the long awaited sequel. This huge space not only permitted expectations of something larger, it also saw the arrival of two directly comparable titles that rose the bar sifnificantly. Colours and Generations (especially the latter) aimed to offer many of the same things that both Sonic 4 episodes have promised and failed to deliver upon. They even directly influenced the game with the addition of things like the Red Rings and pitfall signs.

Moreover, other unrelated titles offering more enjoyable gameplay, better visuals, better audio and more value for money have seen their release between the two episodes which constantly raising standards. There's little improvement between S4E1 and S4E2 despite how the wider world of gaming has grown. It's one of the many factors that contributed to Duke Nukem Forever's lacklustre critical performance. It was stuck in the past and didn't very well keep up with the times. Granted that took a lot longer to come around that S4E2, but the principle is the same. It's just as short and lacking in content as S4E1 yet still holds onto the same pricetag.

I have a very strong feeling that we're seeing a return the attitude reviewers had in that 2005-2008 era. Why? Perhaps, like you noted, its a step down from Generations. Maybe reviewers are punishing the game for this step down, despite the fact that it is far from a major step down and in fact Episode II itself is a big step UP from Episode I. Maybe they're thinking "oh look, the game isn't as good as the last one I played. Better punish it." Perhaps they're remembering the bitterness they felt in the mid-00's and it feels so good to write angry Sonic reviews again, even if the level of hate is a bit extreme.

The thing is, the franchise is one continuous series in itself. Colours was better than Episode 1, Generations was better than Colours, and the Episode 2 came out worse than either Colours or Generations. It's being plugged by SEGA as a main series game both by name and marketing, so it's going to be looked at the same way. It's arguably even worse than Sonic CD, the newly proclaimed seuqel to Sonic 4 entirely, even though it's actually from several years ago. It doesn't sound too hot.

I'm not going to blindly defend these reviewers, because I totally agree that some of what they're saying it just totally barmy. But it's not just 'not as good as the last one', it's a considerable step down from the last few games. Ouch. Didn't Twilight Princess get similar criticism?

I'm a part of a number of fandoms in which a LOT of negativity is thrown at modern releases, like The Simpsons which gets kicked around for being not as good as the golden age and Star Wars which gets shit for the prequels, especially Phantom Menace. However, in those fandoms I read negative reviews and I get why they are disliking things. In the case of Sonic, namely Sonic 4 Episode II, I'm finding it impossible to get the 5/10 (or lower) scores like I could get when it came to stuff like Unleashed and '06. Like, I can't see what they see even when they write it out or show it off in a video. All I hear is bullshit. The video reviews especially show this off, because I can plainly hear the snark from the GT reviewer, and I can see him playing really poorly. Not to mention the editing and choices of music. Show Sonic getting hit a lot by enemies, play the duck music from Oil Desert and it'll look like a shitty game hur durr.

Video reviews exist to back up the journalists points. If they said they game lacks flow due to the onslaught of forced co-op moves, they're going to show that.

And I'm pretty sure the ducks joke doesn't extend beyond they fanbase. GT took issue with the music, so they chose a track that displayed that.

I've come to the conclusion recently that I really am not letting reviews from commercial sites dictate my purchases. The best reviews I've read (and this goes outside of Sonic games too) have been from forum members (here, Retro, SEGAbits) and community writers who write reviews simply because they want to share their opinion and not because they do it for a paycheck/site hits/deadline/their boss threw the game or digital code on their desk and said "have it done by Friday".

When you're a dedicated fan, other dedicated fans are the ones you can better relate to. Always listen to your peers more the mainstream reviewers. They're more likely to think like you even when their opinions differ.

As for the "this is a sequel to Sonic 3! It needs to meet and exceed the previous titles.", I guess some still hold onto that notion and some don't. I look at the gaming world NOW and I do not see the gaming world that existed at the time of the Genesis originals. Back then, Sonic 1-3&K were the big budget AAA titles. Now, stuff like Generations and Colors are the big budget AAA titles. Something like Sonic 4 just would not work as a AAA big budget title. SEGA *could* pour the time and money it takes to make a game like Unleashed or Generations into a long 2D Sonic 4, but I think that's just not something the company would do and I think it's something they can't do. It's unfortunate that SEGA can't take these gambles, but its true. Especially after their recent restructuring.

... r-right. A sequel that lives up to S3K in this day and age doesn't need a massive budget. It could do with some nice visuals, a rich soundtrack, fun levels and a larger scale than what Sonic 4 offers. It doesn't need to be Generations like, it just needs to be a great game. If they wanted to keep things simple, they could have made numerous different design decisions. By very nature, 2D games are simpler and cheaper to develop than 3D ones. Better still if they use 2D engines (which neither E1 or E2 do). The whole direction for this Sonic 4 isn't what people wanted or expected. It's wrong in the eyes of many.

I guess that means there are a few roads to take with this:

• Continue to hate Dimps, Sonic Team and SEGA for not putting a large budget and Generations levels of effort behind Sonic 4 in the first place. Begrudgingly buy the Episodes anyway due to feeling committed as a fan, but continue to be negative towards the situation.

Accept mediocrity and ask for more of the same.

• Continue to hate Dimps, Sonic Team and SEGA for not putting a large budget and Generations levels of effort behind Sonic 4 in the first place, but understand that the gaming landscape has changed and things like 2D titles are not considered AAA titles worthy of a large budget and team.

Be a jaded fanboy and don't accept that times have changed.

It's not actually the case you consider what I've just said about being a S3K sequel.

• Blindly love everything SEGA does and not throw any criticism their way, but start flame wars on forums <- NOT ADVISED

Act like too many people in the fanbase.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Blue Blood

[Barry the Nomad]

• Blindly love everything SEGA does and not throw any criticism their way, but start flame wars on forums <- NOT ADVISEDAct like too many people in the fanbase.

Made me chuckle.

[Emmett L. Brown]

Gosh, that's a high bar.

Am I allowed to simply like the game, because it was fun to play, or would that destroy the future of the Sonic franchise forever?

[Solid SOAP]

Am I the only one surprised at the low review scores? As someone who hated Episode I, I think that Episode II is a really well made and fun game. The level design is good and extremely replayable, the stages are all unique and fun, co-op is pretty fun if a bit flawed, etc. There are some iffy things such as bosses taking long to beat (Which I actually welcome, I like the longer battles) and team abilities being hit or miss, but overall I found Episode II to be a well crafted game.

[Blue Blood]

Gosh, that's a high bar.

Am I allowed to simply like the game, because it was fun to play, or would that destroy the future of the Sonic franchise forever?

Of course not. You're supposed to be a grumpy old guy, and shouldn't like anything if it isn't like the old days.

[Neon]

Strategy Informer Review:

http://www.strategyi...e2/reviews.html

5/10

Edited May 22, 2012 by Neon

[Pawn]

Oil Ocean, Aquatic Ruin, Sky Chase & Wing Fortress, they’re all here (alongside Sonic 3’s Snow Cap) in ripped off and renamed form.

To be fair Episode 2 does rip off Snow Ice Cap's christmas carnival theme and its extensive underwater segments.

EDIT: Yeah ok so they're mostly right about the other levels but credit where credit is due and all that...

Edited May 22, 2012 by Lungo

[Semi-colon e]

To be fair Episode 2 does rip off Snow Ice Cap's christmas carnival theme and its extensive underwater segments.

Ice Cap's underwater segments were extensive? As far as I remember they were mainly a few bottomless pits. If anything it reminds me a lot more of Ice Mountain from Advance 1.

There is still too much rehash in Episode 2 though. White Park has some rehash but is generally the most original and varied (hence why it's my favourite zone). I dunno about Sylvania Castle though, it's less of a rehash to Aquatic Ruin than Emerald Hill was to Green Hill and by that logic Hydrocity is Chemical Plant + Labyrinth. I guess it's just a serieswide issue because there's so many games and levels to be reminded of. But I still see what they're getting at I suppose - Episode 2 is still bad for it (hello Sky Fortress), but I don't think it's as offensive as Episode 1 or anything like that.

If anything, White Park reminds me more of White Acropolis though, in terms of being very hilly and having all the christmas trees covered in snow, while the aurora borealis makes me think of Twinkle Snow (ice zones get pretty samey in this series!).

tl;dr it's a fair complaint, but it's nowhere near as blatant as in Ep 1 with a few exceptions.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Semi-colon e

[Solid SOAP]

I really don't understand the complaints about Zone originality in this game, they're just as original as they were in the Genesis games. Slyvania Castle is to Aquatic Ruin as Hill Top was to Green Hill, White Carnival is to Ice Cap as Lave Reef was to Marble Zone, etc. The only blatant rehash is Sky Fortress, and even so I loved that stage so I'm not complaining.

[Autosaver]

I think some of the EP II review complaints stem from Episode I being reviewed higher. It doesn't really make sense to see EP II getting 6's, 7's, and 8's when EP II is getting 3's, 4's, and 5's. Episode II can be agreed to be a much better game than EP I.

So I guess we could say that EP I was a little bit overrated?.

[Pawn]

Ice Cap's underwater segments were extensive? As far as I remember they were mainly a few bottomless pits. If anything it reminds me a lot more of Ice Mountain from Advance 1.

[Semi-colon e]

I was actually being sarcastic with that line. XP I guess I made it sound too serious. I do think White Park is a unique enough addition to the series.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Semi-colon e

[Solid SOAP]

I think some of the EP II review complaints stem from Episode I being reviewed higher. It doesn't really make sense to see EP II getting 6's, 7's, and 8's when EP II is getting 3's, 4's, and 5's. Episode II can be agreed to be a much better game than EP I.

So I guess we could say that EP I was a little bit overrated?.

[Blue Blood]

I really don't understand the complaints about Zone originality in this game, they're just as original as they were in the Genesis games. Slyvania Castle is to Aquatic Ruin as Hill Top was to Green Hill, White Carnival is to Ice Cap as Lave Reef was to Marble Zone, etc. The only blatant rehash is Sky Fortress, and even so I loved that stage so I'm not complaining.

[Pawn]

I really don't understand the complaints about Zone originality in this game, they're just as original as they were in the Genesis games. Slyvania Castle is to Aquatic Ruin as Hill Top was to Green Hill, White Carnival is to Ice Cap as Lave Reef was to Marble Zone, etc. The only blatant rehash is Sky Fortress, and even so I loved that stage so I'm not complaining.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Lungo

[Sami]

And before my post is quoted and I hear a cheeky reply of "oh maybe the game sucks and deserves a 5/10?" No. I'm not buying that nonsense. I'm not saying Episode II doesn't have its flaws, but it (and the franchise) does not deserve these 5/10 scores.

[Pawn]

White Park looks as unique as it's possible for an ice stage to do, or at least within Act 1. The only stage Act 2 is comparable to is Sky Park, although it's lacking all the character. Act 3 just looks generic. A cave is a cave and all that, but it could stand to look more original.

I really don't know why they left it so empty down there. Why not add some unique plant life, glowing coral, schools of brightly coloured fish or anglers to lighten up the place if you insist on leaving the background looking as drab as it does? If you're going to make Sonic spend the majority of a level underwater, at his slowest even with Tails, then give us something purdy to look at.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Lungo

[Conando]

The only real problem with this is that Episode 1 was horribly overrated, making it seem to the general public that this episode isn't a step up. In my opinion, it's getting there but, it's still not quite right. This is generally in terms of stage design and such because, I'm ok with the physics engine now (except for Super Sonic's, which somehow is a straight rip from Sonic 4).

Edited May 22, 2012 by Crow T. Robot

[Nintendoga]

Kinda funny how a majority of us want this game to get poor/mediocre reviews, kinda like an anti-sonic cycle heh.

Anyways I stopped viewing this game as the long awaited sequel to Sonic 3 when it clearly can not, shall not, will not, and wished it could be the Sonic 4 as we imagined.

I partake Sonic 4 as the modern equivilant of the classics. Ep.1 was a poor attempt at Sonic 1. This game is a poort attempt at Sonic 2. I hope to god they don't "try" (emphasis on try) and make another episode of the supposed GRAND SAGA of Sonic 4 when we all know it will just be a poor attempt at Sonic 3.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Nintendoga

[Autosaver]

Well, the reason we want Sonic 4 Episode II to get "bad" reviews is so SEGA can look at them and actually put more effort into these games. If reviewers/users gave the game high reviews, SEGA wouldn't care nearly as much as they would right now. A message NEEDS to be sent. The only reason physics were changed is because WE complained. Complaints WILL get the franchise going somewhere.

[Nintendoga]

@Auto

True

And to all those saying "Episode one got better scores then Ep.2? Wtf reviewers are retards" I'll use this as an example, Generations was better then Colors as a game, right?

Colors Reviews

GameRankings (Wii) 78.02%

(NDS) 77.75%

Metacritic (NDS) 79/100

(Wii) 78/100

1UP.com (Wii) B+

Eurogamer (Wii) 8/10

Famitsu (Wii) 34/40

(NDS) 32/40

Game Informer (NDS) 8.5/10

(Wii) 7/10

GameSpot 8/10

GamesRadar (Wii) 7/10

GameTrailers (NDS) 7.9/10

(Wii) 6.4/10

IGN 8.5/10

Official Nintendo Magazine (Wii) 86%

(NDS) 85%

Wired (Wii) 7/10

Generations Reviews

GameRankings (PS3) 78.91%

(X360) 78.67%

(PC) 78.17%

(3DS) 70.93%

Metacritic (X360) 77/100

(PC) 77/100

(PS3) 76/100

(3DS) 67/100

1UP.com B

Edge 5/10

Eurogamer (Italy) 8/10

(UK) 7/10

Famitsu 35/40

G4 4/5

Game Informer 6.75/10

GamesMaster 84%

GameSpot 8.0/10

GamesTM 7/10

GamesRadar (X360/PS3/PC) 8/10

(3DS) 7/10

GameTrailers 8.1/10

GameZone 9.0/10

IGN (X360/PS3/PC) 8.5/10

(3DS) 7/10

Nintendo World Report 8.5/10

Official Nintendo Magazine 85%

TeamXbox 8/10

See what I'm trying to point out here? A majority of the reviewers who gave Colors a good score, ranked Generations the same, or maybe even lower then Colors. But yet everyone in the reviews praise Generations for being the best Sonic game in years, and far, far better then Colors.

Sure you can bring out the old " But Sonic 4 Ep.1 and 2 are the same game, and Ep.2 is better then 1, so Ep.2 should be getting better scores" argument, but it doesn't work like that. Sonic 4 Episode 2 fails at what it's trying to do, and just because Ep.1 got 8's and 7's, doesn't mean Ep.2 should get 10/10's. No, because it's an average game with more cons then pros.

They are judging it by itself, which in fact a ton of you should be thankful for because almost every Episode 1 review (critics and fans alike) compared this to Sonic 3, and brought the game down because of it. We're not doing that here, we are judging the game on it's own, because it's trying to be it's own thing.

Of course if you want to compare it to Sonic 3, then go right on ahead, in fact let me help you by starting out with the Thesis Statement

"Sonic 4 Episode 2 compared to Sonic 3, or any of the classics for that matter, is shit-"

Edited May 22, 2012 by Nintendoga

[Nepenthe]

I'm confused by this whole mess. Is not the purpose of Ep. 2 just to be a sequel to and overall better game than Ep. 1? Is it really only supposed to be viewed as a standalone title, or is it supposed to conjure direct comparisons to its prequel as well? One would naturally think the latter, and if so, are the lower scores not inherently a point of contention, or is the teamwork gimmick really so godawful as you guys say it is as to render the shitastic physics of the prequel as a godsend by comparison?

[Indigo Rush]

I think the confusing part for many people is the fact that the first installment of Sonic 4 had recieved fairly positive marks across the board, ranging from 7s to 9s. I'm not going to argue this, but from a first glance, it seems illogical and nonsensical. For all intents and purposes, Episode II is verily indeedly better on almost all fronts than Episode I, particularly in the controls and visuals department. The only thing that's actually regressed, one could argue, is the music and boss fights. Aside from that, it's either unchanged or better. Keeping this in mind, it would appear that a lower score in lieu of the definite improvements seems silly.

However, this is not what I'm arguing for. I think the case seems to be that people (reviewers and critics, mainly) were so wrapped up in the concept of a new 2D Sonic that calls back to the Genesis days without completely and utterly sucking, that they didn't take the time to look at the game more objectively like the more seasoned and critical fans did. Once the "OMG 2D SONIC NO CRAPPY FRIENDS" rush wore down, they were able to look at the game objectively, and found out that... well, neither Episode I or Episode II were the great revivals that they at first appeared to be. You'll see that nearly every Episode II review doesn't open up with "man, Episode I was so great," but rather, "Episode I was okay, but the physics and level design were pretty darn horrid. It's as if their opinion and overall view of the game changed completely between now and then, and if they had the opportunity to review Episode I again, it'd probably recieve much lower scores, more along the lines of what Episode II is seeing now.

So, it's not that Episode II is worse, it's more to do with reviewers coming to the conclusion that most of us realized from day 1: Episode I wasn't that great, and it's going to take more than 2D and a limited cast of friends to do the trick.

I mean... this is the only explanation I have for this. I like Episode II, but I am able to admit that it most definitely fell short of what it was called to do, just... not as much as Episode I did, hence the initial confusion and backlash from various fans who acknowledge and appreciate the definite improvements made.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Indigo Rush