Official Sonic 2006 topic

[Tornado]

It would make more sense calling the characters you don't like "Silvers".

 

This is totally something that people should start doing now.

 

 

"Amy was at her most 'Silver' in Sonic Battle."

 

"Chris was a very 'Silver' character in general, but a lot of characters in Sonic X were pretty 'Silver' compared to the games."

Edited January 31, 2013 by Tornado

[KHCast]

But then What do we call silver?!

[Komodin]

But then What do we call silver?!

 

A character who should not have been.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

But then What do we call silver?!

The original...lol, that's ironic.

[Balding Spider]

But then What do we call silver?!

The only thing worse than Silver. Human Eggman.

Edited January 31, 2013 by BeelzeBummer

[Nix]

The only thing worse than Silver. Human Eggman.

B-but.

 

Eggman's always human.  

[KHCast]

The only thing worse than silver is 06 looking Eggman. And the only thing worse than that is his really tight pants. God I feel bad for those pants. They work so hard. God bless them.

[Balding Spider]

B-but.

Eggman's always human.  

I probably should've said non-toon Eggman. Maybe anatomically correct Eggman? But you get what I was going for yeah? Edited January 31, 2013 by BeelzeBummer

[SIXTH-RATE SOMA]

But then What do we call silver?!

 

Silverboy Prime.

 

"Everything was better on my Mobius!"

Edited January 31, 2013 by Sixth-Rate Soma

[Double A]

instead of quoting I will answer the general questions

1- is this legitimate to make something so bad it becomes awesome?

...Hmm...Here is how I will answer:
I don't think Sega does that on purpose and I think The best option is to make a good story, something like SA2. But my previous statement wasn't about Sega's intentions it was refering to how my brain gets entertained by suff. If the story is so bad it's awesome, it still works, I am entertained. Not on purpose but I am. If the story is just a boring pile of crap, then it fails, because I am not having a good time and I just want to kill myself. 

2- Sonic is for kids blablabla..

I will refer to the era conflict. Of course I was talking about the SA/SA2 years since Sega started to really care about the tone, the artistic direction and the story in that era. Videogame is a young art and we cannot consider older games as complete and elaborate as the new ones.

 

3- Sonic X is bad

errr no it's not. actually it was a really amusing show but a fanboy's brain cannot conceive such a thing since it's not Sonic 2 so it's automatically bad.

4- Sonic was too dark blablabla

err, when? SA2 is what you consider dark? You are a pretty much sensitive fellow in my opinion. When I think about dark I think about Spawn or Diablo. It's not because it's not baby-friendly that it's dark.

 

5- I think new Sonic games are great and it should stay like that!

Ah that's the core of the conflict!

2 fandoms, 2 visions. there's no way to get along, then Sega must follow some kind of cycle that periodically pleases Fandom A and Fandom B. As a proud member of Fandom B I think it's our turn to be pleased since it's been like 6 years that Fandom A is happy, that'd just be fair.

 

[Komodin]

3- Sonic X is bad

errr no it's not. actually it was a really amusing show but a fanboy's brain cannot conceive such a thing since it's not Sonic 2 so it's automatically bad.

 

Oh please. Sonic X isn't bad because it's not Sonic the Hedgehog 2; it's bad because it's a poorly made show.

 

Also, you should refrain from calling those who disagree with you "fanboys;" that only leads to disaster for all parties involved.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

This feels very surreal to see someone from TSS Staff making a poor argument...

 

Or maybe I'm sleepwalking and this is all a dream.

Edited January 31, 2013 by 743-E.D. Missile

[T-Min]

Protip: the Adventures didn't have very good level design.

...I disagree. :I

 

Sa1 is weird but Sa2 has the best LD I ever seen in a Sonic game.

 

Ehm...but I don't quite agree with that, either.

instead of quoting I will answer the general questions

1- is this legitimate to make something so bad it becomes awesome?

...Hmm...Here is how I will answer:

I don't think Sega does that on purpose and I think The best option is to make a good story, something like SA2. But my previous statement wasn't about Sega's intentions it was refering to how my brain gets entertained by suff. If the story is so bad it's awesome, it still works, I am entertained. Not on purpose but I am. If the story is just a boring pile of crap, then it fails, because I am not having a good time and I just want to kill myself. 

I can see where you're coming from on this, but you can't say that like it makes that a legit merit to the game or use it as a defense. Sonic 06's story is still objectively terrible and you shouldn't praise it for that because that's wrong.

 

2- Sonic is for kids blablabla..

I will refer to the era conflict. Of course I was talking about the SA/SA2 years since Sega started to really care about the tone, the artistic direction and the story in that era. Videogame is a young art and we cannot consider older games as complete and elaborate as the new ones.

They sure seemed to care about the story in Sonic 3 & Knuckles.

3- Sonic X is bad

errr no it's not. actually it was a really amusing show but a fanboy's brain cannot conceive such a thing since it's not Sonic 2 so it's automatically bad.

Why don't you stop being a fanboy yourself and accept that people can not like a show

 

Oh, wait, I forgot, suddenly it's okay to call people fanboys when they hate something that happens to be different.

 

For the record, I love every main Sonic game from Sonic 1 to Adventure 2 (and Advance) as well as Unleashed, Colors and Generations, and yet I find Sonic X thoroughly bleh.

 

Huh, there must be something wrong with me.

4- Sonic was too dark blablabla

err, when? SA2 is what you consider dark? You are a pretty much sensitive fellow in my opinion.

It's rather dark for a game about a cartoon hedgehog. Not that I didn't enjoy SA2's storyline myself, but I can see where the others are coming from.

 

But apparently now it's a sin for Sonic games to have lighthearted plots that aren't filled with death and violence. Then, they're CHILDISH and that makes the games unbeatable and cringe-worthy.

 

My god, that annoys me. Sonic is not just for kids, it's for everyone. And not only kids can enjoy something lighthearted and fun like Colors. I am 17 years old and I really enjoyed Colors' storyline - legitimately. Yes, it was simple, but it was well-done in its simplicity and very fun. Generations was barebones, I'll grant you, but there was nothing inherently problematic about Colors' storyline.

 

And really, the fact that you would reject something just because it's "childish" - and not childish in a HERPDERP LOLPENIS way or ITZ GRIMDARK AND EH SAYS DAMN WHICH MAKES IT KUL way, which is another story entirely - is honestly kind of childish in and of itself. And if anything, I think Shadow the Hedgehog's own game pretty much objectively proved that a game can be simultaneously grimdark and unfathomably "childish". If you think Colors' story was poorly-executed, that's one thing, but to criticize it for being "childish" is more immature than its story will ever be.

 

I wish more people would realize this and stop being ridiculous about the whole tone issue, but oh well, I guess we just can't have nice things.

5- I think new Sonic games are great and it should stay like that!

Ah that's the core of the conflict!

2 fandoms, 2 visions. there's no way to get along, then Sega must follow some kind of cycle that periodically pleases Fandom A and Fandom B. As a proud member of Fandom B I think it's our turn to be pleased since it's been like 6 years that Fandom A is happy, that'd just be fair.

You're pretty much advocating inconsistency here, for one thing. If there's one thing we really don't need, it's that.

 

For another, Fandom A is most likely much larger and smarter (IT'S A JOKE GUYS) than Fandom B at this point, so which one would SEGA profit the most from pleasing? They can't just make the game you want, you know, and it's pretty selfish that you would emphasize that they need to. Fandom B which, I assume, includes passionate Adventure fanboys, (STILL A JOKE GEESH I MEAN I'M AN ADVENTURE FAN) 06 defenders and/or people who want darker storylines (and darker =/= more complex, for the record), is a very fringe group in the Sonic fanbase nowadays, and it wouldn't do SEGA very well to go out of their way to pander to you.

 

Also, obligatory STOP DEFENDING 06 THAT'S WRUUOONG message.

 

Man, I must be in a bad mood tonight  :V

Edited January 31, 2013 by Eh I'll Go With T-Man

[smogfog]

2 fandoms, 2 visions. there's no way to get along, then Sega must follow some kind of cycle that periodically pleases Fandom A and Fandom B. As a proud member of Fandom B I think it's our turn to be pleased since it's been like 6 years that Fandom A is happy, that'd just be fair.

It's awesome how ideas are floating in the air. Let me quote Kiberbot:

http://forum.sonic-world.ru/topic/21598-vote-персонажи-sonic-adventure-3/?p=253171241

There's only one real solution. I used to try to promote it at Stadium, but I haven't had real weight in authority, so they send me far. Good thing that now this cool guy Roger from EvilDoc promotes the same thing, and they listen to him with great attention and desire.

This solution is to actually separate Sonic series into two independent formats, for two coexisting audiences.

First one is "the roots": running, 2D, without drama and "shitty friends", and the second is respectively the one plot-only 3D expirience, that the other half of the fandom demands.

Something like this actually were in the 2000s already, when every SA2 and ShTH was followed by it's Advance, so people could play portable running game, if Shadow with guns was unbearable for them. I were seeing it as a perfect balance. But 2006&co was released after that, so one of the fandom sides "dragged a blanket" to itself, associating their frustation not with the proper thing they should spend their mind for.

In the end their frustation has come to an end, while ours accordingly just flared up at full height, just because it's imbalance, and the only way to get rid of it from the both sides is to take the same value to both bowls of scales, which means sub-series for these and those. That's the only format to stop us from butting our intrests in the vicious circle.

Edited January 31, 2013 by crystallize

[Sega DogTagz]

That just essentially gives up on the idea of properly translating the 2D experience into 3D... boo.

 

 

Sonic Team should just roll over and die if they simply abandon all ambition and pander to a split fanbase that barley knows what it wants in the first place. Separating the series down the middle is essentially throwing in the towel. I'd much rather see them keep on keeping on till they churn out a masterpiece that can blow away the masses (i.e. most of us, not all of us)

Edited January 31, 2013 by Sega DogTagz

[smogfog]

You're pretty much advocating inconsistency here, for one thing. If there's one thing we really don't need, it's that.

 

For another, Fandom A is most likely much larger and smarter (IT'S A JOKE GUYS) than Fandom B at this point, so which one would SEGA profit the most from pleasing? They can't just make the game you want, you know, and it's pretty selfish that you would emphasize that they need to. Fandom B which, I assume, includes passionate Adventure fanboys, 06 defenders and/or people who want darker storylines (and darker =/= more complex, for the record), is a very fringe group in the Sonic fanbase nowadays, and it wouldn't do SEGA very well to go out of their way to pander to you.

 

Also, obligatory STOP DEFENDING 06 THAT'S WRUUOONG message.

 

-I've heard that Adventure fans has been seriously bashed in Sonic discussions after 2006. No wonder that now they don't make much noise and it make them look outnumbered.

-Sega can't make a game Adventure fans would like? Why?

-Selfish? After Unleashed, Colors, Generations, Sonic 4 Ep.1, Sonic 4 Ep.2 for you, and barely Chronicles and Black Knight three years ago for us, you call us selfish?

-Above you said it's wrong to call people with different opinions "fanboys". Now you call Adventure fans "fanboys".

-Darker or complex, I haven't seen such stories in Modern Era.

-Again, it wouldn't do SEGA very well to pander to us? Why? In last 3...6 years SEGA haven't even tried properly to do that, to respect about a half of the fanbase. It don't need our money, or what?

Edited January 31, 2013 by crystallize

[Tornado]

Who the hell is Roger and why should I give a shit what he is saying? That's the second person who has brought him up as if his name itself lends credibility to the argument.

 

 

...Hmm...Here is how I will answer:
I don't think Sega does that on purpose and I think The best option is to make a good story, something like SA2. But my previous statement wasn't about Sega's intentions it was refering to how my brain gets entertained by suff. If the story is so bad it's awesome, it still works, I am entertained. Not on purpose but I am. If the story is just a boring pile of crap, then it fails, because I am not having a good time and I just want to kill myself.

It's all well and good that you were entertained by '06 and ShtH because they were so bad that they were enjoyable to you. That doesn't make them better than the more recent titles, and when you are even implying that you enjoyed them less because they weren't bad enough to mock, it kind of means the opposite.

 

 

2- Sonic is for kids blablabla..

I will refer to the era conflict. Of course I was talking about the SA/SA2 years since Sega started to really care about the tone, the artistic direction and the story in that era. Videogame is a young art and we cannot consider older games as complete and elaborate as the new ones.

Sonic Adventure and (especially) Adventure 2 are not indicative of the entire era. The game immediately following those two was so cutesy, child friendly and inoffensive that Sega covered the entire game with a plastic wrap look to prevent spills.

 

3- Sonic X is bad

errr no it's not. actually it was a really amusing show but a fanboy's brain cannot conceive such a thing since it's not Sonic 2 so it's automatically bad.

That's nice. Are you capable of an intelligent rebuttal? 'Cause there is a long ass list of reasons why Sonic X is a bad show, and not a damn one of them has to do with whether you like Sonic 2 (which I don't particularly anyway).

 

 

4- Sonic was too dark blablabla

err, when? SA2 is what you consider dark? You are a pretty much sensitive fellow in my opinion. When I think about dark I think about Spawn or Diablo. It's not because it's not baby-friendly that it's dark.

I'm pretty sure that the issue was more that Sonic Team was trying to do SUPER MATURE STORYLINES GAIZ in an incredibly incompetent way rather than the fact that they were trying at all.
 

 

5- I think new Sonic games are great and it should stay like that!

Ah that's the core of the conflict!

2 fandoms, 2 visions. there's no way to get along, then Sega must follow some kind of cycle that periodically pleases Fandom A and Fandom B. As a proud member of Fandom B I think it's our turn to be pleased since it's been like 6 years that Fandom A is happy, that'd just be fair.

Releasing good games would work too.

 

By the way, if you're making the logical leap to state that there are two clearly divided fandoms and that because Sega hasn't tailored a game to you you deserve one now, there are actually 3 different sects of the Sonic community. And it has been 12 years since a game designed for the actual first group has been made (and that was a side game put together to help promote one of "your" games). Aren't they more disenfranchised then you? Don't they deserve it more than you? See how that argument breaks down?

 

 

 

 

 

-I've heard that Adventure fans has been seriously bashed in Sonic discussions after 2006. No wonder that now they don't make much noise and it make them look outnumbered.

"I've heard this extremely vague thing about those who hold an opinion about this topic secondhand, so of course that's why there are only a few people arguing my viewpoint."

 

 

-Sega can't make a game Adventure fans would like? Why?

Not his argument. His argument was that they can't do it because pandering to a specific minority of the fanbase to the extent of alienating other fans is stupid.

 

 

-Selfish? After Unleashed, Colors, Generations, Sonic 4 Ep.1, Sonic 4 Ep.2 for you, and barely Chronicles and Black Knight three years ago for us, you call us selfish?

Yeah. It helps that by demanding that Sega pander to you over all others and over just wanting a good game, you are.

 

 

-Above you said it's wrong to call people with different opinions "fanboys". Now you call Adventure fans "fanboys".

He also said it in jest.

 

 

-Darker or complex, I haven't seen such stories in Modern Era.

We also haven't had an STH '06 or ShtH level disaster of a story either. Which is very likely the reason that Sonic Team has gone so far out of their way to avoid one since.

 

 

-Again, it wouldn't do SEGA very well to pander to us? Why? In last 3...6 years SEGA haven't even tried properly to do that, to respect about a half of the fanbase. It don't need our money, or what?

I don't think the sect of fans who make a clear line the Modern Era and the Adventure Era and refuse to buy anything from the former is "about half of the fanbase." You are giving the prevalence of the people who happen to hold your opinion far, far too much credit.

Edited January 31, 2013 by Tornado

[Your Vest Friend]

Who the hell is Roger and why should I give a shit what he is saying? That's the second person who has brought him up as if his name itself lends credibility to the argument.

It doesn't, and I speak as a fan of his work.

Roger, aka Rogerregorroger, is an animator from the Netherlands. His most famous works relating to Sonic are the "Sonic [whatever] in X minutes" series of shorts. Recently he's done a different little series called "Sonic Dissected", where he's been giving his thoughts on various things, but mostly plots and characterisation.

...Still, it's not exactly relevant to the conversation right now.

[smogfog]

"I've heard this extremely vague thing about those who hold an opinion about this topic secondhand, so of course that's why there are only a few people arguing my viewpoint."

I could have stated it as a fact, but for honesty's sake I said "I've heard".

 

Not his argument. His argument was that they can't do it because pandering to a specific minority of the fanbase is stupid.

THERE ARE NO ADVENTURE FANS

Seriously now, 1998-2009, about a ten games have come out, and now how can there be not much fans of that era? It's just physically and economically impossible.

 

Yeah. It helps that by demanding that Sega pander to you over all others and over just wanting a good game, you are.

Wow. Just wow. It's wrong in so many ways that I just don't know where to start.

Everyone wants to have a good game, but when Sega panders to you, it's OK, and when we want it to pander to us, it means we're "selfish". Did I get it right?

 

He also said it in jest.

Sorry, the irony was too thin for me to get.

 

We also haven't had an STH '06 or ShtH level disaster of a story either. Which is very likely the reason that Sonic Team has gone so far out of their way to avoid one since.

By the way, 95% of Sonic Team was fired after 2006 because, you know, they haven't make new bug-free game with new characters on a new console with new engine in a one year. Suckers.

Now they hired some newbie students, that like to rip new Gameinformer issues apart.

 

I don't think the sect of fans who make a clear line the Modern Era and the Adventure Era and refuse to buy anything from the former is "about half of the fanbase." You are giving the prevalence of the people who happen to hold your opinion far, far too much credit.

You've made a typo?

THERE ARE NO ADVENTURE FANS number two.

 Among other things, do you mean we have to count Adventure and Modern Era as the same?

By the way, I know Adventure fan, who bought SG on Steam, "just for collection". I was surprised, yeah. So may be there are others like him.

[Tornado]

I could have stated it as a fact, but for honesty's sake I said "I've heard".

 

It still doesn't mean anything regardless of what you preface it with. The idea that the reason that more people don't complain about the Modern games is because they were browbeat into submission in 2006 is absurd. And you did state it as a fact. You just stated it as such based on hearsay.

 

Seriously now, 1998-2009, about a ten games have come out, and now how can there be not much fans of that era? It's just physically and economically impossible.

Yeah. That thing that no one said is impossible. Which makes it good that no one ever said it.

The argument you have been making is that the fans of that era are also all people who who have enough of an issue with the Modern games and have large enough numbers that Sega needs to stop making Modern Era games and go back to making Adventure style games instead.

 

 

 

Wow. Just wow. It's wrong in so many ways that I just don't know where to start.

Everyone wants to have a good game, but when Sega panders to you, it's OK, and when we want it to pander to us, it means we're "selfish". Did I get it right?

 

No, actually. Not even close. How about when Sega panders to anyone rather than worrying about making a good game first and foremost it's a problem? I would have thought the ultimate in fan wank, ShtH, would have taught everyone the dangers of designing a game for one specific subset of the fanbase.

And stop pushing around my arguments as if I'm only making them because I'm biased. Sega aren't pandering to me by making more Modern games. I liked Colors, and I really liked Generations; but hated Unleashed. In the Adventure era, I liked Adventure 2 and Heroes but hated ShtH and STH '06. The only pandering Sega is doing to me is when they make games that are good.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, the irony was too thin for me to get.

Which means... ?

 

 

 

By the way, 95% of Sonic Team was fired after 2006 because, you know, they haven't make new bug-free game with new characters on a new console with new engine in a one year. Suckers.

Now they hired some newbie students, that like to rip new Gameinformer issues apart.

You know... I feel that there is a language barrier, because I have no idea what you are saying with this. Sega certainly carries a lot of the blame for how STH '06 came out, but the development team they put together for it made their own mistakes; and Sonic Team USA showed their fair share of incompetence after Adventure 2 (See: Heroes, ShtH).

 

 

 

 

Among other things, do you mean we have to count Adventure and Modern Era as the same?

No. I mean that you have to keep from acting that everyone who enjoyed the Adventure Era games doesn't like the Modern games, and that even if they did they wouldn't be making up a majority of the fanbase to the extent that Sega needs to start pandering to them.

 

 

 

 

By the way, I know Adventure fan, who bought SG on Steam, "just for collection". I was surprised, yeah. So may be there are others like him.

You were only surprised because you've somehow gotten it into your head that liking games from one Era means you can't like games from another. I'm overwhelmingly a Classic Era fan, but I still love Sonic Heroes. I'm overwhelmingly a Classic Era fan, but I still love Generations. I don't hate ShtH because I'm a Classic Era fan. I don't hate Unleashed because I'm a Classic Era fan.

Edited January 31, 2013 by Tornado

[Kuzu]

Wow. Just wow. It's wrong in so many ways that I just don't know where to start.

Everyone wants to have a good game, but when Sega panders to you, it's OK, and when we want it to pander to us, it means we're "selfish". Did I get it right?

[smogfog]

And stop pushing around my arguments as if I'm only making them because I'm biased. Sega aren't pandering to me by making more Modern games. I liked Colors, and I really liked Generations; but hated Unleashed. In the Adventure era, I liked Adventure 2 and Heroes but hated ShtH and STH '06. The only pandering Sega is doing to me is when they make games that are good.

Last time I were trying to argue here someone also said that I'm putting arguments out of my ass. I wonder what exactly I'm doing wrong.

 

You were only surprised because you've somehow gotten it into your head that liking games from one Era means you can't like games from another. I'm overwhelmingly a Classic Era fan, but I still love Sonic Heroes. I'm overwhelmingly a Classic Era fan, but I still love Generations. I don't hate ShtH because I'm a Classic Era fan. I don't hate Unleashed because I'm a Classic Era fan.

Yeah, like that. Well, I can settle in my head that people like Classic and Modern at the same time. But when someone says he likes games from Adventure era AND something from Classics/Modern - now that's difficult to imagine.

When you feel butthurt because Sega didn't make a game you wanted, rather than just accepting that a good game came out. Yeah, you're being kinda selfish. You're the only one(and any other Adventure fan) who feel Sega is "pandering" to anyone.

I don't want to make yourself to like something because there's nothing better. It's humiliating.

Edited January 31, 2013 by crystallize

[Diogenes]

-Selfish? After Unleashed, Colors, Generations, Sonic 4 Ep.1, Sonic 4 Ep.2 for you, and barely Chronicles and Black Knight three years ago for us, you call us selfish?

I wasn't happy with any of these games. Not the ones from column A, not the ones from column B.

Where's my game, crystallize.

[BlazingTales]

Yeah, like that. Well, I can settle in my head that people like Classic and Modern at the same time. But when someone says he likes games from Adventure era AND something from Classics/Modern - now that's difficult to imagine.

Then I must be some kind of freak, because my favourite Sonic titles happen to be a sampling from ALL three subsets. :/

[smogfog]

The argument you have been making is that the fans of that era are also all people who who have enough of an issue with the Modern games and have large enough numbers that Sega needs to stop making Modern Era games and go back to making Adventure style games instead.

These conversations is like a game translated by pirates, where you can't see a connection between question and an answer... It's also weird you're explaining my point to me.

I meant that there were a hundreds of thousands of people who used to buy Sonic from SA to Black Knight. They couldn't die or suddenly begin hating SA era when Unleashed came out. There must be hundreds or at least tens of thousands of former Adventure fans. And where are they?

Edited January 31, 2013 by crystallize