Characters you don't want to return

[Kuzu]

As CSS already stated, antagonist=/=villain. Knuckles was an antagonist in Sonic 3, after all.

 

 

yes, but as pointed out Knuckles was just protecting his home turf and was tricked by Eggman into antagonizing Sonic. After Eggman's deception is revealed, Knuckles doesn't hesitate to help Sonic. Your view of Fang would be way more valid if everything about him didn't point to him being a selfish prick; he's done nothing good, at all. Even if you want to declare he's "neutral" he is still a self-serving character with very little regard for anyone else, traits which people generally associate with a villain.

 

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Then guess what? Its a duck, plain and simple. Unless you can convince me that Fang doesn't have any of the traits I described above, then honestly I don't care how much you try to tell me I'm wrong for believing he's a villain if you can't even tell me why I'm wrong.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu

[FalconKick]

I already talked to you about this before: there is nothing particularly profound about contributing to threads with nothing but meta commentary about the engagement levels of people partaking in discussion. You are not special for not giving a shit. People are going to discuss facets of the franchise with differing levels of passion. That's the point of this board. You don't really have any unique insight, much less actual authority, to tell anyone how to proceed in the thread from this point on. Another one of these shitty, pretentious posts and it's an automatic strike and suspension. If you have nothing to say that's relevant to the actual subject at hand, don't reply.

Well someone hasn't watched enough Sesame Street. EVERYONE IS SPECIAL, IN THEIR OWN UNIQUE WAY

Ok then, you want me to contribute something relevant? How bout this?

What is the point of a thread which is meant as a way to express individual opinions about which characters should go, if the majority of the time, everyone is arguing against that point for EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER?

At this point, I doubt ANY character is allowed to leave because somewhere, someone is ready to mount a defense for said character. Which is perfectly normal for any fan of a character....but does it have to fill 3-4 pages?! It defeats the purpose of the thread, which is disposal, not recycling. Rather than running around in circles, arguing for and/or against the same 3-5 characters, wouldn't it make more sense to use all this energy in a more constructive and positive manner? That is why I suggested merging with the How to Fix a Character, since a lot of the arguments tend to more forward towards the path of improving a character, not disposing them.

Though if nobody wants to do that, thas ok with me. I'll just assume the thread has evolved past it's original ideal and move on.

But before I leave, one more character to discuss, and keep in mind: whether you agree with me or not is irrelevant. This is simply my opinion and thus it does not any evidence to validate it for you. This isn't a matter of merit, rather it's just a difference in taste.

BIG: I love Big. But Big doesn't even do cameos anymore. SEGA doesn't even like him. It's sad but maybe he was too good to be a Sonic character. Goodnight sweet prince.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

What is the point of a thread which is meant as a way to express individual opinions about which characters should go, if the majority of the time, everyone is arguing against that point for EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER?

1. To facilitate discussion,
2. understand the different views towards the characters,
3. to discuss those differing views,
4. to come to a common understanding between differing views,
5. to vent out and/or find out the negative aspects pointed out in these views and suggest ways that they could be better, regardless of whether or not it would come to fruition
6. to have fun discussing these things.

Take your pick, I can probably come up with more.

 

 

 

At this point, I doubt ANY character is allowed to leave because somewhere, someone is ready to mount a defense for said character.

Yeah, well some of us aren't exactly of the opinion to get rid of characters anyway, even the ones they don't like.

 

 

 

Which is perfectly normal for any fan of a character....but does it have to fill 3-4 pages?! It defeats the purpose of the thread, which is disposal, not recycling. Rather than running around in circles, arguing for and/or against the same 3-5 characters, wouldn't it make more sense to use all this energy in a more constructive and positive manner? That is why I suggested merging with the How to Fix a Character, since a lot of the arguments tend to more forward towards the path of improving a character, not disposing them.

Well we already have topics on fixing characters, but they've died out. You're more than welcome to bump them and facilitate discussion there, but it's not like an occassional tangent is a bad thing.

Edited September 22, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[LATER BUDDY]

Well someone hasn't watched enough Sesame Street. EVERYONE IS SPECIAL, IN THEIR OWN UNIQUE WAY

Ok then, you want me to contribute something relevant? How bout this?

What is the point of a thread which is meant as a way to express individual opinions about which characters should go, if the majority of the time, everyone is arguing against that point for EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER?

At this point, I doubt ANY character is allowed to leave because somewhere, someone is ready to mount a defense for said character. Which is perfectly normal for any fan of a character....but does it have to fill 3-4 pages?! It defeats the purpose of the thread, which is disposal, not recycling. Rather than running around in circles, arguing for and/or against the same 3-5 characters, wouldn't it make more sense to use all this energy in a more constructive and positive manner? That is why I suggested merging with the How to Fix a Character, since a lot of the arguments tend to more forward towards the path of improving a character, not disposing them.

Though if nobody wants to do that, thas ok with me. I'll just assume the thread has evolved past it's original ideal and move on.

But before I leave, one more character to discuss, and keep in mind: whether you agree with me or not is irrelevant. This is simply my opinion and thus it does not any evidence to validate it for you. This isn't a matter of merit, rather it's just a difference in taste.

BIG: I love Big. But Big doesn't even do cameos anymore. SEGA doesn't even like him. It's sad but maybe he was too good to be a Sonic character. Goodnight sweet prince.

 

That's...kinda the point though here. I mean we're all putting in our inputs, debating on how we personally feel how characters should be handled, and as a normal human being interaction usually goes: we disagree lawl. That's when discussion happens and we come to middle ground, debating over our opinions while still trying to respect each others. We get on a roll of a particular character since the moment someone posts something some one disagrees with, it gets replied to, which usually sparks another reply from somewhere else, and by the time you know it, the 40 odd people that maybe look at this a day has put in a word, making a page or two.

 

May it run in circles sometimes? Yeah a lot of the time actually. Does it matter? Not really, it's not like it changes anything other than for the pure fun debate. It's a forum where you share ideas, not really come to a handshake agreement with all the fans on what the perfect solution is, since that'd be a fools errand.

 

The positive attitude is something with everyone in general. The more people respect other peoples opinions, the happier people are generally, though there's times when things get heated and people really get into things, and that's when we step in to say "yo go outside for a sec and drink something :U" real fast. Other than that, snide remarks toward staff suggestions toward you doesn't help that attitude in the slightest, especially with a clear warning like she gave you.

 

But hey yus, Big was awesome, and seems like everyone still has a heart for him. It's a damn shame he was axed, but I guess he wasn't really that relevant anymore, or maybe they were just tired of using him as a comic relief as they were shifting gears in the series or something *shrugs*. Think he'll definitely always be a fan favorite regardless however.

[Splash the Otter]

yes, but as pointed out Knuckles was just protecting his home turf and was tricked by Eggman into antagonizing Sonic. After Eggman's deception is revealed, Knuckles doesn't hesitate to help Sonic. Your view of Fang would be way more valid if everything about him didn't point to him being a selfish prick; he's done nothing good, at all. Even if you want to declare he's "neutral" he is still a self-serving character with very little regard for anyone else, traits which people generally associate with a villain.

Like I said before, Wario's a selfish prick who only cares about money. How come he's regarded as neutral? And the only reason Fang hasn't done anything good is because he's never been given the chance to do so!

 

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Then guess what? Its a duck, plain and simple. Unless you can convince me that Fang doesn't have any of the traits I described above, then honestly I don't care how much you try to tell me I'm wrong for believing he's a villain if you can't even tell me why I'm wrong.

Excuse me? You're the one telling me I'm wrong! There is nothing objective about Fang's alignment, so stop acting like I'm full of shit just because my interpretation of the character is slightly different from yours!

[Kuzu]

Like I said before, Wario's a selfish prick who only cares about money. How come he's regarded as neutral? And the only reason Fang hasn't done anything good is because he's never been given the chance to do so!

 Which is exactly the point I am making. He hasn't done anything good, so he's not neutral. You can't say "Oh well just because he hasn't done anything good, doesn't mean he's neutral" because the very definition of "neutral" is having some Antagonism towards both heroes and villain. And once again, Fang has only antagonized the heroes. So no, he is still an antagonist.

 

 

Excuse me? You're the one telling me I'm wrong! There is nothing objective about Fang's alignment, so stop acting like I'm full of shit just because my interpretation of the character is slightly different from yours!

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying your claim does not make much sense because you keep trying to convince everyone here "Fang isn't evil, leave him alone" without giving any reason to back up this statement beyond the superficial ones you've provided. I just finished explaining to you why your reasoning doesn't make sense in a completely objective manner. If you want to shut me up, then back up your statements, and stop getting in a hissy fit whenever someone says something you don't agree with.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu

[Jet Prower]

As I explained before, when it comes to Nack, I dont think he isn't a bad guy, because he obviously has done bad things. The only reason I would list him as nuetral is not that he hasn't done anything bad, but he has no allegiance to anyone. He doesn't work for the bad guys or the good guys exclisely. He is just going to work for whoever is going to pay him the most, be is being a guard, a mercendary to kill someone, to find something, to steal something. He is just going to work and do whatever he wants for the money. Aka, I usually say someone like that is nuetral, not because he is someone that hasn't done anything bad at all, because he has, but because he just does his own thing. He isn't loyal to anyone and is just going to do whatever he pleases. Or maybe you could list that as Chaotic nuetral or something like that then? For the most part, he does bad things, but if it would benefit him, who's to say he wouldn't work for someone different?

[Kuzu]

Well like I said previously, even if you label Fang as a neutral character, most of his appearances are antagonizing the heroes in general. Can anyone really remember when he was against Eggman in all of his appearances, like the only instance I can think of is Sonic the Fighters and that's a fighting game. Combined that with having no real redeeming qualities, then its pretty easy to paint him as a villain.

[Splash the Otter]

Well like I said previously, even if you label Fang as a neutral character, most of his appearances are antagonizing the heroes in general. Can anyone really remember when he was against Eggman in all of his appearances, like the only instance I can think of is Sonic the Fighters and that's a fighting game. Combined that with having no real redeeming qualities, then its pretty easy to paint him as a villain.

He was against Eggman in STT, remember? In the Atomic Destroyer he tries to steal Dr. Eggman's Chaos Emerald, but runs off when he sees the giant mech that Eggman is piloting. It's only one scene, but it does show him antagonizing a villain (or trying to at least).

[TCB]

I know I wanted to steer clear of this little debate here, but this I had to comment on.

 

He was against Eggman in STT, remember? In the Atomic Destroyer he tries to steal Dr. Eggman's Chaos Emerald, but runs off when he sees the giant mech that Eggman is piloting. It's only one scene, but it does show him antagonizing a villain (or trying to at least).

 

In that scene, I kinda interpret it as him just stealing it for the sake of stealing it, thinking it'll be easy pickings. But when he sees that mech he goes 'oh fck this I'm outta here' and hightails it.

 

I mean, if Rouge were to do the same thing, would she 'antagonizing' the villain? Maybe, because we know more about her established character, i.e. an 'anti-hero' if you will. In Nack's case, and this is how I go by with him on the games ALONE, he's just a character that can be in antagonistic role, but it doesn't have to be directly against the heroes. He can be like that just because in that game he was just in it for himself. 

 

And if you are counting Sonic the Fighters, aren't all the main characters there fighting for one goal anyway? To be the one to pilot the Lunar Fox, kick Metal's and Eggman's asses and destroy the Death Egg II?

[LATER BUDDY]

I tried to nudge at it in my last post but I guess it got looked over.

 

People chill the fuck out over things and respect each other's opinions.

 

It's not hard to debate something without pointing fingers and using an inside voice.

[TCB]

I tried to nudge at it in my last post but I guess it got looked over.

 

People chill the fuck out over things and respect each other's opinions.

 

It's not hard to debate something without pointing fingers and using an inside voice.

 

I hope I wasn't doing that... :/

[LATER BUDDY]

I mean anyone getting offended if someone's calling them out on things, as well as if people are absolutely gunning people down if they don't share the same idea. It's alright to disagree on things, and it's just over some characters (that aren't even relevant anymore), so it's no big deal in the end XD.

[Hobgoblin]

Really, the only character I can outright say that I absolutely dislike and don't want to return is Big the Cat.

 

I'm fine with Silver returning, but I think they should use him less and justify him appearing when he does show up. After Sonic 2006, there hasn't really been a point to his character.

[Cyalume]

@OP: Anyone who isn't Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy, or Eggman. I like most of the characters for varying reasons, but the previously mentioned ones are the only ones I'd want to see in a game outside of multiplayer minigames or something.

Personal opinion.

[yanis7272]

I want to play with Shadow again

I prefer play with differents characters like SA1 & 2

[Jet Prower]

@OP: Anyone who isn't Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy, or Eggman. I like most of the characters for varying reasons, but the previously mentioned ones are the only ones I'd want to see in a game outside of multiplayer minigames or something.

Personal opinion.

 

They can have more characters in the games, it is just they need to use them better and in situations that make more sense for them. As long as you can fit the character in logically in the story or gameplay, stick them into it. Don't just use the character to use the character. That's how you get into these situations in the first place.

[Newgeneration]

They can have more characters in the games, it is just they need to use them better and in situations that make more sense for them. As long as you can fit the character in logically in the story or gameplay, stick them into it. Don't just use the character to use the character. That's how you get into these situations in the first place.

 

Pretty much how I feel about the characters. If they use them logically, and not just for the heck of having them there, then that's fine by me.

 

Personally, I believe that there's no reason to toss any characters. Sure, some of the characters back in the comics (which I've never read  ) may seem a bit unnecessary now, but hey, who knows. A little diversity would be nice, long as they use their characters right.

[Blacklightning]

I don't see a need for even that to be honest - you could make characters unlockable non-canon extras like Sonic Riders did and there really wouldn't be any room to complain. In fact I really wish they'd do it more often, because it's been quite a while since I've seen a "for fun" extra in a Sonic  game, for lack of a better description. The "logical inclusion" side of things only really applies insofar as actually making them a presence in the plot, which believe it or not isn't actually a requirement for their appearance as a playable character.

[Jet Prower]

Maybe if they would add more fun things to the games like that it would be good yes. The lack of replayability in the last two games really has hurt the amount of time I play sonic stuff. I finished colors in like two days and I played generations like a week before I 100% it. There just often doesnt seem to be much reason to keep playing. While the levels are fun, there aren't near enough of them. I would just like alot more unlockables, characters, levels, or whatever to keep me playing alot longer.

 

I know not all characters need to be in the games and comics at all times, but I've still never thought about just tossing any character out at all. Just throwing them out never to me seems like the right answer. Some of them may need to just be used less. Some characters may need to be slightly redesigned, and a few others may just need to have thier backstories or their settings changed a bit to flow better. There are many other solutions other than just scrapping them.

[Zazz]

Silver is an amazing character & is actual one of my top 3 favorite characters. Hes a telekinetic hedgehog from the future, who can controls shit with his mind & can create shockwaves of psychokinetic energy, hes nothing short of a badass..

[-blank-]

Aside from characters who are essentially dead (Tikal) or characters who really don't have much of a reason to return (Chip), there really isn't anyone I don't want to return. I feel that most of the cast has potential - if SEGA would only ultilize it.

[Somebodyelse]

There's no character Sega has ever introduced that doesn't have potential, however I really don't think any of them have ever been fully utilized and I am very happy that they're sticking with just the classic cast as it is right now. If they can just get Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy and Eggman nailed down, then we can worry about everybody else. As it is, I really hope they keep it at that for the foreseeable future.

 

I also really wish they would stop introducing extra side characters on top of that in every single game; Chip, the Wisps, the Deadly Six, Orbot, Cubot... I'm really not interested. I do kinda like Orbot, but two bots is too many.

Edited October 10, 2013 by MisterMacanulty

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Honestly, this makes absolutely no sense.

 

If they could get the classic cast nailed down, then they could equally have gotten the other characters right at the same time; conversely if they can screw up one group of characters, whether they're classic or modern, they could screw up the other group as well. I fail to see what, beyond nostalgia, makes the Classic cast so much more special in getting tune ups first while the other characters have to wait. If you take off the rose-tints, they're no different from each other in failing or succeeding.

[HeroMystic]

Honestly, this makes absolutely no sense.

 

If they could get the classic cast nailed down, then they could equally have gotten the other characters right at the same time; conversely if they can screw up one group of characters, whether they're classic or modern, they could screw up the other group as well. I fail to see what, beyond nostalgia, makes the Classic cast so much more special in getting tune ups first while the other characters have to wait. If you take off the rose-tints, they're no different from each other in failing or succeeding.

 

Simply put, it's building a foundation. Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, and Amy are all considered part of the original cast, and therefore would be considered more "important" to be done correctly than the Post-Adventure era cast. If the Classic-era characters (the ones that people would remember most fondly) have strong character archetypes, then any character that is added in the future would have a stronger chance to utilize their potential since they can bounce off already established characters. I'd like to believe SA2 is the strongest example of this. Shadow's personality meshed well with Sonic, Eggman, and Amy. Rouge's personality meshed well with Eggman and Knuckles.

 

The thing is, no character except perhaps Sonic has a strong characterization since everyone got bastardized from Heroes onward, so throwing in all the characters at once is just asking for a cluster of nonsense and frustration.