Pontaff Retrospective: What's Up with all the Hate?

[Soniman]

So, at the end of the day, the general subject of Ken Pontac and Warren Graff's work in the Sonic series is like pretty much everything in regards to a series with a fan base as "split" as that of Sonic's. Specifically, it is the sort that you either love or hate, to varying degrees, with notably expressed neutral opinions few and far between.

Why are we still acting like the issue on Pontac is  still "split" I think it's pretty damn obvious from just this topic how the fanbase as a conglomerate view them, this isnt a 50/50 scenario  try 10/90. And I dont blame them, they have very good reasons to hate the writers based on the walls of informed posts ive seen, I myself have kinda seen the warts over the years but damn if I still dont think people give SLW story some credit that it deserves.

I honest to god wanna know why people are so quick to say Lost World is such an improvement and achievement for the series. And are so quick to call it better attempts at writing than almost everything from the past decade and a half. This isn't me saying its bad or being a "blind nostalgiafag", but I truly wanna know. 

I think it's just people who are fans of the game wanting others to acknowledge the things it did do right rather then just have this mindset of thinking it did everything wrong story wise.

Speaking of, im not sure the opinion some have on Colors regarding the whole "it was fine/tolerable on it's own but the succeeding games made me retroactively dislike it" is a fair one or not.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Soniman

[Dr. Mechano]

Yes, or at least implied considering there have been more than one attempts at him trying to do so. I wouldn't expect there to be any blood and gore in it if that's what you think I'd like to see.

 

I mean, Eggman has killed someone by destroying Prison Island. Even if we assume Flying Dog's pilot was somehow the only person there, that's at least one human life. 

...Of course, Shadow and Rouge are equally culpable in the death(s) here, for planting the bombs and going along with his plans. In Shadow's case, he was at least an outright villain at the time (reforming right at the end of the game), but Rouge was ostensibly an undercover hero who just kinda threw Prison Island under the bus for the sake of the mission. I guess GUN really is still super-corrupt even after fifty years.

Either way, that's three characters who are definitely guilty of murder, or at the very least being an accessory to murder.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Dr. Mechano

[ZDozer]

Why are we still acting like the issue on Pontac is  still "split" I think it's pretty damn obvious from just this topic how the fanbase as a conglomerate view them, this isnt a 50/50 scenario  try 10/90. And I dont blame them, they have very good reasons to hate the writers based on the walls of informed posts ive seen, I myself have kinda seen the warts over the years but damn if I still dont think people give SLW story some credit that it deserves.

I think it's just people who are fans of the game wanting others to acknowledge the things it did do right rather then just have this mindset of thinking it did everything wrong story wise.

Speaking of, im not sure the opinion some have on Colors regarding the whole "it was fine/tolerable on it's own but the succeeding games made me retroactively dislike it" is a fair one or not.

The true problem? It's not getting undercredited, it's getting the credit it earned.

Lost World was an overhyped game, especially because of Generations' success. It brought back the Sonic Cycle after Generations actually broke it. Pontac and Graff are receiving their share of the shit for writing such horrible-quality stories, and SEGA and Sonic Team are sure receiving theirs, as "Pontaff" surely has nothing to do with the poor gameplay and the accusations of the game trying to imitate Super Mario Galaxy.

Edited October 6, 2015 by ZDozer

[Frosted Felix]

I honestly did not mind Lost World as it was the most recent game I enjoyed playing, Boom however, no thanks.

[DarkDefeater]

 

I mean, Eggman has killed someone by destroying Prison Island. Even if we assume Flying Dog's pilot was somehow the only person there, that's at least one human life. 

...Of course, Shadow and Rouge are equally culpable in the death(s) here, for planting the bombs and going along with his plans. In Shadow's case, he was at least an outright villain at the time (reforming right at the end of the game), but Rouge was ostensibly an undercover hero who just kinda threw Prison Island under the bus for the sake of the mission. I guess GUN really is still super-corrupt even after fifty years.

Either way, that's three characters who are definitely guilty of murder, or at the very least being an accessory to murder.

With relative ease, Eggman can shoot down some of the jets that are trying to bomb him in the Prison Island level. Those jets were very likely manned; the game does a good job of downplaying it, but there's a great deal of murder in Sonic adventure 2.

And there's the level where Tails can shoot down jets as well (the most nonsensical highway you'll ever see), and the unknown number of murders when the Gun truck goes on its rampage. I doubt all those cars were empty; what an insurance nightmare that must have been.

Back on topic, I feel that for Eggman to be the villain he should be, writers need to remember how deadly he can be, while still being amusing.

Think of Glados or Joker; those examples may be a bit extreme, but they do an excellent job of being comical while being remarkably deadly.

Eggman without his deadliness is an empty shell of what he should be. Perhaps if Eggman was able to maintain his deadly reputation, there would not have been a need for Eggman Nega.

Edited October 6, 2015 by DarkDefeater

[Dr. Mechano]

Eggman without his deadliness is an empty shell of what he should be. Perhaps if Eggman was able to maintain his deadly reputation, there would not have been a need for Eggman Nega.

Nega isn't "Eggman, but more evil" though. Eggman Nega is to chaos what Eggman is to order. Eggman wants perfect control, a world under his rule. Sure, that world would likely look like a giant narcissistic theme-park, but it would still be a dictatorship where his word is law. Nega, on the other hand, just wants destruction. He doesn't care about what happens to the world, and in three out of his four appearances has tried to destroy it altogether (and even in the first Rush, he says he wants "an age of chaos").

I think the contrast isn't a moral one; It's purely about what kind of end they're working toward that differentiates Eggman and Eggman Nega. Both are bad people (although Eggman himself does have some redeeming qualities); They're just different kinds of bad. Lawful Evil vs. Chaotic Evil, basically.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Dr. Mechano

[Kuzu]

I think it's just people who are fans of the game wanting others to acknowledge the things it did do right rather then just have this mindset of thinking it did everything wrong story wise.

Nobody actually thinks though :V

See, this is how things get misinterpreted because people are looking at this in a vacuum instead of as a whole; just because people criticize a game for doing something poorly doesn't suddenly mean they're denouncing the good aspects of it, but that the bad parts kind of outweigh the good ones. 

In the case of Lost World, I understand there are parts of the game that people liked and appreciate, but those alone don't just suddenly invalidate everything else wrong with the game as a whole. Its basically ignoring the forest for the trees. Especially since the same people that do that, are the ones so quick to call out everything else wrong with every game prior, which naturally only aggravates the critics of games like Lost World even more if they were fans of those games people suddenly are so quick to judge on.

So, like it was said before, I think everyone could stand to respect the positive and negative aspects of the games that we like and compromise on wanting a better experience overall for everyone instead of this "us vs. them" mentality and constantly mock the preferences of each other. I've seen too much "Classic, vs. Modern, vs. Adventure" for my taste when we all love the same fucking series about the same characters :V

[Nepenthe]

Why are we still acting like the issue on Pontac is  still "split" I think it's pretty damn obvious from just this topic how the fanbase as a conglomerate view them, this isnt a 50/50 scenario  try 10/90. And I dont blame them, they have very good reasons to hate the writers based on the walls of informed posts ive seen, I myself have kinda seen the warts over the years but damn if I still dont think people give SLW story some credit that it deserves.

I think it's just people who are fans of the game wanting others to acknowledge the things it did do right rather then just have this mindset of thinking it did everything wrong story wise.

Speaking of, im not sure the opinion some have on Colors regarding the whole "it was fine/tolerable on it's own but the succeeding games made me retroactively dislike it" is a fair one or not.

I don't think it's wise to use a topic of like five active participants- if that- as a measure of the general trend in viewpoints towards the storytelling, or even the active fanbase as we and people on Retro and wherever else are not the only ones buying these games anyway. SSMB topics aren't a sample size worth promoting on their own for anything beyond these walls, which is another reason I don't feel Pontaff fans have that much of a point in saying that these games are as dragged through the mud as everything else.

And why are people obligated to acknowledge the things SLW did right not only in terms of a topic that specifically asks us why we don't like their work, but in the context of a community that has scarcely given the benefit of doubt to titles, stories, and characterizations of yesteryear whose proceeding irrelevance makes it much harder to defend them? We just had a person in here say "People want to go back to the stories that just didn't work" in the middle of a rant about just how upset they were that people weren't giving their favorite stories a more nuanced take and what that might hold for the future (hint: we have no real effect on Sega's output so it matters not what we think), not even realizing the irony inherent in this blunt, stereotypical dismissal of everything that came before in terms of how those fans would take it. I mean, give me a fucking break.

It's textbook majority fragility in the face of people rejecting a presumed status quo: fans of less popular things are now suddenly expected and emotionally appealed to to give more empathy and understanding to a section of the fanbase that are not only fans of games whose high critical scores created a new status quo but who also astronomically failed (and continue to fail) to return that same respect to others in the process. In an environment where I just kinda have to deal with and shrug off far more people in far more social media and industrial outlets shitting on, say, Shadow the Hedgehog as a character versus fans of Pontaff's writing ever will, sorry that I can't muster the ability to dole out sympathy cards to people who made the "mistake" of liking A and B-rated games of all things. Just...no.

And changing opinions in the face of new evidence and standards is perfectly fair. It's a normal human reaction that happens all the time. Ignoring the fact that you cannot walk into any game perhaps aside from your very first without some kind of mental biases and standards constantly working, making comparisons, and informing your subjective assessment anyway, technology just tends to get old really quick. What was once amazing five years ago is not amazing anymore. We find new and more interesting ways of making games or playing with mechanics or fine-tuning things that expose the flaws of games made beforehand. If we didn't, we'd all actually still be under the impression that Sonic Adventure is just as technologically impressive as Generations. It's ludicrous.

[Wraith]

Nobody actually thinks though :V

See, this is how things get misinterpreted because people are looking at this in a vacuum instead of as a whole; just because people criticize a game for doing something poorly doesn't suddenly mean they're denouncing the good aspects of it, but that the bad parts kind of outweigh the good ones. 

In the case of Lost World, I understand there are parts of the game that people liked and appreciate, but those alone don't just suddenly invalidate everything else wrong with the game as a whole. Its basically ignoring the forest for the trees. Especially since the same people that do that, are the ones so quick to call out everything else wrong with every game prior, which naturally only aggravates the critics of games like Lost World even more if they were fans of those games people suddenly are so quick to judge on.

So, like it was said before, I think everyone could stand to respect the positive and negative aspects of the games that we like and compromise on wanting a better experience overall for everyone instead of this "us vs. them" mentality and constantly mock the preferences of each other. I've seen too much "Classic, vs. Modern, vs. Adventure" for my taste when we all love the same fucking series about the same characters :V

At no point in this post did he imply that he was ignoring any of the flaws with the game, though. Nobody in this topic or on this board even implies that. Hell, even with the mainstream the story of Lost World is met with the same indifference a story in a Mario game would be and isn't actually praised all that much. I genuinely don't get where all the talk of Lost World being praised comes from, especially since there are people who think the exact opposite. That it was some game that got universally panned and shouldn't be acknowledged anymore when in reality it was met with a universal "meh".

[Kuzu]

At no point in this post did he imply that he was ignoring any of the flaws with the game, though. Nobody in this topic or on this board even implies that. Hell, even with the mainstream the story of Lost World is met with the same indifference a story in a Mario game would be and isn't actually praised all that much. I genuinely don't get where all the talk of Lost World being praised comes from, especially since there are people who think the exact opposite. That it was some game that got universally panned and shouldn't be acknowledged anymore when in reality it was met with a universal "meh".

This is missing the point of what I was even saying to begin with. It doesn't matter if people like Lost World or thought it was the worst pile of shit known to man, what I was getting at is that the people on this site who do like Lost World are so caught up with any sort of criticism towards it and equate that as "hating the game" and constantly bemoan that their favorite game is being scrutinized. It comes off as ridiculous to me, because as you said, nobody actually hates Lost World. 

Me and about the other 4 to 5 people who have criticized Lost World didn't just decide to form our own little circle jerk and form some sort of Anti-Pontac and Graff movement. Just because we're vocal about our criticisms doesn't suddenly mean everyone else feels the same way, because at the end of the day, we're just a bunch of adults in our twenties arguing on a site about Sonic the Hedgehog :V, we have no creative control over anything, so excuse some of us for voicing some criticism towards a direction in the series that we're not too fond of.

This idea that games like Lost World and its contents need to be appreciated more only comes up when its actively being criticized by, once again, a handful of users on this site at the most. Yet, those same people that say that are so quick to pan games that are already universally considered low quality or "dated". That's what I was getting at, this appeal to popularity that's overtaken the fanbase ever since Sonic Colors came out. When that game came out, even trying to criticize it got you labeled as a "hater" even if you legitimately did not believe it was a good game. Or alternatively, people treated one or two more vocal critics as if they spoke for the entire fanbase and insisted that the game was more hated than it actually was. So instead of understanding that people have different tastes and respecting that, we've created these false dichotomies. Its just comes off as overblown to me in all honesty. 

[Fake Hedgehog]

 

I mean, Eggman has killed someone by destroying Prison Island. Even if we assume Flying Dog's pilot was somehow the only person there, that's at least one human life. 

...Of course, Shadow and Rouge are equally culpable in the death(s) here, for planting the bombs and going along with his plans. In Shadow's case, he was at least an outright villain at the time (reforming right at the end of the game), but Rouge was ostensibly an undercover hero who just kinda threw Prison Island under the bus for the sake of the mission. I guess GUN really is still super-corrupt even after fifty years.

Either way, that's three characters who are definitely guilty of murder, or at the very least being an accessory to murder.

When I saw, and whenever I see the scene where team dark blows up the island I do feel a bit uneasy and questioning to the idea of Eggman doing that.

 

"Why would he do that?"

I search the screen anticipating I'll across something, somewhere that indicates any humans made it off the island safely, then imagine anyone who did get "blown up" to be standing there crispy, blackened and and wide-eyed, Looney Tunes style, because that's the tone I'm inclined to project onto what I'm seeing. I'll allow that I may be fabricating this tone more than I think I'm "maintaining" it; but loss of life isn't what I regard run-of-the-mill for Sonic.

Same with how Eggman crashed his ship and died in Sonic 06. "wtf?! Eggman died? Eggman can't die he gets blown up all the time! h-he's not!"  

& y'all know he woulda dodged at the last second too so dont lie

 

[Dr. Mechano]

Same with how Eggman crashed his ship and died in Sonic 06. "wtf?! Eggman died? Eggman can't die he gets blown up all the time! h-he's not!"  

& y'all know he woulda dodged at the last second too so dont lie

Yeah, but at least Sonic undoes that, so it's all good.

I was genuinely disturbed by those (thankfully non-canon) ShtH endings where Shadow murders Eggman for essentially no reason whatsoever. "What? I'm a robot? This information suddenly makes me want to senselessly murder you!" Yeah, stellar writing.

Honestly, I'm still kind of mad at that game even ten years later.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Dr. Mechano

[Kuzu]

More like laughable, its so over the top its hard to take it seriously.

[FriendBot]

More like laughable, its so over the top its hard to take it seriously.

I found it more pathetic than laughable really.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

This is missing the point of what I was even saying to begin with. It doesn't matter if people like Lost World or thought it was the worst pile of shit known to man, what I was getting at is that the people on this site who do like Lost World are so caught up with any sort of criticism towards it and equate that as "hating the game" and constantly bemoan that their favorite game is being scrutinized. It comes off as ridiculous to me, because as you said, nobody actually hates Lost World. 

Me and about the other 4 to 5 people who have criticized Lost World didn't just decide to form our own little circle jerk and form some sort of Anti-Pontac and Graff movement. Just because we're vocal about our criticisms doesn't suddenly mean everyone else feels the same way, because at the end of the day, we're just a bunch of adults in our twenties arguing on a site about Sonic the Hedgehog :V, we have no creative control over anything, so excuse some of us for voicing some criticism towards a direction in the series that we're not too fond of.

This idea that games like Lost World and its contents need to be appreciated more only comes up when its actively being criticized by, once again, a handful of users on this site at the most. Yet, those same people that say that are so quick to pan games that are already universally considered low quality or "dated". That's what I was getting at, this appeal to popularity that's overtaken the fanbase ever since Sonic Colors came out. When that game came out, even trying to criticize it got you labeled as a "hater" even if you legitimately did not believe it was a good game. Or alternatively, people treated one or two more vocal critics as if they spoke for the entire fanbase and insisted that the game was more hated than it actually was. So instead of understanding that people have different tastes and respecting that, we've created these false dichotomies. Its just comes off as overblown to me in all honesty. 

What's funny is that all of this sums up much about not just people regarding Lost World, but literally everything we try to have at discussion over. Almost every discussion degenerates into some cynical rant towards something (admittedly I've done my fair share of that whenever I'm skeptical of certain opinions), to the point that even being constructive in criticizing an idea (as in legitimately trying to help it improve) gets pissed upon without even bothering to understand the reason why - sometimes even after stating in plain english what the reason was.

Like, there's misunderstanding and skepticism, both of which I'm sure many know have run rife on this forum after seeing one to many people state one thing and then do something entirely different to what was blatantly stated. Not exactly the most trusting environment to be in. But then, not only is there false dichotomies, but there's this intentional accentuating the negative and disrespect that changes the entire atmosphere of discussion. People say it's hyperbole, but that's kinda the whole issue: how many times have any of us posited an idea, nothing intended to take away anyone's enjoyment (better yet, trying to improve upon it), only to get blasted or insulted for the mere thought of it despite knowing and telling them full well that's not what you meant? We've seen this kind of thing with people supporting the Boost gameplay, people loving the thrill of the speed while others point out how rigid it is - support the boost and you're automatically in favor of keeping things stale rather than trying to find inventive ways to make the boost more flexible; side against the boost and suddenly you'd rather go back to the shit games that were ShTH and Sonic 06, or that you want to go back to the genre roulette of the Adventures which were somehow never good in the first place.

We've constantly seen this to this day regarding storytelling, despite saying millions of times that it's about quality and not its tone and it is disregarded - you say you want things to have more intensity, stakes, depth, and (gasp!) some darker elements and somehow this is exaggerated to you wanting convoluted stories like Sonic 06 and ShTH, that SA2 never did dark well if you hold this up as a (albiet flawed) example of doing this right, that even that SA1 wasn't really a dark plot and no one should go beyond it, or my favorite "Darker plots = bad in general"; you say you prefer a simpler, lighthearted plot, and somehow you want Sonic to be as simplistic and kiddy as the Teletubbies. Even more when people go the extra mile and use franchises like Mario as an example for having little to no story, and ignore the ones where he does (and rather dark ones to boot).

You want to salvage an idea from a bad game that would have done well if retooled and developed into something useful and workable, and somehow it's a cardinal sin to think about because the bad game tainted it and it should never be done again. No, this goes beyond misunderstanding and straight into flaming each other like a bunch of 5 year old psychopaths getting kicks out of making people feel bad - and then you pretend to wonder why things end up getting hostile or don't even care.

And it's downright ridiculous...

Like, I'm a strong critic of what the writing we've been getting since Pontac and Graff came in as writers, for various reasons, but that doesn't mean I hate them and treat their work like garbage. And while some do, for various valid reasons, that doesn't mean ever other person criticizing their work falls into the same category either. That's like me saying everyone criticizing SA2's story, a game I strongly support for doing dark right despite its flaws, is immediately a hater; or better yet, that's like me grouping every person who isn't a fan of Shadow as a rabid anti-Shadow fan who refuse to see any merit in the idea towards improving and fixing the bad parts about him.

People talk about the favorite parts of their favorite games, whether it would be the Adventures, Heroes, Unleashed, Colors, Generations, Lost World, hell even the Classics and come off as if the things they like are so sacred that no one is allowed to criticize them. Others have the audacity to dare see something worth salvaging in games like ShTH and Sonic 06, repurpose them into something more fitting - and rather than hear them out and maybe offer some constructive advice, people blow them off as wasting their time, or grab their torches and pitchforks as they gather around to mock them for it and stomp on their thoughts.

For crying out loud people, there's a middle ground here.

Edited October 7, 2015 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[ZDozer]

What you said reminds me of the entire brazillian Sonic fanbase. Rings a big bell to it.

As for Pontac and Graff, I don't hate them as people, but I sure hate them as writers.

I remember that one time I managed to piece the entire story of ShTH together quite neatly. A shame it got lost into Orkut and Google fucked everyone over by deleting it. I would need a time machine to recover that thing.

[Komodin]

For crying out loud people, there's a middle ground here.

 

Aye, this is very much true. Unfortunately, though, the Internet and some of its users have this weird tendency to be all "it's my way, or the highway" when it comes to expressing its opinion on things. This sort of attitude just makes talking about stuff that you (dis)like a bigger hassle than it has every right to be, and that's just not right. Like I've said before--and admittedly, it's something even I have to constantly remind myself at times--you can have an opinion on a thing while acknowledging and appreciating that others will hold a different opinion on it.

[Chaos Incarnate]

They haven't done anything outstanding that puts them heads and shoulders above other Sonic writers, honestly, so I don't see where the acclaim for them came from for Sonic Colors' story when the game came out. I guess some people were happy to have a more simple story after the likes of Sonic plots with a huge scope, like Unleashed prior. The only character I feel they do anything interesting with is Eggman in Lost World, but that kinda went down the shitter in the third act of that game.

 

I don't really hate them, though. Their work is just sort of there, nothing too special for me to care much about. This series could do much better without their mediocre writing, however. 

 

 

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

bringing this up to say that it looks like Pontac is back as a writer for a future Sonic game. http://aodsf.org/guests/

 

[FriendBot]

There has been talks that it might just be Fire & Ice though since we already know that Fire & Ice is gonna be a thing so it confuses me why they didn't bother to drop the name. But it's obvious they'll do the 25th Anniversary game's story as well so I'm hoping it's in the direction of Lost World but actually good.

[Kuzu]

I'm not really surprised or affected by this, they're pretty much the go to writers for the direction the series is going. So its like...why drop them lol. 

[Idon'tcare]

Just now, Mikyeong said:

bringing this up to say that it looks like Pontac is back as a writer for a future Sonic game. http://aodsf.org/guests/

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

Great, the games not even had anything revealed about it yet by SEGA/Sonicteam and yet I now already have a reason not to buy it... Well played SEGA, well played indeed.

[Nepenthe]

There's nothing much surprising about this news. The only thing I can hope for is that, as said above, they try another Lost World-esque story but don't cock it up with nonsensical circumstances and hamfisted conflict. Granted, it's an anniversary game so....

[Failinhearts]

I'm not the biggest fan of Pontac and Graff, but my biggest gripes come from Lost World's story. The lack of explaination in that is the reason why I hate the story in that game. I hope this next game won't do the same thing Lost World did with it's story.

Either way, I'm not expecting anything spectacular from the story.

[PC the Hedgehog]

I really hope they're referring to the new Sonic Boom and not the 25th anniversary game, though who are we kidding? They'll be around for that one too, I'm sure. I can see it now...

SONIC: 'Sup, Tails? You ready to kick Eggman's big ol' butt again?
TAILS: Ha ha, it is big, isn't it? He has a big butt. Because he's fat.
SONIC: Yeah, isn't that funny? I'm so hilarious. *stares at camera* RIGHT, KIDS? RIGHT?!
TAILS: [overt reference to recent Sonic game while blatantly ignoring any Sonic games prior]