Did Sonic meet Amy or Tails first?

[Tornado]

But again you seem to be ignoring the possibility that CD could come after S&K simply because it's "less complicated."

He's not ignoring the possibility. He's simply saying that it makes more sense for it to be the way he is suggesting.

Reality can't be pushed aside simply because it's inconvient to you.

It is objectively inconvenient. The only subjective thing about it is how one would explain them without any Word of God to go by, and even then the subjective reasoning for the inconsistencies are based on facts purported throughout the rest of the series.

Truth be told, Sonic CD has problems that would need to be explained no matter where it is placed in the timeline. But by and large, placing Sonic CD before Sonic 2 creates less of them in relation; and the actual story behind the development at least hints at the game's location in the timeline in relation to the others.

Edited November 10, 2009 by Tornado

[Yong]

Truth be told, Sonic CD has problems that would need to be explained no matter where it is placed in the timeline. But by and large, placing Sonic CD before Sonic 2 creates less of them in relation; and the actual story behind the development at least hints at the game's location in the timeline in relation to the others.

I keep hearing these "problems" that can't be explained yet the only one we've discussed thus far is the one related to Sonic 3, which I think was agreed that it has to take place after Sonic 2. That's it. What exactly can't be explained that would default Sonic CD to be before Sonic 2 since we seem to be stuck on that?

[Diogenes]

While I agree with it being impossible to find out who Sonic met first without SEGA outright telling us in an upcoming game, I don't see why you would compare the question to the old "chicken and the egg" crap.

The egg came first. Everyone who knows a thing or two about science and isn't clouded by religion can realize that species' just kept laying eggs, their contents slowly evolving through the years, until one day something close to the modern day chicken popped out some creatures' egg. Granted, that is a simplified explanation, and evolution isn't a fool-proof theory, but it's a hell of a lot better than any alternative answers imo.

I think you're missing the point of the question, tho'. It's not asking about any egg, but a chicken's egg. So, was the egg that birthed the first "chicken" a "chicken's egg" because that's what hatched from it, or was it a "not-quite-a-chicken's egg" because it was laid by something that was almost, but not quite, a chicken (and thus the first chicken egg was laid by the first chicken)? Evolution doesn't give a simple and obvious answer to this.

It was always meant to be more of a philosophical question, anyway. Giving a straightforward logical answer and declaring the matter settled misses out on the discussions of circular causation, our choices of definitions, and stuff like that. That's really the meat of the question, at least now.

[Saint Nathan]

I think it said in the PC manual that it comes before Sonic 2.

Other than that, it could take place even after S3&K, but not before it if you enjoy LOGIC.

[Tornado]

I keep hearing these "problems" that can't be explained yet the only one we've discussed thus far is the one related to Sonic 3, which I think was agreed that it has to take place after Sonic 2. That's it. What exactly can't be explained that would default Sonic CD to be before Sonic 2 since we seem to be stuck on that?

Nothing can't be explained. Let me establish that right now. The only thing is that none of the explanations would be official, and would therefore be completely subjective, regardless of how much factual basis they had.

Sonic CD after Sonic 3&K Problems:

No Tails in Sonic CD (outside a cameo).

No Tornado (outside a cameo).

Sonic CD before Sonic 2 Problems:

Inconsistent order of Metal Sonic development history.

No Amy in Sonic 2/Sonic 3.

As you said in this post, there isn't any definitive proof either way, but one of the main inconsistencies is much easier to (subjectively) explain for the latter than the two for the former. I find it makes more sense before Sonic 2 rather than after Sonic 3. Someone else might think that the Metal Sonic problem is much more bothersome and therefore disagree.

[Yong]

Nothing can't be explained. Let me establish that right now. The only thing is that none of the explanations would be official, and would therefore be completely subjective, regardless of how much factual basis they had.

Sonic CD after Sonic 3&K Problems:

No Tails in Sonic CD (outside a cameo).

No Tornado (outside a cameo).

Sonic CD before Sonic 2 Problems:

Inconsistent order of Metal Sonic development history.

No Amy in Sonic 2/Sonic 3.

As you said in this post, there isn't any definitive proof either way, but one of the main inconsistencies is much easier to (subjectively) explain for the latter than the two for the former. I find it makes more sense before Sonic 2 rather than after Sonic 3. Someone else might think that the Metal Sonic problem is much more bothersome and therefore disagree.

I'll counter argue 3 of those reasons right now. The absence of a character and/or vehicle is NOT proof that a game comes before or after another game. The Chaotix did not appear in Sonic Battle nor Sonic 06, but that does not mean that those games came before Sonic Heroes. The Tornado wasn't in Sonic 06, yet that does not mean it came before Sonic Adventure. The logic in those arguements is inconsistent with the other games, therefore they can't be reasons for why those games have to be ordered in such a way.

As far as I know there's no "history" to how the robot Sonics were created, aside from one version of Mecha Sonic to the next in Sonic 2 and Sonic & Knuckles. (if they is such documentation then I'd like to see it) It's only an assumption that Metal Sonic is the superior model over Mecha Sonic, so it's a relatively weak arguement. Still it's a logical arguement none the less, given what we've seen that the 2 are capable of.

[Tornado]

I'll counter argue 3 of those reasons right now. The absence of a character and/or vehicle is NOT proof that a game comes before or after another game. The Chaotix did not appear in Sonic Battle nor Sonic 06, but that does not mean that those games came before Sonic Heroes.

The Tornado wasn't in Sonic 06, yet that does not mean it came before Sonic Adventure. The logic in those arguements is inconsistent with the other games, therefore they can't be reasons for why those games have to be ordered in such a way.

I really don't understand what you are trying to do here. You are playing an argument of semantics seemingly just because, and I can't understand why you are pushing the issue when I've already admitted that problems occur no matter where the game takes place.

What was the point of the above statement when I already agreed with how the game can take place in either spot, and furthermore that the only explanation that is even remotely official is how the absence of Tails would make perfect sense if the game was before Sonic 2?

Even ignoring that, the above reasoning doesn't hold water anyways. Normally you are right: Absense of characters and whatnot does not actually change a story's location in the timeline. That is because the games from today have a clear timeline of events that dictate what happened when, in addition to references towards past events in the story. The inconsistencies that you pointed out for those games don't matter because the inconsistencies don't actually throw the storyline's location into doubt. Sonic Battle happens after Sonic Heroes. Advance 3 comes after Battle. STH '06 comes after Sonic Adventure, etc.

Sonic CD, however, does not have an official place on the timeline, and is largely a side-story (or rather, a self-contained one), so these inconsistencies in the timeline do matter because they are the only way to determine where the game took place. Therefore, whether or not the logic is consistent with the other games in the series doesn't matter because Sonic CD is not like the other games.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Tornado

[Yong]

I really don't understand what you are trying to do here. You are playing an argument of semantics seemingly just because, and I can't understand why you are pushing the issue when I've already admitted that problems occur no matter where the game takes place.

That reasoning above doesn't fly anyways. Normally you are right: Absense of characters and whatnot does not actually change a story's location in the timeline. That is because the games from today have a clear timeline of events that dictate what happened when, in addition to references towards past events in the story. The inconsistencies that you pointed out for those games don't matter because the inconsistencies don't actually throw the storyline's location into doubt. Sonic Battle happens after Sonic Heroes. STH '06 comes after Sonic Adventure, etc.

Sonic CD, however, does not have an official place on the timeline, and is largely a side-story (or rather, a self-contained one), so these inconsistencies in the timeline do matter because they are the only way dictate where the game took place without an official opinion on the matter. Tails' absense in particular matters because, if Sonic CD came place before Sonic 2, his absence would be explained officially.

Because you guys have insisted that CD before 2 makes more sense, so I'm curious as to why since I'm more of the opinion that it can go either way.

The arguement of character absence is still flawed because no matter how you order it, you're going to end up with a game without Amy in it, or a game without Tails and/or Knuckles in it being in the "wrong" place in your timeline. So the arguement eats itself into invalidity. There are most likely more valid arguements for why the games have to be ordered in a certain way, but it's not going to be because of the absence of a certain character. Remember there's always the chance that there's no good evidence to suggest that a game has to go in a certain spot in the timeline, so it's free game until Sega comes out and declares something.

[Badnik Zero]

For the Metal-Mecha debate, I always considered them two different lines of Sonic robot. Sonic Adventure proves me right, actually placing both models side by side. The "Silver" Mecha Sonic and sharp looking S3&K bot are different incarnations of the same robot. Who's to say after Metal failed in CD, Robotnik didn't try another approach.

[Tornado]

The arguement of character absence is still flawed because no matter how you order it, you're going to end up with a game without Amy in it, or a game without Tails and/or Knuckles in it being in the "wrong" place in your timeline. So the arguement eats itself into invalidity.

No it doesn't, because Tails not being in Sonic CD if it took place before Sonic CD has a canon explanation. Building on that, it makes much more (subjective) sense canonically for Amy to not be in Sonic 2/3 than it does for Tails to not be in CD. What I am not saying, and what you seem to think I am saying, is that either of these things constitute hard proof that the game takes place before Sonic 2. At most, they are merely allusions.

There are most likely more valid arguements for why the games have to be ordered in a certain way, but it's not going to be because of the absence of a certain character. Remember there's always the chance that there's no good evidence to suggest that a game has to go in a certain spot in the timeline, so it's free game until Sega comes out and declares something.

That's exactly what Sonic CD suffers from, which is why what would otherwise be minor inconsistencies actually matter. When there is nothing else to go on, it makes sense to choose the explanation that causes the least problems. Based on the characterization of the characters and the story of Sonic 2, Sonic CD taking place before Sonic 2 causes the least problems. That does not mean that it definitely took place before Sonic 2. Hell, if I still considered Knuckles Chaotix canon, I personally would call it a 50/50 split.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Tornado

[Yong]

No it doesn't, because Tails not being in Sonic CD if it took place before Sonic CD has a canon explanation. Building on that, it makes much more (subjective) sense canonically for Amy to not be in Sonic 2/3 than it does for Tails to not be in CD. What I am not saying, and what you seem to think I am saying, is that either of these things constitute hard proof that the game takes place before Sonic 2.

That's exactly what Sonic CD suffers from, which is why what would otherwise be minor inconsistencies actually matter. When there is nothing else to go on, it is common sense to choose the explanation that causes the least problems. Based on the characterization of the characters and the story of Sonic 2, Sonic CD taking place before Sonic 2 causes the least problems. That does not mean that it definitely took place before Sonic 2, it just means that with what we know it makes more sense. Hell, if Knuckles Chaotix was still considered canon, I personally would call it a 50/50 split.

I wasn't aware there was an explanation for his absence. What would that be?

How can there be "problems" if there's "nothing" to go on? If there's a problem or inconsistency within the game or with another game then there's something. What is that something exactly?

[Diogenes]

Because you guys have insisted that CD before 2 makes more sense, so I'm curious as to why since I'm more of the opinion that it can go either way.

It can go either way, but that doesn't mean they're equally likely.

The arguement of character absence is still flawed because no matter how you order it, you're going to end up with a game without Amy in it, or a game without Tails and/or Knuckles in it being in the "wrong" place in your timeline.

Would you agree that not all characters are equally likely to appear in a game? When a new game is announced, aren't there characters we consider shoe-ins and those that have a snowball's chance in hell? I'd say it's far more likely that *insert arbitrary future Sonic game here* will include Tails but not Marine than Marine but not Tails.

So I don't think it's accurate to say that "no Amy" necessarily equally cancels out "no Tails or Knuckles". There are a lot of reasons a character may or may not be used, but one of them is their role in the game universe; Tails is Sonic's friend and sidekick, so he's more likely to show up than Amy, who Sonic is inclined to run away from.

Though, to be fair, this might not hold much weight when considered in its time; when these games were made, there was no set precedent that Tails would be such a major character and Amy would be a tier lower. It still fits rather well retroactively, tho', so if we're going to be pushing these games around from our current perspective, I believe it still has value. And of course, it isn't conclusive proof; it is still entirely possible that the character simply does not appear, no deeper meaning to it. It's never going to outright prove the order of the games, but it may tip the scales one way or the other.

Remember there's always the chance that there's no good evidence to suggest that a game has to go in a certain spot in the timeline, so it's free game until Sega comes out and declares something.

It doesn't really sit right to have these games just floating in the aether, tho'. Even if we don't have absolute proof or guarantees, it feels better to put them in the best places we can, with what little evidence we can scrounge up. Until/unless we get new evidence or a better theory, we go with the best one that we can.

[Yong]

It can go either way, but that doesn't mean they're equally likely.

Would you agree that not all characters are equally likely to appear in a game? When a new game is announced, aren't there characters we consider shoe-ins and those that have a snowball's chance in hell? I'd say it's far more likely that *insert arbitrary future Sonic game here* will include Tails but not Marine than Marine but not Tails.

So I don't think it's accurate to say that "no Amy" necessarily equally cancels out "no Tails or Knuckles". There are a lot of reasons a character may or may not be used, but one of them is their role in the game universe; Tails is Sonic's friend and sidekick, so he's more likely to show up than Amy, who Sonic is inclined to run away from.

Though, to be fair, this might not hold much weight when considered in its time; when these games were made, there was no set precedent that Tails would be such a major character and Amy would be a tier lower. It still fits rather well retroactively, tho', so if we're going to be pushing these games around from our current perspective, I believe it still has value. And of course, it isn't conclusive proof; it is still entirely possible that the character simply does not appear, no deeper meaning to it. It's never going to outright prove the order of the games, but it may tip the scales one way or the other.

It doesn't really sit right to have these games just floating in the aether, tho'. Even if we don't have absolute proof or guarantees, it feels better to put them in the best places we can, with what little evidence we can scrounge up. Until/unless we get new evidence or a better theory, we go with the best one that we can.

Perhaps so. I do have my own personnal spots for said loose games. But still if you were to ask me where I put a game before and after a certain game I would give you my reasoning immediately, no matter how weak the arguement I'm using. Still though I'm not going to argue with someone for how they arrange said games in their timelines, unless they have poor reasoning to say why a game goes before or after another, which is what's happening here with the assumption that Sonic CD before Sonic 2 makes more sense and is less complicated.

And you missed the point completely. I was further counter arguing the absent character arguement within the constraints of the old school games currently in existence. I was never refering to any arbitary unreleased game. It is clearly logical that if you try to order the existing old school games with the assumption that all characters must appear in all games following the first game they appear in, then you will end up with no place to put Sonic CD after all games featuring Tails and/or Knuckles, nor any place to put Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 after all games featuring Amy. Thus the absent character arguement isn't a valid arguement for game placement in the timeline.

And I never argued against all games being in the timeline. I much prefer timelines like that. Removing games is for lazy people who can't think. What I was saying is certain games don't have enough evidence that would force them to come before or after another game, so that either arrangement is perfectly acceptable unless Sega comes out in the future and says that they have to be in a certain order.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Yong

[Badnik Zero]

But Amy was almost a one-shot character in the old games. The only game outside CD she appears in are the Drifts.

[Yong]

But Amy was almost a one-shot character in the old games. The only game outside CD she appears in are the Drifts.

And Sonic the Fighters. And that one game on the Pico if you count that. And eviditly she wasn't a one-shot character. And I don't see why being a one-shot character would make someone less relevant, nor do I remember anyone here saying such a thing.

[Mick]

I always thought Sonic met Tails first. Sonic 2 was released in 1992 and Sonic CD was released in 1993. Tails just wasn't present in Sonic CD. I never played Sonic CD. I've always wanted to play it though.

[Flyboy Fox]

Perhaps Tails was off having his 'Tails Adventure' time during CD (one of the two language canons has it that he met Sonic before Tails Adventure, so...?)

[Yong]

Perhaps Tails was off having his 'Tails Adventure' time during CD (one of the two language canons has it that he met Sonic before Tails Adventure, so...?)

As far as I know, the story in the Japanese manual for Tails Adventure specifically states that it takes place before Tails meets Sonic, which I go by when placing that game.

[Diogenes]

It is clearly logical that if you try to order the existing old school games with the assumption that all characters must appear in all games following the first game they appear in, then you will end up with no place to put Sonic CD after all games featuring Tails and/or Knuckles, nor any place to put Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 after all games featuring Amy.

Which is why we don't do that. The argument is based on the question of which is more likely: Amy having met Sonic before Sonic 2/3&K but not appearing in them, or Tails having met Sonic in CD but not appearing in it. Considering that Sonic willingly spends time with Tails, and that, Tails being a sidekick, they tend to adventure together, as compared to Sonic tending to run away from Amy, and most likely being inclined to keep her out of trouble (her being mostly a damsel in distress at the time), it makes more sense for Amy to have simply not appeared in S2/3&K than for Tails to have similarly been absent from CD.

[Yong]

Which is why we don't do that. The argument is based on the question of which is more likely: Amy having met Sonic before Sonic 2/3&K but not appearing in them, or Tails having met Sonic in CD but not appearing in it. Considering that Sonic willingly spends time with Tails, and that, Tails being a sidekick, they tend to adventure together, as compared to Sonic tending to run away from Amy, and most likely being inclined to keep her out of trouble (her being mostly a damsel in distress at the time), it makes more sense for Amy to have simply not appeared in S2/3&K than for Tails to have similarly been absent from CD.

I'm just going to say read the previous direct quotes prior to that one post, because I don't want to explain myself again on that point.

[Badnik Zero]

And Sonic the Fighters. And that one game on the Pico if you count that. And eviditly she wasn't a one-shot character. And I don't see why being a one-shot character would make someone less relevant, nor do I remember anyone here saying such a thing.

I'm trying to explain why she doesn't show up in main games post-CD. She was used in the 8-bit racers, and the spin-off Sonic R and Fighters. It matters that they're spin-offs because those games use back characters to fill the playable roster. Tails is a main character as a sidekick, so you expect him to have more appearances that's all.

[Yong]

I'm trying to explain why she doesn't show up in main games post-CD. She was used in the 8-bit racers, and the spin-off Sonic R and Fighters. It matters that they're spin-offs because those games use back characters to fill the playable roster. Tails is a main character as a sidekick, so you expect him to have more appearances that's all.

Doesn't really matter to me what the reason is or was. I was arguing against the character absence arguement anyway.

[Badnik Zero]

Doesn't really matter to me what the reason is or was. I was arguing against the character absence arguement anyway.

But there is no absent character argument, just an absent Tails argument. The game came out after Sonic 2, which makes you wanna place it there in the timeline. But since Tails appears in Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 in the same connected plotline, you wonder where he went. One of the answers is to say the game happens before Sonic 2. No one asks where Amy went because she's a minor character at that point and CD was a stand-alone story.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Stretchy Werewolf

[Yong]

But there is no absent character argument, just an absent Tails argument. The game came out after Sonic 2, which makes you wanna place it there in the timeline. But since Tails appears in Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 in the same connected plotline, you wonder where he went. One of the answers is to say the game happens before Sonic 2. No one asks where Amy went because she's a minor character at that point and CD was a stand-alone story.

It's a common arguement many have used to argue why a certain game takes place before another, or to remove the game from the canon entirely. However the arguement is flawed due to the counter arguements I've already mentioned in this thread. No one mentions Amy in said arguement in regards to Sonic 2 and Sonic CD cause they failed to see the flaw in the argument.

[psikeout]

I know I said I was going to drop out of this after getting tired of your bad attitude, Yong, but glancing back at this just grates on my nerves too much. I'm going to just throw it out there once more, point by point, since you keep insisting there's no substance mentioned in any of the arguments.

My argument is first and foremost from a development standpoint.

- Sonic CD was developed by Sega of Japan with Ooshima at the same time as Sonic 2 was developed by STI with Yuji Naka.

- Let me reiterate that point for emphasis, so you can't glaze over it this time: Sonic CD was developed at the same time as Sonic 2.

- Sonic CD uses older resources than Sonic 2. It uses sprites from Sonic 1, and does not share the sprite style that was created for Sonic 2, 3, and S&K.

- There is nothing at all to say that any concept for Sonic 3 or Sonic & Knuckles existed at the time of Sonic CD's development. That means there is nothing to say that Sonic CD was intended as a sequel to S&K.

Because Sonic 3 and Sonic and Knuckles did not exist, but Sonic CD and Sonic 2 did exist at the same time, even if they were not released at the same time, it is thus unlikely that Sega intended Sonic CD to take place chronologically after S&K.

Because Sonic has all seven Chaos Emeralds in his possession at the end of Sonic 2, and is with Tails at the end of Sonic 2, and still has all seven Chaos Emeralds in his possession at the beginning of Sonic 3, and is still with Tails at the beginning of Sonic 3, it is strongly inferred that Sonic 2 leads into Sonic 3, since it is also a direct numerical sequel. It is thus unlikely that Sega intended Sonic CD to take place chronologically after Sonic 2.

This leaves Sonic CD's most natural, logical, least disputable placement to be before Sonic 2.

Comprendé?