Full first two levels

[Phos]

Phenomenal is a word reserved the true hallmarks of the industry - single defining moments that end up shaping a genre.

Here's the first out of a ten part article describing the numours times others have tried to replicate Sonic's successes.

Sonic then proceeded to cause Sega to gain a market share lead over Nintendo:

Sonic rocked the entire industry.

And Phos, I don't deny your ability to analyze. But at the core, your arguments often hinge on the fact that doing it one way as opposed to the original way is the problem. Fixating on minutae is not objectivity if you're not acting free from the bias that drives it in the first place, as can be shown in your repeated attempts to cast Sonic's current design in a negative light.

I was comparing it to Hydro Thunder, I have no idea where you got that from. It's not a case of it being bad because it isn't like the classics, it's bad due to a massively limited influence over in game events and the prevalence of false difficulty. It can't even compare it to the classics because they don't have enough in common. If I did, I would have incudeed complaints such as "Why is the core concept absent?'" and "Why is running on walls such a rare occurrence, and why do I have such limited influence over it?"

Oh, and I also forgot that there's little besides changes in appearance to distinguish each level.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Phos

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

A straight line is 1 dimensional inside its own vector space, pal. Lern 2 Euclidian geometry.

Actually, the fact that Sonic can jump makes it 2 dimension, since he's going along in two axises: left-right, up-down. If it was 1 dimension, he would only be able to move on one axis, either left-right or up-down. He would either jump or fall throughout the game or move fromt to back rathen than do both.

Just wanted to get that out there.

Edited June 18, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Nepenthe]

ITT, Razorsaw hates S3&K.

There's facts on the one hand and opinions on the other, but claiming that S3&K wasn't (isn't!) a phenomenal game stretches the bounds of credulity a bit.

Alas, in modern times, as Sonic fans we seem to have been conditioned to celebrate even mediocrity after a decade of sub-mediocre franchise, and the fact that Colours has near everyone drooling only proves it.

Colours is a pretty game that looks fun. But this is not ground-shattering brilliance; this is mediocrity. ALL videogames are supposed to be pretty and fun. It's only because Colours is the first Sonic game in a long while that actually looks half-competently made that people are fawning over it - when in fact this sort of thing is the bare minimum of what we should actually expect from a game.

That is utilises the graphical capacity of its platform well, and seems vaguely playable, are cause for equanimity, not celebration. "OK game, you seem (in this early, demonstration-grade outing) to work properly"; NOW start actually impressing me with the things you do beyond barebones playability.

...

1D linear gaming disguised as 3D?

Sub-QTE gimmickry?

Short level is short?

Well shit.

Or maybe-- grasp your heart for this one-- the game looks like genuine fun to some people?

Your posh attitude is absolutely detestable if only because of the phenomenal hypocrisy it displays. To suggest that all of the people who have given Colors a shake are delusional simply because they don't agree with you is worthy of an eye-roll.

But to not turn around and be similarly disgusted over the other fans who managed what I thought was an impossibility: Raging so hard over things like palmtree art and the return of some robots that they broke the law, reinforced the negative stereotypes about Sonic fans to Sega and the general gaming community, and shut down one of Microsoft's online services all in one go? The elephant in the room is staring you down, my friend, and he's not happy.

Fact is, the potential delusion of Sonic fans is not limited to those who don't immediately receive the new games with a feeling akin to grieving over matricide; The classics have been given almost absolute immunity from any remotely negative or apathetic thought to the point that the idea that a Sonic game doesn't have to be like them to be quantifiably good has now become a sheer impossibility. New ideas are not considered on their own merits, but whether they are "classic enough." Improvement can almost invariably be translated as "Make it more classic by any means necessary." If it doesn't ascribe to the ideal, the classic ideal, it's inevitably inferior. There is no alternative or middle ground for many of these people you seem keen on defending as being better guided.

And it's an attitude that makes me fucking sick.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Nepenthe

[Badnik Zero]

I think you're getting to the same thing Frozen is, Razorsaw. You're saying S3&K is not among the best of games. I'd say it's among the best of platformers for sure, but whatever. I think Frozen's point can be taken another way. When 2010 is remembered, it won't be for Sonic Colors. It's hardly revolutionary.

Of course that depends too. It's easily well ahead of the games five years ago. People want good Sonic so badly they'll jump on a hype train. This is not my opinion though. I think it looks genuinely good. It's nothing new, even where Sonic is concerned. It's a recast of Unleashed. But hey it's what Sonic needs now.

[Tyranno]

You're mistaking what is a benchmark from something that ends up imitated. Halo had imitators, but it didn't have a profound influence on the genre it existed in. That right was reserved for something like Goldeneye.

Imitation /= this sort of thing. They copied Sonic's image, his visceral character trait and marketing as a cool animal hero. They didn't capture what the gaming was all about beyond both of them being a platformer.

I think you're getting to the same thing Frozen is, Razorsaw. You're saying S3&K is not among the best of games. I'd say it's among the best of platformers for sure, but whatever. I think Frozen's point can be taken another way. When 2010 is remembered, it won't be for Sonic Colors. It's hardly revolutionary.

Few games ever are.

But at the same time, there's a decisive difference between me and Nitrogen. I'm not destroying S&K, I'm being critical of it. And in terms of analysis, critical doesn't always mean something BAD. It means analyzing it and its place in metafiction and as an art form.

Really, when did saying it's a great, memorable game equate to damning it, like so many people often do with new games?

Edited June 18, 2010 by Razorsaw

[Frozen Nitrogen]

I think you're getting to the same thing Frozen is, Razorsaw. You're saying S3&K is not among the best of games. I'd say it's among the best of platformers for sure, but whatever. I think Frozen's point can be taken another way. When 2010 is remembered, it won't be for Sonic Colors. It's hardly revolutionary.

This is indeed the point I was trying to make. Many thanks for rendering it more comprehensibly, 'nikz.

But at the same time, there's a decisive difference between me and Nitrogen. I'm not destroying S&K, I'm being critical of it.

Tom-ay-to, tom-ah-to.

Your posh attitude is absolutely detestable if only because of the phenomenal hypocrisy it displays. To suggest that all of the people who have given Colors a shake are delusional simply because they don't agree with you is worthy of an eye-roll.

Well, it would be quite difficult to carry on a discussion if I thought my position was wrong and the opposite position was right, wouldn't it!

But to not turn around and be similarly disgusted over the other fans who managed what I thought was an impossibility: Raging so hard over things like palmtree art and the return of some robots that they broke the law, reinforced the negative stereotypes about Sonic fans to Sega and the general gaming community, and shut down one of Microsoft's online services all in one go? The elephant in the room is staring you down, my friend, and he's not happy.

So the fact that I'm not curently blazing with righteous indignation about YOUR personal fandom cause célèbre is what's annoying you here? Just because I don't share your raeg-filled opinion about the Partnernet leaks makes you "fucking sick"?

Could you remind me which one of us was accusing the other of gratuitous hypocrisy again?

Edited June 18, 2010 by Frozen Nitrogen

[Tyranno]

So let me get this straight.

There's NO meaningful difference between me saying that Sonic 3 & Knuckles is a great, solid game, but comes up short of being phenomenal

and

You likening anyone on the opposition to a battered wife who keeps making excuses and accepting what you're calling "mediocre half gestures" in the place of real and profound change?

I'm sorry, but I think there is.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Razorsaw

[Rusty Spy]

This is indeed the point I was trying to make. Many thanks for rendering it more comprehensibly, 'nikz.

You can't expect every video game that comes out to be revolutionary. Very few games ever do anything groundbreaking, even for it's own franchise, and thinking otherwise is only setting yourself up for greater disappointment than a Sonic fan anticipating '06.

And expecting such an out-of-the-blue, seemingly quick-cash-in Sonic game like this to break any ground for the franchise is absurd. The fact that it's striking so many high notes for critics and fans alike is in itself a huge surprise to me.

While I do partly agree with your original sentiment that most people are drooling over this game is because it's the only one in a long while that looks anywhere above decent, I still don't believe the game looks bad by any stretch of the word myself, and feel that the people's excitement for this game is justified in that it looks FUN to play as a game in general. While I also agree that a whole lot more could've been done with the game, I'm not gonna condemn it for that.

The main point I'm trying to make is that even though the game could've done a lot more, and part of people's excitement for it is that it's the most decent looking Sonic game in a long while, that doesn't mean it ISN'T decently made, and overall GOOD.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Black Spy

[Nepenthe]

Well, it would be quite difficult to carry on a discussion if I thought my position was wrong and the opposite position was right, wouldn't it!

Subscribing to a side does not mean that you dismiss all of the bullshit that other subscribers perform and do to others.

So the fact that I'm not curently blazing with righteous indignation about YOUR personal fandom cause célèbre is what's annoying you here? Just because I don't share your raeg-filled opinion about the Partnernet leaks makes you "fucking sick"?

Could you remind me which one of us was accusing the other of gratuitous hypocrisy again?

I did not suggest not even imply you had to agree with my general viewpoints. What I am saying is that you're hurling stones through glass houses. You never cease to point out the behavioral failings of neutral or modern fans, yet all the while classic fans are capable of the exact same levels of reprehensible behavior which you will gladly sweep under the rug.

It would help your sentiments hold some actual water if you would actually make your side any more worthy of imitation. Classic fans are just like modern fans; Same song, different key.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Nepenthe

[Frozen Nitrogen]

While I do partly agree with your original sentiment that most people are drooling over this game is because it's the only one in a long while that looks anywhere above decent, I still don't believe the game looks bad by any stretch of the word myself, and feel that the people's excitement for this game is justified in that it looks FUN to play as a game in general. While I also agree that a whole lot more could've been done with the game, I'm not gonna condemn it for that.

Didn't I explicitly state that the game looks fun and pretty? That is is using the graphical power of its Wii platform well?

That's what a videogame is supposed to be, and Colours does it where no Sonic game really has of late. This is not something I dispute.

But that doesn't blind me to the things that don't seem so competently-executed: 1D level design; brevity; curious curtailed QTEs. The fact that I have the temerity to mention these deficiencies doesn't constitute a condemnation. It's nothing more sinister than the fact that I have eyes and a keyboard.

Subscribing to a side does not mean that you dismiss all of the bullshit that other subscribers perform and do to others.

So we're taking sides now?

Trapsing out the sordid old generalisations of classic vs. modern?

In the first instance, I'll mention that I don't consider myself to be pitched in either of those camps - or even that those camps exist. If I'm a "classic fan", This is a fandom made of lots of individuals, each with their own minute and subtle opinions. We're not playing warring nationstates here.

I did not suggest not even imply you had to agree with my general viewpoints. What I am saying is that you're hurling stones through glass houses. You never cease to point out the behavioral failings of neutral or modern fans, yet all the while classic fans are capable of the exact same levels of reprehensible behavior which you will gladly sweep under the rug.

Sorry Nep, but your argument here remains nothing short of "You've not been loud enough in condemning behaviour that I find objectionable, therefore your posts are invalid". The fact that I haven't felt it necessary to scream and gnash my teeth about leaks in a self-effacing display of public hand-wringing hardly constitutes an Orwellian rug-sweeping cover-up on my part, as you seem to interpret it.

And everyone knows about it anyway, so it's not like I COULD sweep it under the rug, even if I was inclined to.

Which I'm not.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Frozen Nitrogen

[Nepenthe]

So we're taking sides now?

Trapsing out the sordid old generalisations of classic vs. modern?

In the first instance, I'll mention that I don't consider myself to be pitched in either of those camps - or even that those camps exist. If I'm a "classic fan", This is a fandom made of lots of individuals, each with their own minute and subtle opinions. We're not playing warring nationstates here.

You are the one who insisted you had a particular position. xP

And you're hardly pulling a Benedict Arnold with that post, but fair enough, I'll take your word for it. In fact, I completely empathize, yet the only reason I put as much effort into defending modern principles as I do is because the classic ones don't really need it, now do they?

Sorry Nep, but your argument here remains nothing short of "You've not been loud enough in condemning behaviour that I find objectionable, therefore your posts are invalid". The fact that I haven't felt it necessary to scream and gnash my teeth about leaks in a self-effacing display of public hand-wringing hardly constitutes an Orwellian rug-sweeping cover-up on my part, as you seem to interpret it.

And everyone knows about it anyway, so it's not like I COULD sweep it under the rug, even if I was inclined to.

Which I'm not.

I don't find the leaks objectionable in the way you think I find them objectionable. They were wrong. But do they anger me in any fashion? Not really, and why you think I'm saying you should rage over them is anyone's guess. Again, I've only used them as a mere example of stupid behavior, because that's what it was-- Stupid behavior.

The other example which you ignored is the general raging altogether that has happened since Sonic's 4 announcement which is on the opposite end of fans' enthusiasm, thus it's equally objectionable. As I said, it's the same song but a different key. Most everyone's deluded whether they like the new releases or not, thus I maintain that only calling out the enthused side of the equation as deluded more often than not is still hypocritical.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Nepenthe

[Aquaslash]

I don't find the leaks objectionable in the way you think I find them objectionable. They were wrong. But do they anger me in any fashion? Not really, and why you think I'm saying you should rage over them is anyone's guess.

But to not turn around and be similarly disgusted over the other fans who managed what I thought was an impossibility: Raging so hard over things like palmtree art and the return of some robots that they broke the law, reinforced the negative stereotypes about Sonic fans to Sega and the general gaming community, and shut down one of Microsoft's online services all in one go? The elephant in the room is staring you down, my friend, and he's not happy.

Might wanna re-read your posts, case that's sure as hell what it sounded like to me :/

[Nepenthe]

If anything, it sounds like I'm calling out what I believe is worse behavior than being excited about a new Sonic game and making a direct comparison between the two shows of behavior, hence the whole "elephant in the room" bit which I thought would've put that statement into context about what I meant.

Really, if you guys honestly need definitive proof that those leaks didn't make me lose sleep, how about you find some of my posts that were actually made during the height of the controversy? =/

[Ferno]

Really, if you guys honestly need definitive proof that those leaks didn't make me lose sleep, how about you find some of my posts that were actually made during the height of the controversy? =/

Simplicity? In my Sawnik Fandom? BLASPHEMY! XD We're Pirates Sonic Fans, doing that would make things too simple, and we don't do simple, we've gotta drag things out for as long as we can! [/obvioussarcasm] I am filled with thorough enjoyment.

*Shot by all three*

(Not taking any sides here by the way) ._. -eep.

[Aquaslash]

Maybe I should have bolded the important parts. You sure sounded like you wanted him to be mad over the leaks.

If anything, it sounds like I'm calling out what I believe is worse behavior than being excited about a new Sonic game and making a direct comparison between the two shows of behavior

See, you just said it again.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Aquaslash

[Nepenthe]

Since when does one have to be mad to call something out as idiotic?

Do I have to denounce all Democrats to say that Obama was lax on his reaction to the Gulf Disaster? Do I have to boycott Hollywood because of Lindsay Lohan's shenanigans? Do I have to blow up Nintendo offices because I am annoyed over the spread of motion controls?

You guys are crazy. xP

[Aquaslash]

Since when does one have to be mad to call something out as idiotic?

Do I have to denounce all Democrats to say that Obama was lax on his reaction to the Gulf Disaster? Do I have to boycott Hollywood because of Lindsay Lohan's shenanigans? Do I have to blow up Nintendo offices because I am annoyed over the spread of motion controls?

You guys are crazy. xP

I didn't say YOU were mad. I said you wanted him to be mad

[Nepenthe]

If I'm not mad about it, why would I want him to be mad about it? That's retarded. =/

I would rather him merely recognize the extremism that cautious fans are capable of displaying more often instead of almost exclusively devoting such efforts to enthusiastic fans. Consistency is all I require, not rage.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Nepenthe

[Aquaslash]

Well:

why you think I'm saying you should rage over them is anyone's guess.

Now you know the answer to this question.

and knowing's half the battle! Now would you like red lasers or blue lasers?

[Nepenthe]

You know what? Can I just chalk this up to a misunderstanding on both sides, apologize for coming across as a bitch to people, and bow out of this conversation gracefully before I facepalm harder or laugh myself into a coma?

[Scar]

I just want to get this out there.

Everything that involves getting from point A to point B is linear.

It doesn't matter how many different ways you can get to point B. It doesn't matter how wide-open a level is; if you're going from point A to point B it is linear.

So with that out of the way, this game looks like it will be fun.

If its so wrong to be "drooling" over a Sonic game that ma be fun for the first time in ages I really don't know what we should be drooling over.

Not every game can be so revolutionary that it is drool worthy. Mario Galaxy was revolutionary. Mario Galaxy 2 was better, but it wasn't revolutionary anymore, because its prequel had already set the foundation.

Its not bad that SEGA are trying to use what worked. Every video game company does this. They find a formula that works and spam it to all heck; making minor cosmetic changes and adding slightly new gameplay elements with each new installment to remove tedium.

Thats how gaming works I'm afraid.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Requiem

[Rusty Spy]

Didn't I explicitly state that the game looks fun and pretty? That is is using the graphical power of its Wii platform well?

That's what a videogame is supposed to be, and Colours does it where no Sonic game really has of late. This is not something I dispute.

But that doesn't blind me to the things that don't seem so competently-executed: 1D level design; brevity; curious curtailed QTEs. The fact that I have the temerity to mention these deficiencies doesn't constitute a condemnation. It's nothing more sinister than the fact that I have eyes and a keyboard.

Ah, I see.

[Silencer226]

When watching the gameplay it actually seems kind of fun. The ability to drill underground and find hidden items and powerups makes for some good exploration. And as far as graphics are concerned it looks much better than any Sonic wii release I've seen so far. I'm still going to proceed with caution but so far I'm interested in the game (and I haven't been interested in any Sonic game for a long time). I'm going to add it to my "games I might buy if they don't suck" list.

[Blue Blood]

I think that Colours is an impressive looking game, regardless. The level design is not my ideal, I'd rather have something like Adventure 1. And some of those 3D sections look bland I can't deny. Thing is, they're short sections. Amongst the vast amount of 2D areas that are very focused on platforming, those empty cat walks look rather thrilling. Looking at it as a collective package, everything the game is doing seems rather fantastic. Graphics, sound, atmosphere and most importantly gameplay. It all looks very good. Not gonna cry GOTY or anything, but from what we know so far the game looks like it would score a solid 8 in my books. Your mileage may vary however, and that's fine.

Also, for the record, the levels in Colours are looking like an improvement over the Unleashed. The 2D parts are more diverse and less cramped, while the empty 3D areas are being used mainly for a change of pace. Hopefully some of the later 3D areas will include parts that are similar to Jungle Joyride and Eggmanland (both 360) though. The QTEs are more in vain of Rush tricking. While just mindless button mindless mashing, they were half the fun. Again, your could perceive all of this very differently. Just depends on what you like.

tl;dr (and it isn't long, so go read): Level design isn't what I'd want, but I really do like it. Everything else is great too. Don't agree? Fair enough.

[Phos]

I just want to get this out there.

Everything that involves getting from point A to point B is linear.

Ok. Well, that statement isn't actually all that accurate, but that doesn't have anything to do with my complaints.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Phos