Megathread Archie Sonic Main Discussion

[The-Master-Board]

I will say one thing, admittedly. I actually wasn't that keen on Genesis because of the fact that it was pretty much filler that had no bearing on the plot (which was actually really building steam and getting interesting at the time).

 

I think the problem I had with Archie's 'too many characters' syndrome was that the majority of them didn't even resemble Sonic characters in the slightest. I'm not just talking about some rather... odd... species choices (what was the deal with putting an anthro horse in the series again, exactly?), but the fact they (and the majority of the cast) were drawn in a style that looked so awkwardly generic and out of place standing next to Sonic.

 

The art has improved leaps and bounds both in terms of style and consistency in recent years. We've got Yardley, Bates and Peppers now, as opposed the horrors of Ron Lim. Steven Butler used to be one of the better artists, and he's still decent now (even he was a major offender in terms of drawing boobs!Sally), but has been massively overshadowed by the others. 

 

Seriously, back before I dropped the comic originally, one thing that always baffled the living hell out of me was how some of the art in there even got past quality control. I may not be the biggest fan of the comic by a long shot, but if nothing else I'll give credit where credit is due and say it at least looks largely professional now.

An anthro horse? As opposed to...an anthro hedgehog. 

Is that seriously an argument?

Sally with boobs! The travesty! How dare a Sonic series character have boo...oh wait; Rouge.

 

I find it hilarious people here arguing that the Sonic cast is bloated when they have been told multiple times that a comic's cast is fundamentaly large. Then you try show these people comic book universes like Marvel's and apparently this is "different".

I'd really like to see the comic book you all are envisioning that adheres so strictly to the games and doesn't build a believeable world full of depth. The way the games are these days you'd be lucky to have a 5 issue series if you are restricting yourself to the games adaptations.

[Mogtaki]

Enerjak is a demi-god, and manifests in an echidna who wields a MASSIVE amount of Chaos Energy. One of those avatars was an ancestor of Knuckles named Dimitri before he became a cyborg, and Knuckles himself became Enerjak as a result of manipulation from Dr. Finitivus.

 

 

Yeah, you can't look at the comics from a game perspective regarding Sonic history, when the history of the comics is clearly different by contrast. That was your first mistake.

 

The comics stopped implying that before the series even hit the triple digits of issues. Knuckles even had his own series of comics that illustrated the echidna society before it was discontinued and put together with the main Sonic comics during Pender's run (I think).

 

Hmmm I see. There's no way a new reader who picked up those issues would know any of that since it was never implied. I still barely know why Dimitri is the way he is as some freaky tentacle monster.

 

I guess that's your answer to this whole thing...? New readers like me don't have a clue what's going on so it's difficult to get into at times. I ended up skipping a bunch of issues because I barely cared for a certain arc with a certain hated green hedgehog recolour and I don't think Sega would like that if a bunch of readers did that too.

 

Same with the Knuckles comics, they're so old that they're irrelevant now so why bother with the Penders characters if no new reader knows who the hell they are or why they're there.

[-Mark-]

An anthro horse? As opposed to...an anthro hedgehog. 

Is that seriously an argument?

Sally with boobs! The travesty! How dare a Sonic series character have boo...oh wait; Rouge.

 

I find it hilarious people here arguing that the Sonic cast is bloated when they have been told multiple times that a comic's cast is fundamentaly large. Then you try show these people comic book universes like Marvel's and apparently this is "different".

I'd really like to see the comic book you all are envisioning that adheres so strictly to the games and doesn't build a believeable world full of depth. The way the games are these days you'd be lucky to have a 5 issue series if you are restricting yourself to the games adaptations.

 

Mostly because the anthro horse looked so ridiculously out of place in the Sonic universe. Fuck, it wasn't drawn in the Sonic style, or even much of a cartoon style; it looked more like a realistically drawn horse standing on two legs wearing clothes. Your argument is like trying to say that the Thundercats wouldn't look at all out of place in a Bugs Bunny cartoon 'because they're all talking anthro animals'.

 

And Rouge still strongly resembles a Sonic character in her design and proportions. Her boobs aren't a massively prominent feature, and more importantly, she wears fucking clothes. Not only was Sally often drawn with largely human proportions back in the dark days of the comic, but she paraded around in a flimsy open jacket that in no way counted as adequate coverage or clothing for the rack she was boasting in a children's comic. Being a squirrel/ chipmunk/ whatever doesn't exempt you from nudity if you're still shoving borderline full-blown tits in kids' faces. No matter how you try and spin it, she was always far more heavily sexualised than Rouge.

 

Your argument of 'people shouldn't say the cast is bloated because we keep telling them the cast is large' is like saying people shouldn't say shit smells bad because you warned them in advance. Knowing or expecting something in advance doesn't make something less true. 

Edited February 4, 2013 by -Mark-

[Vertekins]

I honestly don't see how you can compare this;

 

 

With this;

 

 

Oh, and SEGA pulling shit like Shadow the Hedgehog and '06 doesn't justify Archie taking the same route with their crap. This isn't a case of being obligated to mimic like "Monkey see Monkey do", it's a case of expecting them to at least try to exemplify a "serious" tone that isn't melodramatic and pretentious like those two travesties if they absolutely must follow the 'leader'. Also, Archie were pulling off badly-written grimdark stories years before the games ever became "Darker and edgier"

[Tornado]

I honestly don't see how you can compare this;

 

*Rouge*

 

With this;

 

*Sally*

Because the thing that is objectionable is exactly the same between both, except one of them has a shitty art style. Rouge purposely was implemented with boob physics in the game she debuted in, and you're going to tell me that the sex appeal argument is only valid as it applies to Sally?

 

 

Oh, and SEGA pulling shit like Shadow the Hedgehog and '06 doesn't justify Archie taking the same route with their crap.

No one was saying that Sega making bad stories justifies Archie making bad stories. The argument wasn't "Archie stories are good because Sega sucks also." The argument was that "Sega is hardly the group to step in and fix Archie's problems when they generally can't write worth a shit either."

 

The crux of the matter is that what image, exactly, is Sega trying to protect? What image, exactly, should Sega force Archie to prescribe to instead of whatever it is that they've been doing? The one that completely flips on its head every other game, and panders directly to whatever is the most popular thing at the time? You throw all of the Archie backstory out to align the comic more with whatever game is coming out, and you've turned the comic into nothing more than an advertisement that you pay for each month.

 

 

This isn't a case of being obligated to mimic like "Monkey see Monkey do", it's a case of expecting them to at least try to exemplify a "serious" tone that isn't melodramatic and pretentious like those two travesties if they absolutely must follow the 'leader'. Also, Archie were pulling off badly-written grimdark stories years before the games ever became "Darker and edgier"

It can't be both things.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Tornado

[Amomynous]

Sally being all sexualised is out of her character as well, with Rouge this is how she was made, but with Sally it was forced upon her by someone who wanted to bend her to their will.

While Rouge originally broke the Sonic style in order to exaggerate her body laughably, she has been made to conform to Sonic style since, Sally originally fit the cast only to break form more and more for a certain period to look like a Rob leifeild woman.

 

And sometimes with Rouge she doesn't even seem to be played entirely straight, her overly forward' flirting' sometimes comes off as taking the piss or having no respect for any objection she may cause.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Mysterics

[BlazingTales]

Because the thing that is objectionable is exactly the same between both, except one of them has a shitty art style. Rouge purposely was implemented with boob physics in the game she debuted in, and you're going to tell me that the sex appeal argument is only valid as it applies to Sally?

In all fairness, that drawing of Sally is quite literally a nude Barbie doll with a chipmunk head attached to it. They're both highly sexualised, of course, but I can see how someone could find one portrayal more objectionable than the other by visual prevalence alone.

[-Mark-]

Sally being all sexualised is out of her character as well, with Rouge this is how she was made, but with Sally it was forced upon her by someone who wanted to bend her to their will.

 

And sometimes with Rouge she doesn't even seem to be played entirely straight, her overly forward' flirting' sometimes comes off as taking the piss or having no respect for any objection she may cause.

 

This.

 

This was Sally's original design;

 

 

Notice how she has a figure without having boobs. 

 

And say what you will, but even with all the boob physics in the world there's still the fact that Rouge actually puts a freaking lid on her jugs.

Edited February 4, 2013 by -Mark-

[Vertekins]

Because the thing that is objectionable is exactly the same between both, except one of them has a shitty art style. Rouge purposely was implemented with boob physics in the game she debuted in, and you're going to tell me that the sex appeal argument is only valid as it applies to Sally?

No it isn't. Rouge doesn't have a defined belly button and is not proportioned in a super model-esque way that makes who stand out like a sore thumb compared to the other characters like Sally is. Note how Sally did not start out looking like she does in that panel;

 

 

Butler just exaggerated things that weren't explicitly there to begin with and when you compare it to the clothed Rouge then yes, it does look more suggestive and sexualised for the simple fact that Sally didn't start out with them in the first place.

 

 

No one was saying that Sega making bad stories justifies

Archie making bad stories. The argument wasn't "Archie stories are good

because Sega sucks also." The argument was that "Sega is hardly the

group to step in and fix Archie's problems when they generally can't

write worth a shit either."

 

These are two portions of what Mark said on page 503 of this topic;

 

Don't get me wrong, Ian's done a great job in 're-Sonic-ifying' the

comic in recent years, but before that? It honestly felt less like a

Sonic comic, and more like a generic furry superhero political

romance drama with Sonic just copypasted in. Even if they do their own

canon, the general style and tone should at least be consistent with the

franchise as a whole.

 

I know that the comics don't affect the game canon, but I'm speaking more in terms of the image and reputation of the franchise as a whole. Ultimately, regardless of canon, universe or medium, Sonic is Sonic. At

least, it should be. Before Ian took over, the comics were painfully

unprofessional for the most part, both in terms of writing and artistic

quality, with it bordering on trashy furry porn on an awkwardly regular

basis.

 

This is CSS's responses to Mark's sections of post above;

 

The general style of the franchise itself wasn't even consistent during

that time. Sonic 06? ShTH? And you're calling out the comics for being

inconsistent?

 

 

No you're not speaking in terms of the image and reputation of the franchise as a whole, and don't even try to make that excuse.

You're speaking from a personal bias against what the comic has, and

whether you acknowledge that or not, the image and reputation of the

franchise as a whole was always affected more by the games than any

other part of the franchise. You're calling the comics unprofessional in

writing and artistic quality, bordering on furry porn, and yet we had a

game that went so far as to use guns and cuss words in an attempt to

gain an older audience, followed by a game which went uber-realistic and

where many tend to cry "beastiality" over a human kissing an

anthropomorphic hedgehog?

Yeah, image and reputation my ass, bud.

 

What SEGA has done in the series at the time in all of it's awfulness doesn't justify the route Archie took because it was fundamentally bad. The degree that the franchise is 'affected' by Archie still isn't all that relevant to the notion that many of it's aspects in the past have been terrible. Bad is bad.

 

Whatsmore, I strongly, strongly doubt that the people who dictate what the comic is to do have any real relation with the game's writers considering that they are a marketing relations team and presumably nothing more. So saying that SEGA aren't justified in dictating what Archie does because they've written Sonic games bad in the past is an awful argument at best because, in extreme likelihood, marketing relations were not the writers of ShTH or SONIC '06, nor is it likely at all that they suggested guns and such in ShTH. If my memory is right, it was Iizuka that suggested that.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Vertekins

[-Mark-]

Also, even if you take Sonic 06 and Shadow the Hedgehog into account, the game series has at least been relatively consistent in its characterisation and portrayal of the characters. Their personalities and behaviour are relatively consistent.

 

Sure, Shadow the Hedgehog was a deliberate attempt to be dark and edgy but it still just about stay on the edge of what was believable and acceptable for part of the Sonic franchise. And I will adamantly stand by Sonic 06 in that it wasn't any 'darker' or what have you than either of the Adventure games, aside from the realistic art style. What exactly about Sonic 06's plot made it any 'darker' than either of them?

 

Even at their worst or most drastic, the Sonic games are a case of "How about we try one a bit more <theme> this time?", not "Let's throw out the template entirely and do whatever the hell we want." No matter how bad it was, Sonic 06 didn't feel drastic enough in style or tone that it felt out of place in the franchise. Shadow the Hedgehog really stretched that to breaking point, but even that just about managed to feel like it belonged as part of the series. Yes, it felt like a Sonic game taking itself too seriously to a comical extent, but it still felt like a Sonic game. It was a Sonic game with guns and vehicles, not a generic GTA/ FPS clone with Sonic characters pasted in.

 

My prior argument is that the older Archie comics honestly felt like they were Sonic in name and appearance (just about) only. Nothing about the plot, setting or characterisation felt like it bore any resemblance to the Sonic franchise period, and the series honestly wouldn't have felt all that different if the Sonic cast had been swapped out for generic original characters. I get that the Archie comic is it's own canon, but if you're going to write something that differs so drastically from the source material, why even bother doing a licensed comic (other than to piggyback on the brand familiarty)?

 

Also, in regards to 'the comics being an advert'? What do you think every single piece of extra-game media for Sonic (or every toy or game franchise) ultimately serves as? All the cartoons and Sonic X were basically glorified marketing vehicles for the games. The comics only began because the Sonic series was printing money and they wanted to cash in. Even if the comics are more their own entity and don't bluntly scream 'buy the games' (well, apart from the game adaptations), they were pretty much created for the sake of cashing in on Sonic's popularity and raising brand awareness. Keeping the comics going gives Sonic a monthly presence between games.

Edited February 4, 2013 by -Mark-

[Kuzu]

Also, even if you take Sonic 06 and Shadow the Hedgehog into account, the game series has at least been relatively consistent in its characterisation and portrayal of the characters. Their personalities and behaviour are relatively consistent.

 

Errr.......yeah, um.....I don't think that's the case.

[-Mark-]

Errr.......yeah, um.....I don't think that's the case.

 

When has Sonic ever really acted out of character in the games, exactly? Regardless of the setting or tone of the game, the characters still more or less act the way they're supposed to.

Edited February 4, 2013 by -Mark-

[Tornado]

No it isn't. Rouge doesn't have a defined belly button and is not proportioned in a super model-esque way that makes who stand out like a sore thumb compared to the other characters like Sally is. Note how Sally did not start out looking like she does in that panel;

 

 

Butler just exaggerated things that weren't explicitly there to begin with and when you compare it to the clothed Rouge then yes, it does look more suggestive.

 

Which means... at a specific point in time they suffered from the same problems except one has a shitty art style. You don't "accidentally" sexualize your character by making her wear hooker boots and a skintight leotard that accentuates her big boobs that have jiggle phyiscs in a platforming game anymore than you "accidentally" sexualize your character when you draw her with human proportions and naked except for a jacket. And just like Rouge hasn't always been so blatant about the sexualization, neither has Sally.

 

 

These are two portions of what Mark said on page 503 of this topic;

 

 

 

This is CSS's responses to Mark's sections of post above;

I'm not seeing how a conversation where CSS said the same thing I said in greater detail refutes when I said the same thing more broadly.

 

What SEGA has done in the series at the time in all of it's awfulness doesn't justify the route Archie took because it was fundamentally bad.

Again, where does anyone says that it does justify bad writing? Where does anyone say that Archie isn't bad because Sega was also? The only thing CSS was arguing is that Sega reigning in in Archie's stuff to keep from hurting the series' image is silly, because the series itself has a shitty image because of stupid things done that have far more of an effect on the series' image than anything Archie can do.

 

The degree that the franchise is 'affected' by Archie still isn't all that relevant to the notion that many of it's aspects in the past have been terrible. Bad is bad.

But it's absolutely relevant to the notion that Sega doesn't have much of a leg to stand on if they are dictating things to Archie to keep the series' image from being damaged.

 

Whatsmore, I strongly, strongly doubt that the people who dictate what the comic is to do have any real relation with the game's writers considering that they are a marketing relations team and presumably nothing more. So saying that SEGA aren't justified in dictating what Archie does because they've written Sonic games bad in the past is an awful argument at best because, in extreme likelihood, marketing relations were not the writers of ShTH or SONIC '06, nor is it likely at all that they suggested guns and such in ShTH. If my memory is right, it was Iizuka that suggested that.

This argument basically boils down to "Sega is justified in dictating what Archie does because they are Sega," which doesn't mean anything. Of course Sega is perfectly justified in dictating whatever the hell they want about an adaptation of their franchise. If they told Archie that they wanted the Sonic comic to be entirely about Big fishing in bass tournaments from now on, that is completely their prerogative and they can do it for whatever idiotic reason they want.

 

That doesn't mean that their reasoning for doing it can't be questioned, and simply repeating that they are the ones who can force those changes is irrelevant to the conversation because of it.

 

 

Also, even if you take Sonic 06 and Shadow the Hedgehog into account, the game series has at least been relatively consistent in its characterisation and portrayal of the characters. Their personalities and behaviour are relatively consistent.

 Amy.

 

My prior argument is that the older Archie comics honestly felt like they were Sonic in name and appearance (just about) only. Nothing about the plot, setting or characterisation felt like it bore any resemblance to the Sonic franchise period, and the series honestly wouldn't have felt all that different if the Sonic cast had been swapped out for generic original characters.

So what? That's still not an inherently bad thing. The issue is not that Archie is so different. The issue is that Archie is different and does a bad job at being different more often than not, which can be perfectly fixed by the writers being more competent. If you don't like it because it is different, that's a completely different situation than it actually being bad.

See: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles the comic vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 1987 vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies. See: Pokemon games vs. Pokemon anime vs. Pokemon Manga.

Or any number of adaptations with wildly different storylines and characterizations and characters than the original source material.

 

Also, in regards to 'the comics being an advert'? What do you think every single piece of extra-game media for Sonic (or every toy or game franchise) ultimately serves as? All the cartoons and Sonic X were basically glorified marketing vehicles for the games. The comics only began because the Sonic series was printing money and they wanted to cash in. Even if the comics are more their own entity and don't bluntly scream 'buy the games' (well, apart from the game adaptations), they were pretty much created for the sake of cashing in on Sonic's popularity and raising brand awareness. Keeping the comics going gives Sonic a monthly presence between games.

Which is altogether different from turning it into a marketing vehicle for whatever specific thing Sega has coming out in the next few months. Archie keeps awareness of the franchise up and keeps interest going when there isn't a game coming out. So did Fleetway. So did stuff like Sonic X, and all the other Sonic shows for that matter. That in no way made them 22 minutes ads for what game just came out that long ago abandoned attempts at real narrative and character development because of it (See: Pokemon anime).

Edited February 4, 2013 by Tornado

[Vertekins]

This argument basically boils down to "Sega is justified in dictating what Archie does because they are Sega," which doesn't mean anything. Of course Sega is perfectly justified in dictating whatever the hell they want about an adaptation of their franchise. If they told Archie that they wanted the Sonic comic to be entirely about Big fishing in bass tournaments from now on, that is completely their prerogative and they can do it for whatever idiotic reason they want.

 

That doesn't mean that their reasoning for doing it can't be questioned,

and simply repeating that they are the ones who can force those changes

is irrelevant to the conversation because of it.

 

 

It was stated that SEGA are unqualified for telling Archie what to do when the stories in their games have been just as bad or worse not because the changes they're forcing are questionable.

 

This point would only have relevance if SEGA marketing team that dictates what Archie does were the writers of the more badly-written Sonic games. Which I'm pretty sure they weren't, therefore not making them in any way culpable to be pulled-up over what they are doing in respects to the stories of the badly-written Sonic games.

[Tornado]

It could be Iizuka himself who demanded that Archie straighten up and fly right. It could be the guy who cleans the toilets and fixes the furnace. It doesn't matter whatsoever for the purposes of pointing out that the games themselves have hardly been sterling examples of building goodwill for the series' image. Archie doesn't exist in a void, causing all manner of ill-effects on the series by itself. If the reason being given for pulling Archie closer to the fold is to make the image of the series better, the problems with that reasoning still apply regardless of who gave the orders.

 

 

Now, if CSS was saying that Sega was hypocritical for doing so, yes. Then you would be right, because the only way it would be hypocritical would be if the same people that wrote the worst games were handing down the edict. But pointing out hypocrisy and pointing out a double standard isn't the same thing.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Tornado

[-Mark-]

I will reiterate;

 

 

if you're going to write something that differs so drastically from the source material, why even bother doing a licensed comic (other than to piggyback on the brand familiarty)?

 

Again, it's a lot better for this now (than it used to be at least) but during the Penders/ Bollers reign it really felt more like they were just using the Sonic name to get their own shit out there because they knew full well it wouldn't fly on its own. This is evident with Penders' 'not-Knuckles' Echidna crap that he's been trying to get off the ground since he got kicked off the comic proper.

 

Penders didn't write Sonic stories. He wrote his own little 'original' pet project and relied on the presense (or pretense) of the titular character to sell his horrible ideas and writing.

 

Again, I don't so much have an issue with the Archie canon being different, but my point is that, back when the comic bore little to no resemblance to the franchise it was initially supposed to be based off of, what the hell's the point any more? Surely the whole point of a licensed comic is to at least bear a relatively strong resemblance to the thing that it's actually originated from. If you're going to pull some shit that's pretty much an 'in name only' resemblance then you may as well just write original stories.

 

There's a difference between a Sonic comic, and a comic with Sonic in it. In my opinion, the Archie comic have always been the latter, although admittedly they're about as far away from it now as they've ever been.

Edited February 4, 2013 by -Mark-

[Soniman]

I believe the Sonic comics are still Sonic comics, despite being in a diffrent continuity.

 

Shows like SatAM which the comic was based off of, still had to be approved by Sega to get syndicated and be aired. Sally, Antoine, Rotor, etc, they're all owned by Sega, they're still effectivley Sonic characters. The fact that they're still relevant even today and not be snuffed out by Sega by now is a testament to that.

 

The comics still have the struggle of Sonic vs Eggman, it still has rings, Chaos Emeralds, special stages, nearly every Sonic character making a appearence. You still have G.U.N, you got Soleanna, Station Square, the Death Egg etc etc. Sure the comic has it's original stuff but current issues have done well to give the comic a preomdimantley Sonic feel. New artists like Bates, Yardley, and Peppers stick to the clean, shapely Sonic style and not the human-like proportions we've had for past artists not to mention the generall color palette has increased signifignatly, making the comic in general pop-out a lot more.

 

Bottom line is, even though the comic takes place in a diffrent setting it still is a Sonic comic to me (I compare to a melting pot where many continuites of Sonic sort of blend togehter).

Edited February 5, 2013 by Soniman

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I will reiterate;

 

 

 

Again, it's a lot better for this now (than it used to be at least) but during the Penders/ Bollers reign it really felt more like they were just using the Sonic name to get their own shit out there because they knew full well it wouldn't fly on its own. This is evident with Penders' 'not-Knuckles' Echidna crap that he's been trying to get off the ground since he got kicked off the comic proper.

 

Penders didn't write Sonic stories. He wrote his own little 'original' pet project and relied on the presense (or pretense) of the titular character to sell his horrible ideas and writing.

 

Again, I don't so much have an issue with the Archie canon being different, but my point is that, back when the comic bore little to no resemblance to the franchise it was initially supposed to be based off of, what the hell's the point any more? Surely the whole point of a licensed comic is to at least bear a relatively strong resemblance to the thing that it's actually originated from. If you're going to pull some shit that's pretty much an 'in name only' resemblance then you may as well just write original stories.

 

There's a difference between a Sonic comic, and a comic with Sonic in it. In my opinion, the Archie comic have always been the latter, although admittedly they're about as far away from it now as they've ever been.

Thing is, the comics it orginated back before the series had an a more set in stone identity than it does now, in 1993. It was a continuation of the SatAM cartoon show, not the games. And from that point on, they were license to continue to use those elements from the cartoons before adding more and more material from the games to go into it.

 

The whole point of a licensed comic is to represent the franchise it is a part of in a different medium. Just like the whole point of a licensed cartoon is to represent the franchise it is a part of (Sonic X, Sonic OVA). If their license allows the to add more creative freedom to the plot, it makes no sense to criticize the comic for something Sega had no problem with. When said creative freedom goes to the point that Sega issues mandates, as was done with the Pender's fiasco, then that is a different story and one that we don't have control over.

 

The comics aren't the only part of the franchise that is a medium "with Sonic in it" and with little resemblance of the franchise it represents. Sonic X has only 3 adaptations from the Adventures and Battle while going completely different in it's plot from the games. The OVA does the same thing, being nothing more than a cartoon with Sonic characters in it. And this is before getting into the DiC cartoons of Sonic Underground, AoSTH, or SatAM that Sega had no problems with in the past.

 

So why is it that the comics seem to be called out for not sticking to the source material, when there are other mediums that I mentioned above that do the same thing, some of which made by Sonic Team themselves?

 

 

This is CSS's responses to Mark's sections of post above;

My response to the above was pretty much what Tornado was telling you. It wasn't to justify Archie doing what they did, it's that calling them unproffessional when Sega themselves weren't paragons of professionality is being completely one-sided. And I find it hard to believe someone isn't biased towards the comics when they bash it that way and say that Sega was in the right after finally getting its act together several years later over this mess.

Edited February 5, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[-Mark-]

I believe the Sonic comics are still Sonic comics, despite being in a diffrent continuity.

 

Shows like SatAM which the comic was based off of, still had to be approved by Sega to get syndicated and be aired. Sally, Antoine, Rotor, etc, they're all owned by Sega, they're still effectivley Sonic characters. The fact that they're still relevant even today and not be snuffed out by Sega by now is a testament to that.

 

The comics still have the struggle of Sonic vs Eggman, it still has rings, Chaos Emeralds, special stages, nearly every Sonic character making a appearence. You still have G.U.N, you got Soleanna, Station Square, the Death Egg etc etc. Sure the comic has it's original stuff but current issues have done well to give the comic a preomdimantley Sonic feel. New artists like Bates, Yardley, and Peppers stick to the clean, shapely Sonic style and not the human-like proportions we've had for past artists not to mention the generall color palette has increased signifignatly, making the comic in general pop-out a lot more.

 

Bottom line is, even though the comic takes place in a diffrent setting it still is a Sonic comic to me (I compare to a melting pot where many continuites of Sonic sort of blend togehter).

 

Except until recently the comics completely screwed up the entire concept of the Chaos Emeralds in particular. If I remember correctly, weren't there hundreds of them in the comics? And how many ridiculous 'other forms' did they even give Sonic and the rest of the cast, back in the day?

 

And again, I can't say I speak for Sega, but considering how much more focus the game-canon characters have been getting as of late whilst quite a few of the core SatAM cast are being shelved or gently nudged into the background a little to me says that Sega are at least starting to wake up and smell the coffee and have decided they want some changes.

 

 

Thing is, the comics it orginated back before the series had an a more set in stone identity than it does now, in 1993. It was a continuation of the SatAM cartoon show, not the games. And from that point on, they were license to continue to use those elements from the cartoons before adding more and more material from the games to go into it.

 

The whole point of a licensed comic is to represent the franchise it is a part of in a different medium. Just like the whole point of a licensed cartoon is to represent the franchise it is a part of (Sonic X, Sonic OVA). If their license allows the to add more creative freedom to the plot, it makes no sense to criticize the comic for something Sega had no problem with. When said creative freedom goes to the point that Sega issues mandates, as was done with the Pender's fiasco, then that is a different story and one that we don't have control over.

 

The comics aren't the only part of the franchise that is a medium "with Sonic in it" and with little resemblance of the franchise it represents. Sonic X has only 3 adaptations from the Adventures and Battle while going completely different in it's plot from the games. The OVA does the same thing, being nothing more than a cartoon with Sonic characters in it. And this is before getting into the DiC cartoons of Sonic Underground, AoSTH, or SatAM that Sega had no problems with in the past.

 

So why is it that the comics seem to be called out for not sticking to the source material, when there are other mediums that I mentioned above that do the same thing, some of which made by Sonic Team themselves?

 

 

My response to the above was pretty much what Tornado was telling you. It wasn't to justify Archie doing what they did, it's that calling them unproffessional when Sega themselves weren't paragons of professionality is being completely one-sided. And I find it hard to believe someone isn't biased towards the comics when they bash it that way and say that Sega was in the right after finally getting its act together several years later over this mess.

 

The main difference here is that, despite ultimately being a different canon, Sonic X stuck ridiculously closely to the game canon to the point that were it not for pretty much one or two instances where the show tweaked things a bit, it could quite easily have been set in the game canon entirely. I still stand by the opinion that Sonic X is the most faithful extra-game Sonic media by a country mile. The fact that Sonic Team and Yuji Naka actually had involvement in the thing was probably a big factor in that, mind. 

 

The old DiC cartoons were likely given the green light back then because, as you said, there was relatively little source material to go on at the time (and the fact that Sega of America generally did whatever the hell they wanted with the franchise back then anyway). The fact that Sega seem to have stepped in and outright pulled the upcoming Sonic Underground issue from the Universe comic makes it seem like they'd rather have the series swept under the rug and kept out of the public eye. There's been a far more established cast and universe since Sonic Adventure, so I really doubt if someone pitched a new show along the lines of AoStH or SatAM to them now that it would get approval at all. 

 

Seriously though, five or six years ago it honestly felt like Sega were just blindly giving their stamp of approval to everything Archie did without even checking it. Looking back at it I'm still shocked that some of it even got through quality control (I'm talking about the often... 'interesting' artwork here even more than the writing at the time). 

Edited February 5, 2013 by -Mark-

[The-Master-Board]

Mostly because the anthro horse looked so ridiculously out of place in the Sonic universe. Fuck, it wasn't drawn in the Sonic style, or even much of a cartoon style; it looked more like a realistically drawn horse standing on two legs wearing clothes. Your argument is like trying to say that the Thundercats wouldn't look at all out of place in a Bugs Bunny cartoon 'because they're all talking anthro animals'.

 

And Rouge still strongly resembles a Sonic character in her design and proportions. Her boobs aren't a massively prominent feature, and more importantly, she wears fucking clothes. Not only was Sally often drawn with largely human proportions back in the dark days of the comic, but she paraded around in a flimsy open jacket that in no way counted as adequate coverage or clothing for the rack she was boasting in a children's comic. Being a squirrel/ chipmunk/ whatever doesn't exempt you from nudity if you're still shoving borderline full-blown tits in kids' faces. No matter how you try and spin it, she was always far more heavily sexualised than Rouge.

 

Your argument of 'people shouldn't say the cast is bloated because we keep telling them the cast is large' is like saying people shouldn't say shit smells bad because you warned them in advance. Knowing or expecting something in advance doesn't make something less true. 

And since when has the games conformed to a "Sonic Universe style" ?

You've got anthro animals yet also got small furry animals that don't seem athro at all that pop out of the old badniks in the classic games. When did Chip conform the the established character style? Tiny thing with no elongated "tube arms and legs". You've got humans that had a distinct anime style with large eyes in the adventure games, then super realistic humans (and Eggman) in 06' and then the shitty pixar looking ones in Unleashed.

Hell even the main characters themselves haven't been consistant. Riders series Sonic is always lankier and more "streamlined" to the regular Sonic and they broke the norm of style with their cool anime intro.

What you're criticizing is style?

I really don' think you understand comics at all because if you did you'd know that style varies. It's not just something that every artist can mimick and conform to. If you did that you'd probably have one or two artists fromArchie that would be non-stop working on the comic. Every artist has their own style. Fair enough in the games if characters conform to a style but we are talking about a comicbook series here. Style changes between artsist and over time, which leads me to my next point.

 

The "boobs" Sally you criticize here was during an era when the comic was trying a more Japanese manga style. Manga style always is over the top and exaggerates everything, especially the female form. Show me a scene where Sally is being overtly sexual? I'd like to see it.

It was just a style. It wasn't at all like you claim Sally "waving" her tits in the readers face, but with little to no effort I bet I could find you a "kids" comic that actually does. Hell manga and anime is highly sexaulised and for kids. Things like the issue of sexualised characters isn't such a big deal these days.

Sally was just the receipient of the style, and being a main character in the comics, would've seen the spotlight a lot. I can bet you could find a "boob" Bunnie somewhere too.

Sally is in no way "sexualised" in the comic anymore than any character in the comic is. 

Rouge on the otherhand was created with sexuality in mind. Boobs front and centre on show with cleavage, skintight catsuit, hearts over her body, husky voice, always flirting with Knuckles.

If SEGA is fine with this I really can't see the outcry of "Rrrr boobs, shame on the comic" that you seem to hold besides the obvious bias you seem to have towards the comic and anything that isn't conforming to your ideal "games world".

 

Here's a quick test. Let's drop our age in

3

2

1

I'm twenty six. More than likely if anyone else did this I'd expect the majority of people to be over 18, therefore an adult. The only people I see having a problem with a kids comic having a (way blown out of proportion) tits issue are.....adults.

Says a lot more about their prudence to sexuality than anything else. See a cartoon character, immediately think of sex, think everyone else will think the same.......must save the children!!!

Kids won't notice this shit. Hell kids seem to just buy the comic simply because its got Sonic on it. It' hilariously adults I see as being the only ones with a problem here. Kids see a character overzealous idiots see a noxious hazard to their kids.

When I was a kid I had no idea there was even such a thing as racism. I treated everyone the same until the time I was older and actually found out the word. Then I didn't know how to act around people of other races, like all of a sudden things had become awkward. The ignorance of a child is bliss.

It's only when adults start making such a big fuss over such a little thing that kids would take notice. And really what is all the bitching about here? An anthro character who some think is parading around half naked. Really? That's such a big fuss? Sonic has been pantsless for 21 years!

I really doubt kids are seeing the character as "Hot damn that's one sexy squirrel!", yet people are acting like they do and hate the comic for it.

 

The argument isn't "We keep telling you the cast is bloated so therefore it's large, so deal with it", the argument is we keep showing you  that comic universes have multitudes of characters to create depth because they are ongoing series that come out monthly and need to have extra characters and depth unlike games which can get by with little story and few characters because they are so few and far between, AND we keep showing evidence that you can't run a comic series like you run a game, yet you have no capacity to see reason and just dismiss things as "Oh that's other comicbook series, they're different".

The moment you claim a comic book cast is bloated and try run things like an adaptation of just the games is the moment you started losing the argument.

Edited February 5, 2013 by The-Master-Board

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

The main difference here is that, despite ultimately being a different canon, Sonic X stuck ridiculously closely to the game canon to the point that were it not for pretty much one or two instances where the show tweaked things a bit, it could quite easily have been set in the game canon entirely. I still stand by the opinion that Sonic X is the most faithful extra-game Sonic media by a country mile. The fact that Sonic Team and Yuji Naka actually had involvement in the thing was probably a big factor in that, mind. 

Oh, please. Now you're making excuses.

 

The only thing Sonic X stuck closely to the game canon was the characters, the chaos emeralds, and the adaptations. And even then it did those differently. From the beginning, you're in Sonic's world for all but 5 minutes before they're warped to another dimension and into the human world where majority of the time is spent there. Then the first parts of it involve Sonic finding his other friends, who then try to hide their existence from the rest of the world while living in Chris' mansion before the world takes notice and allows them to wonder freely, while Eggman is terrorizing the world by selecting robots from a slot machine, then later Rouge ends up becoming a spy for the government as a partner of Agent Topaz as they destroy Eggman's first base. At some point, Tails and Chris' grandpa builds this new plane called the X Tornado that replaces the old biplane we've been long familiar with in the games. This gets done in the 8th episode, fairly early in the series and we end up saying goodbye to the old Tornado bi-plane.

 

Later on, Eggman makes a new flying base for his operations and proceeds to terrorize the world that way, before it gets destroyed and he builds a new one before THAT one gets destroyed by Super Sonic.

 

And this is before we even get into the SA1 Adaptation. You're seriously going to tell me this junk sticks ridiculously close to the game canon? This is just as different and ridiculous as how Archie deviates from the game canon. Stuff like the S Team, stuff like the Metarex, and don't get me started on robots like Bocoe, Decoe, and Bokkun.

 

Not once do we see a reference to Green Hill Zone or any part of Sonic's world as we hardly spend anytime there, not once do we see Metal Sonic, we only see Angel Island a few times before we reach Season 3, and the designs of Eggmans Robots were completely different to just about every design in the game canon. Heck, on a more minor note, we hardly even see Tails use his tails to fly until episode 20. Meanwhile, we're dealing the life of Chris who takes more of the focus away from Sonic and his friends, and Sonic is really just there to run around while hardly doing anything significant as the central character up until the adaptations. 

 

Yeah, this stuff is no different from how Archie takes creative freedom with the property and is just as drastically as different from the source material, if not even worse because Sonic is treated more like a support character by comparison and hardly any other material from the games is even used. Says even more when the people behind this are the very ones who made the games. You could simply read the episode list and see a massive difference between it and the games.

The old DiC cartoons were likely given the green light back then because, as you said, there was relatively little source material to go on at the time (and the fact that Sega of America generally did whatever the hell they wanted with the franchise back then anyway). The fact that Sega seem to have stepped in and outright pulled the upcoming Sonic Underground issue from the Universe comic makes it seem like they'd rather have the series swept under the rug and kept out of the public eye. There's been a far more established cast and universe since Sonic Adventure, so I really doubt if someone pitched a new show along the lines of AoStH or SatAM to them now that it would get approval at all. 

Or maybe there were some other circumstances completely different to "We don't ever want to see this ever again" that led them to pull it.

 

So what's your excuse for the OVA being so drastically different from the source material? Because right now, all you've been doing perpetuating this double standard of how unfamiliar the world of Archie is to the games when every other medium outside of the games do the same thing, and even more you're giving a free pass for Sonic X being unfamiliar while ironically claiming that it sticks closely to the game canon (it doesn't). And some how, that is a bad thing for it to have done while the cartoons did the same thing from AoSTH up to Sonic X and yet you give them absolutely no flak for it while the comics are the only medium outside of the games that still live on.

 

This established cast and canon since the Adventures was never around the way it is now when Archie Sonic first took off; we were already on issue 79 by the time the first Adventure adaptation was made in 1999. Back then it was just Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy, and Eggman around in the games while the Chaotix were recently brought into the games in 2004 since debuting in Knuckles Chaotix, only managing to live on in the comics. And it was prior to that adaptation where all these characters and elements made an appearance into the comics.

 

Now that the cast and material is more solidly established in the games, Archie at the very least took them in and adapted them into it's larger world. Badniks from the classic games working along side the Swatbots from the cartoons before both of them got scrapped (and even then we got a few cameos when we passed the 150 mark for the comics), the use of the Death Egg in addition to the Space Colony Ark, Chaos rampaging Station Square, the Special Stages where the Emeralds are kept, Angel Island with it's old past mentioned along side the newer elements before it was deserted, heck even the use of Warp Posts, Warp Rings, Sol Emeralds and Time Stones, even Silver's devastated future and Blaze's alternate dimension being put to narrative use in the comics, and so forth. Heck, how about the Battle Bird Armada from Tails Adventures being made a mention? Babylon Rouges and Babylon Garden along with Extreme Gear? Even Eggman Nega, although he has yet to make a visual appearance, has even been given a small reference as he dimension hopping and mocking the Zone Cops. There's only a few things that to my knowledge are not mentioned in the comics, such as Iblis and Solaris and the plot of Sonic Battle, but compared to Sonic X it adapts far more of the game material into it's universe.

 

In other words, what is generally used in the games tends to find some way into the comic at some point. Much more so than any of the cartoons have ever done. And what's more? I'm pretty sure any casual reader getting into the comics would have some decent understanding to put two and two together and understand that Archie Sonic is completely different from Game Sonic and still read them without any problems. Various cartoons and anime do the same thing, such as the X-men when it comes to their comics and cartoons, Batman when it came to his movies, cartoons, and even video games, Pokemon when it came to their games and cartoons, or even TMNT and Thundercats when they make reboots of each other from their past cartoons. Heck, how about the Young Justice with it's difference of other characters and alterations made from the source material? How about Teen Titans differing from it's comic version and it's cartoon version?

 

Do I need to further dig around the internet and make a list of examples of other franchises that do the same exact thing? Because right now, you're making no effort to grasp this detail when it comes to differences between mediums that represent the same franchise.

 

TL;DR - no shit Archie Sonic has some different and even downright unfamiliar elements in it's continuity. Why in the blue hell is that a bad thing in itself when not only is it not the only form of Sonic which does the same thing, but other franchise's do similar things as well and still advertise the franchise that it is apart of? It's one thing to be unfamiliar with the different elements from one side of the series, but it's another to call them terrible for being so.

Edited February 5, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[The-Master-Board]

Damn I hate when I have to agree with CSS. Spot on about SonicX and other franchise comparisons.

 

To me I believe the comic is something almost greater than the games because of the way they run it. The games are so disjointed and change so much between game to game, I mean look at Unleashed with its stupid realism and then the very next game is Colours with its bright and vibrant cartoon world feel.

The reason I love the comics is because if I happen to love a certain element from the games, say a character or a place, I will likely never see that character or place again outside of that game. Love Johnny from SRA? Well get used to only seeing him in that one game. Miss an old character like Nack who  (thanks a lot jerks at SEGA  ) we'll likely never see again in games? Too bad.

But the comic is a well of opportunity and has been using this vast compiled history and backlog of characters and game settings as writing material. Who ever thought we'd see the Battle Bird Armada again? Tails Doll a distant memory? Well the comics still remember him.

It's this well of potential to appease fans of the various elements from the games over the years, and I can very much say in recent years that the comic is doing marvelously at it. Not just by acknowledging characters long forgotten to the games like Ray and Mighty, Bean, Bark, Heavy and Bomb, but actually utilizing them as well as giving some further depth to elements that were never touched in the games.

We never saw much of Silver's ruined dystopian future world beyond a few clips in 06', well now we can delve into it and explore via the comics.

While they are a completely different medium to the games and of course in no way canon, they do let us relive the games long after we've completed thm and are longing for more.

 

We'll always have more Sonic, but what if I like Omega as a character. I can list his game time on one hand:

Sonic Heroes as part of team Dark. Helps save the day.

Shadow the Hedgehog. Is there to assist in missions involving destroying Eggmans things.

06' Apparent;y sealed away to stop Shadow.

Sonic Chronicles. (debatable whether this game is canon) Just there.

Made a cameo in DS version of Sonic Colours? No real presence.

 

So if I am limited to the games then I have no real idea about Omega and am left wanting more. However the comics can take Omega and give him his own arc if they want. I haven't seen him in games for a while but he can live on in the comics.

As a fan of the vast obscure parts of the Sonic series I love that the comic has access to all these things and actually uses them.

It would be a shame to see the comic fall to the mundane compliances you haters seem to want it to.

[Aquaslash]

I was going to wait til I got to the end of the thread to reply, but I think I need to respond to this now before I forget it.

 

I think people are forgetting that these character belong to SEGA. NOT Archie. It's SEGA's entire right to dictate how their characters be used.

About time too that Archie were put in their place and SEGA began wearing the trousers. They've had a far too long leash for a while now, fucking-up characters, making crap/melodramatic/inappropriate stories and doing whatever the hell they want with a bare amount of moderation.

 

I'm sorry, but screw that noise.  The comics are not the games, and the games are not the comics.  It took SEGA nine years to produce quality stories in the games, and even then, they had to outsource the writing to do it.  During that nine years, SEGA did a fine job of "fucking up" their OWN characters ten times worse than Penders or 4Kids could ever dream of.  Sonic is the laughingstock of the gaming community today because of SEGA's own ineptitude.  Case in point, the comics had been ass for YEARS before Flynn came along, and there was little to no repercussion on Sonic's overall rep.  Meanwhile it was arguably two games that drove Sonic's name through the dirt, and he seems to be still recovering from that.

 

The points I'm making here are several.  First off, in the grand scale of things what the comics/tv shots/etc do is largely irrelevant to the perception of the franchise as a whole, whether it's good or bad.  Next, SEGA exerting more control, while being totally within their right as it's their IP, can bring nothing but negativity to the comic canon because SEGA as a whole is grossly incompetent and has been that way for over a decade. Lastly, and most importantly different canons means different characterizations.  G1 Optimus Prime is completely different from Armada Optimus Prime, who is completely different from Animated Optimus Prime who is completely different from the live action Optimus Prime, and the Transformers Franchise isn't any worse for the wear for it.  If you want things to be like the games, then play the goddamn games.  It's one thing to not like the comics, and that's totally cool.  But don't go taking a dump on them because they don't write the characters like the games, when they have been frankly, writing Sonic's character better than the games up until 2010.

 

And now, back to playing the catch up game.

[DarkLight]

Cover for #249 is up

SONIC THE HEDGEHOG #249
Script: Ian Flynn
Art: Tracy Yardley!, Terry Austin, Jack Morelli, and Thomas Mason
Cover: Patrick "SPAZ" Spaziante
Throwback Variant Cover art compiled by Ryan Jampole
On Sale at Comic Specialty Shops: 5/29
32-page, full color comic
$2.99 US.
"When Worlds Collide" Part Six of Twelve: The crossover mega-event reaches its half-way point! On the eve of Sonic the Hedgehog's landmark 250th issue, Sonic, Tails, Mega Man and Proto Man are confronted by Drs. Eggman and Wily and the eight Roboticized Masters! Why do they look so familiar to Sonic? Do our heroes even stand a chance?! Featuring stunning new cover art from Patrick "SPAZ" Spaziante, and a special 16-Bit pixel art variant cover!

 

So those Robot Master-like robots are robotized versions of the characters? Also love how Tails is having a harder time with carrying Mega Man.

Edited February 5, 2013 by DarkLightDragon

[DarkLight]

I'm starting to think whether or not any crossover stuff should put in the crossover thread, that way no one can interrupt this little debate that's been going on for a couple of pages.

Edited February 5, 2013 by DarkLightDragon