So now that you have played sonic colo(u)rs

[DistantJ]

That's the thing. I'm a Sonic fan before I'm a Mario fan. The Mario-esque parts of Colours are the parts which are actually playable, only they're not as varied or unique as Mario, they're those silly little rectangle platforms and nothing else. Then the loops and corkscrews and speed parts, the parts which make it inherently Sonic and just not any other platform game, are nearly all automated or completely empty. I would have forgiven the platforming being so bland and frustrating (seriously, that jump does not fit those platforms, and if you guys can forgive that jump then you should be able to forgive the jump in Sonic 4 too, I just don't think you want to) if the iconic Sonic (I'm a poet and I didn't know it!) sections were ones which I was properly involved in. I also felt that some of the temperamental nature of some of the pre-Unleashed games came back too, for example in asteroid coaster, the coasters dropped off without warning, you had to jump without pressing a direction otherwise you'd fall out and die for some reason, stuff like that, it's as if the game has you wanting to get the 3D bits out of the way to get to the next boring 2D bit. A "Sonic game for Mario fans" well, I want a Sonic game for me, a Sonic fan. If I wanted a game which plays like Mario, I would play Mario, because god knows the Mario-alike parts of Colours don't even come close to the actual Mario games. So what does it have over Mario? Some on-rails parts and some glorified cut-scenes (you tell me those running sections in Starlight Carnival are anything more than cut-scenes).

And what the heck is this about pinball physics now? Does Mario have pinball physics? So how come his levels aren't all just tiny little squares?

You wanna talk about platforming in Unleashed? I think you guys must only go back and play the first couple of levels or something because I can remember a tonne. You guys remember the rotating cylinders in Chun-Nan? Beat the crap out of a bunch of little squares side-on. What about the moving platforms and spike pits in Shamar? The tonnes of tricks and traps in Adabat? The clock tower in Spagonia? The game even goes out of its way to put little trip-ups to stop you from boosting like crap through the whole thing.

Anybody who does 'boost boost boost fall into a pit and die' in Unleashed wasn't playing it properly. If boosting sent you into a pit maybe you shouldn't have been boosting? Just a thought.

Edited November 21, 2010 by DistantJ

[Saint Nathan]

That's the thing. I'm a Sonic fan before I'm a Mario fan. The Mario-esque parts of Colours are the parts which are actually playable, only they're not as varied or unique as Mario, they're those silly little rectangle platforms and nothing else.

A good portion of Super Mario Galaxy 2 would heartily disagree. Any platforms (as in floating in the air things) are usually small bland squares or clouds.

Then the loops and corkscrews and speed parts, the parts which make it inherently Sonic and just not any other platform game, are nearly all automated or completely empty.

Yeah. Since like 3D Blast.

I would have forgiven the platforming being so bland and frustrating (seriously, that jump does not fit those platforms, and if you guys can forgive that jump then you should be able to forgive the jump in Sonic 4 too, I just don't think you want to)

I could write an essay on how much better Color's jump is compared to Sonic 4. It would involve a lot of talk about the lack of momentum in 4. You know, something that is unique to Sonic, like you apparently want?

if the iconic Sonic (I'm a poet and I didn't know it!) sections were ones which I was properly involved in.

You're totally in control for the platforming, most quickstep sections, and most of the game in general. if you didn't expect loops to be automated you've been in a hole since S3&K.

I also felt that some of the temperamental nature of some of the pre-Unleashed games came back too, for example in asteroid coaster, the coasters dropped off without warning,

Actually they do give you the flashing bottomless pit symbol a while before the reach the end.

you had to jump without pressing a direction otherwise you'd fall out and die for some reason,

"for some reason"

Yeah, you should be able to jump AWAY from something, and still stay on it.

it's as if the game has you wanting to get the 3D bits out of the way to get to the next boring 2D bit. A "Sonic game for Mario fans" well, I want a Sonic game for me, a Sonic fan.

I'm not sure where everyone is getting that. It was made to attract the demographic MSatOG brought in, and that was accomplished with the atmosphere and other things, I can't think of a time when they said "we're making this like a mario game".

If I wanted a game which plays like Mario, I would play Mario, because god knows the Mario-alike parts of Colours don't even come close to the actual Mario games.

What ones? I mean really, jumping on things and general platforming dosen't make it a Mario game. Colors still involves a lot of running and a lot of speed.

So what does it have over Mario? Some on-rails parts and some glorified cut-scenes (you tell me those running sections in Starlight Carnival are anything more than cut-scenes).

You mean like, three levels of Starlight Carnival, one level of Planet Wisp, and Terminal Velocity Act 2?

The only parts of the game that have a significant amount of any of that?

And what the heck is this about pinball physics now? Does Mario have pinball physics? So how come his levels aren't all just tiny little squares?

... What? I don't even understand this.

Also no, Mario dosen't have pinball physics, obviously.

Anybody who does 'boost boost boost fall into a pit and die' in Unleashed wasn't playing it properly. If boosting sent you into a pit maybe you shouldn't have been boosting? Just a thought.

The only point on here that I can agree with.

EDIT:

You wanna talk about platforming in Unleashed? I think you guys must only go back and play the first couple of levels or something because I can remember a tonne. You guys remember the rotating cylinders in Chun-Nan? Beat the crap out of a bunch of little squares side-on. What about the moving platforms and spike pits in Shamar? The tonnes of tricks and traps in Adabat? The clock tower in Spagonia? The game even goes out of its way to put little trip-ups to stop you from boosting like crap through the whole thing.

The moving platforms in Shamar were little square platforms in the sky.

The clock tower in Spagonia takes a total of five seconds.

Adabat was a bunch of square platforms in the sky (literally giant ones) and the traps were pretty much "crushing wall fire fire fire crushing wall!"

The rotating things in Chun Nan were cool but they pop up like twice.

So, two of the things you mentioned are small in terms of the rest of the level, and the other two are comprised of exactly what you say you dislike.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Galaxy Man

[Emmett L. Brown]

You guys remember the rotating cylinders in Chun-Nan?

*flashback to overshooting or falling short of those cylinders over a dozen times, forcing level restarts*

*shudder*

Say whatever you want about Colors, at least they don't sadistically reset your score to zero with every life lost. I still want to meet the guy who decided that all Sonic games from Adventure 2 onward should have that feature. Needless to say, I would punch him in the face.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Grumpy Old Guy

[DistantJ]

Galaxy Man, I don't think you've read the rest of the thread. The pinball physics things was something somebody mentioned all along (saying there couldn't be different shaped platforms without pinball physics etc) and there was also a link to an article where SEGA talked about how Sonic Colours is for Mario fans.

[SilentDoom]

I still don't get why people like Unleashed better. Even if you do prefer Unleashed's day levels to Colours' levels, you can't just dismiss the Werehog, which took up about 50% of the game (even more in the Wii version).

The Werehog is utter trash looking back at it now (on all the systems). On the 360/PS3, the levels are overly long, pointlessly relentless (if you die, you start miles back a lot of the time), have really REALLY pointless puzzle sections whilst the Wii/PS2 version is just really uninspired and lacks variety. Not to mention all the Werehog levels in all the versions have poor level design and bland enemies that are almost all killed in the same way.

Not to mention that the 360 and PS3 versions had those pointless hub worlds and that stupid as hell Sun/Moon medal progression system, whilst the Wii version had those pointless menus and puzzle games (though the puzzles were optional).

Colours doesn't have any of this sort of crap. The only thing you need to do to "complete" the main story of the game is to play through all the acts in each of the zones. You are not forced to do anything apart from this. You do not need to collect the Red Rings, you do not need to play the Game World levels and you do not need to do the EGG Shuttle.

Not to mention the engine itself exceeds that of Unleashed (all versions). If you were to put the kind of precise platforming that was in Colours in Unleashed you would fail a lot of the time (and there would actually be MORE complaints about cheap deaths). There were very few points in Colours that I regarded as cheap anyways, but there were plenty of points in Unleashed where I felt the deaths were cheap simply because of the fact that I had not memorised a section of the level.

I honestly think that some people need to start looking at Unleashed as the overall package, rather than just focusing on the day levels of Unleashed and comparing them to Colours and saying those are better.

[Saint Nathan]

Galaxy Man, I don't think you've read the rest of the thread. The pinball physics things was something somebody mentioned all along (saying there couldn't be different shaped platforms without pinball physics etc)

That dosen't make what you said make any more sense. I'm really trying to figure out what you mean.

and there was also a link to an article where SEGA talked about how Sonic Colours is for Mario fans.

Yes, I know. It says nothing of the sort that the platforming is for Mario fans. I think another interview says that the wisps and level themes are supposed to do that, not the platforming.

The platforming is more like classic Sonic than it is Mario. I'm really not seeing where it's like Mario at all except for the whole, you know, jumping on shit.

Also Iizuka simply says stupid things.

ANOTHER EDIT:

Within the same interview, Iizuka essentially says that bringing in the Wisps helped allow more fleshed out platforming.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Galaxy Man

[PC the Hedgehog]

While I'll admit Sonic Unleashed does feature a great deal of BOOSTBOOSTBOOST segments, I'd like to respectfully showcase this little platforming gem from the game:

Now THAT is how I feel the platforming in Colors should have been. The platforms are wide enough to jump on without going incredibly slow for fear of overstepping. The level flows, going from one platform to the other without having to slow to a crawl. And best of all, the camera isn't zoomed ridiculously far out and you can easily see where your character is at.

I really look forward to the next game from the Unleashed HD team, because in my humble opinion, I think they have much better level designers than the Storybook team.

[DistantJ]

Nice post, PC. I agree with you - while even that level isn't the best in my opinion (it's still just using the same kind of platform over and over, but as you say, they're platforms with space to land and a bit more freedom to navigate), you can do platforming without it having to be super slow, super zoomed out (this wouldn't be as bad on HD consoles anyway) and super repetitive.

I honestly think that some people need to start looking at Unleashed as the overall package, rather than just focusing on the day levels of Unleashed and comparing them to Colours and saying those are better.

This is a problem I have with the 'internet generation', the people who are so used to reviews and analysis - everybody has to judge everything as a sum of it's parts - is the Werehog more of a hinderance to the game than Colours' slow platforming? Probably. But then the Werehog as good as disappears when you've beaten it and want to replay levels, becuase you do it your own way. I don't remember ever finding the Werehog any worse than the treasure hunting and mechs in SA2 (and the length of a Werehog level is about the same as a treasure hunting level and a mech level together) so...

But what I mean is, do we have to judge everything by balancing out the good and the bad, as a sum of it's parts? Surely it should just be about how much fun we got out of it before and we get out of it now. Throwing out the bad stuff doesn't make the good stuff better, I think the levels in Colours are a pale, cheap shadow of the daytime levels in Unleashed, and saying 'You don't have to do the Werehog' isn't going to make me forget that, since I don't even have to repeat the Werehog levels on my replays anyway. I got more fun and thrills out of Unleashed, whether it had the Werehog or not. Colours may be a more solid game, not ruined with any stupid ideas, but that doesn't have any effect on how little I enjoyed it, the levels and controls were just not to my liking at all, didn't feel like Sonic and didn't even feel like a good platformer for 2010.

I barely wanted to replay any Colours levels - a lot of the levels with fun fast sections would end with awkward bottomless pit platforming and stuff, or block-puzzles with that spikes wisp and things... Or have an awkward zoomed-out platform bit in the middle of it...

[Carbo]

But what I mean is, do we have to judge everything by balancing out the good and the bad, as a sum of it's parts?

Why the fuck not? If a game is half shit and half good do you think its okay to just ignore the shit parts when looking at it as an overal package?

I don't want to wade through an abysmaly bad section to get to the good parts of a game. That tears down the fun for me. Unleashed as a complete package is above-mediocre. Obviously its something most people tend to not look at considering replayability tends to mostly ignore these stages, and I admit, I did that for the longest part too. Hell I forgot about the Werehog actually. Comparing elements is really good with the two games but the entire game itself? I consider that a no-contest.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Carbo

[JezMM]

Not to mention all the Werehog levels in all the versions have poor level design

Have to disagree with this. It may not have been Sonic gameplay but - for the werehog gameplay - I thought there were some real gems, platforming-wise. I really enjoy Apotos, Spagonia, and Empire City in particular.

Not to mention that the 360 and PS3 versions had those pointless hub worlds

Sad face. I loved the hub worlds. They gave so much more life to the locations you visit than a simple map screen does. I love being given a non-obstacle course area in the story to explore and mess around in. I think Unleashed's hub worlds have been the best so far. The characters had a ton more love put into them than SA and 2006, they were so pretty and everything felt like a real place, and with the exception of I think two points where you HAVE to talk to people, everything is clearly marked by giant floating icons to tell you "LEVELS THIS WAY GUYS".

I honestly think that some people need to start looking at Unleashed as the overall package, rather than just focusing on the day levels of Unleashed and comparing them to Colours and saying those are better.

Bringing up the werehog (and other stuff like hub worlds and medals) doesn't really have any merit in comparing Colours and Unleashed, because we're not talking about which is the better game, we're talking about which has the better basic Sonic gameplay. Yeah the Werehog and stuff ruined the game for a lot of people, but he was 100% seperate from the normal Sonic gameplay, so it's not relevant to the discussion.

(Though even then as I mentioned in another topic, I had no problem with the Werehog, so -I- still enjoy Unleashed more overall anyway, for what it's worth).

We are purely comparing the way Sonic handles and the general level design theory between the two, nothing more.

Edited November 21, 2010 by JezMM

[Voyant]

Why the fuck not? If a game is half shit and half good do you think its okay to just ignore the shit parts when looking at it as an overal package?

I don't want to wade through an abysmaly bad section to get to the good parts of a game. That tears down the fun for me. Unleashed as a complete package is above-mediocre. Obviously its something most people tend to not look at considering replayability tends to mostly ignore these stages, and I admit, I did that for the longest part too. Hell I forgot about the Werehog actually. Comparing elements is really good with the two games but the entire game itself? I consider that a no-contest.

With Carbo on this one...as an overall game colors is MILES better than unleashed...Sonic Unleashed is a bad game with good parts. There not enough good parts in the game to out weigh the bad...while colors has...well no bad parts that take away from the experience...colors is pure Sonic...all the time. If the were-hog was in colors people would say the same thing about unleashed.

Colors overall is a better game than unleashed.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Voyant

[DistantJ]

No, what I mean is, just because Colours doesn't have the Werehog doesn't mean it's completely better (Think SA2 vs. Heroes. I know which I like better) - I think that while it's without the flaws of Unleashed, it misses most of it's charm too, and most of what made the good parts of Unleashed great are gone here... So my point is, everything should be about how much fun you had, not about balancing out pros and cons. Sonic Colours wins if you balance out pros and cons for sure, but I have way more fun with Unleashed (and unlike some, I actually kinda like the Werehog stages, so...) less flaws doesn't equal better, is my point, just because they haven't put in the obligatory 'shit part' doesn't mean this game is suddenly the most enjoyable.

It's not that you should pretend the Werehog wasn't there - but if, like me, it was something you could 'forgive and forget' (like the Emerald Hunting and Mechs in SA2) then Colours shouldn't score 'bonus points' just because it didn't have it. I don't find Colours' Sonic levels even remotely exciting compared to Unleashed's, so I'm not about to call it better just because it doesn't have Unleashed's big problem present.

Edited November 21, 2010 by DistantJ

[Scar]

OK so can we all agree that Sonic Colours; whilst borrowing heavily from Unleashed was different enough to be considered its own unique title.

Its quality is undeniable. Whatever it did, it did well. The only part which depends on "Your mileage may vary" was the level design.

It was a marmite situation; love it or dislike it (no one explicitly hates it except for Jim "Le Troll" Stirling).

[JezMM]

So essentially, DistantJ and I have an arguement like this.

Chocolate Eclair is a perfect Sonic game.

Unleashed was a Chocolate Eclair with a dollop of cabbage dumped on top. Pick through the cabbage and the eclair is still delish underneath, and once you've pushed the cabbage aside you never need pick through it again.

Colours is an Eclair, no cabbage. But... they were kind of stingy on the cream, even if they did add extra chocolate. =(

Of course I liked the Werehog well enough so...

TL;DR

Jez eats chocolate eclairs with cabbage.

[Carbo]

Pros and cons are not factual. They are also opinions, and attribute at least as much as "fun" does. Why do you think variety in reviews exist? Isn't this why people was bitching at GameTrailers and DToid for so long, because things that they considered cons got in the way of their fun?

Colors isn't automatically better because it doesn't have the Werehog, for the most of the part you should have to judge a game on its own merits, and yes if I disregard comparisons, I still have more fun to find in Colors and more pros to discover in it than cons, which was a big opposite when it came to Unleashed.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Carbo

[Voyant]

No, what I mean is, just because Colours doesn't have the Werehog doesn't mean it's completely better (Think SA2 vs. Heroes. I know which I like better) - I think that while it's without the flaws of Unleashed, it misses most of it's charm too, and most of what made the good parts of Unleashed great are gone here... So my point is, everything should be about how much fun you had, not about balancing out pros and cons. Sonic Colours wins if you balance out pros and cons for sure, but I have way more fun with Unleashed (and unlike some, I actually kinda like the Werehog stages, so...) less flaws doesn't equal better, is my point, just because they haven't put in the obligatory 'shit part' doesn't mean this game is suddenly the most enjoyable.

It's not that you should pretend the Werehog wasn't there - but if, like me, it was something you could 'forgive and forget' (like the Emerald Hunting and Mechs in SA2) then Colours shouldn't score 'bonus points' just because it didn't have it. I don't find Colours' Sonic levels even remotely exciting compared to Unleashed's, so I'm not about to call it better just because it doesn't have Unleashed's big problem present.

Are you SERIOUS?!!!!

So your Telling me...that Colors is not the better game, cause your just going to IGNORE the rest of the bad parts in other games? Are you kidding me? How does that make your point have any sort of actually merit...when your just going to IGNORE the bad parts. That got the be the stupidest thing I heard in a while.

"Hey friend...I can't decide whether I want to get Sonic Unleashed or Sonic Colors...what should I get"

"Ahh well even though Sonic Unleashed has 70% of bad stuff in it the Sonic Stages are a bit funner than Colors. I say TRUDGE THROUGH HOURS OF SHIT! Just to get to the Sonic levels...

"why...do you have to do it in Colors as well?"

Colors is a bit less fun, doesn't have the flaws of unleashed though and is pure Sonic All the time, with 44 stages plus another 21 stages. I say go with unleashed though a grin and bare the bad parts "

"Wait...huh?"

***

YOu can't debate and argue about something when your going to PRETEND the bad parts aren't there. That's childish at its core...I find Sonic Unleashed fun...but for different reasons than Colors. But to say that Unleashed is an overall better game even though it has less flaws than Colors? Really, what game would your recommended to a friend...Colors or Unleashed?

Edited November 21, 2010 by Voyant

[JezMM]

Colours isn't pure Sonic all the time. The Wisps constantly interrupt it.

Not a BAD thing, the Wisps are fun, but it is a thing that exists.

[Voyant]

Colours isn't pure Sonic all the time. The Wisps constantly interrupt it.

Not a BAD thing, the Wisps are fun, but it is a thing that exists.

You don't HAVE to use the wisp though....in Unleashed you HAD to use the werehog...you HAD to medal collect...and you HAD to do Tails Flying Plane parts...in Colors this is all optional. That's what gives Colors it trump card over unleashed.

I like both game style for Sonic in both games Equally...but I will NEVER REPLAY Sonic Unleashed from the start...because the entire thing is a fucking chore and didn't need to be there. If Unleashed was just like Colors with more stages, but based on its "Sonic Rush" style instead of platforming than yes...you have an argument in saying which game is better quality, but ignoring the shit that's in Unleashed and calling it a better game than Colors that doesn't have the flaws of unleashed?

is just...*gag*

Edited November 21, 2010 by Voyant

[Djawed]

I thought the wisps were an awesome addition if you ask me. In the end it's all subjective indeed. Personally I didn't like unleashed as a whole. From the story, to the gameplay concept it was built around (ZOMG SPEED IS AWSUM) and the werehog.

For me sonic colors isn't just better than unleashed, it's a step further than that.

[DistantJ]

Are you SERIOUS?!!!!

So your Telling me...that Colors is not the better game, cause your just going to IGNORE the rest of the bad parts in other games? Are you kidding me? How does that make your point have any sort of actually merit...when your just going to IGNORE the bad parts. That got the be the stupidest thing I heard in a while.

"Hey friend...I can't decide whether I want to get Sonic Unleashed or Sonic Colors...what should I get"

"Ahh well even though Sonic Unleashed has 70% of bad stuff in it the Sonic Stages are a bit funner than Colors. I say TRUDGE THROUGH HOURS OF SHIT! Just to get to the Sonic levels...

"why...do you have to do it in Colors as well?"

Colors is a bit less fun, doesn't have the flaws of unleashed though and is pure Sonic All the time, with 44 stages plus another 21 stages. I say go with unleashed though a grin and bare the bad parts "

"Wait...huh?"

***

YOu can't debate and argue about something when your going to PRETEND the bad parts aren't there. That's childish at its core...I find Sonic Unleashed fun...but for different reasons than Colors. But to say that Unleashed is an overall better game even though it has less flaws than Colors? Really, what game would your recommended to a friend...Colors or Unleashed?

Enough with the attitude! Being nasty isn't going to convert me to your cause. What I am saying is, the good bits in Unleashed are better to me than the good buts in Colours - and in some cases 'the shit bits are taken out' doesn't necessarily make something better, if what's left isn't as good as what was good before. Sonic '06 doesn't have emerald hunting or mechs. Does that make it better than SA2? No, because the stuff which was great about SA2 isn't in there either, and that's how I feel about Colours. Just because they took out the Werehog doesn't mean it's better, because most of what was good about it is gone too.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

[Voyant]

Enough with the attitude! Being nasty isn't going to convert me to your cause. What I am saying is, the good bits in Unleashed are better to me than the good buts in Colours - and in some cases 'the shit bits are taken out' doesn't necessarily make something better, if what's left isn't as good as what was good before. Sonic '06 doesn't have emerald hunting or mechs. Does that make it better than SA2? No, because the stuff which was great about SA2 isn't in there either, and that's how I feel about Colours. Just because they took out the Werehog doesn't mean it's better, because most of what was good about it is gone too.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

And I'm not trying to be nasty I trying to inject a Point. Sonic Unleashed has good bits...it was awesome I agree with you, but even if you think colors is a step down its not THAT much of a step down that it makes it less of a QUALITY Sonic title than Unleashed because clearly its not. Even yourself said that Colors is a quality title, but you didn't find the Sonic levels as fun. I found treasure hunting in SA2 fun, but I'm not going to go down on my knees and say Sonic Colors sucks because it doesn't have it in it. Because that's not good for the series...at all.

Would you recommend Sonic Colors...or Sonic Unleashed to a friend who never played a Sonic game before (or left the series after Adventure 2?) Who been hearing about Sonic being shit since due to alternate gameplay style and lack of polish? And yes that's a rhetorical question...if you pick Unleashed then there something wrong with you and would never want you to make decisions for me...ever...

My point is? Sonic Colors > Sonic Unleashed as an overall game. Sonic Colors = Sonic Unleashed (To me) when you count JUST Sonic only. Period.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Voyant

[SilentDoom]

This is a problem I have with the 'internet generation', the people who are so used to reviews and analysis - everybody has to judge everything as a sum of it's parts - is the Werehog more of a hinderance to the game than Colours' slow platforming?

Yes. Yes it is. Because the Werehog fails in every department whereas the platforming in Colours doesn't.

Probably. But then the Werehog as good as disappears when you've beaten it and want to replay levels, becuase you do it your own way. I don't remember ever finding the Werehog any worse than the treasure hunting and mechs in SA2 (and the length of a Werehog level is about the same as a treasure hunting level and a mech level together) so...

I do. And the long length of the Werehog levels I find is a BAD thing. They aren't at all fun to play, so the fact that they endure for longer than they need to is just pointless. It makes the game feel unnecessarily padded out.

But what I mean is, do we have to judge everything by balancing out the good and the bad, as a sum of it's parts? Surely it should just be about how much fun we got out of it before and we get out of it now.

That's really the only fair and unbiased way to judge something. If you want to take it from a balanced perspective you have to talk about all the gameplay types. You can't just ignore them and focus solely on the good parts of the game, especially when those good parts of the game make up less than half of the overall package.

Throwing out the bad stuff doesn't make the good stuff better, I think the levels in Colours are a pale, cheap shadow of the daytime levels in Unleashed, and saying 'You don't have to do the Werehog' isn't going to make me forget that, since I don't even have to repeat the Werehog levels on my replays anyway. I got more fun and thrills out of Unleashed, whether it had the Werehog or not. Colours may be a more solid game, not ruined with any stupid ideas, but that doesn't have any effect on how little I enjoyed it, the levels and controls were just not to my liking at all, didn't feel like Sonic and didn't even feel like a good platformer for 2010.

This is really just subject to clash of opinion here. Personally, I think the exact opposite. I felt more involved playing through Colours' levels than any of the day time levels in Unleashed. The controls have been improved in almost everyway (the few platforming sections that were in Unleashed were hell in my opinion because of the way that Sonic jumped and controlled), the level design is more involving in most cases and the boost has been toned to a more controllable and realistic level. In fact I'd say Colours has felt more like a Sonic game in almost every aspect than any other Sonic game in recent years. That includes the Adventure games, the Rush games, the Advance games and everything else.

I barely wanted to replay any Colours levels - a lot of the levels with fun fast sections would end with awkward bottomless pit platforming and stuff, or block-puzzles with that spikes wisp and things... Or have an awkward zoomed-out platform bit in the middle of it...

Again, another point that's really subject to opinion. I consistently wanted to replay through the levels in Colours to find Red Rings and improve my rank and whilst this does hold true to an extent for Unleashed (the improving the rank part anyways), it's not quite the same. Not to mention the fact that you were forced to replay the levels if you didn't collect enough medals, which is not only irritating, but also ruins any true fun that can be had in the level. It means that you have to either slow down and deal with the controls as you fly past a ring that you just missed, or you have to execute a maneuvre which requires a mixture of speed and precision (the latter being difficult to utilise well).

Now I'm trying to understand where exactly you're coming from in some aspects. I really am. But I'm finding it really difficult to properly piece together why you dislike this game so much (not the reasons as such, but relating the reasons for disliking this game and comparing them to reasons for liking other games).

[Nepenthe]

As an innocent bystander who hasn't played Colors yet really wants to, it seems to me that neither side of this argument is difficult to understand, but you all seemed determined to browbeat this idea to DistantJ that Colors' objective superiority should undoubtedly equal a better subjective experience. This viewpoint that the parts, even the same parts across two or more experiences, should always be equivalent to a particular sum of that particular experience or else there's something wrong with you has always strangely seemed very exclusive to gaming, and frankly its disheartening, alienating, and a disservice to the medium as an art form. Good games can be downright boring and do nothing for a player. Bad games can be extremely fun and resonate with the player in some meaningful way. Surely this isn't blasphemous, is it?

Anyhoo, in terms of whether or not Colors beats Unleashed, I shall hopefully find that out next week once I get some funds. I'm naturally wary however; I am a staunch Unleashed defender, and not just the daytime parts. Ergo, I'm hoping very much that the game lives up to the expectation you guys are setting here.

[Carbo]

Actually, the discussion for the last page was more or less about the idea that a game should be judged as an entire package rather than comparing superiority by an element. No one was onto Distant about the idea that an element of a game was better, it was more the idea that as a game, something like say, Colors is undoubtedly a far more accessible experience judging from the entire game itself as its less schizophrenic in general and plays it alot more safe than Unleashed. No one said anything about pressing the idea that the game is better though.

Whether or not there exist cons that get in the way is entirely subjective. But stating that games should not be able to be judged by balance of where they excel or just plain suck is pretty silly.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Carbo

[Voyant]

HUGE PRO TIP: You can Air Boost in drifting sections...makes those parts a lot more fun and faster...gave colors a big +1 for me too. Also if you hold down the A jump button Sonic does not uncurl so you can go hold school on some robots there are even times when doing old school can be better because it keeps Sonic's forward momentum going and you can do some pretty cool trick links.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Voyant