Jump to content


Retired Staff
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nepenthe

  1. We don't even know if he's succeeded of his own volition at this point. Infinity is not going to be completely divorced from this. Even then, there's so much fucking shit in this game's narrative- time travel, dimension-hopping, villains returning who honestly shouldn't fucking be here, the OC resistance, and all of that, that it's honestly now taking away from the fact that I need to take Eggman seriously now. Like, I can't be bothered to care at this point in time who the final boss is.
  2. Because Sega is literally making it harder on themselves by just adding extra explanations where they aren't necessary.
  3. Does the final boss particularly matter? Neither scenario is all that unique or interesting, particularly since most bosses in Sonic- final status or otherwise- are kinda mediocre. It's either going to be Eggman, who has been the final boss the most times in series history, or it's gonna be Infinity/a monster, which is the series' second biggest boss trope. The most interesting thing they could do is an environmental finale where you have to complete objectives to prevent disaster instead of fighting something. Like, End of the World except not terrible or something.
  4. Apparently Classic Sonic is from another dimension. So who knows whether this game involves dimension-hopping, time-travel, or even both for maximum fuckery?
  5. I'm glad to know that the monster we saw in the original Odyssey trailer turned out to be a T-rex with a cowboy hat on.

  6. I'm... not the biggest fan of the fact that the Avatar feels this different from modern Sonic, especially since their levels are far more platforming heavy than his.
  7. No one wants a giant interconnected epic. They want to be reasonably reassured that characters will be recognizable in the next game.
  8. Hmm. Seems like there's a lot of small diversions here and there in the level, but they're going by so fast and the level is so dense with geometry it's hard to make out what is and isn't solid ground. Also, like the song, from what I can hear. Butt rock in Sonic levels just makes me feel cozy. Also I still don't find the chatter too distracting; surprised that Sonic doesn't talk back most times though, as that makes it a bit awkward. Finally, I like that this is shaping up to look like Modern Sonic's opening level- a hectic, dire situation. It's kinda like Sega listened to people who wanted Unleashed's opening playable. But man it's kind of...short. Like, it feels nowhere near as long as Apotos was.
  9. Not only can you not find where I said anything about S1, but no one said anything about how thick or thin the plot was. You said Sonic games were never about plot. I and others have charged that part of their appeal was that the stories connected together and told one narrative across multiple games regardless of their depth, which gave their stories far more presence than Mario's (which you keep equating Sonic to for some weird reason) and gave consumers that much more reason to buy them compared to every other platformer at the time that was doing the same ol' thing of not having any narrative beyond excuse plot. Seriously, the fact that they connected together is literally undeniable, and following from that it's the basis with which I and others have criticized Shadow's implied characterization in Forces, which ignores the fact that he had a character that was dictated by connected plot threads in individual titles. Again, your argument is that you don't care. Which is fine. However, I don't think your apathy should step over the line and start dictating to Sega what the games should be like. If you don't care about the story, then logically it shouldn't matter how consistent it is or not. The people who do care want more consistency, and they can base this desire in an actual precedence of the games made prior. Thus, the best compromise would be to write better stories that take into account basic character rules. Now, if you do care about story, inasmuch as you want them to basically burn it because fan service is what should matter above all else, that's a fundamental disagreement we have with one another that can't be argued beyond that.
  10. The classic games strung together the plots of S2, S3, and S&K in one multi-game story that actually had a character turn in the form of Knuckles. SA1 referenced both CD and S3&K through Amy's flashbacks and the entire echidna lore respectively; it gave Knuckles a self-contained arc (as well as referenced his previous deceiving) and Amy and Tails character goals and desires. SA2 references the events of SA1 by way of mentioning Tails being rewarded for Station Square, and Amy and Tails pick up where they left off. SA2, Heroes, ShtH, and Sonic 06 partly or wholly devote themselves to Shadow's character development from a brainwashed villain to a hero who attains self-actualization. So, yes, the games were once about story to a greater degree than what you've characterized them as, certainly far more than Mario has outside of the RPGs. This was the general proceeding from 1992 to 2006- 18 years, nearly 3/4s of the series' lifespan. Even if I agreed with you that this only started with SA1, which is objectively false, that's not only a third of the series' lifespan, but it- once again- was a deliberate creative decision made by Sonic Team of Japan without any noted outside influence from gamers at large to make it that way. They did it of their own volition, which means at one point they all agreed internally that Sonic should differentiate itself on the basis of having a narrative of some sort that's at least more relevant than Mario's. And why do you insist on noting the quality of any given game's story (another broad stroke I disagree with you about) when you constantly keep letting people know how much you absolutely do not care about it? Seriously, I don't get how you can have a distaste for the older games' stories but be okay with this clusterfuck.
  11. Not caring about the story doesn't really matter much to whether or not the series' identity was based partly in that, just like people not caring about the rolling doesn't really matter much to whether or not the series identity was defined by that. It's one thing to say one didn't like/care about, but now we're talking about throwing away yet another aspect of the franchise that once gave it a reason for being just because, regardless of its effect on the context of the series as a whole, and that's utterly offensive. Some people don't care about the story. Okay. But why do they get precedence over determining how the franchise should be dictated for everyone else, especially when for much of its lifespan it was dictated by narrative arcs by Sonic Team's own decisions regardless?
  12. You would have to have a damn good reason to justify an absolute reversion in morals in Shadow's particular case. We've already seen that he's steadfast in his overall ethics and he is, by his own volition, not able to be influenced away from those ethics by anyone, probably because he's tired of anyone and everyone trying to use/brainwash him for his own ends. Him telling Mephiles "thanks but no thanks", even against warnings that humanity would turn against him in the future and that Mephiles could make that go away, was one of the biggest character-defining moments of his narrative arc because it settled the matter of what he was really about. Shadow, from that point on, was effectively a hero. That was it. It was fucking done. Now you're telling me that all four of those games/five years of plotting was utterly meaningless? Anything less than a Tolkien-level of explanation will be unacceptable to me. And I'm certain at this point Sonic Team cannot pull it off, or don't care to pull it off.
  13. I'm not about to lower my standards to zero. I've never said Forces is worthless. However, money is finite and precious for the majority of people. If you can't sell me on why I should get your game over the direct competition, even if it's not a BotW-level of a game changer, then I'm not buying it.
  14. I'm merely extending the logic that people are using to justify the narrative issues we've gotten wind of thus far. People are telling me that apparently it's alright to stop caring about lore and implying that my feelings towards Shadow's usage are unfounded because "it's a platformer (why is this relevant)/Sonic Team doesn't care (this isn't a fucking good thing), so why should anyone else care? Let them do literally anything with the cast so long as it's entertaining!" Well, Forces' gameplay isn't bad-looking (to me), but it's clear as day that it's not got the passion and clarity of something like the two games I mentioned. So, should we just let them slide with that? So long as it's playable, I guess Forces is just peachy then. But that's what HIS character development was about, for literally five years of games, back-to-back-to-back. Seriously, we're acting like this didn't already happen. It did happen. Shadow was characterized from a brainwashed misanthrope to a practical hero who takes stock in his own agency. And it was finished. So why are we making him a villain again aside from irrelevant fan service? No one is also saying he has to be super nice or anything. Shadow is not inherently an approachable person. However, him opposing Sonic just because is absolutely fucking stupid, and that's in part due to his previous development. It's like "Knuckles fell for Eggman's lies yet again and is fighting Sonic" levels of stupid.
  15. Also, Sonic Team doesn't care about a lot of things beyond story. Gameplay is one such thing; Mania and Odyssey are steamrolling Forces on different fronts with the arguable exception of sheer graphical fidelity. So since they don't care about shit like physics and cohesive design and all of that, should we just settle for whatever?
  16. You care about the plot insofar as you prefer Shadow being a bad guy than anything else, even if it contradicts lore. I feel like if you really didn't care about the plot, you wouldn't actually have a preference either way for how he was characterized.
  17. Not particularly, no. It would just soften the blow. Even if I found it entertaining, I would strongly advise them to not do it again.
  18. I don't play Sonic to get the same exact gaming experience as I would with Mario. If I wanted that, I'd honestly just play Mario and not touch Sonic ever again at this point, because at the very least I know I can always guarantee a better gameplay experience. The whole point of Sonic's existence in the first place was to be an alternative choice in the genre to sell consoles, and part of making that choice viable and worth investing in was the fact that Sonic Team once upon a time cared about both creating lore and stringing subsequent games' stories together in narrative arcs whereas Mario didn't care at all. This is partly why a lot of the older games' stories are fondly remembered, and I enjoy the games' stories most when they don't underestimate me as an audience member or underestimate themselves just because they're a platformer (which doesn't mean anything; literally no one shits on Ratchet and Clank for having a continuous narrative or character arcs). On top of this, I'm still a huge Shadow fan, and I don't want to see him used in a manner that amounts to nothing but basic fan service that's not even relevant to the character in this day and age anymore. I want his previous character development acknowledged properly, and I want his subsequent appearances based off of that. Hell, I want him to develop or be characterized in new ways and get into interesting narrative situations, like what ironically happened in Sonic 06. This can't happen if all they keep doing is bringing him back as ridiculous boss fodder because it's "nostalgic."
  19. This must be a record speed from a mod posting a warning to active acknowledgement of that post by a member that they've gotten a strike as a result of deliberately breaking the rules. If anyone else wants continue with this nonsense instead of talking about the game, they're free to do so.
  20. Making an update here for all to see, because my original post and accompanying status about behavior in the Forces threads are going to be buried, and I don't want anyone complaining about not knowing what the new deal is:
  21. Read the bolded end of this post clearly and concisely:


    1. Kuzu the Boloedge

      Kuzu the Boloedge

      Are we officially in "No fun allowed" mode?

    2. Wraith


      Thank you. Got tired of(ironically) the "positive" people shitting up the thread

    3. Zaysho


      Telling people to stop complaining about people complaining is "No fun allowed"?


    4. Soniman


      ragna no lol

    5. Kuzu the Boloedge

      Kuzu the Boloedge

      @Zaysho no, but is this point the point on cracking down

  22. Because your argument was about the cyclical nature of the complaints, not about how they were being expressed: So, when new information drops on a game and I have a negative reaction to it, I shouldn't post then if I've had a negative reaction before. Got it. The Forces megathread's biggest issue by far was that a lot of it was simply off-topic and cluttered, dealing less with Forces and moreso with people's general feelings about the franchise as a whole. Also, you do a disservice to handwave any of the interesting speculation, idea exchanging, the informative videos by Sonikko, the interest in things like Modern Sonic's gameplay and the music that had been posted in the thread, and most people's general conclusions that the game will probably ultimately amount to "ok," to imply there was little of value or that no one gave the game a chance whatsoever. Hell, you do me a disservice; I know very well that I posted several times saying that E3 could turn things around, and I know I made reaction posts detailing the things I've liked about all facets of the game that have been displayed up until this point. So don't try to spin this narrative that the Forces thread was literally nothing but negativity just because you barely visited it due to your own preconceived notions. So two people is enough of a sample size for you to conclude what the overall opinion of everyone is, even though you admitted you haven't seen any positivity in the Forces megathread, not even the conversation about the fucking vocal themes which almost everyone had a positive reaction towards. This goes back to my point that you come across as having an issue against negative reactions versus an equitable discussion environment, and on that note: This next bit is not just towards you, but to everybody: We play this silly little schoolyard game every single time a new game drops and doesn't get the most glowing impressions. People who like the game get in their feelings and act like the world is against them just because their opinion may be in the minority. Negative opinions are inherently taken as personal attacks or calls for more optimistic people to censor themselves when that may not even be the case at all. For years, people have been allowed to get away with characterizing either specific members or the forum as a whole as being unreasonably intolerant to positive opinions of contentious new releases, sometimes ironically engaging in personal attacks themselves. This shit stops today. I personally will be monitoring the thread for the foreseeable future and actively handing out strikes or suspensions to any people who engage in this kind of victimization and shit-stirring. I will also make sure to hand out strikes or suspensions to any people who are negative about the game if they also break the rules. We did that yesterday in one of the Forces threads and we'll happily do it again. This is your first and only warning. If you want a more positive environment, you are free to: A.) Put members on your ignore list who you find intolerable. B.) Make a thread asking earnestly the things people like about the game. C.) Report actual rule breaking behavior. D.) Engage in conversation with members who have posted positive opinions and create those discussion tangents within the bigger topics. You are not obligated to respond to anyone and everyone. These behaviors would do wonders in better fostering an environment of just basic tolerance. You know what doesn't; constantly complaining that people are not happy, or saying people are "beating a dead horse" for reacting genuinely to new news, or insisting that people with positive opinions are "not being allowed to like the game." Get ahold of yourselves.
  23. You ceded on one and couldn't think of a rebuttal for another. This: is not a "healthy counter," especially with the jab at me at the end. This doesn't actually refute anything I've said, nor has this necessarily been proven in this argument. Please point to to me A.) a game in which he wanted the world specifically shaped in Dr. Eggman's vision of his own volition, and B.) Where in this trailer we've gotten word that he's even potentially working for Eggman and not Infinite in the first place.
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.