E-122-Psi

Rotor never really came off as hard-assed to me, in fact in the cartoon he almost came off a bit too laid back for his own good (besides with Antoine occasionally who in fairness pissed off everyone). Designated hero is what it says on the tin, the guy that's designated the hero even if they don't exactly act like one. Maybe it's the fact Fleetway Sonic, while a complete ass, seemed to be intentionally and openly so, he thought he was awesome, but I don't reckon he or the writers thought he was some paragon of virtue, while Archie Sonic seemed a little bit more over assured he was always in the right and everyone who challenged him was either a jerk, or a nag like Sally. House of Cards was that reaching boiling point. It didn't help that Archie Sonic was combined with the games Sonic, who is known for being playfully smarmy of the highest order. As I mentioned with Sally, self righteousness is a flaw you need to handle VERY gingerly. Done wrong it's one of the most odious traits you can give a character.

I stand by the sad belief that Sally was one of those characters Ian just wasn't going to master. Nearly every writer has an easier or harder understanding of certain archetypes and concepts, just in luckier circumstances they have a team of varied writers who all fill in for each other's shortcoming.

To simplify, no one likes a designated hero.

Probably because Sally by bad writing was still inherently priggish and standoffish at times, just unlike those cases, it didn't come back to haunt her, and so she rarely had the big moments of humility or remorse. Most of the time she was outright treated in the right. Plus again, not actually treated like a flaw so Sally tended to end up accidentally boring instead of deliberately and humorously boring.

Maybe it wasn't so much they were overfond of Sally as much as they just had a one track view of the role she was supposed to have, i.e. the straight man instead of a character who sometimes needed an ego check herself. Also generally characters of her archetype that do have a strong flawed side usually have some moments of acting extremely vindictive or standoffish. I mean, they always feel bad afterwards, that's the point, they only wanted to look out for others but then hurt them worse by going overboard with it (this is probably why that Xmas Carol story worked so well). But such characters, yeah, they do tend to end up VERY divisive because of their attitude, and I think those writers were insistent Sally was just a nice girl with a frustrated streak from dealing with idiots. Plus most control freaks end up the butt monkey commonly, and I think they preferred that sort of humour going to the male cast. 'Well meaning control freaks' in fiction are common, but you do see the fan base split down the middle whether they are the most relatable characters of the cast or just pushy mean jerks who ruin all the fun. Ask the Winnie the Pooh fan base about Rabbit, or the MLP fan base about Twilight Sparkle.

It's odd how gag stories seem to get a better hang of Sally's archetype than serious ones that actually attempt dynamic character development.

Not a lot, but I did read that Christmas Carol gag story. They could characteristically make Sally into a Scrooge who was a closed minded miser in spite of meaning well.

Was it still an ego in the same way though? As said there's a difference between being shoe boating and narcissism egotistical, and being holier than thou and thinking you know best egotistical. That's nuances in quirks I don't think the Archie writers got. Remember most of the time they wanted one of the more mild mannered characters to be flawed they just had them act reckless or abrasive in spite of that being the total opposite of their character otherwise. Like being reckless and hot headed is the only way you can screw up and introverted characters can only ever be straight men.

I think it was a double edged sword in trying to 'fix' her, rather than trying to play on the woes fans had with her and trying to use that flesh out her character, they just tried to abolish it and pretend it wasn't there in hopes that would please fans, but they couldn't. It was too ingrained into her character. Ian still wrote Sally as a close minded hypocrite at times, I get the feeling he was only making a random reach to please fans and if it weren't for them complaining about Sally he would have been perfectly fine writing her the same way Hurst and Penders originally did. He didn't really understand what the problem was. The problem wasn't that Sally had moments of being temperamental or self righteous, just they never came back to haunt her. They were more little tics to her character the writers thought came being the sane one, which was sometimes true, but after a while of overbearing it or sometimes making her a designated hero, sometimes made her unbearable. I think fans would have far more appreciated traits like THAT getting thrown back at her over just generic mistakes like bad cooking. The fact they weren't really conveyed as flaws also meant she lacked real foibles, hence her still coming off as bland regardless. Sally had perfect potential to be flawed since she was an opposite to Sonic, she could have been the opposite to a fault. Sure dashing into things solo isn't a great idea, but trying to hold everyone off from taking too many big risks or making them follow very meticulous plans to the soundest detail can be just as poor planning. Also while she wasn't a show off like Sonic, she still had an ego in a different way, the 'I know what's best for you more than you do' sort of way. But of course the writers couldn't differentiate nuances and were convinced Sally was perfectly humble and careful. I haven't seen a lot of Boom since Ian began to write for it by the way, how did he write Amy? She was a lot like Sally in Boom but with those elements fully realised (eg. Closed Door Policy).

I get that, but the problem was that Archie never really grew out of that. It only really had a few more diverse female characters in it's whole run, the rest were still mostly cookie cutter no-nonsense foils to the males who shown all those chauvinistic boys who was boss. It was 90s girl power up until the 2010s. Even at that I think Sally and Bunnie had plenty openings for quirks in the Satam cartoon and early comics, even if they weren't really grasped much. Sally could be no-nonsense and meticulous to the point of being a grouchy control freak while Bunnie being a cowgirl could easily be given a plucky abrasive side. They were archetypes that have been fleshed out well in other cartoons and franchises to be entertaining on their own (eg. Twilight Sparkle and Applejack). It's odd how even the comic when it was TRYING to make them flawed (to the point of shoving it in our faces for Sally in the end) like they couldn't really grasp any sort of consistent vice for them.

I don't mind slower moving characters so long as they keep to the same basic physics. I think Amy and Big should have been SLIGHTLY faster though, not to Sonic levels, just to standard platformer levels. Gamma could have had a compromise by having the same walking speed he has, but his rolling mode offering more of a boost (and maybe not being so easily hindered by terrain). Other than that, I think level design owed a bit to it. Besides some of Amy's levels, most of the characters' levels were blatantly just smaller and slightly modified versions of Sonic's. It did help keep them a bit consistent with Sonic's gameplay but it did also leave less potential to used. Usually their final levels shown a more developed attempt at showcasing their gameplay. This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think Next Gen did a better job of interchanging character levels in terms of layout. Blaze's Wave Ocean is still modified off of Sonic's for example, but it's more palpable in length and branches off in routes for her gameplay a lot more often than say, Gamma's Emerald Coast compared to Sonic's, which has one nice little unique pathway and then....is just over.

The problem often they were so ill limelighted you could barely tell the difference. The Freedom Fighters didn't really have a lot of foibles or quirks compared to the games/original comic characters. If Robotnik or other bad guys hadn't affected their lives they'd likely be every men with little character agency at all. Dulcy stopped being bumbling comic relief ages ago, even more so than Antoine. A large amount of the story was still through Sally's POV however. She was essentially the supporting protagonist.

That was a key problem for Archie Sally, she was too vanilla, mostly there to foil more abrasive members like Sonic, and openings for possible character foibles and quirks seemed to be things the writers didn't like to admit existed. Mostly just things happened AROUND her. In her mini series they pretty much just gave us Geoffery and Hamlin to act as a poor man's Sonic and Antoine while Sally was just the somewhat dull competent one. I think they were too adamant in making Sally the nice sensible one of the Freedom Fighters (despite you know, that being Rotor, Bunnie, Dulcy, NICOLE, and later even Antoine too for the most part) but you can't really make an interesting lead that is just nice and sensible and only has circumstantial hang ups. Spark of Life was a halfway attempt to rectify this, but it was too superficial, and ultimately even Big was a more memorable part of the story (a Big Universe arc should have happened).

Under principal I think every character should have gotten at least six or seven levels and a couple unique mini games (though I can't complain with the direction of at least trying to make Sonic's the most complete in the limited time they had). Big would have been fine if they had made him a little faster and put in a little more platform focus in his levels (like in Hot Shelter which has a small on-foot segment at least). Something akin to Big's Fishing Derby could have made a cool mini game for Big.