E-122-Psi

It's just a very strange mandate to make since, well, does anyone expect the good guy to lose permanently in a family franchise like Sonic? If there's sort of alternate stipulations I could understand, but in terms of just 'the bad guy can't kill Sonic off permanently and take over' it's kind of, "Uh, yeah, duh." Hell even in terms of more mundane losses, they've shown leeway there. Boom had Sonic end up the butt monkey of several episodes unnegated, even in sorts of lite role reversal situations where he's the antagonistic character getting his comeuppance. Them outright stating such a mandate exists is about the only reason Sonic wouldn't seem like a pretty fallible protagonist.

I don't think the problem is that she's goofy per se, that's half the charm with Sonic characters, it's, as with many others, the rather obnoxious repetitive manner they enforce it. It's like how in SatAm Dulcy is technically less goofy than Antoine and at least halfway competent, but her shtick is just the same annoying catchphrase and even more tired slapstick meaning that Antoine actually comes off as more tolerable because he at least has SOME variation to him. Hell LOADS of people liked Knuckles in Boom despite turning him into a blithering idiot. I'm sure they could do loads of stuff with Sticks with some thought, a conspiracy nut who has a strictly all natural lifestyle because she doesn't trust ANYTHING technological (which is Tails AND Eggman's shtick among others). Again having a Sonic equivalent of Dale Gribble could be a work of genius. How about Sticks constantly trashing the heroes supply of gadgets....and Tails telling her he's GONNA KICK HER ASS.

I feel like Sticks had potential, but they just played that same gag over and over to an obnoxious level. She babbles (or more loudly shrieks) conspiracy drivel in the background...and it almost always turns out to be true, to the point the subversive twist wasn't actually a twist. Most of her episodes were focused on other characters' perspective of her so she didn't really develop much. She could be competent or lucid sometimes but otherwise they didn't really take her much outside that same running gag, which got kind of obnoxious without any sort of variation to it, especially with that VOICE. Even as comic relief, I think the writers eventually found more stuff for Knuckles (sometimes I wonder if they should have merged Knuckles and Sticks into one character really). They could have focused on the 'wild kid' background of her, or they wanted to make her the conspiracy nut they may as well go all the way and make her a hilarious Dale Gribble esque anti hero that drives the others up the wall. I don't think that role is taken by anyone else in the franchise at least.

I'm truthfully liking these interactions in the wallpapers, they're showing a shrewdly flawed but still playful element to Sonic and the potential in character dynamics he could have with all these guys.

I admit to kinda liking the idea of Eggman not only having a successful revenge plan where he brainwashes Chaos to follow him properly this time, but Chaos actually breaking his stoic character to be comically PISSED OFF about it (boy there's no scale in that panel though). Eggman was pretty much stuck in the heirarchy as the comic relief patsy to every super sinister villain in the games and Sonic X at the time, so it was interesting having a 'that little weasel actually duped ME???' moment from one of them. It's also disappointing thinking the comic had a more climatic battle than the actual anime. They sure did LOVE having Sonic tank everything in the show didn't they?

Well in fairness we've reached the era in the comics where we're beating a dead horse in nearly every critique.

More the comics trying to have their cake and eat it too. Some of Archie's ways to compromise more games-esque qualities into their very different premise didn't always work out great (one of the most obvious being brain damaging Charmy to act like his childish Heroes-onward self). With Sonic they were stuck with a more complex situation where Sonic has conflicting situations and challenges from wanting to be 'like the wind' but still tied to roles of authority, but kept it a pink elephant in the room or tried taking the easy way out of with 'anyone who questions his contradictions is a jerk'. It's one of the reasons Archie is treated as pretentious sometimes, since it wanted a more complex and mature foundation but didn't want to develop the baggage it caused. Most of Ian's ways of trying to streamline the dynamics were pretty much the Freedom Fighters going 'Screw it, we're the top heroes so we can do whatever we want'. Like that's literally nearly every way they win an argument between their own fractions in that era. I mean nearly ALL versions of Sonic are this, but they lack the same authoritarian ties so don't come off as hypocritical or corrupt about it. Sonic and Sally come across as feeling they're the ONLY ONES who should be allowed to bend the rules.

I feel at the very least SOME implication GUN was getting cleaned of its bad eggs would have worked. Sonic X done that by having them arrested in the adaptation during their attempts to cover people figuring out their past. I mean yeah I get that it's the past and people might have changed since then, but SA2 made PERFECTLY clear GUN had NOT changed at all, to the point they resorted to trying to scapegoat, imprison and even murder the world's hero than risk letting their mistakes be uncovered. They fit into Amy's category of the selfish sort that only cared about their own hides and were actually in control of Sonic's world, prioritising killing innocents just to hide their incompetence. They needed some key closure on that (even if nuking Prison Island likely took a good few of the dirtbag members out :P).

I feel like Sonic and Sally are ALWAYS the two the comics struggle to not make unlikeable. Penders is obviously the worst case, but even Gallagher and Flynn kept making foul ups with them that made them look self serving or unwilling to accept responsibilities for their actions. It's not that there aren't bigger assholes in the Sonic world at all, but more that, aside from a couple obvious cases like Locke, they're usually reprimanded for their bad acts a lot more, or at least aren't kept in dangerous position they can constantly be enabled, while Sonic and Sally of course are the main heroes and the ones they want you to root for. They do sometimes note their bad actions but too often think a slap on the wrist is enough, otherwise they're just 'rogues'. I think it's largely from the fact that Sonic has to be 'loveably' arrogant and careless. They can show him having moments of humility, but ultimately Sonic is a guy that just does whatever the fuck he wants. Sally at times is this but in denial, a hypocrite who insists every impulse she does is duty bound and for the good of others. In this take however, all these petty or irresponsible moments come off as risking WAY more repercussions. Heavy politics and balance are so often put into place here, not to mention this is a work where people can DIE from one slip up in a mission. They place WAY more stakes and complexities here, and yet still expect you to empathise when they vent mundane self centered teen issues at the wrong time. These two are the top of the hierarchy among the heroes, the ones that make all the decisions and often poo-poo anyone who undermines them (who is usually treated as in the wrong). Even worse when they slip their own personal impulses and egos into delicate situations. Sonic is someone who suffers aesop amnesia from acting like a reckless arrogant show off when millions of lives are in his hands, yet whenever anyone threatens to take matters into their own hands, gets butt hurt, tells them to back off and just be grateful he usually saves MOST of them. They make a point Sonic isn't fantastic in a diplomatic role, but only to a surface level, doesn't stop him being king in some timelines. I think him being stripped of his knighthood was the closest to him suffering real consequences for a big mistake caused from personal hangups between him and Sally (while Sally was absolved of ANY fault). I think this is why it feels cheap that Archie keeps taking the one note route in terms of calling them out, anyone who challenges them is always dismissed as a strawman or a jerk, anyone that could have added a complex query to who they are and how well intentioned they really are is quickly dismissed so they can be enabled. If anything this got worse in Ian's run, while Penders and Bollers at least TRIED to dabble in some grey morality, Fiona, Hamlin, Geoffery all became flat out one dimensional hate sinks under Ian. Even the final pre reboot arc shown Mina and any other commodity in Mobius would get dismissed as 'just a jerk' before they questioned Sonic and Sally's virtues and methods. This is generally why Sonic works better as his own guy, not one giving orders or leading a group. You can't be an id in nearly every way and then be trying to keep others in their place.

It's actually weird they never really delved into that, especially since ARK victims such as Shadow and the Commander align with GUN later on, and you think them exposing the former government's corruption and horrific acts at last and turning it into a unit with honourable members would be something they'd want to address, otherwise why would those guys wanna be anywhere close to them?

I dunno really. There's several mandates I don't agree with on paper, but the fact they're broken so often suggests SEGA are more open with them than implied and it's more down to the usual situation of half assed writing that's been there since the series got spin off media. "Sonic can never lose" for example could seem burdening to Sonic's character and risk making him an invincible hero, but the truth is Sonic has gotten his ass kicked MORE often since this mandate was revealed than not. Hell SEGA even had a game where Eggman found a way to beat his ass down and conquer the world, while Sonic Boom even had a few comical situations he ended up the butt monkey of an episode, even the end of pre-reboot Archie was a long conga of Sonic being one-upped by the bad guys over and over with any victory coming off as incredibly bittersweet. It seems like Sonic "losing" is only forbidden in regards to the bad guys permanently defeating him, which is kind of a case of "Eh, well duh." The same issue with lack of emotions, since while writing isn't brilliant in this era, we still arguably see MORE of a humanized Sonic commonly in media, compare to say earlier cases like SA/X Sonic who was pretty stunted in emotions, modern takes on Sonic at least seem to commonly care about what's going on and even lose their cool a few times (Lost Worlds was definitely an attempt a more vulnerable Sonic, if not done brilliantly). Again it seems more writing issues that take their toll here, unless it's down to a case of outright melodrama that demands Sonic outright break down, in which case do I ask do we REALLY need that for a 'human' Sonic. This if anything could be seen as a test to make Sonic likeable through his standard personality without resorting to cheap tricks like angst and emotional torture that are harrowing and sympathetic no matter what way you put them. There's a couple few newly revealed ones that I don't like the sound of and do sound hindering to how the characters are given depth, stuff like 'currency doesn't exist in the Sonic world' (which abolishes a bit of the Chaotix's motivations) and 'Shadow can not have 'pet the dog' moments where he cares about other people', but even these don't seem consistently done. It really does feel like there's a bit more leeway to these than is let on.

Guys guys guys, they obviously mean these:

It's not that Heroes is hard to figure out, but more the level of demand it's mechanics ask is far more divergent and unfocused. Sonic was always about platforming, zipping through big 'virtual playgrounds' with still a decent focus on platforming hopping and momentum. Heroes on the other hand dumbs that all down in favour of stop and go gimmicks, needing to switch out into different gameplay modes non-stop or play through a lengthy combat area. Most gameplay elements it inherits from previous games are almost exclusively what Sonic Adventure 2 introduced to make itself different like grinding. It's not to say this makes it a BAD game (though execution does vary) but more it's a very weird choice as an introduction to Sonic. I feel like porting over the Adventure games first to get people into the swing of a more divergent new take would have been a better strategy here, especially as an old Megadrive owner who only playing those games AFTER Heroes. Hell even Next Gen in concept would be closer to a loyal introduction to the franchise in spite of poorer quality. That PS2 gamers got only Heroes and Shadow and then Mega Collection Plus leaves a HUGE evolutionary process missing that makes old and new seem barely the same. It's feels a bit like if they chose to bring Crash Bandicoot back into the market by remaking Crash of the Titans (speaking even as someone who thought that game was decent).