Jump to content

Diogenes

TSS Member
  • Content Count

    21,772
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    172

Everything posted by Diogenes

  1. Because it was still trying to be Archie Sonic. IDW Sonic isn't Archie Sonic, it's just clearing up the mess left by Forces.
  2. The world was already freed from Eggman's control before IDW Sonic started, that's why "the Resistance" morphed into "the Restoration". IDW Sonic just doesn't have the same kind of setting as SatAM or early Archie, with an entrenched dictator necessitating an organized group to fight against him, it's just spun off of the games at a point when they had very briefly broken from the status quo.
  3. Well, yeah, just introduce some outside threat that's dangerous to both him and the rest of the world, like the other times he's been playable/allied with the heroes. Just slap some rocket skates on him and he could be zooming around just like Sonic. Hell, wouldn't even be the first time. Really though they'd be better off making a spinoff focused entirely on Eggman, with gameplay that naturally follows from the kinds of things he usually does, than trying to adapt him into Sonic's style of gameplay. The odds of Sega going for a character-based spinoff like that aren't great these days, but I'd say there's a better chance they'd try it with Eggman than anyone else, unless they were going to take a second shot with Shadow.
  4. Alright I'm done, you're making up things to be mad about.
  5. He literally just left him there, fully aware that he could reactivate or be repaired and pull his shit again, thus the "rematch" remark. Sonic's actions have absolutely nothing to do with thinking Metal is safely shut down or contained; they are the exact opposite. The whole point of Omega when he was introduced is that he wanted revenge on Eggman for abandoning him. If you think he can twist his own programming so much that he can try to be the best Eggman robot by killing Eggman then Metal should be able to twist his to a similar extent. And you do a real disservice to these characters by refusing to see them as actual characters. And Eggman's tried several times as many evil schemes as Metal ever has but Sonic doesn't worry about him getting away. Was actually a fake. Not a real person.
  6. Again, the ending scene. He didn't leave Metal in Team Dark's custody, he just left him laying there, after he had tried to take over the world. He had no problem leaving Metal the chance to pull shit again because he knew he'd beat him again if he did. Sufficiently advanced robots are essentially no different from living people in this series. We've seen Gamma and Omega rebel against Eggman; am I supposed to believe that Metal can't? Erazor's an exception, because he straight up murdered one of Sonic's friends. What other non-monster villains has he felt the need to imprison or kill?
  7. Well there's, y'know. The other time he did it. Sonic's the kind of guy who wants to believe there's good in everyone, and the kind of guy who thinks he'll always win when it counts, and the kind of guy who will have fun smashing up the bad guy's plans. He's almost exactly the opposite of the kind of guy who will take someone out of the equation just on the chance they'll be a problem in the future.
  8. He literally does exactly that in issue 19, and again in issue 23. Exact words from the later: "I've screwed up--a lot".
  9. sonic and shadow accidentally chaos control the ark 50 years into the past, crashing it into itself, killing everyone on both

    1. KHCast

      KHCast

      Just chaos control it into the future. That way they don’t have to deal with  the repercussions now. Leave it to the future generations

    2. Harkofthewaa

      Harkofthewaa

      Then Silver comes back into the past like "You're the Ark Trigger! You set off the explosion that ruined my world! For the sake of the future I must destroy you! IT'S NO USE, TAAAAKE THIS!!!".

    3. KHCast

      KHCast

      So send it farther in the future. Problem solved 

    4. SenEDDtor Missile

      SenEDDtor Missile

      @Diogenes And then cause a time paradox because the ARK crashing into itself can't happen/exist because the future version crashed into itself in the past.

    5. Tarnish

      Tarnish

      I love happy endings.

  10. On that subject, I've got mixed feelings. I'd agree that Sonic can't change endlessly, but I don't think an unchanging Sonic is ideal either. It risks ranging into "Sonic is always perfect" territory, if the series repeatedly, unfailingly proves him right. Really the problem is that no story can go on forever and not turn to shit. But a complete commitment to him being unchanging makes the werehog aspect a narrative failure. It would've been easy enough to use it to explore a different side of Sonic, some "darker" aspect of his personality, and have him come to terms with it (to at least some extent) without requiring massive unsustainable changes to him as a character.
  11. I guess this series will just suck forever then.
  12. Except, no. The only main series game in the Adventure era that actually wrote something of a story about Sonic was SA2. The other games don't really bother doing anything with him besides having him fight Eggman and whatever the final boss ends up being. Sonic, and what we know about him, is exactly the same at the end of SA as it was at the beginning. Heroes doesn't really care much about anyone aside from setting up Shadow's game. ShtH is a spinoff starring Shadow so obviously Sonic isn't supposed to be the most important character but considering he's one of the characters with the closest ties to Shadow it's a big missed opportunity that he isn't more involved (before anyone says it: same goes for other characters connected to Shadow like Rouge and Omega). And '06 is of course the worst, as it's a game where his biggest contribution is as a sacrifice to a villain he didn't even know existed. I don't even know why I have to explain this, because you've basically already agreed that it's true, just that you were happy with it; "I think sonic's narrative strength has never been at the center of a narrative", "all my favorite sonic stories ... the focus is on someone else". What I'm saying is that he should be at the center of the narrative at least some of the time, and not just as an object to meet the bare minimum criteria of being a "Sonic" game while the real story happens around him. Then fucking fix it.
  13. As someone who likes Sonic, the character, and wants to see stories about Sonic...that is a problem. See now you're reading the tragic, twisted outcome of the monkey's paw into the original complaint. Nobody said Sonic has to be the most important character all of the time, nobody said no other character is ever allowed to be important. It's absurd to assume that wanting the main character of the series to have an important role in it instead of being shoved off to the side means "only he can matter, everyone else can get fucked".
  14. We really weren't. The problem is that asking Sonic Team for something is like wishing on a monkey's paw.
  15. At this point it feels like you're arguing against characters having flaws. Any demonstration of a flaw is going to make a character look "inferior" in that area to characters without it. The overall execution of it is absolute garbage, but if all they wanted to do was introduce Classic Sonic there's a million other ways they could've gone about it. They chose to do it the way they did for a reason, they build up to it (in the admittedly short amount of time it's relevant) with him seeing Sonic go down and Silver talking about Tails having "lost it". It's not arbitrary or accidental, they just completely botched the follow-through. Generations' climax is lazy in how it uses the other characters but it doesn't really do anything to make the characters "inferior". Heroes was a game where 12 characters were already playable, it was relatively trivial to give them all an in-game shot at fighting Metal, but Generations was never going to suddenly go from a 2 character game to a 10+ character one. They're antagonists. They antagonize. They're just not the focus of the game's story. And Lost World isn't exactly a game that tries to flatter Sonic, with it making him responsible for the D6 breaking from Eggman's control and putting the world in danger because he got cocky. Which, y'know, is kind of true. And it's not like Sonic's one to take things all that seriously. It's more because Eggman pulled this magic rock out of his ass that breaks reality and gave it to an asshole to cause havoc. Sonic couldn't do shit to Infinite the first time they met; he was the first one to lose. The point of Forces isn't that Sonic is the most important and most powerful person ever and everybody else sucks, it's that everyone had to work together to overcome Eggman and Infinite, even if it did a pretty bad job of expressing it. My interests don't always align with community consensus but I'm not exactly thrilled with how the other characters are handled either. I just think you're looking at it the wrong way here, like you're looking to sand off all of the interesting parts of the characters to make them "perfect".
  16. ...I honestly don't think any of these are true. I mean to some extent how a character acts does describe the characters around them by contrast, but I'm not sure of any situation lately where I'd say that was the main purpose. Like in Forces, Tails isn't afraid of Chaos to make Sonic look good, it's because he's dealing poorly with Sonic, his hero and best friend, being missing and possibly dead. "His" Sonic never even intersects with that plot line (possibly in part because they abandon it almost immediately, but still), and Classic Sonic showing up to save him isn't about him being braver than Tails but him filling in for the Sonic that Tails has lost.
  17. It's not lazy for a character's flaws to help drive the story. It's just actually got to be derived from the character, not contrived just to have things happen the way you want. Like when people keep saying Knuckles is just naive and trusting and that's why he kept getting tricked by Eggman, that doesn't work for me, because if he's just naive, he should be able to learn. The guy you trusted turned on you, electrocuted you, stole what you had sworn to protect, and put your home in danger, and the guy you had been fighting went and fixed everything, okay, you fucked up, you trusted the wrong guy, but now you know better, right? Well, no, because you let that first guy fool you into fighting the second guy again on nothing but his word. That's contrived. But if he's dumb? If he's hotheaded, jumps to the wrong conclusions, starts throwing fists rather than asking questions...that tracks. That's a fight borne out of his flaws. In a more focused story he'd pay for fucking up and work to make up for it, but SA is not exactly a tightly written story.
  18. I mean, it's less that I'm saying that it didn't happen and more that the question of what did and didn't happen doesn't have much meaning. What exists is what's convenient at the time you ask the question, and whatever else is in the vague soup. Referencing spinoffs is convenient for Paper Mario in the same way referencing E Gadd was convenient for Sunshine, and that's about as far as it's meant to be considered. It's all Mario, even if it's different Mario, whether it's real or not. Maybe this is a weird way of seeing it (and I'm definitely not explaining it very clearly) but I just can't see Mario as something that was meant to be pieced together and I think it's ultimately found more freedom in not doing so.
  19. I just don't think Mario's continuity was ever meant to be...well...to be, at all, really. Mario 3 was a play, it opens with stage curtains, you exit each level offstage into the darkness and all, but it's no less loved and no less important for it. And it's hard to square all the spinoffy karting and tennis and such with "Bowser is actually a big evil monster who kidnaps an innocent princess basically constantly" if it's all "real". It plays so loose with itself that I think it can get away with having different interpretations coexisting in an amorphous mix of "Mario". I actually do care about Paper Mario, I'm just not fanatically dedicated to the first two games to the exclusion of all other options (Color Splash was a good game that deserved better). If my posting hasn't been as productive as it could've been it's because discussion of something I think looks pretty cool was instantly swamped with complaints, some about things we don't even know for sure yet, and that makes me a bit bitter.
  20. Comic relief is part of it. Part of it is that stupidity causes conflict and conflict is the root of most stories. Rush into a situation without thinking or knowing what's going on and you're liable to make it worse, and once things have gotten worse, you can work towards making them better. A lot of times people get upset when a character does something "dumb" and makes things worse, but it's not always bad writing. A lot of times, I don't think people consider it from the character's perspective; their limited information vs the audience's wider view, what the character's needs and desires are especially in the moment vs the audience's detached evaluation of the situation, etc. Flawed characters are more interesting than ones who always make the right choice. Plus, it's canon. Knuckles is dumb. It's been scientifically proven.
  21. I don't think this is the clever retort you think it is. The games occasionally use their conceit for comedy. Mario plummets to the ground, and then is revealed to float down safely, as he is paper. Kolorado falling is a different gag entirely, unrelated to paper. It's a cartoon world, not a physics simulation. But it still chooses to portray Mario and the world around him as paper rather than some other material, and in more places than just that. Like is this really a rare viewpoint or something? That Paper Mario is in fact made of paper?
  22. It's not! They've always been paper. That's the whole conceit of the series, it's a paper world in a storybook. Even within the first chapter of the first game you have Mario fluttering to the ground like a piece of paper...because he is paper.
  23. They can do both! I really, genuinely don't understand why so many people are against Paper Mario acknowledging that its world and characters are made of paper.
×
×
  • 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.