The Sonic Generations Review Topic

[Soniman]

That's a high score...But it's equivalent to a...? And this will go to Metacritic too

[Sami]

That's a high score...But it's equivalent to a...? And this will go to Metacritic too

Edited November 2, 2011 by Dissident

[Megabox91(Renzy)]

I have to say this may actually be the best Sonic game to date. Beating out the infamous Sonic 3 & Knuckles.

<.<

>.>

Yes I just said that.

I'll write out a full review later, but as it stands this game def gets a 9.5 from me. Only things

that hold it back are the small frame rate drops and the final boss. (biggest waste of time I've ever spent in my life)

[Vec]

8.2/10. On scores that are given on a 1-5 scale, just multiply the score by two.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Vec

[Djawed]

Colors was a great game and all of you are weird.

~Dissident

[Vec]

Was the Eurogamer.es review posted?

http://www.eurogamer...ations-analisis

If not, they gave it an 8/10

EDIT: Everyeye.it has a review too...but I don't understand italian that much...but it's an 8 too

http://www.everyeye.it/xbox360/articoli/sonic-generations_recensione_15283

Edited November 2, 2011 by Vec

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Did anyone even read my comment about how the 95/100 Score was put on the PS3 metacritic yet?

[Vec]

Did anyone even read my comment about how the 95/100 Score was put on the PS3 metacritic yet?

[Eternal EX]

Colors was a great game and all of you are weird.

~Dissident

[KrazyBean]

I have to say this may actually be the best Sonic game to date. Beating out the infamous Sonic 3 & Knuckles.

<.<

>.>

Yes I just said that.

I'll write out a full review later, but as it stands this game def gets a 9.5 from me. Only things that hold it back are the small frame rate drops and the final boss. (biggest waste of time I've ever spent in my life)

So the final boss sucks then? Great, so the Time Eater just looks ferocious for show then.

Edited November 2, 2011 by KrazyBean14

[SimplePlan2k8]

Did anyone post up the GameTrailers review? They focussed a lot on the humour, which looked great, especially the scene with Charmy (which I laughed at so much I woke my housemate up...)

[Neon]

Eurogamer Review:

http://www.eurogamer...s-review-review

7

Edited November 2, 2011 by Neon

[Detective Shadzter]

Bottomless pits are now signposted with big red warnings, but that only prevents you falling in when you know no better - it's still very common to tumble into them because of imprecise aerial movements or because they have been thrust into your path during a high-speed section. It's player error to an extent, but enormously frustrating and surely quite easy to eradicate. Either way, there are better ways to challenge our skills, two decades on.

It's like reviewers are going out of their way to find reasons to complain about bottomless pits.

[Robuttnik]

It's like reviewers are going out of their way to find reasons to complain about bottomless pits.

No shit? This has been pretty evident for a while now. When critics complained about cheap deaths in Colours, that was when I figured out there is a massive bias against Sonic from the critics, and they go out of their way to complain about things regardless of the validity of the complaint.

[DaN]

I'm Italian, and I've read the Everyeye review. It is pretty much favorable, and it praises the game visuals and gameplay. They say that even though the gameplay might not be the most fresh around here, it is various and very enjoyable. They highly recommend the game to everyone.

[frokenok3]

Let's remove all bottomless pits......and put some badniks and roads.

*Next game comes. It's a Sonic Colors quality and above. No Bottomless pits*

X Review: It's a great a game but it's just too EASY! In our first run we didn't find a single challenge where we had to be careful and time our jumps. At least in the previous titles there were bottomless pits that made it more difficult.

>.>

<.<

Edited November 2, 2011 by MoDeRn frokenok3

[Detective Shadzter]

No shit? This has been pretty evident for a while now. When critics complained about cheap deaths in Colours, that was when I figured out there is a massive bias against Sonic from the critics, and they go out of their way to complain about things regardless of the validity of the complaint.

I know it's been a complaint with all past games, but I'm referring to the fact that Sonic Team has helped them out with a warning signs option, yet the critics are still complaining.

[Jeffhog]

Let's remove all bottomless pits......and put some badniks and roads.

*Next game comes. It's a Sonic Colors quality and above. No Bottomless pits*

X Review: It's a great a game but it's just too EASY! In our first run we didn't find a single challenge where we had to be careful and time our jumps. At least in the previous titles there were bottomless pits that made it more difficult.

>.>

<.<

1. Whine about the game being too hard/unfair when it really isn't.

2. Whine about the sequel being too easy.

3. Trollery complete.

[Robuttnik]

I know it's been a complaint with all past games, but I'm referring to the fact that Sonic Team has helped them out with a warning signs option, yet the critics are still complaining.

Colours had a warning sign too, which just adds to the fact the complaint about Colours supposed cheap deaths was bullshit. Generations just made the warning signs even bigger and more noticeable. Critics will complain no matter what. They could have Omochao scream a bottomless put is coming up 10 seconds before you reach it, and they would still complain. It's just bias against Sonic. That's just the way it is.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Robuttnik

[frokenok3]

Bottomless pits/ just pits that make you die are everywhere. Not only in Sonic games. That's what i don't understand.

I mean let's take 2 random quick examples.

New Super Mario Bros. ---> It has bottomless pits and a lot of them during the levels. I don't see anyone complaining.

Uncharted 3 ----> It's not bottomless pits exactly but if you don't make a proper jump at the last moment you will fall and die. Again no one complains.

Anyway...i don't like this. It's okay to say that the game has faults. Like for example that it's a short game or something but giving a lower score because there are bottomless pits and there are not cheap and you have signs warning you...i don't know.

I will stop here and won't say anything else about it.

Edited November 2, 2011 by MoDeRn frokenok3

[krazeeKidd102]

You know what? Sonic Colors is a legitimately great game and more enjoyable than Sonic Generations. Yes, I said it

Think about it: Sonic Colors (at least at the time) was the first console Sonic game in a while without ny bullshit alternate gameplay styles and rehashed monster-of-the-week plots. Not only that, but it was a full game with nothing SU daytime stages with several improvements AND new ideas for replay value (which is VERY important in Sonic the Hedgehog games).

Before that game was even announced, we had already been pelted to death with game-padding alternate gameplay styles, THE SUPER POWER OF TEAMWORK, a game with everything besides guns that was wrong with it, one of the worst games of all time, THE worst port of all time, and a werehog, a game with genies and horrible controls, and a wagglefest. And what did we get when they promised to go back to the basics and give us Sonic the Hedgehog 4 (made by the same peope who made Sonic Advance 1)? An uninspired collection of copy-and-paste jobs with boring, automated level design and crap physics.

So yeah, Sonic Colors was a huge fucking deal for us...or me, at least.

Plus, it didn't need any help from positive bias anyways. It was clearly a 3D game (even if it was 70% 2D) and used an obvious gimmick. But guess what? It still worked for the most part. It didn't need to reuse old assets for nostalgia; it didn't need Classic Sonic hastily slapped on and slightly modified from Modern Sonic's engine for an extra buck. It was simply a modern Sonic the Hedgehog game, and a pretty damn good one at that.

I simply looked at the first few trailers for Sonic Generations and decided it was going to be good and were pretty damn casual about it, but last year, when I looked at gameplay footage for Sonic Colors, I simply loved every minute of it because (let's all say it now) "SAYGA FYNALEE GOT IT RYTE!!!!111"

It's the impact of the game that truly makes the difference between Colors and Generations; it's a lot like when many fans cherish the Sonic Adventure series as the best Sonic games of all time, only love for Sonic Colors is completely legitimate because unlike those games, Colors will always stand the test of time without resorting to sympathy points or other positive bias even for its time of release. Five years will pass by and SEGA will STILL be using nostalgia and Classic Sonic and "Classic Gameplay" as their marketing and selling points, furthering Sonic Generation's road to obsoletion (if that's even a word) when they're better off making a well-deserved sequel to a well-deserved game.

[turbojet]

You know what? Sonic Colors is a legitimately great game and more enjoyable than Sonic Generations. Yes, I said it

Think about it: Sonic Colors (at least at the time) was the first console Sonic game in a while without ny bullshit alternate gameplay styles and rehashed monster-of-the-week plots. Not only that, but it was a full game with nothing SU daytime stages with several improvements AND new ideas for replay value (which is VERY important in Sonic the Hedgehog games).

Before that game was even announced, we had already been pelted to death with game-padding alternate gameplay styles, THE SUPER POWER OF TEAMWORK, a game with everything besides guns that was wrong with it, one of the worst games of all time, THE worst port of all time, and a werehog, a game with genies and horrible controls, and a wagglefest. And what did we get when they promised to go back to the basics and give us Sonic the Hedgehog 4 (made by the same peope who made Sonic Advance 1)? An uninspired collection of copy-and-paste jobs with boring, automated level design and crap physics.

So yeah, Sonic Colors was a huge fucking deal for us...or me, at least.

Plus, it didn't need any help from positive bias anyways. It was clearly a 3D game (even if it was 70% 2D) and used an obvious gimmick. But guess what? It still worked for the most part. It didn't need to reuse old assets for nostalgia; it didn't need Classic Sonic hastily slapped on and slightly modified from Modern Sonic's engine for an extra buck. It was simply a modern Sonic the Hedgehog game, and a pretty damn good one at that.

I simply looked at the first few trailers for Sonic Generations and decided it was going to be good and were pretty damn casual about it, but last year, when I looked at gameplay footage for Sonic Colors, I simply loved every minute of it because (let's all say it now) "SAYGA FYNALEE GOT IT RYTE!!!!111"

It's the impact of the game that truly makes the difference between Colors and Generations; it's a lot like when many fans cherish the Sonic Adventure series as the best Sonic games of all time, only love for Sonic Colors is completely legitimate because unlike those games, Colors will always stand the test of time without resorting to sympathy points or other positive bias even for its time of release. Five years will pass by and SEGA will STILL be using nostalgia and Classic Sonic and "Classic Gameplay" as their marketing and selling points, furthering Sonic Generation's road to obsoletion (if that's even a word) when they're better off making a well-deserved sequel to a well-deserved game.

What does having an impact in mascot's reputation or how it is viewed by the gaming community have to do with it being a better game or not? Hell, if we compared Colors Modern Sonic to Generations Modern Sonic, no one can make a conducive argument that I would take seriously that Colors was better. As for calling Classic a gimmick, it is one of the best gimmick's that I've ever seen and it works with the player. We don't know if Sonic Team won't use it again, if not in a separate series or games. So how is Colors better besides reputation?

I'd like to add that if Sonic Generation came before Sonic Colors, we probably would be getting the same backlash from reviewers since it is change in community within consoles.

Edited November 2, 2011 by turbojet

[SimplePlan2k8]

Why are they complaining about lives?! Come on, that's not even a valid complaint. I didn't see Galaxy 2 getting panned for lives, so why this? Could be worse, could be like SA2 where it chucks you to the title screen rather than the level start...

[kadosho]

Valid points all around, but I give Sonic Team points for making it challenging. Sure Omochao may give a helping hand, but the player still has to be aware of their surroundings. This is the type of game that forces you to use your peripheral vision. In fact the better you get, the tougher the obstacles.

Another thing that critics need to stop whining about - music. This game has a solid soundtrack (what are these hiccups that they are talking about?) I'm using my headphones, and I hear everything just fine. Haha take that!

Gameplay time - 5 hours? So we complain if its not long enough, or its too long. If a game works, just say so.

*Seems like Sonic Team can't please anyone versus the gameplay time management discussion.

Overall I love it, and that's that.

[Voyant]

Like...I don't know what is worng with these fuckers? Are all reviews now a days just retarded FPS fans that don't know how to control something jumping from a black to a block?

Hell if this was the case how the FUCK does Uncharted 3 get such high scores...you think they will complain to all hell about death pits and unfair deaths there. At this point will be lucky if the game even gets to 80.

Hopefully the PS3 version does better than the 360 version...that will honestly be enough for me. Where is Vandal Review on the game...they are registered in meta and gave the game a 8.5 and we knew about their review on the 31 of October.