Jump to content
Awoo.

Why Is Generations Recieving More Hate Than Colors?


CanofEpicSauce

Recommended Posts

Except there's the advantage of knowing what you may possibly get before you get the incentive to shell out $50-60 for a game that might not be as good as you think.

Then again, there is renting the game to avoid paying the full price. Then there's looking at other reviews and see where the majority opinion is being held at. If someone sees a few reviews that gives the game a 5-6 out of 10 and the majority of the other reviews are well above 7-8 out of 10, you can easily see where the stronger opinion is being held at.

Seriously, don't get to upset just because reviewers didn't give the game the score you wanted them to give it. It's more so in the actual review where you can determine whether the score was deserved or not. If they're going to hate something, at the very least they could do it accurately, and that's where your hate should be focused on when they don't.

I don't think they were getting upset. Quite the contrary infact.

I disagree that reviews are the only way to find out about a game. Watch gameplay videos on youtube, look at screenshots, read character/story synopses. They always give me a far better view of a game than a review, as a review will always be biased and only you can know whether you'll like it or not. I suppose this mindset comes from not having a mainstream opinion of games though. I unfortunately don't jump for the next shooter which gets 9s or 10s from most reviewers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be amazed that there's so much criticism and disappointment in this forum alone if I didn't recognise that aspect of human nature.

Want a demonstration? Go to TV Tropes, pick out the amazingly popular work of fiction you can think of, and then go to the Headscratchers section. Be amazed at the human inability to be satisfied with anything, and all the more critical the more popular it is.

Still, I think a lot of people are comparing this game to an imaginary one they've been building up in their heads while watching the trailers and release material the last six months. There's a reason I avoided this sub-forum all that time, and it's probably the same reason I seem to be one of the few able to accept this game for what it is instead of constantly focusing on what it could have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read a single review that knocked the game's score down because Classic Sonic didn't control exactly like he did in the 90's, nor were there any reviews that I'm aware of that complained that Modern Sonic didn't have enough open fields or branching paths to travel through.

I think a majority of the non-Sonic fans out there care more about the complete package and who's faces they see in the games. Like it or not, hardly anyone outside of the fanbase likes the Sonic roster post-Knuckles the Echidna, and to even hear their voices, or see them standing in front of each stage entrance or even help you in an extraneous mission is somehow enough to warrant a knock off the counter.

That isn't to say that they only complain about the presence of friends, it's an anomaly: most "problems" are actually subjective, such as the soundrack or difficulty level. I'm tired of some of Mario Galaxy's

but I've never even once thought of not buying the game because of them!

I dunno. I still don't know what's wrong with the game. The problems I actually have are never even raised in reviews, so does that make people like Dio who have legitimate complaints against controls in the wrong? What gives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reviewers can't tell the difference between Sonic 2 and Sonic 4. Therefore, their opinion doesn't matter.

No, really. That's all that needs to be said. Good day.

  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. I have this to say. To one of the most button-pressing (pun intended) complaints across several reviews:

For those of you who are deluded, the Hedgehog Engine has rendered Blast Processing obsolete. Please, live in the beauty of the now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they're both pretty great games. Though I have to admit for how great I think Generations is, I do think Colors does certain things better.

Also I know it's not a huge issue but it really bothers me that Generations final boss sucks and that Super Sonic in levels is more useless then a toothbrush for a turtle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really give a proper judgement seeing as I haven't played Generations, but from what I've seen of the game, I'd say that the reason it's potentially getting more "hate" than Colours (though really I wouldn't say anyone is hating on the game, if anything people are saying it's a more refined package than the 2010 offering) is that there's a sense of magic missing about it. Don't get me wrong, it's a complete and utter nostalgia fest up the wazoo, and I absolutely adore some of the writing (particularly during the pre-final boss cutscene), but something about the game just gives me the impression that it's underwhelming. Maybe it's the fact that it's all over in a flash. Maybe it's the fact that there's hardly any story to speak of whatsoever. Or maybe it's just because, when Colours came out, its quality took everyone by surprise, whereas with Generations people are expecting something special. Colours had no expectations, Generations had plenty.

I'm sure Generations is an absolutely amazing game, but for me, Colours looks like it has a little bit more of a sparkle about it. It was refreshing, and it tried something new that paid off handsomely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, before playing Generations I never would have imagined that Colors would have ended up with the more fulfilling story. Well, it did to me at least.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...isn't there only like a one point difference between both game's meta scores?

Anyway, I will remain from judging reviews until I get my hands on the game. I will admit some comments like the shitty friends thing sound really dumb though and I see why people are worked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that reviews are the only way to find out about a game.

Edited by ChaosSupremeSonic
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure I brought up renting as another option if you read that whole post.

Yes, I did read your whole post actually. However, that still costs money, and also not every game is rentable. A lot of niche games you can't rent out, just because they aren't popular enough for the companys to stock them. Meaning renting is not a viable option in some cases.

That is a load of bull. They're just as biased as the very reviews you're talking about. Screenshots hardly do a damn thing other than to show you how pretty the game looks, and as would be the case with Sonic 06 is not a full guarantee on how good the game will be nore is it a better alternative. The same applies to character/story synopses as they are completely irrelevant to the gameplay.

Gameplay videos are absolutely no substitute for playing the game, nor is it a better alternative to a review either. Sonic 06 had some pretty great looking gameplay videos, and yet most of the fandom who has played it have seen first hand that the game isn't very good. If anything, you're saying all of this completely out of spite for reviews or at the very least making excuses here.

I'm curious. Are you a reviewer yourself? That's the only conclusion I can come to considering how quickly you jumped to insinuating that I'm saying this out of spite, or making excuses. Which is absurd considering I haven't even mentioned my opinion on the generation reviews, just that I don't really put much stock in reviews in general.

Of course gameplay directly from SEGA will be biased, because they'll only show the things they want you to see. What I meant was gameplay taken by outside sources. Gameplay recorded by game sites/real players, etc. Using your example of Sonic 06. You only need to look at any gameplay videos from players on youtube to see what a broken mess that game is. Seeing gameplay in action like that is the closest thing you can get to actually buying it/renting it yourself. As for story and character synposes being useless. I strongly disagree. For certain genre's, such as RPGs, the story and characters is one of the most important parts. I can forgive a lot in terms of the gameplay if the story and characters are great.

You're right that they arent a substitute for actually playing a game, however, if there isn't a demo, there isn't much you can do besides renting(Which as I said above, in some cases isn't an option). Regardless. I'll stick to using my methods of seeing whether I'll like a game. They work for me, as I haven't bought a game I've disliked in a good 4 or 5 years. If reviews work for you, then you can stick to using them too if you so wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I did read your whole post actually. However, that still costs money, and also not every game is rentable. A lot of niche games you can't rent out, just because they aren't popular enough for the companys to stock them. Meaning renting is not a viable option in some cases.

Edited by ChaosSupremeSonic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generations vs. Colours?

I think the thing is, right, that Colours finally struck the perfect balance between classic and modern Sonic, truly utilising Unleashed's idea of switching between side scrolling and full 3D to it's full potential, mixing the speed and adrenaline of modern Sonic with the platforming perfection of the classics. Whilst Unleashed featured side-scrolling sections reminiscent of Sonic Rush, Colours used this feature to bring back the platforming perfection and exploration which we all remember without having to split it off into a separate style of gameplay (i.e. Werehog, treasure hunting, mechs).

The thing is, after that, Generations kind of splits it in two again. I know it has better platforming than Unleashed, but hear me out - Colours made certain alterations to modern Sonic such as crippling and limiting his boost ability to something you can only gain from specific power-ups and had to save for the right moments, rather than easily refilling at any time, so whilst you could utilise the ability, there was never really any 'boost to skip this challenge' moments.

The inclusion of classic Sonic as a concept and even as a separate character seems unnecessary after Colours in my opinion. If the boost hadn't gone back to Unleashed/Rush style, where you can just easily refill and use it through pretty much the entire level, there would have been no need for the classic levels at all.

My personal disappointment with Colours came from the simple fact that the Wii limited it so much - I love the Wii but in a game which zooms the camera right out in a low res screen and cripples itself due to lack of buttons (quickstep 'sections' etc.) the limitations can really frustrate you.

I love Generations, I think it kicks ass, but I think Colours had the right idea - to bring back what made classic Sonic special and merge it into the adrenaline and excitement of modern Sonic by balancing the two just right. If it had used Colours' boost power-ups instead of 'ring energy', they could have, like in Colours, done side-scrolling levels without any boost power-ups present.

So yeah, that's why I believe Colours pleased the classic and modern fans alike better than Generations, because whilst Colours brought us together, Generations divides us up into two separate camps again.

Edited by DistantJ
  • Thumbs Up 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't underestimate how much a bad final boss can taint someone's opinion somewhat on the quality of the whole game.

Kind of like seeing a great movie with an awful ending, it's (unfortunately) what people can be left with, it being the last thing they remember.

And while I would appreciate more cutscenes and character interactions, considering the "mainstream" hate for Sonic's friends I can see why Sega didn't go down this route.

I've lost count of how many comments I've seen (sometimes within actual reviews, no less) along the lines of :

"Sonic's friends all get sucked into time holes LOL they should end the story now and leave them all there"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And while I would appreciate more cutscenes and character interactions, considering the "mainstream" hate for Sonic's friends I can see why Sega didn't go down this route.

I've lost count of how many comments I've seen (sometimes within actual reviews, no less) along the lines of :

"Sonic's friends all get sucked into time holes LOL they should end the story now and leave them all there"

Sonic not interacting with anyone else is one of the main reasons why I'm disappointed with the story as a whole and I'm getting tired of Sega 'playing it safe' and trying so hard to please these people who hates Sonic's friends and completely ignoring that there's many people who likes the other characters as well and wants them more involved in the series again. I sometimes think these people don't have a good reason to hate the friends characters anymore except that they're in the game and if they bring up games like Sonic 06 and Heroes as a reason the friends characters sucks then Sonic also sucks too at that point.

Edited by sonfan1984
  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sonic not interacting with anyone else is one of the main reasons why I'm disappointed with the story as a whole and I'm getting tired of Sega 'playing it safe' and trying so hard to please these people who hates Sonic's friends and completely ignoring that there's people who likes the other characters and wants them more involved in the series again. I sometimes think those people don't have a good reason to hate the friends characters anymore except that they're in the game.

Why can't they just think they're annoying. That's a perfectly acceptable reason.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't they just think they're annoying. That's a perfectly acceptable reason.

But why are they annoying? Many of them don't even say why and atomically lable them as 'annoying friends' when you don't even have to talk or play as them. Instead of fixing the characters so they can become really likeable again they would rather get rid of them.

Edited by sonfan1984
  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say rather than removing 'friend' characters, make them less annoying. If you ask me Unleashed started doing it right, Amy just kinda following you around the hub worlds, fits her character, Tails being the helpful sidekick, Chip (don't judge, I LOVE Chip!) the funny 'guide', and no more after that, no massive cast of overused characters shoehorned in for the sake of it. I say don't throw the other characters out just because they've come to be annoying, just use them in moderation (come on, Sonic Heroes was crowded!) and find ways to make them add something to the game rather than just sit there being annoying and unnecessary. I used to find Tails annoying but recently he's been extremely helpful for plot progression and game hints. Chaotix, Rouge etc. are kinda forced in, even in Generations. They worked in Shadow, because of the many multiple routes through the story, but yeah it's a bit much when they try and cram ALL of them into one storyline.

I'd like to see Knuckles get a major role again some day though.

Am I the only one who wants to see more NPC animal characters? Seems Sonic's world consists of a surreal version of Earth populated by humans and normal animals, just with a bunch of antropomorphic animal heroes. I'd like to see more like the echidnas in Sonic Adventure 1, animals not important to the story etc. wandering around.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't they just think they're annoying. That's a perfectly acceptable reason.

Primarily, because there is no reason as to why. I find the characters annoying too.

However, their mere existance isn't a flaw with the game. They are a part of the history of the franchise.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friends were handled perfectly in this game. I liked that they only really appeared in optional side missions and helped you out, with genuinely fun gameplay elements to enjoy such as Knuckles' treasure hunting in Sky Sanctuary and Vector tossing you in Crisis City. It's when SEGA force you to play as them and go through their boring stories that makes people hate them. In Sonic '06, when I choose Sonic's story, I don't want to be forced to play as Tails, Knuckles, and Silver with shitty controls. People hate the "shitty friends" because they're forced upon us, they don't mind when they're optional diversions.

For example, people don't seem to mind the hundreds of unoriginal recolor characters the Mario series has to offer, despite how, well, unoriginal they may be. There's "dark" versions of characters (Wario, Waluigi), baby versions of characters (Baby Mario, Baby, Peach, etc), male/female versions of characters (Yoshi-Birdo, etc), and more. However, what Nintendo does it segregate these characters from the mainstream games. You don't find Waluigi shouting "WAHHH" in Super Mario Galaxy, nor are we forced to play a slow-paced beat 'em up as Baby Mario in New Super Mario Bros. Popular characters such as Wario and Donkey Kong are given spin-offs (The Wario Land, Wario Ware, and Donkey Kong Country series' are still alive and critically acclaimed today), and slightly less popular characters such as Daisy and Petey Piranha usually appear in spin-offs after their debut games.

I'm happy that Sonic Team are leaning more towards this direction with the series, only putting "necessary" characters in games, and when there's more characters they don't take the limelight away from Sonic.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to be forced to play as Tails, Knuckles, and Silver with shitty controls. People hate the "shitty friends" because they're forced upon us, they don't mind when they're optional diversions.

Yes they do mind. I can understand that people don't like to be forced to play as the other characters cause their alternate gameplay in the past isn't fun but it's to the point now that they'll bash the other characters just by them appearing in the games at all no matter if they're non-playable, completely optional or how big or small their involvement in the story is.

Edited by sonfan1984
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Sonic '06, when I choose Sonic's story, I don't want to be forced to play as Tails, Knuckles, and Silver with shitty controls. People hate the "shitty friends" because they're forced upon us, they don't mind when they're optional diversions.

That wasn't the case with some reviews regarding Generations where none of them are even playable. They complained regardless.

For example, people don't seem to mind the hundreds of unoriginal recolor characters the Mario series has to offer, despite how, well, unoriginal they may be. There's "dark" versions of characters (Wario, Waluigi), baby versions of characters (Baby Mario, Baby, Peach, etc), male/female versions of characters (Yoshi-Birdo, etc), and more. However, what Nintendo does it segregate these characters from the mainstream games. You don't find Waluigi shouting "WAHHH" in Super Mario Galaxy, nor are we forced to play a slow-paced beat 'em up as Baby Mario in New Super Mario Bros. Popular characters such as Wario and Donkey Kong are given spin-offs (The Wario Land, Wario Ware, and Donkey Kong Country series' are still alive and critically acclaimed today), and slightly less popular characters such as Daisy and Petey Piranha usually appear in spin-offs after their debut games.

But not all of us want that. We have fans of every character, with the more popular ones holding a strong representation in the franchise. Characters like the Baby versions of the Mario cast are much less recognized than character such as Silver, Blaze, or Amy.

That, and some of us actually want to play as our favorites in a main game and not a spin-off we're less likely to play by comparison, and to add to that we also don't like to be forced to play as characters we have no interest in. Relegating them to spin-offs is not even trying to solve the problem than it is to make a lazy way around the solution, so why not do as you said and make them optional?

I'm happy that Sonic Team are leaning more towards this direction with the series, only putting "necessary" characters in games, and when there's more characters they don't take the limelight away from Sonic.

Remind me what makes a character "necessary" again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.