Sonic-related pet peeves?

[Johnny Boy]

I'm really peeved that the colors writers missed a perfect opportunity to take jabs at 06 in Generations.

[Blue Blood]

I'm really peeved that the colors writers missed a perfect opportunity to take jabs at 06 in Generations.

They missed the opportunity to make jokes and self-references everywhere. Poking fun at previous games wouldn't have been something the devs would have liked, but were there references to any past events apart from that one line about Colours and SatSR (which was wrong, btw)? The cutscene at the end of Chemical Plant was really poor.

[Your Vest Friend]

There was the reference to the fact that Tails wasn't in Sonic 1, and...ah...Blaze having been in Crisis City before.

[Vertekins]

but were there references to any past events apart from that one line about Colours and SatSR (which was wrong, btw)?

Wrong as in SatSR's ambiguous canonicity or wrong as in the fact that Sonic wasn't actually saving genies in that game?

[Komodin]

Poking fun at previous games wouldn't have been something the devs would have liked, but were there references to any past events apart from that one line about Colours and SatSR (which was wrong, btw)?

What was wrong with it referencing Sonic and the Secret Rings?

[Blue Blood]

Wrong as in SatSR's ambiguous canonicity or wrong as in the fact that Sonic wasn't actually saving genies in that game?

That. Referencing SatSR was cool, but it was as accurate as saying "When we first met Knuckles and he helped me find all the Emeralds".

[Soniman]

He brought Sharah back to life, which kinda counts as saving.

[Johnny Boy]

They missed the opportunity to make jokes and self-references everywhere. Poking fun at previous games wouldn't have been something the devs would have liked, but were there references to any past events apart from that one line about Colours and SatSR (which was wrong, btw)? The cutscene at the end of Chemical Plant was really poor.

And why wouldn't the devs allow jokes? Are they just that sensitive?

Edited July 3, 2012 by Dark Energon Johnny

[sonfan1984]

And why wouldn't the devs allow jokes? Are they just that sensitive?

Maybe cause Sonic Team don't want the writers to be poking fun at their own games even though it will probably be cool if they did.

Edited July 3, 2012 by sonfan1984

[Johnny Boy]

Maybe cause Sonic Team don't want the writers to be poking fun at their own games.

And I guess they'd be red in the face if their greatest failure was made fun of (06).

[sonfan1984]

And I guess they'd be red in the face if their greatest failure was made fun of (06).

Yeah probably.

[Your Vest Friend]

Forget the devs, think of the FAN reaction. While I'm sure most here would get a kick out of it, Mephiles has a sizable fanbase for his short role, and quite a few quite like the game in general.

[Blue Blood]

And why wouldn't the devs allow jokes? Are they just that sensitive?

It's not a good idea to draw attention to your own failings, especially when you're a company who's yet to properly recover from them.

[Jango]

Let's see:

People who claim Sonic 06 is Sonic Adventure 3. IT ISN'T SPELLED S-O-N-I-C-A-D-V-E-N-T-U-R-E-3 ON THE GAME'S COVER, TITTLE SCREEN, ETC, ETC.

Heroes' third Chaos Emerald (yellow). Just WHY, WHY, SEGA?

[...]

Let's see:

People who claim Sonic 06 is Sonic Adventure 3. IT ISN'T SPELLED S-O-N-I-C-A-D-V-E-N-T-U-R-E-3 ON THE GAME'S COVER, TITTLE SCREEN, ETC, ETC.

Heroes' third Chaos Emerald (yellow). Just WHY, WHY, SEGA?

[Jango]

There's actually very good reasons why people call '06 "Sonic Adventure 3". =P

So I assume people can actually call Colors an Unleashed 2? Heroes is like an Knuckles Chaotix 2, right? Seriously, people need to stop calling games things they aren't. Sonic 06 does feels like an Adventure game, but is a downside for the serie in all aspects.

Sonic 4 is the same deal, although called "the Hedgehog 4", it hardly can be claimed as one of the serie.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Jango

[Shrek]

There's actually very good reasons why people call '06 "Sonic Adventure 3". =P

Is it because the Level Design is bad and the story is painful to sit through?

On a more serious note, something that's always bothered me is that there's no Animal/Mobian NPC's in the games (With the exception of the Koala's, but they all look identical to eachother). The Human characters from Sonic Unleashed are fine and all, but Sonic and the rest of his own friends stick out like a sore thumb by comparison. It wouldn't really be that hard to make Animal NPC's without them looking too much like fan-characters, and the only logical reason why they haven't made them is the "Shitty Friends" Argument. I would love a mixture of Animals/Mobians and Humans to appear if we get another set of Hub Worlds like Unleashed had for the next Sonic game, but that's just wishful thinking.

[Diogenes]

People who claim Sonic 06 is Sonic Adventure 3. IT ISN'T SPELLED S-O-N-I-C-A-D-V-E-N-T-U-R-E-3 ON THE GAME'S COVER, TITTLE SCREEN, ETC, ETC.

This is the stupidest fucking thing.

It's not like the cover says "Sonic '06" either, y'know.

[Lady Soniko]

This is the stupidest fucking thing.

It's not like the cover says "Sonic '06" either, y'know.

people only call it Sonic 06 or Sonic Next Gen so it doesn't get mistaken for the original Sonic The Hedgehog

although people just call it Sonic 1, but you get the idea.

[Tobbii]

So I assume people can actually call Colors an Unleashed 2?

Well it doesn't have the "Unleashed" mode, but yes. But there's one important difference, people aren't whining about "I WANT SONIC UNLEASHED 2, THAT WILL SAVE THE FRANCHISE!!!!1" like it's become with SA3 at times.

[Old dead account]

People who claim Sonic 06 is Sonic Adventure 3. IT ISN'T SPELLED S-O-N-I-C-A-D-V-E-N-T-U-R-E-3 ON THE GAME'S COVER, TITTLE SCREEN, ETC, ETC.

Sonic 06 does feels like an Adventure game, but is a downside for the serie in all aspects.

Sonic 4 is the same deal, although called "the Hedgehog 4", it hardly can be claimed as one of the serie.

This is funny

[SilJeff]

I remember seeing this on SSMB (not sure which thread) that fits this mini-discussion perfectly!

Edited July 4, 2012 by Mr.Snarf

[-blank-]

When people go; "Why did Sonic game B get a better score than Sonic game A? Sonic game A is clearly better!" or something like that.

Why did Sonic game B get a better score?

Difference of opinion.

[JezMM]

So I assume people can actually call Colors an Unleashed 2? Heroes is like an Knuckles Chaotix 2, right? Seriously, people need to stop calling games things they aren't. Sonic 06 does feels like an Adventure game, but is a downside for the serie in all aspects.

You just answered your own question there. People call it Sonic Adventure 3 as a short form for "Sonic 2006 is basically what Sonic Adventure 3 would have been. Granted we're not taking glitches and such into account here, but the general design and gameplay choices are more or less exactly what people want out of Sonic Adventure 3, just missing a Chao Garden I guess if you insist on that".

And yes I do consider Sonic Colours to be a direct sequel to Unleashed to the point that if they had called it "Sonic Unleashed 2: Colours" it wouldn't have come off as odd. Sonic Generations as well is basically Sonic Unleashed 3 in gameplay.

I remember seeing this on SSMB (not sure which thread) that fits this mini-discussion perfectly!

I hate this image and I'm not surprised I've never seen an infamous popular star on a single moment that it's been posted. For the record that comparison is just outright incorrect on most things.

The image claims Sonic 2006 can't be Sonic Adventure 3 because it didn't have these things that supposedly SA1 and SA2 did:

The physics system and engine - Sonic Adventure 2 had a different engine to Sonic Adventure 1.

The control quality - Sonic Adventure 2 had a different control quality to Sonic Adventure 1.

The level design - Sonic Adventure 2 had different styled level design to Sonic Adventure 1.

Most in-level or stage specific gimmicks - I'm not sure what the point of this is because why would they bring back the same stage specific gimmicks each game?

The musical instrumentation - Sonic Adventure 2 had different musical style to Sonic Adventure 1.

The art aesthetic - With the exception of slightly more anime humans, I think SA1 and SA2 both were trying to have their envioronments look as realistic as possible on the avaliable hardware.

The objective quality - When people claim Sonic 2006 would be Sonic Adventure 3, they are usually disregarding the end quality of the product and just referring to the design choices involved, glitches or not.

The critical reception - Most retrospective reviews of Sonic Adventure have been less than favourable, we'll see with Sonic Adventure 2. At the end of the day, though you cannot compare the fact that Sonic Adventure was released in a time when people were still pretty wowed by modern graphics and Sonic Adventure WAS a pretty fast game compared to other stuff.

The Sonic 4 stuff is also inane but won't argue about that here. Honestly the whole thing would have been a lot more forgivable if it just played itself straight without the self-righteous patronising "OF COURSE!" at the end. Stupid arguements.

Edited July 4, 2012 by JezMM

[Semi-colon e]

I really hate how people are all like HURR COLOURS AND GENERATIONS ARE UNLEASHED 2 AND 3 but yet when someone says 06 is like a third Adventure game these same people flip their shit just because it's bad. Just because it's a sequel to a good game doesn't mean it has to be a good game itself, and it's like they don't want it to tarnish their "perfect adventure games". It's a blatant double standard that pisses me off. This shit exists whether you like it or not, and it's not like the quality of one thing should retroactively make the other thing terrible or bad in most cases. It's not like Sonic 4 is suddenly ruining the Classic games now is it? It's just a poor game that happens to be called Sonic 4.

It's just a name anyway, so it doesn't matter. Sometimes things are sequels or successors despite not being numbered and the fact they aren't numbered or have different aspects to them doesn't make them suddenly totally separate.

It's more the double standard that annoys me really I suppose.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Semi-colon e