Popular and unpopular Sonic opinions you agree and disagree with!

[Kuzu]

 

1 hour ago, VEDJ-F said:

Even so, game events don't align very well to give them that dynamic, at least on the modern side. 

-Sonic CD happens, it's Metal Sonic's first outing, he dies so hard he's left as scrap on Little Planet. 
-Sonic 4 happens, so Eggman revives Metal Sonic for a second go. He fails again in the same fashion.
-The next step seems to be that Metal Sonic was put in statis as of Adventure.
-At some point in statis time, Metal Sonic got the upgrade that led to Heroes. 
-I'll be damned if they have that dynamic after Heroes for certain. 

There is so little that is explored between the games, that practically anything is up for interpretation.

Eggman and Metal Sonic's relationship never gets much attention beyond a standard villain and minion dynamic, so I don't really see how that Eggman treating him like a son contradicts anything. What you said hasn't stopped Eggman from continuing to use Metal Sonic either. 

On a humorous note, Neo Metal was just Metal's teenage rebellion phase.

 

1 hour ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

Now that just makes it even more ironic how the inputs of 30 year olds seem be what Sega are listening to.

To be fair, we're a bunch of loud 30 year olds who probably get way too emotionally invested in this series than needed.

[Whatever the WhoCares]

Sonic’s world, not necessarily the events, needs a retcon/reboot. You can’t have a universe as inconsistent as Mario’s (which is also annoying) when your characters speak in complete sentences. 

[StaticMania]

16 minutes ago, Whatever the WhoCares said:

You can’t have a universe as inconsistent as Mario’s when your characters speak in complete sentences. 

Yes you can.

[Red Hot Jack]

I think Shadow has been well written in the past, he had a great arc in SA2, they probably should have left him dead but if the fans want obscure Mighty and Ray back, Shadow would have followed eventually had they not brought him back immediately. Fan reaction brought him back anyway. I also liked him in Sonic 06, even though I don't like Shadow as a hero, I prefer him as a villain, loner or antihero, aggressive and not passive, but I admit he was badass in that game. OK in Forces, he had some cool scenes and was incorporated well in the storyline. Where I hated him... Heroes, Shadow the game, most spin offs, and Boom obviously, he was a stupid bully. In Archie he had ups and downs, but there was that Shadow Fall arc in which he was amazing, as much as I dislike the Black Arms.

Silver was also "good" in 2006, I mean, he obviously proved popular and Sega kept him even though the game was a disaster. I feel like the complicated hero with a dilemma is interesting, it was some nice drama, obviously I found him annoying though in that game, but I prefer his dork and naive personality from later interpretations, and an optimist, a quality which is really good for him, despite the fact he comes from a bleak future.

As for crazy stereotypes, I'm talking as a person who has been crazy in the past and is curing himself. There are crazy characters I like, and characters I dislike: for example Zazz is very bland, mono-trait and just a psycho, hyperactive villain, I know he's supposed to be evil but I find him stupid and maybe even insulting for crazy people; while Sticks is great, she's a lot more balanced and has actual traits other than being paranoid and crazy, she's cynical, smart and intuitive, anti-technologic, an expert survivalist, a fighter who makes her own weapons, she's cute and adorable but without having it written all over the face (like Cream, which I don't really like), a loner who grew up in the jungle, a recluse but fundamentally she's a good friend and a hero. Which is why I prefer her as a positive character and I think she should be less cynical and more explored in-depth, maybe in the comics, so yes, she IS awesome and deserves a chance, definitely a character that crazy people can relate to. This is why I love her.

[E-122-Psi]

Looking back, I don't think Sally Acorn being the 'bossy matriarch' archetype was ever the problem, but more that they never went the whole way with it. They never had that one 'ethical low point' where Sally got TOO controlling and neurotic or blasted at the others before having the big sincere remorse moment. Yeah, it's kind of cliche but it's nearly always the way you add humanity to those sort of commanding archetypes, that they can be pushy and lose their temper about it, but they mean well and it breaks their heart when they realise they've went too far and are hurting someone to do it (eg. Elinor burning Merida's bow in Brave, Stoick disowning Hiccup in How To Train A Dragon, Twilight Sparkle's outburst in the MLP movie). Sally was in that awkward unhumanised medium in terms of being the matriarch of the group, it was just NOT defined enough that it never got too toxic and she was made to accept it as a flaw, but it just WAS defined enough to be a key characteristic of hers, thus she was still kind of acerbic and hypocritical enough that you thought she was getting off too easy. It's like having a version of Sonic that's recurrently smug and reckless and doesn't pay for it at least once, there needs to be that moment a vice comes crashing down on someone.

Granted the comics did arguably have a couple moments she did hit this extreme point and FAILED the character test miserably (eg. 'the slap' or blaming Sonic for her father's injuries), no matter how much Ian tried to retroactively amend things by saying she was super duper sorry about it and served her time stewing for it offscreen. I don't think wiping this characteristic clean off of her like an old shame was quite the way to go, at least not without having the key development from it first, the cathartic display of humanity.

[Kellodrawsalot]

5 hours ago, E-122-Psi said:

Looking back, I don't think Sally Acorn being the 'bossy matriarch' archetype was ever the problem, but more that they never went the whole way with it. They never had that one 'ethical low point' where Sally got TOO controlling and neurotic or blasted at the others before having the big sincere remorse moment. Yeah, it's kind of cliche but it's nearly always the way you add humanity to those sort of commanding archetypes, that they can be pushy and lose their temper about it, but they mean well and it breaks their heart when they realise they've went too far and are hurting someone to do it (eg. Elinor burning Merida's bow in Brave, Stoick disowning Hiccup in How To Train A Dragon, Twilight Sparkle's outburst in the MLP movie). Sally was in that awkward unhumanised medium in terms of being the matriarch of the group, it was just NOT defined enough that it never got too toxic and she was made to accept it as a flaw, but it just WAS defined enough to be a key characteristic of hers, thus she was still kind of acerbic and hypocritical enough that you thought she was getting off too easy. It's like having a version of Sonic that's recurrently smug and reckless and doesn't pay for it at least once, there needs to be that moment a vice comes crashing down on someone.

Granted the comics did arguably have a couple moments she did hit this extreme point and FAILED the character test miserably (eg. 'the slap' or blaming Sonic for her father's injuries), no matter how much Ian tried to retroactively amend things by saying she was super duper sorry about it and served her time stewing for it offscreen. I don't think wiping this characteristic clean off of her like an old shame was quite the way to go, at least not without having the key development from it first, the cathartic display of humanity.

The Slap was literarly written to break up Sonic and Sally because the writer at that time ( Karl) wanted Sonic and Amy to become a couple ASP, the issue was less about Sally's Breaking point and more about making her look bad so the audience would tottes be cool with Sonic being in a secret relationship with Amy 

[DabigRG]

9 hours ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

The Slap was literarly written to break up Sonic and Sally because the writer at that time ( Karl) wanted Sonic and Amy to become a couple ASP, the issue was less about Sally's Breaking point and more about making her look bad so the audience would tottes be cool with Sonic being in a secret relationship with Amy 

Wow. You know, when you say it out loud...

[E-122-Psi]

I think a big problem with a lot of Sonic characters is that most of them lack much in the terms of character deconstructions, an emphasis on their key traits and how they affect their agency and role (which is admittedly hard to do when most of them don't have much agency and role). Too often because of this lack of fleshing out, they are often dismissed as one note running gags and goofball traits rather than intrinsic elements of their personalities, so too often writers try to downplay or abolish them rather than develop on them.

Sonic Boom I kinda liked because they did try this more often in a light hearted but effective way, moments each character's trait was really tested or it became such an intense characteristic that the rest made clear they weren't gonna put up with their crap anymore. The only one I thought was maybe a bit too one note was Sticks, if maybe because most of the time her crazy quirks were just comic relief or they did the 'right all along' twist. Even Knuckles felt like he was made to face his stupid habits more often.

[Kuzu]

There was an attempt at trying to flesh these characters out, but then Sega stopped caring due to backlash.

[DabigRG]

10 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

There was an attempt at trying to flesh these characters out, but then Sega stopped caring due to backlash.

And that was which one...?

[Red Hot Jack]

11 hours ago, DabigRG said:

And that was which one...?

I think up to 2006. That's where people complained about the "shitty friends" and Sega changed approach and started the "Sonic only" trend. Thankfully they are starting to bring the characters back.

[DabigRG]

3 hours ago, Jack the Shadow said:

I think up to 2006. That's where people complained about the "shitty friends" and Sega changed approach and started the "Sonic only" trend. Thankfully they are starting to bring the characters back.

I guess that's sorta true, if only for characters like Shadow, Amy, and at one point Omega?

Everyone else was more or less static or experienced a brief bout of development before continuing on as usual, either with that development as a footnote or like little has changed.

[Kellodrawsalot]

I honestly think Sonic Boom was a giant mistake, outside of the first game being a glitch-fest and being one of the lowest sold Sonic game in history, Sonic Team themselves seem to have regretted their decision (when they kept calling SonicBoom just a spin of to sell more toys to American children in a rather disrespectful way in an interview) The characters for the most part aren't the same characters anymore there supposed to be newer characters but neither does the games or the tv show give us a proper introduction to them, the games and tv series starts expecting the audience to already know everyone. (sorry stole that from Somecallmejohhny) Since these aren't the same characters it doesn't really ad anything to the Sonic franchise and even as a Spin of, the games were not well received and outside of Sticks I dont think the Spin off left its mark or stand out strongly on its own.

Outside of some very clever jokes, and funny episodes and pretty good looking animation the tv series suffered from ''no development'' with every new episode setting the world back to the status quo (confirmed by the tv staff themselves) which didn't allow the show to develop the characters all that much. and while the tv show has recieved mix-reactions from the fans it wasn't strong enough to continue for more then 2 seasons. I just think it was a missed opportunity. 

[DabigRG]

14 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

the tv series suffered from ''no development'' with every new episode setting the world back to the status quo (confirmed by the tv staff themselves) which didn't allow the show to develop the characters all that much. 

That's not entirely hardfast, to be fair.

[Kellodrawsalot]

1 minute ago, DabigRG said:

That's not entirely hardfast, to be fair.

I never understood why that is since the Boom team was already allowed to make so many changes anyway. The comic books at the time had Sonic characters develop too and it was a missed opportunity to create more Boom-Only characters so they are allowed to be developed but most of the Boom-Only characters were pretty one dimensional, comedy-relief or were agnostic to Sonic and friends  for no reason. (despite them saving the place several times?)

[DabigRG]

9 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

I never understood why that is since the Boom team was already allowed to make so many changes anyway. The comic books at the time had Sonic characters develop too and it was a missed opportunity to create more Boom-Only characters so they are allowed to be developed but most of the Boom-Only characters were pretty one dimensional, comedy-relief or were agnostic to Sonic and friends  for no reason. (despite them saving the place several times?)

I think someone suggested something to the effect of them intentionally keeping many of the recurring characters basic to help the game cast & Sticks stand out. I doubt that was actually the intent, but hey, it's just a theory.

Also, while there were exceptions, I think the real reason is a combination of the writers attempting to keep things fairly lighthearted to stay somewhat in genre and readily accessible for new views.

[Heckboy]

13 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

were agnostic to Sonic and friends  for no reason.

Assuming you meant antagonistic, that was the joke. Most people are insufferable, ungrateful assholes in real life, and in the Boom setting not even Sonic and friends are appreciated by the general public.

[StaticMania]

50 minutes ago, DabigRG said:

...I think the real reason is a combination of the writers attempting to keep things fairly lighthearted to stay somewhat in genre and readily accessible for new views.

Or they just wanted to write a simple "action" comedy and there's nothing wrong with that.

Plus Plus

[Kellodrawsalot]

1 hour ago, DabigRG said:

I think someone suggested something to the effect of them intentionally keeping many of the recurring characters basic to help the game cast & Sticks stand out. I doubt that was actually the intent, but hey, it's just a theory.

Also, while there were exceptions, I think the real reason is a combination of the writers attempting to keep things fairly lighthearted to stay somewhat in genre and readily accessible for new views.

and @HeckboyThat makes sense but yeah personally not a fan of that genre  that and some jokes were...really a hit and miss. : p But Sonic Boom's greatest thing was its comedy. But thats about it, it didnt overall made a huge impact. And its goal was just to sell more toys to American children also didn't succeed because the toys apparently didnt sold as Sonic Team hoped it would.

[DabigRG]

45 minutes ago, StaticMania said:

Or they just wanted to write a simple "action" comedy and there's nothing wrong with that.

Plus Plus

That's what I said.

[Kellodrawsalot]

Oh forgot to add this to my Boom Post.

 

another unpopular opinion I have is that I find Sonic Heroes to be quite overrated.

....THen again I am not sure that is an unpopular opinion anymore lol. I swear when I was very young and went online I was the only one that didn't praise Sonic Heroes in most active Sonic fan communities but it seems its kinda changing nowadays? I notice a lot more Sonic fans critiquing the Adventure games too and a lot of people outright stating Sonic went of the trail BECAUSE of the Adventure games. 

[Your Vest Friend]

What circles were you in? The general consensus is that Heroes was panned by the fans from the start (not me though). 

[DabigRG]

25 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

and @HeckboyThat makes sense but yeah personally not a fan of that genre  that and some jokes were...really a hit and miss. :p

That's comedy for ya.

26 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

 But Sonic Boom's greatest thing was its comedy. But thats about it, it didnt overall made a huge impact. And its goal was just to sell more toys to American children also didn't succeed because the toys apparently didnt sold as Sonic Team hoped it would.

Yeah. Hence why SEGA were considering canceling it once Season 2 was over.

[Kellodrawsalot]

6 minutes ago, VEDJ-F said:

What circles were you in? The general consensus is that Heroes was panned by the fans from the start (not me though). 

 

I dont remember all of them, but one of them was the Sonic Zone Forum, and another one that was very active I forgot the name but all I remember that the design of the forum used dark-colors. That and Deviantart's Sonic-club accounts (before the whole group thing was created) liked it alot, the whole 3-team thing was very well recieved in the fan-art communies that concept alone spanwed so much fanworks of Sonic-Oc ''heroes'' groups.

 

Oh @DabigRG ohh! is that why it was canceled? That makes sense

[DabigRG]

2 minutes ago, Kellodrawsalot said:

 

Oh @DabigRG ohh! is that why it was canceled? That makes sense

Or was going to be, anyway, though I suppose there's little to show they did.