Popular and unpopular Sonic opinions you agree and disagree with!

[Salamander]

Regarding the SA2 discussion, while I haven't played it myself, and I accept that this may invalidate my opinion, everything I've ever read or heard about the backstory of the game makes it sound like the writer wasn't actually interested in Sonic characters and just wanted to write about humans, and more specifically, a human-based conspiracy thriller that had essentially nothing to do with the Sonic series.  I can see where some of the base elements are closely related to the Sonic series - nothing wrong with a bit more background to Eggman's family or giving a new character a tragic backstory to explain their villainy - but the details seem to have ended up being very much to do with humans and human politics rather than any previously established or precedented parts of Sonic's universe.  It seems like there's not even any in-universe reason why Shadow should've been an anthro character (especially once you take his own game into account) - maybe the backstory would have worked better as a wholly separate story, a little anime tragedy, with Shadow replaced with a human.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Regarding the SA2 discussion, while I haven't played it myself, and I accept that this may invalidate my opinion, everything I've ever read or heard about the backstory of the game makes it sound like the writer wasn't actually interested in Sonic characters and just wanted to write about humans, and more specifically, a human-based conspiracy thriller that had essentially nothing to do with the Sonic series.  I can see where some of the base elements are closely related to the Sonic series - nothing wrong with a bit more background to Eggman's family or giving a new character a tragic backstory to explain their villainy - but the details seem to have ended up being very much to do with humans and human politics rather than any previously established or precedented parts of Sonic's universe.  It seems like there's not even any in-universe reason why Shadow should've been an anthro character (especially once you take his own game into account) - maybe the backstory would have worked better as a wholly separate story, a little anime tragedy, with Shadow replaced with a human.

That's not really true since a lot of it has to do with Sonic characters aside from Eggman, specifically Sonic and Shadow, and to a lesser extent Knuckles.

 

You already know about Shadow being the military project, but Sonic was the person they framed to cover it up when it got loose and further dragged him into their ordeal with Shadow slandering his name as a global hero now turned villain. Knuckles involvement came last minute but his involvment came with him trying to use the Master Emerald to stop the colony drop Shadow helped set into motion. Other characters, Tails, Rouge, and Amy were more support, even though Tails was taking a lot of leading points in getting the crew up there to stop the ARK's Eclispe Cannon.

 

Really, most of the stuff about humans beyond Maria are background catalysts for Shadow or simply background characters meant to show the stakes of the plot. You don't get any idea of the politics, you just hear about the govenment creating weapons of mass destruction in the first space colony and the military going after the characters, and that's pretty much it aside from Eggman holding the world hostage and threatening the president.

[Kuzu]

Yea, even when I was 8 years old and playing the game, nothing in Sa2 really sticks out to me as "too far" in terms of tone. I've watched Mufasa die, Bambi's Mom get shot, and Jafar explode violently, yet somehow SA2 is out there for a Sonic game? 

 

 

When Sa2 came out, this was hardly an issue anyone had with the series, so why is it now that its suddenly an issue worth bringing up? It feels almost as if people are still sour about Shadow & 06 and are automatically wired to assume anything remotely serious or "mature" is "out of place" in the series. 

[Killtank]

We're talking mainly Maria's death and the revenge it motivates in two characters. The main point being Maria being gunned down is too brutal even if off screen and that lighthearted works can still go too far, even with works like those from Disney go much further despite being optimistic themselves.

A lot of stuff in SA2 can fit with some alterations, make the human military more stylized rather than realistic, you can brighten the scenery, etc. But my point is that I don't think the elements done in SA2 are out of reach for Sonic or go too far in themselves.

 

I liked the conversation you were having with Tara. Honestly, I thought the two of you made excellent points, but I agree with you for the most part. While Maria's death was brutal, and some may not how dark such an incident can be congruent for the series, I still think it's acceptable if handled appropriately. It isn't as if we can't have any overwhelming tragedy in such media, but I think it has to be, like anything mature in tone, tasteful and handled tactfully. I think allowing Maria to live would have been counterintuitive to themes at work within the story. I think the impact is ultimately lessened if Maria is left to live out the rest of her days even in prison. However, her brutal demise could've made an even bigger impact, like Tara said, if we saw more positive moments spent between Maria and Shadow. Her death could have been even more tragic if we saw the bigger scope of their relationship. If we saw more of a Maria as a person, rather than a symbol, her death would have meant more to us. It's still tragic, but it could have been darker and even more effective if we saw the happier times the two spent together in flashbacks. Strangely enough, as Tara said earlier, that would have made this story even sadder than it was already. 

[Dr. Crusher]

When Sa2 came out, this was hardly an issue anyone had with the series, so why is it now that its suddenly an issue worth bringing up? It feels almost as if people are still sour about Shadow & 06 and are automatically wired to assume anything remotely serious or "mature" is "out of place" in the series. 

 

I just want to say that I don't think it's a good idea to assume that everyone has the exact same mindset. There are a few people who have always felt the SA2 plot to be a little "off", myself included.

[Kuzu]

I just want to say that I don't think it's a good idea to assume that everyone has the exact same mindset. There are a few people who have always felt the SA2 plot to be a little "off", myself included.

 

I'm not saying no one felt that way, but the general consensus seemed way more neutral until after Shadow & 06, it wasn't until after those games came out that the "DARK IS BAD" sentiment came in full.

 

Sa2 isn't everyone's cup of tea, but jeez people, it still was a Sonic game more so than what came after it until Unleashed. I dunno, it just feels less like a natural progression and more people just hopping onto a bandwagon.

[JAiRO]

Yea, even when I was 8 years old and playing the game, nothing in Sa2 really sticks out to me as "too far" in terms of tone. I've watched Mufasa die, Bambi's Mom get shot, and Jafar explode violently, yet somehow SA2 is out there for a Sonic game? 

 

 

When Sa2 came out, this was hardly an issue anyone had with the series, so why is it now that its suddenly an issue worth bringing up? It feels almost as if people are still sour about Shadow & 06 and are automatically wired to assume anything remotely serious or "mature" is "out of place" in the series. 

 

You aren't remembering correctly, many people took issue with the darker tone. I love the game, but people have always taken issue with Maria just straight up fucking dying.

[Kuzu]

You aren't remembering correctly, many people took issue with the darker tone. I love the game, but people have always taken issue with Maria just straight up fucking dying.

 

Not really? Everyone I talked to about SA2 never mentioned Maria dying as some forbidden thing.

 

In fact, this is the first time I'm hearing this as a criticism at all.

[Dr. Crusher]

I'm not saying no one felt that way, but the general consensus seemed way more neutral until after Shadow & 06, it wasn't until after those games came out that the "DARK IS BAD" sentiment came in full.

 

Sa2 isn't everyone's cup of tea, but jeez people, it still was a Sonic game more so than what came after it until Unleashed. I dunno, it just feels less like a natural progression and more people just hopping onto a bandwagon.

 

Maybe my own experiences were simply convenient, but I recall the opposite happening. Before Heroes came along, I actually heard quite a few concerns about Adventure 2's story. It wasn't until after Heroes and everything else in which those concerns started to become more and more... quiet, I suppose.

[JAiRO]

Not really?

 

Adding a question mark doesn't make it a question. Yes really.

 

Everyone I talked to about SA2 never mentioned Maria dying as some forbidden thing. 

 

In fact, this is the first time I'm hearing this as a criticism at all.

 

I don't believe that, Maria's death has always been topical whenever the discussion of SA2 has come up.

[Kuzu]

I guess *shrug* I still don't see what's particularly wrong with SA2's tone honestly; It still has that Sonic corniness we naturally associate with the series, and the characters still their wacky selves , with the exception of Shadow, and even then he was far more jovial and less serious than he is in just about any other game or adaptation. 

 

Different strokes for different blokes.

 

 

 

Adding a question mark doesn't make it a question. Yes really.

 

 

I don't believe that, Maria's death has always been topical whenever the discussion of SA2 has come up.

 

Don't know what to tell you then because my experiences are way different, nobody had a problem with SA2's story as far as I was concerned..

[JAiRO]

I guess *shrug* I still don't see what's particularly wrong with SA2's tone honestly; It still has that Sonic corniness we naturally associate with the series, and the characters still their wacky selves , with the exception of Shadow, and even then he was far more jovial and less serious than he is in just about any other game or adaptation. 

 

Different strokes for different blokes.

 

Don't know what to tell you then because my experiences are way different, nobody had a problem with SA2's story as far as I was concerned..

 

I suppose you're right, there's no where left for this conversation to go.

 

I guess our experiences were just different.

[Tara]

When Sa2 came out, this was hardly an issue anyone had with the series, so why is it now that its suddenly an issue worth bringing up? It feels almost as if people are still sour about Shadow & 06 and are automatically wired to assume anything remotely serious or "mature" is "out of place" in the series. 

The main thing is that a lot of us were too young to care at the time.  It didn't deviate nearly as far as ShTH and '06, so while the change in tone was obvious, it wasn't enough for me to think too differently.  Having an adult mindset on the matter changed that.

 

Also, I swear, I will get back to you on that post, CSS.  I'm just too tired right now. XD

[Kuzu]

The main thing is that a lot of us were too young to care at the time.  It didn't deviate nearly as far as ShTH and '06, so while the change in tone was obvious, it wasn't enough for me to think too differently.  Having an adult mindset on the matter changed that.

 

Also, I swear, I will get back to you on that post, CSS.  I'm just too tired right now. XD

 

Well even with an adult mindset, I'm not still not seeing what's so out of place.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well even with an adult mindset, I'm not still not seeing what's so out of place.

I agree.

If anything, having an adult mindset and seeing stuff like ShTH done poorly made me understand don't do dark for the same of being dark, because that's childish and immature in itself. It also let me see the value in the light, hence why I get on people constantly wanting Sonic to be grimdark and why I say rather than be dark or light, we should be flexible as there's value in both tones of storytelling.

Light shows how fun Sonic can be, dark shows strength, that even when things change for the most shocking Sonic can still be Sonic. We've been seeing screw ups of that since SA2, but I think we can take what didn't work and learn why instead of attributing it to being dark and using that as an excuse to avoid things because they weren't done with care.

[PharoahBeast]

As and adult male, I still think Chao are adorable.

[E-122-Psi]

That's not really true since a lot of it has to do with Sonic characters aside from Eggman, specifically Sonic and Shadow, and to a lesser extent Knuckles.

 

You already know about Shadow being the military project, but Sonic was the person they framed to cover it up when it got loose and further dragged him into their ordeal with Shadow slandering his name as a global hero now turned villain. Knuckles involvement came last minute but his involvment came with him trying to use the Master Emerald to stop the colony drop Shadow helped set into motion. Other characters, Tails, Rouge, and Amy were more support, even though Tails was taking a lot of leading points in getting the crew up there to stop the ARK's Eclispe Cannon.

 

Really, most of the stuff about humans beyond Maria are background catalysts for Shadow or simply background characters meant to show the stakes of the plot. You don't get any idea of the politics, you just hear about the govenment creating weapons of mass destruction in the first space colony and the military going after the characters, and that's pretty much it aside from Eggman holding the world hostage and threatening the president.

While I can see where it ties into Sonic in that sense, I can still partially agree with FFWF in the sense it still involved them greatly altering the setup and backdrop of the series for the sake of this story. It is not something that could have likely happened in the premise of the original series, and so in a way their new premise seems to come over the Sonic one per se.

 

As for the Maria argument I think it's similar, it's not just she died, but she did so in a completely unconventional manner. Being gunned down in a realistic manner has a much more blunt and contrasting method than say, Gamma exploding as a nod to the badnik mythos.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

While I can see where it ties into Sonic in that sense, I can still partially agree with FFWF in the sense it still involved them greatly altering the setup and backdrop of the series for the sake of this story. It is not something that could have likely happened in the premise of the original series, and so in a way their new premise seems to come over the Sonic one per se.

Well they could have done it better, but I'd say it's not like these things were done to completely forgo the original series than it was to create new material for it.

 

 

 

As for the Maria argument I think it's similar, it's not just she died, but she did so in a completely unconventional manner. Being gunned down in a realistic manner has a much more blunt and contrasting method than say, Gamma exploding as a nod to the badnik mythos.

Before I start, I should remind people that Maria being gunned down was held off-screen to where it was only mentioned she was killed in the attack in Gerald's diary. So compared to something like Bambi's mom, Kerchak, and Todd's mom getting unambigiously shot in the Disney movies, we were given something far more tame and indirect with her death in SA2 as opposed to hearing the actual gunshot like the former examples until ShTH two games later.

 

Yes, Maria getting gunned down like she did is more blunt and contrasting compared to Gamma's death. But Gamma's death was intended to be more bittersweet where as Maria's was intended to be more tragic and something to fuel the revenge of the antagonist at large; it's essentially going further with what was done with Chaos and his motives for revenge when Chao were being killed by Echidnas in SA2. You can make it less realistic, but it's still going to be blunt, contrasting, and tragic due to the fact that she gets murdered anyway.

[Tara]

Okay, let's see if the board wants to work with me today. XD

 

I don't think so, because here Maria still dies in a horrible way. If she doesn't get shot, she slowly succumbs to her disease, so all you're doing is trading a quick, brutal death for a slow, brutal one. They both get the same result, but the latter is no less lighthearted than the former.

 

So I know NIDS is an obvious euphemism for AIDS, but do we really know enough about it to assume that she suffers from it to the extent that, without proper treatment, she'd die of a slow, painful demise?  In this instance, I can't help but feel you're adding a plot point that doesn't necessarily have to be there.

 

 

 

But it's not as scarring, and his motivations are still arguably petty compared to a death before his eyes that cements him as more tragic. So she gets imprisoned and dies there, so that gives him the motivation to destroy the world? I'd rather we keep the death, as it makes the disproportionate retribution much more understanding and equal (okay, that's a stretch), since it makes him want blood for blood spilled unjustly instead of blood for unjust imprisonment then death.

 

I disagree entirely.  Being forcibly extracted from everything and everyone you love is still pretty damn scarring to put it bluntly, and I fail to see how it's even the slightest bit petty.  If someone abducted my closest friend and stripped them of the freedoms and comfort that prevented them from living a full life, I'd be a more than just a little devastated. =/ - There's more than one way to hurt someone, and it doesn't necessarily have to include their immediate demise.  (See Flowers in the Attic for a more grim example)

 

Honestly, I find it no more or less petty than his motivations as a result of gunning her down.  Because from a rational mindset, why would Shadow blame all the humans when Maria, being a human, was considered good in his eyes?  He also apparently had an okay relationship with Gerald, and we're never led to believe that he has anything against the unseen people that are said to work on the ARK.  So because one group of people killed someone close to him, that gives him motivation to destroy the entire world?  It's still petty and backwards, based on your own context of the word here.

 

But labeling it petty, death or no death, undermines a key feature of Shadow's personality:  Insecurity.  From a rational mindset, we can see why Shadow is being unreasonable, but Shadow himself does not have that luxury.  His mind is too clouded with thoughts of revenge and trauma to focus, which only further exasperated something that I'm led to believe was pre-existing given the aforementioned cutscene following his rescue of Rouge.  So regardless of the merits of his motivations if Maria wasn't gunned down in front of his face, I think keeping her alive could add just as much, if not more, to his character under those conditions.  

 

 

 

Then, I'm sorry, but I think you're a bit squeamish over these things and I don't really agree with it.

 

 

There's a difference between squeamish and simply not associating something with the identity that the series had had ten years (at the time) to establish.  Just because I don't care to see the topics of genocide and ethnic cleansing brought up in Yo Gabba Gabba doesn't mean I'm opposed to them elsewhere.  That's obviously not to say I hold Sonic to the same standards as Yo Gabba Gabba, but Sonic is a series that I think stands well without the need to resort to unpleasantly dark, Tom Clancy-style character origins and while SA2 obviously didn't go nearly as overboard as ShTH, it still feels as though it went entirely against it.  (On a related note, I suddenly really want to see the subject of ethnic cleansing brought up in Yo Gabba Gabba...)

 

It's not that I'm opposed to the concept of death in children's media, or even Sonic for that matter, but telling me that a little girl being gunned down in such a way fits well within the perimeters of a Sonic game is like telling me that a cheeseburger fits well within the reptile classification of animals.

 

 

 

Lots of works are lighthearted in moments and atmosphere that go too far: Mufasa and Scar's death in Lion King 1, Bambi's mom getting shot in Bambi, the introduction to Fox in the Hound where Todd's mother gets shot (I recall you giving me this as an example at one point), Clayton and Kerchak's death (the latter also gets shot, like Maria and the other two Disney moments listed) in Tarzan, Esmeralda's burning at the stake and Frollo's death in Hunchback of NotreDame, Bowser's flaying body in New Super Mario Bros, Mewtwo's killing of the scientists in Mewtwo Strikes Back, the destruction of Neo Arcadia in Megaman Zero 4, the genocide of the Panda's and the Alpha Wolf's death in Kung Fu Panda 2, etc. (really, there's a whole list for animated works, much less Disney alone here)

 

 

All of those worked well within the perimeters of the movie/game's established world and didn't particularly feel like they stood out too heavily.  Well, except the Mario example because I still feel that was a giant WTF moment.  With Sonic's pre-existing world (granted, a world that has never had a solid foundation to begin with, which gives it the kind of flexibility to deviate from this structure in this manner accordingly), little girls being gunned down through hostile military takeovers seems like a huge elephant in the room.

 

 

 

If it still goes too far despite being lighthearted, then I don't really buy that you're okay with more weight in this series like you say your are. Maria's death presented in SA2 was no less gruesome or extreme than the examples above, particularly in the three examples where characters also get gunned down off screen just like her. So if that's too far for you regarding Sonic, then I'm not sure what else to say regarding these comparisons. 

 

 

First, you're saying that as though lightheartedness and the events that take place within the atmosphere are not mutually bonded.  That's like saying Happy Tree Friends is lighthearted because it's bright and colorful, ignoring the obscene instances of blood and violence that ensue throughout.

 

Second, my problem really is that you do feel the need to hunt for comparisons to tell me how it fits, instead of showing me how Sonic, on its own merits, lends well to the type of story being described.  Yes, I'm aware Sonic has always been a fairly derivative franchise and I'm certainly not saying that comparisons should never be used.  Of course not.  Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and other such cliches, but these comparisons do nothing to show that it stands well as a narrative for a Sonic game on its own merits, and if a series can only advance based on what we can compare it to as opposed to its own unique qualities, then the series never gets anywhere.  You've shown me examples of how it works in other media, but those medias are just that.  They're their own thing, and the plotlines working there does not convince me that it works well within the perimeters of a Sonic game.

 

Also, I just want to address this, because it's been sort of an unnerving point I've been seeing thrown about lately.  Humans have five senses.  Five.  Why is only one of them, sight, the determinant factor for what is lighthearted and acceptable?  Sure, it's our primary sense, but treating the fact that many of these deaths took place off-screen as though it somehow changes matters ignores the audio and most importantly contextual resonance that can leave just as much an impact if not more when delivered appropriately.  The difference between Todd's mother being killed off-screen compared to us actually seeing Little Foot's mother falling through a crevice as a result of an earthquake has a lot less to do with what see and don't see as much as it does how the characters interact with it and how it impacts the narrative from that point forward.

 

 

Before I start, I should remind people that Maria being gunned down was held off-screen to where it was only mentioned she was killed in the attack in Gerald's diary. So compared to something like Bambi's mom, Kerchak, and Todd's mom getting unambigiously shot in the Disney movies, we were given something far more tame and indirect with her death in SA2 as opposed to hearing the actual gunshot like the former examples until ShTH two games later.

 

You're totally forgetting the pivotal cutscene where Maria is first introduced right before Radical Highway.  We hear the gunshot that kills her and we see her sluggishly moving to the machine, holding her chest in (presumed) pain.  (Although it's really hard to tell given the Dreamcast's highly dated graphics) - In Bambi, we hear Bambi's mother get shot.  Next scene.  (I haven't watched Bambi in forever; feel free to correct me there)  In The Fox and the Hound, we hear Todd's mother get shot and that's the end of it.  SA2 is hardly tamer than those two, especially when SA2 continues to call back to it.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

another very unpopular opinion: I really like Chris Thorndyke from Sonic X. I dont think hes horrible.

 

Hes one character that reminded me of myself when I was that age and was played the Sonic games. Chris is a character who wants his family to be a family but they are never around. Yeah he has a butler, a maid and his grandfather and 3 best friends but they arent really his family except for his grandfather. Parent love and bond is that he lacks and longs for. A good male/female role model. Someone to look up to. I guess Tanaka can fit but still. When he was young, his parents made promises they never keep so it can be lonley for the 12 year old boy.

When Sonic came along, he brought fun to Chris life. He got to go on adventures, he got to figure out what he really wanted to be in his life, and he learned so much and enjoyed taking risks. Before then he has his futures decided for him or pushed for him to be into machines. Not only that but he got the role model he never had. Sonic is a guy who keeps his word and can be a really good role model and insperation. But Sonic is also a mentor to Chris as well. Sonic was someone who listened and cared about Mr Thorndyke and thats why he will stop for him. Friendship is freedom.

Speaking, Chris points out his own flaws like being too attached to Sonic and taking on everything witho. He feels really bad about taking Sonic away from his world and lets him go back even when Sonic says its okay. He calls himself out and challenges himself. And last hes one of the most bravest Sonic characters. Hes a human, but he lets himself get punched by Shadow of all people and he has put himself in danger even knocking him uncouncius. He went from being an everyday middle school anime child to being a brave young man.

All and all I really love this character and I never understand why hes so hated. His relationship with Sonic at first seems weird to me when I watched this show but when I watch it more and more and think about how me myseld veiws Sonic, it clicked. I understand why Chris feels strongly for Sonic. Sonic... is like a father-figure to him or lessor, a big brother. Sonic is protective, caring and even mentors the young boy and best of all he keeps all his promises to help him. Something his parents didnt do. Sonic meant alot to me as a kid just like he means alot to Thorndkye and I dont know... but this character clicks with me.

Thorndyke rules and Im not afraid to say it. Yeah hes a human character and he attaches himself to Sonic and can be annoying. But thats his quirks. Hes supposed to be a kid who is lonley and wants to help Sonic. Its up to you to decide if you like him or not.

[E-122-Psi]

Also, I just want to address this, because it's been sort of an unnerving point I've been seeing thrown about lately.  Humans have five senses.  Five.  Why is only one of them, sight, the determinant factor for what is lighthearted and acceptable?  Sure, it's our primary sense, but treating the fact that many of these deaths took place off-screen as though it somehow changes matters ignores the audio and most importantly contextual resonance that can leave just as much an impact if not more when delivered appropriately.  The difference between Todd's mother being killed off-screen compared to us actually seeing Little Foot's mother falling through a crevice as a result of an earthquake has a lot less to do with what see and don't see as much as it does how the characters interact with it and how it impacts the narrative from that point forward.

This I admit is a fair point. And also something that ties into the cosmetic side of 'darkness'. While the fact they completely replaced the usual Sonic backdrop with a photo realistic one with a human population punctuated how alien the plot felt at times, it wasn't all that was detriment. Other darker works retain the more whimsical animal-world setting but still maybe drift a bit too far into unusually unsettling territory for Sonic (perhaps one most notable is an Archie story where Kodos brutally kills two defenseless civilians to spearhead a war, or both it and Satam's rather disturbing emphasis on the 'living death' mentality of robotocization). Concerning the Disney examples, even though they are whimsical, they were standalone stories, they didn't break from their usual mentality because they were one standalone story that had that darkness to begin with (Todd's mother is pretty much the establishing moment that begins the story). I'm still wary how much darkness you can place into the Sonic games when comparing it to the zany mayhem of the Genesis games without it seeming grandiose.

[Kuzu]

Wasn't much "zany" in the Genesis games honestly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StaticMania]

 I'm still wary how much darkness you can place into the Sonic games when comparing it to the zany mayhem of the Genesis games without it seeming grandiose.

What "...Zany Mayhem..." do you happen to be talking about really? There isn't much to the Zany-ness as there is to a standard cartoony feel when playing the classic Sonic games. The only Genesis game with any real amount of Zany whackiness would be Sonic Spin Ball and to an extent Sonic 3DBlast.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

This boards a pain in the ass for me too. 

 

EDIT: SERIOUSLY WHAT IN THE FLIPPING FUCK IS WRONG WITH THIS PIECE OF SHIT OF AN EDITOR!!?!?!HFIAWFHGOA

 

EDIT2: No seriously, fuck this editor right now, I'm just going to double quote things.

Okay, let's see if the board wants to work with me today. XD

 

So I know NIDS is an obvious euphemism for AIDS, but do we really know enough about it to assume that she suffers from it to the extent that, without proper treatment, she'd die of a slow, painful demise?  In this instance, I can't help but feel you're adding a plot point that doesn't necessarily have to be there.

 

If she doesn't, then you're not giving it enough weight to justify Gerald and Shadow's revenge towards the world for losing their own world. If you're going to create something ambiguous, anyone could fill in the holes that can lead to horror, apathy, or mercy.

 

 

 

 

I disagree entirely.  Being forcibly extracted from everything and everyone you love is still pretty damn scarring to put it bluntly, and I fail to see how it's even the slightest bit petty.  If someone abducted my closest friend and stripped them of the freedoms and comfort that prevented them from living a full life, I'd be a more than just a little devastated. =/ - There's more than one way to hurt someone, and it doesn't necessarily have to include their immediate demise.  (See Flowers in the Attic for a more grim example)

 

 

Honestly, I find it no more or less petty than his motivations as a result of gunning her down.  Because from a rational mindset, why would Shadow blame all the humans when Maria, being a human, was considered good in his eyes?  He also apparently had an okay relationship with Gerald, and we're never led to believe that he has anything against the unseen people that are said to work on the ARK.  So because one group of people killed someone close to him, that gives him motivation to destroy the entire world?  It's still petty and backwards, based on your own context of the word here.

 

 

But labeling it petty, death or no death, undermines a key feature of Shadow's personality:  Insecurity.  From a rational mindset, we can see why Shadow is being unreasonable, but Shadow himself does not have that luxury.  His mind is too clouded with thoughts of revenge and trauma to focus, which only further exasperated something that I'm led to believe was pre-existing given the aforementioned cutscene following his rescue of Rouge.  So regardless of the merits of his motivations if Maria wasn't gunned down in front of his face, I think keeping her alive could add just as much, if not more, to his character under those conditions.

 

 

But here's why it's petty:

 

By capturing and locking Maria up, on one hand, you're sending the message that GUN is showing restraint and being much more considerate of the lives onboard the ARK. They see a sickly little girl, and rather than shoot her, they keep her locked up. Yes, it's a maximum security prison, but she's alive and she can live out the rest of the life she has left. Killing her steals a lot more away from both her, Shadow, and Gerald, and makes GUN more of the bastard we're suppose to identify them as 50 years ago. But in avoiding that you're sending a different message.

 

And in that restraint you've given GUN over locking her up instead of shooting her, you making GUN a lot more merciful and much more sympathetic over the characters who's vengeance we were suppose to understand and sympathize while at the same time see how equally, if not more, disproportionate they're being in retribution, conflicting with the image they were suppose to present as an organization that's gone too far themselves. And with with that in mind, Gerald and Shadow's revenge comes off as petty because GUN allowed Maria to continue to live while they want to murder every person on earth, cutting their lives off more suddenly. Like the themes of forgiveness, dispropotionate retribution and revenge is another theme that is connected to it, one you would be weakening by having one side show restraint: GUN wanted WMDs for whatever reason and commission Gerald, Gerald works on it but then GUN decides to cut the plug and rather than stop the project they kill everyone on the ARK - and because of their unrestrained actions, they don't care if the people on the ARK is a sickly little girl, she dies with them too. Because Maria was killed so unfairly, that gives more cause for Gerald and Shadow to enact even more disproportionate retribution, and they want blood spilled for blood spilled until one of them takes a stand to break that cycle of disproportionate revenge that would destroy everyone and show forgiveness.

 

And this is just one side of the coin. On the other side, if we're still not making GUN sympathetic, you're making them darker and more sinister. They capture this sickly little girl completely uninvolved in the project being worked on in secret, lock her up, and they don't tend to her condition in a maximum security prison, keeping her locked up in a similar cell like Gerald, and they don't care and let her die of her illness. Now this is a cruel mercy, and while it justifies the disproportionate retribution and keeps the intent it also comes off as petty for GUN and much darker due to their indifference of her being ill but willing to keep her alive as she succumbs to it. This is the same kind of penitentiary stuff in works like Splinter Cell.

 

So you're trading one scene and risking one of two changes that have ambiguous results that completely change the themes in the narrative or goes even further than what you were trying to avoid. Or even negates the themes and ends up with something else unintended.

 

 

There's a difference between squeamish and simply not associating something with the identity that the series had had ten years (at the time) to establish.  Just because I don't care to see the topics of genocide and ethnic cleansing brought up in Yo Gabba Gabba doesn't mean I'm opposed to them elsewhere.  That's obviously not to say I hold Sonic to the same standards as Yo Gabba Gabba, but Sonic is a series that I think stands well without the need to resort to unpleasantly dark, Tom Clancy-style character origins and while SA2 obviously didn't go nearly as overboard as ShTH, it still feels as though it went entirely against it.  (On a related note, I suddenly really want to see the subject of ethnic cleansing brought up in Yo Gabba Gabba...)

 

 

It's not that I'm opposed to the concept of death in children's media, or even Sonic for that matter, but telling me that a little girl being gunned down in such a way fits well within the perimeters of a Sonic game is like telling me that a cheeseburger fits well within the reptile classification of animals.

That's jumping off a slippery slope then, especially considering the examples I gave of lighthearted media similar to Sonic treading these same territories.

 

There's a middle ground to these things, and telling me that a little girl getting killed like that cannot fit within the parameters of a Sonic game is telling me Sonic isn't and cannot be flexible enough to handle these elements with care because you don't like such family unfriendly moments in works like this.

 

For example, since you're bringing up ethnic clensing in a work you wouldn't expect, there is a lighthearted work that does just that when it never delved into it before: Kung Fu Panda. Just like Sonic, Kung Fu Panda has never dealt with things like genocide and on-screen or off-screen death in a serious and straight faced manner until a later title. It was goofy with moments of high tension, and it wasn't as dark as what would come next. Where as Po defeats Tai Lung with the Wuxi Finger Hold in KFP1 in a not so dark manner, Lord Shen straight up murders Thundering Rhino with a cannon KFP2. And prior to that scene, there's the ethnic clensing in the intro with the Panda genocide in the sequel that Shen carries out to avoid a threat in a prophecy, while not specifically referred to as genocide but it doesn't put any ambiguity over it being a mass murder, and none of these things connected to it, such as Po's backstory were present in the earlier title. Yet the sequel doesn't feel any less like a Kung Fu Panda work. While you could argue SA2 doesn't feel associated with Sonic, you don't need to remove entire parts and replace them with different and softer in order to make it fit with Sonic.

 

When people tell me they don't they're not opposed to these concepts but go off to change the entire scene, I find that to be extreme and much harder to believe they're not opposed to them. I can understand their problems with the execution, but my empathy stops at that point when their idea to deal with it risks changing several other things it was suppose to hold up.

 

All of those worked well within the perimeters of the movie/game's established world and didn't particularly feel like they stood out too heavily.  Well, except the Mario example because I still feel that was a giant WTF moment.  With Sonic's pre-existing world (granted, a world that has never had a solid foundation to begin with, which gives it the kind of flexibility to deviate from this structure in this manner accordingly), little girls being gunned down through hostile military takeovers seems like a huge elephant in the room.

It really isn't. Not the idea of it anymore than having that same girl dying in a maximum security prison for simply being around and all the other horrors that could imply.

 

Now I can understand the style and execution in pulling it off, but that can be altered so it can fit within the established world without changing it as a whole.

 

 

 

 

 

First, you're saying that as though lightheartedness and the events that take place within the atmosphere are not mutually bonded.  That's like saying Happy Tree Friends is lighthearted because it's bright and colorful, ignoring the obscene instances of blood and violence that ensue throughout.

 

 

Second, my problem really is that you do feel the need to hunt for comparisons to tell me how it fits, instead of showing me how Sonic, on its own merits, lends well to the type of story being described.  Yes, I'm aware Sonic has always been a fairly derivative franchise and I'm certainly not saying that comparisons should never be used.  Of course not.  Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and other such cliches, but these comparisons do nothing to show that it stands well as a narrative for a Sonic game on its own merits, and if a series can only advance based on what we can compare it to as opposed to its own unique qualities, then the series never gets anywhere.  You've shown me examples of how it works in other media, but those medias are just that.  They're their own thing, and the plotlines working there does not convince me that it works well within the perimeters of a Sonic game.

 

I'm actually saying this as though lightheartedness and dark elements like the one we're discussing cannot exist within the established work that didn't have them before.

 

My problem is more of the idea of pacifying the scene to the point of changing the thing entirely so that it isn't as dark, but also risks changing a lot of the themes, intents, and even motivations and audience perception of the characters and events to where it doesn't deliver the same message as intended. Because as you're saying that I'm not telling you how Sonic can do this on its own merits you seem more intent to avoid having it done at all. 

 

These comparisons underline a single point I'm making: that heavy elements like straight up murder and general lighthearted, optimistic narratives need not be completely divorced and can be shown with tact without betraying the series. The main criticisms of SA2 is that it feels out of place, like it is Sonic slapped in a different game. Understandable, when the points for it are that it's too realistic and the cartoony characters feel out of place in the environments.

 

But the solutions of those critical of the narrative appear more like they want to airbrush a lot of the story SA2 was trying to tell so that it avoids them, so that they're not as disturbing, even though one could say that was the partly the point behind the moments. So rather than find a way to deliver the same scenes without losing the Sonic-y feel, rather than do something like change the values and tone of the colors the scenery, make the humans more cartoony to fit with the characters, or even use different tools to keep the scenes in question but without being gruesome about it, we should veer away change the entire package? It's a matter of delivery and execution of these elements, not the elements themselves.

 

 

 

 

Also, I just want to address this, because it's been sort of an unnerving point I've been seeing thrown about lately.  Humans have five senses.  Five.  Why is only one of them, sight, the determinant factor for what is lighthearted and acceptable?

Because that's what we're going by as far as this discussion is going? It's not like the others are irrelevant, but the sight is the most predominant one.

 

 

You're totally forgetting the pivotal cutscene where Maria is first introduced right before Radical Highway.  We hear the gunshot that kills her and we see her sluggishly moving to the machine, holding her chest in (presumed) pain.  (Although it's really hard to tell given the Dreamcast's highly dated graphics)

Not really? I could just barely hear the gunshot over Shadow's theme song to the point you could miss it completely. (and it seems to be taken out in later ports)

 

I still stand by my point that Sonic can handle these heavy scenes when done with tact and care.

[Vertekins]

Unpopular opinion? Colours - Lost World's writing of Tails is not the 'revolution' for his character like it's pretty frequently claimed to be and Tails was anything but a "lifeless tag-along" in games that preceded it.

 

Tails being a "Lifeless tag-along" pre-Colours is pure unadulterated rubbish as far as I'm concerned.

 

Would a lifeless tag-along express discontent at things such as Sonic's snarky reactions to his blabbermouth in Sonic Adventure? Or garner the courage necessary to take on a positively murderously-pissed mad scientist who was obviously intent on blowing away the city he was in at the time and then making mincemeat out of him? Or garner the self-assurance necessary to step-out of Sonic's shadow and shoulder the responsibility of saving an entire city by himself?

 

Would he swear that he'd never let down his adoptive brother or give up after having seen what he thought was him getting remorselessly murdered right in front of him due to his own mistake? And then canonically win against Sonic's 'killer'?

 

Or what about expressing fright at Knuckles' commiseration about Shadow being a ghost in Heroes and then begging for him to stop going on about it?

 

I'm hardly scratching the surface with these.

 

Just like Colours and it's writing in no way stands-out regarding accomplishing things with Sonic's character that previous games happened to do therefore making it unexceptional (And whilst I'll give SLW credit for making Sonic more visibly fallible, it in no way succeeds at making Sonic sympathetic "for the first time" by "merit" of seeing him sad about his belief in his allies deaths when quite a few previous games did this as well and hugely effectively to boot), Tails' current writing isn't the truly tremendous improvement on previous portrayals it's touted to be either. They're good-great portrayals but they don't really succeed in bringing a copious amount of life to a character by 'merit' of characterizing him with more negative traits when we've already seen Tails have negative traits. Not precisely in the same way as SLW but traits that bring him to life nonetheless.

 

I'm not stating that Tails Colours+ writing is bad. I'm just stating my view that it doesn't particularly stand-out and that Tails had plenty of personality before it.