Popular and unpopular Sonic opinions you agree and disagree with!

[Kuzu]

41 minutes ago, Sonic Fan J said:

The reason I always fall back onto those three is because while they are status quo locked their status quo is the ne that most allows for continuing adventures that follow the story of Sonic. Sure there isn't a lot of development with those three in particular, but conversely that allows you to focus on the story of the location and anyone affiliated with that story. As I've said before, to me Sonic is about the adventures and the places he goes and how he effects those location so a recurring cast isn't really necessary, but as Tails and Amy are the ones I personally feel fit the role best due to how I prefer Sonic stories they usually fill the role if I need more than Sonic and the cast of the location. Though really I'm good with any kid character who can look up to some aspect of Sonic and desire to better themselves to see more of him doing what he does. As a result it's part of why I like Marine as she is a kid character with the desire to adventure though her lack of idolizing Sonic would definitely introduce a different dynamic.

Now admittedly I can see how such a setup like this can be limiting (I've seen more than enough people who can't figure out how the Pokémon anime is still going with Ash/Satoshi perpetually locked in his status quo) especially if you follow the story for the characters and how hey develop. To me though that is always the benefit of creating distinct and imaginative locations populated with interesting and engaging characters which this franchise used to really thrive at. It's why enjoy Adventure's story as well 06 despite how botched it is.

Of course I never said limit the cast entirely to just those three, particularly since I prefer seeing how Sonic affects different characters along his adventures and how the characters that follow him see that. If we completely limited the cast that would result in a rather stale experience. No, what I said is that if a character has their story finished, take them out of use until you have a story to tell with them again that also allows Sonic to go on another adventure to another new and exciting place. You can reuse characters all you want as long as they have more purpose than being eye candy for their fans in a narrative. When I ask what role does Knuckles (or even Shadow sometimes) serves and the only answer is to be Sonic's rival with all of no examples of how they are rivaling Sonic in any of their outings where they have no story significance they come across as a total waste. At least in the scenario that I present Tails and Amy have a locked perception of Sonic and relationship to him so you can hand wave their appearance away, not that you have to. How do they interact with the new location and characters that chasing after Sonic has brought them into contact with? How are those people affected by them and not just Sonic? There are stories to be told from that perspective and I personally believe that they can be quite engaging simply because of the story arc central characters.

If the focus is meant to be on new locations and the people in them, then you don't really need Tails and Amy to tell that story, especially since it can make them feel superfluous and therefore unneeded. It just sounds to me like you have some bias towards Tails and Amy and have some preference towards them regardless if they fit or not.

If you're focus is on them admiring and looking up to other characters, why does it always have to be Sonic? Are they not allowed to look up to anyone else? 

It just feels like you hold some double standard on the rest of the cast; Knuckles and Shadow shouldn't be relevant because their stories are "done", but Tails and Amy can keep appearing even though they've gone through stories themselves. 

The type of storytelling you want for the series just feels extremely limiting and boring to be honest, which is my main gripe with the games right now.

 

 

At least try to entertain that there other characters besides Sonic that exist and contribute to the series that don't always look up to him. Sometimes they're against him and make him question things, which drives conflict and therefore makes for an engaging story.

As opposed to Sonic just always being right and nobody ever questioning him ever because he's just that amazing.

 

The latter type of story only really works when Sonic isn't the main focus at all, otherwise I can't imagine how such a story can be remotely engaging.

[StaticMania]

13 minutes ago, Wraith said:

Like it feels like by putting Sonic on such a high pedestal I'm actually robbing him of the attention you give a well rounded character. 

What are ya gonna do with Sonic really that hasn't already been done before with characters like him?

Him being put on a pedestal is more interesting than being flawed (ratio) but only if he's not as flat as in Sonic X.

He doesn't need to be perfect, he doesn't need to be stone faced,  he just needs to be good.

This only applies to his heroism, casual interactions should stray from the pedestal idea though.

[Kuzu]

Sonic doesn't need to be flawed, or go through some big character change. He just needs to be put in interesting scenarios that challenge what he believes, but ultimately his beliefs win out in the end.

[Diogenes]

Regarding characters being "done", it's not that a character can only have one arc or one story, but in this series in particular they seem too eager to wrap up a character's business in one game rather than letting their situation change over time.

SA told us all about Tikal and Chaos' past and the trauma they went through, then wraps it all up in the last few minutes and has them ascend to heaven(?). We had Gamma questioning the nature and morality of his existence leading up to his death. Shadow broke free of his brainwashing and became the hero he promised Maria he'd be, right before dying. Then he came back with amnesia and was maybe a robot clone and then had some connection to an alien and then, bam bam bam, all three points dealt with in one game, he discards his past and moves on to...???. Silver's future gets saved via time travel so nothing he did actually stuck with him and then they just go and ruin his future again so he can keep doing the same thing. Emerl died in the same game he was introduced, Black Doom died in the same game he was introduced, Mephiles died in the same game he was introduced, the Gaias effectively died in the game they were introduced. Not every character ends up exactly this way but it happens enough that it's caused problems for the series, most obviously in how Sonic has no rogue's gallery because every villain or rival gets killed off or converted almost immediately.

I think it's also worth pointing out that it's not actually a bad thing for a character to be designed around one story, used for that story, and then retired. I don't fault Gamma as a character for having an arc that ends with him dying rather than trying to drag out "must destroy robot, but...I am robot???" for several more games. I don't think it's a bad thing for Chip to end up sleeping in the planet for another hundred thousand years or whatever, never to see Sonic again but permanently changed by meeting him. They need to do a better job of handling the characters they keep around, but it's also entirely fair to let some go rather than scraping for a reason to keep them.

7 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Sonic doesn't need to be flawed, or go through some big character change. He just needs to be put in interesting scenarios that challenge what he believes, but ultimately his beliefs win out in the end.

I wouldn't say he needs to go through any major change exactly but if he doesn't have any flaws I can't imagine him staying interesting for long. And for how long can you challenge his beliefs in interesting ways if he's always being portrayed as flawless?

[Shadowlax]

28 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Sonic doesn't need to be flawed, or go through some big character change. He just needs to be put in interesting scenarios that challenge what he believes, but ultimately his beliefs win out in the end.

 don't really agree. He needs to be flawed, and he needs to be wrong.

Shits relatable and interesting. Sometimes you wrong dog, it happens. No reasons sonic shouldn't be. If its good enough for superman , king of " guy you should look up to " its good enough for friggin sonic.

[Dr. Detective]

3 hours ago, E-122-Psi said:

In fairness I didn't just call out those two medias. I pointed out issues with Sonic X and the games in that regard. And Archie is the massive multiplayer crossover of Sonic so of course it's going to house examples of many of the franchise's flaws.

For a non SatAm/Archie example, let's look at the 'Shadow era', how a ridiculous amount of the franchise's universe had to be altered drastically just to house this new character and make him the star, not to mention the many many characters he didn't really have any relevant chemistry with so got demoted the more prominently he was used.

If I were you I'd continue on as I've always been. If the example is a good one and it's relevant to the conversation then who cares how many times you use it? I've never demanded anyone stop using Sonic X as a negative example of something despite my love for it. Well, my love for the original subbed version anyway.

2 hours ago, StaticMania said:

What are ya gonna do with Sonic really that hasn't already been done before with characters like him?

Him being put on a pedestal is more interesting than being flawed (ratio) but only if he's not as flat as in Sonic X.

He doesn't need to be perfect, he doesn't need to be stone faced,  he just needs to be good.

This only applies to his heroism, casual interactions should stray from the pedestal idea though.

I like the idea of Sonic having his ideas challenged and his flawed nature played up as an actual flaw from time to time. It doesn't need to be some big, complicated, over-arching character study but the idea of putting him on a pedestal doesn't sound interesting to me at all.  Even as someone who didn't mind him in Sonic X, it was mostly because I was fond of his attitude and how easy it was for me to embrace the dynamic he had with everyone despite how borderline perfect he came off at points. The show played him up as a role-model, which can work well enough but it's not ultimately the most interesting thing you could have done. Granted, there were times where he was played up as being a bit dumb and flawed in Sonic X too. Everyone remembers Episode 21 with him being trapped on the Cruise ship for a reason. It doesn't happen often enough but it's there. 

Sonic Lost World almost did that. To this day I still love the hell out of the scene where he ignores Tails and kicks the conch away. The rest of the game goes on to ignore that in favor of saying that Sonic's actual fuck-up was something that Tails made up in-between cutscenes, completely ruining it though.

Just as a side-note, I'm not fond of the "What are ya gonna do with Sonic really that hasn't already been done before with characters like him?" line of thinking. There's SO much fictional media out there to the point that you wouldn't be able to absorb it all within a thousand life-times. You might as well stop writing stories if you think that covering ground that was previously covered by other characters in fictional media will lead to an immediate waste of time. It won't. There are new angles to approach with this sort of thing and even if they should cover familiar territory from other stories, the chances of it feeling different are notable simply because how it would pertain to the Sonic series versus something like Uncharted or whatever would mean different things to different people. 

I'm not fond of going for anything too drastic. A little something would be nice though. 

[Kuzu]

12 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

I wouldn't say he needs to go through any major change exactly but if he doesn't have any flaws I can't imagine him staying interesting for long. And for how long can you challenge his beliefs in interesting ways if he's always being portrayed as flawless?

Just having him question his beliefs is enough, especially for someone as self assured as Sonic. Because it puts him in a position of how he'll deal with the challenge.  The burden of change is on the person who is challenging Sonic.

Older games were fine with that setup; usually there's a a problem with another character that Sonic had to solve. Chaos wanted to destroy the world because of what happened to the Chao he was protecting. Obviously that's wrong, and it's on Sonic to fix that and Chaos changes for the better in the end.

A better example is Shadow in SA2 as him and Sonic engage in a constant back and forth through the game. But its ultimately Sonic's righteousness that wins and Shadow gets coverted to the good side because of it.

Lost World is another example, if a poorly done one. But the attempt was there.

[Wraith]

I actually agree that they need to start cherishing their villains/rivals a bit more but it's hard to say when it's appropriate to kick a character off the bus and when you should keep them in play. I don't think losing any of the monsters of the week or Black Doom or anything was any skin off our nose for instance since they wouldn't have fit well as recurring villains anyway but someone else might have had an idea. Gamma, Tikal and Chaos passing on felt kind of appropriate even though I wouldn't have minded them sticking around.

On the flipside I think Emerl was a waste and DIMPS seemed to agree since they came up with a stand-in. I don't think Shadow's arc had to end in death but the comically over the top ways they came up to continue it don't do that mindset any favors, etc. I guess it's a case by case thing.

 

[Kuzu]

4 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

 don't really agree. He needs to be flawed, and he needs to be wrong.

Shits relatable and interesting. Sometimes you wrong dog, it happens. No reasons sonic shouldn't be. If its good enough for superman , king of " guy you should look up to " its good enough for friggin sonic.

Not everything has to be "relatable" to me. I don't need to understand what a character is going through to want them to punch a bad guy in the face.

Not that I have a problem with what you're describing, but I don't believe that's the only type of storytelling to write.

1 minute ago, Wraith said:

I actually agree that they need to start cherishing their villains/rivals a bit more but it's hard to say when it's appropriate to kick a character off the bus and when you should keep them in play. I don't think losing any of the monsters of the week or Black Doom or anything was any skin off our nose for instance since they wouldn't have fit well as recurring villains anyway but someone else might have had an idea. Gamma, Tikal and Chaos passing on felt kind of appropriate even though I wouldn't have minded them sticking around.

On the flipside I think Emerl was a waste and DIMPS seemed to agree since they came up with a stand-in. I don't think Shadow's arc had to end in death but the comically over the top ways they came up to continue it don't do that mindset any favors, etc. I guess it's a case by case thing.

 

Sega handling these things poorly doesn't mean they're inherently bad ideas.

[Wraith]

3 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

 

Sega handling these things poorly doesn't mean they're inherently bad ideas.

Of course not, but if I argue Shadow still has value he can bring to the franchise and most of the Shadow content that exists after his death supports the contrary than it puts me in a more difficult position. I'm arguing what they could have done but we only have what they did to go off of.

[Diogenes]

3 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Older games were fine with that setup; usually there's a a problem with another character that Sonic had to solve. Chaos wanted to destroy the world because of what happened to the Chao he was protecting. Obviously that's wrong, and it's on Sonic to fix that and Chaos changes for the better in the end.

And Sonic was pretty fucking boring in SA, so.

3 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Lost World is another example, if a poorly done one. But the attempt was there.

Lost World actually let Sonic be flawed and make mistakes. His impatience and cockiness came back to bite him in the ass and bringing Eggman along caused more problems than it solved. In terms of him being flawed I'm not really asking for any more than that.

[Dr. Detective]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

Of course not, but if I argue Shadow still has value he can bring to the franchise and most of the Shadow content that exists after his death supports the contrary than it puts me in a more difficult position. I'm arguing what they could have done but we only have what they did to go off of.

I'm the kind of guy who has more confidence in what they didn't do personally. It's pretty easy for me to go off of stuff that didn't happen when I'm sat here coming up with ideas for what to do all the time.

I don't want to say that my ideas are better than there's but... I dunno. 

I guess that's what I'm saying...

[Wraith]

1 minute ago, Dr. Detective Mik-Eggman said:

I'm the kind of guy who has more confidence in what they didn't do personally. It's pretty easy for me to go off of stuff that didn't happen when I'm sat here coming up with ideas for what to do all the time.

I don't want to say that my ideas are better than there's but... I dunno. 

I guess that's what I'm saying...

I agree and I think about these characters all the time too, but you'll have a hard time convincing anyone with just ideas at the end of the day. What's tangible serves as far better evidence. The damage Sega/ST did to some of these characters runs deep and not everyone is gonna be able to disassociate them from that. 

[Shadowlax]

Just now, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Not everything has to be "relatable" to me. I don't need to understand what a character is going through to want them to punch a bad guy in the face.

Not that I have a problem with what you're describing, but I don't believe that's the only type of storytelling to write.

I'm not saying its the only type of story to write. I just feel personally , for sonic its kind of the direction he as a character should head. While I don't think every character should be relatable to you , infact trying out different types of characters for audiences is a good way to get more diversity in media. I don't think sonic falls under that though, sonic's whole M.O and the other sonic characters is to be relatable, or at least as relatable as a blue hedgehog can be, in a sense. But at least in my eyes, sonic hasn't been that ... for years. And not because he's doing fantastic thing as some type of on pedestal role model.  Its because him not being relatable and having flaws just seems like...means to keep him cool

And that hasn't been cool, for years. Unrepeatable nothing characters are the mark and often criticized as , fan fiction characters, uninteresting anime protagonists and the like. So it feels like sonic is chasing this idea of cool that has long since been uncool ( but hey sonic chasing trends long gone is nothing new , huh ) .

The modern influential protagonists of our day for children have made it pretty clear. What's cool are dorks , nerds , akward folks. That demographic seems to be relating to characters who while doing cool stuff also can be ... people with flaws. So one of my main issues with it is it seems like , for sonic that it is just an outdated idea of what cool is. If sonic wants to be cool now, he's gonna have to dork up . He's gonna have to come up in making a joke and people ignore him, maybe he tries to make  move on blaze and she says no and he's akward about it, maybe he's just wrong sometimes. Sonic has always been about being " Hip with the kids " and relating to them, homie started out as a cooler mario alternative. But cool is an ever changing thing , and other brands are changing to adapt to cool. And sonic kind of needs to, at least in my opinion as well. Or with this, and in combination with his not great games, he's gonna get left in the fucking dust.

[Dr. Detective]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

I agree and I think about these characters all the time too, but you'll have a hard time convincing anyone with just ideas at the end of the day. What's tangible serves as far better evidence. The damage Sega/ST did to some of these characters runs deep and not everyone is gonna be able to disassociate them from that. 

Oh absolutely. And Sega's solution to that problem so far has been to just not use the characters at all anymore. All those reviewers and bloggers who hated the cast still hate them just as much as before though. A lot of people like these characters but a lot of people don't and you're never going to endear the people who don't to these characters by putting them on the sidelines and validating all their complaints about how useless and pointless they are. 

 

[Wraith]

1 minute ago, Dr. Detective Mik-Eggman said:

Oh absolutely. And Sega's solution to that problem so far has been to just not use the characters at all anymore. All those reviewers and bloggers who hated the cast still hate them just as much as before though. A lot of people like these characters but a lot of people don't and you're never going to endear the people who don't to these characters by putting them on the sidelines and validating all their complaints about how useless and pointless they are. 

 

I've accepted it at this point. People can dislike Shadow and Silver all they want as long as nobody minds me dissing Cubot. Can't do anything but shrug, haha. 

[Kuzu]

2 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

And Sonic was pretty fucking boring in SA, so.

Lost World actually let Sonic be flawed and make mistakes. His impatience and cockiness came back to bite him in the ass and bringing Eggman along caused more problems than it solved. In terms of him being flawed I'm not really asking for any more than that.

Well then it comes down to what you prefer in your storytelling. Do you prefer a flat hero that changes a flawed world around him, or a flawed hero that overcomes their own vices.

I don't think Sonic was boring in SA1; not exactly the most interesting character, and pretty straightforward but it's why the thing with Chaos works to me, because Sonic has to fight to get Chaos to calm down.

I don't think one is more valuable than the other.

 

But it should be noted that I think it's harder for Sonic to have a real change in character since he's meant to be the recurring protagonist. It's not like other characters who change and make no further appearances. 

Sonic would have to change, and then that change would have to be consistent through subsequent games. 

 

[Dr. Detective]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

I've accepted it at this point. People can dislike Shadow and Silver all they want as long as nobody minds me dissing Cubot. Can't do anything but shrug, haha. 

Yeah. I guess so. It's a good thing I can draw. It's a nice way to expand on my endless "What ifs". 

[Wraith]

Lost World had problems but Sonic both being wrong and getting taken to an emotional low like that was interesting. I was actually pretty fascinated by it when I first saw it. I'd never really seen that outside of the comics and brief moments in Unleashed. Having a story where Sonic is just kind of destroying everything trying to overcorrect was at least a unique take and I actually liked how it was executed in the later parts where both Talis and Eggman seem to get disposed of due to him being wreckless. The resolution just doesn't really follow through on that which leaves a sour taste. 

 

I wouldn't mind them taking another crack at it.

 

[Kuzu]

9 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

I'm not saying its the only type of story to write. I just feel personally , for sonic its kind of the direction he as a character should head. While I don't think every character should be relatable to you , infact trying out different types of characters for audiences is a good way to get more diversity in media. I don't think sonic falls under that though, sonic's whole M.O and the other sonic characters is to be relatable, or at least as relatable as a blue hedgehog can be, in a sense. But at least in my eyes, sonic hasn't been that ... for years. And not because he's doing fantastic thing as some type of on pedestal role model.  Its because him not being relatable and having flaws just seems like...means to keep him cool

And that hasn't been cool, for years. Unrepeatable nothing characters are the mark and often criticized as , fan fiction characters, uninteresting anime protagonists and the like. So it feels like sonic is chasing this idea of cool that has long since been uncool ( but hey sonic chasing trends long gone is nothing new , huh ) .

The modern influential protagonists of our day for children have made it pretty clear. What's cool are dorks , nerds , akward folks. That demographic seems to be relating to characters who while doing cool stuff also can be ... people with flaws. So one of my main issues with it is it seems like , for sonic that it is just an outdated idea of what cool is. If sonic wants to be cool now, he's gonna have to dork up . He's gonna have to come up in making a joke and people ignore him, maybe he tries to make  move on blaze and she says no and he's akward about it, maybe he's just wrong sometimes. Sonic has always been about being " Hip with the kids " and relating to them, homie started out as a cooler mario alternative. But cool is an ever changing thing , and other brands are changing to adapt to cool. And sonic kind of needs to, at least in my opinion as well. Or with this, and in combination with his not great games, he's gonna get left in the fucking dust.

You are right that Sonic is boring, but I don't think that's because he's not an awkward dork or anything you described. 

It's because the things he does are boring. All he does is fight Eggman, with the only other  antagonists being the Deadly Six and Infinite and I don't think we need to say they're not...good.

If Sonic is boring, then give him an actual challenge he has to overcome. I mean, there's a reason the Adventure games are so well regarded, because that's what they do well; they give Sonic large challenges he has to overcome and he's not an awkward dork or anything like that.

 

What you described works well for a parody or SOL sitcom, which Boom is. But not really for an engaging action-adventure. And I'm just kind of tired of ironic and self deprecating heroes because they're just so saturated in media nowadays.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

10 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

You are right that Sonic is boring, but I don't think that's because he's not an awkward dork or anything you described. 

It's because the things he does are boring. All he does is fight Eggman, with the only other  antagonists being the Deadly Six and Infinite and I don't think we need to say they're not...good.

If Sonic is boring, then give him an actual challenge he has to overcome. I mean, there's a reason the Adventure games are so well regarded, because that's what they do well; they give Sonic large challenges he has to overcome and he's not an awkward dork or anything like that.

 

What you described works well for a parody or SOL sitcom, which Boom is. But not really for an engaging action-adventure. And I'm just kind of tired of ironic and self deprecating heroes because they're just so saturated in media nowadays.

Silver or Tails or Amy being dorks makes more sense anyways. Tails the geeky dork, Amy the love struck fangirl genki girl dork, and Silver the dork knight hero wannabe.

...dork dork dork dork dork.

[Diogenes]

1 minute ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Well then it comes down to what you prefer in your storytelling. Do you prefer a flat hero that changes a flawed world around him, or a flawed hero that overcomes their own vices.

How about a flawed hero who overcomes their vices and changes the world around him? Or even just a flawed hero who changes the world while continuing to be flawed?

I'm not gonna say every character should be some tortured soul fighting with their inner demons, but if you can't work any kind of flaw or foible into your protagonist and if you can't make the conflict operate on a personal level to some extent I can't imagine producing much more than fluff.

1 minute ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

But it should be noted that I think it's harder for Sonic to have a real change in character since he's meant to be the recurring protagonist. It's not like other characters who change and make no further appearances. 

Sonic would have to change, and then that change would have to be consistent through subsequent games.

This much is absolutely true, and a major obstacle to the series actually having good stories. Sonic can't change much because this series isn't a story meant to have an ending; it's not supposed to lead anywhere, it's just supposed to keep running in place. But I don't think a flawless and unchanging protagonist is the right answer to that problem.

[Shadowlax]

1 minute ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

You are right that Sonic is boring, but I don't think that's because he's not an awkward dork or anything you described. 

It's because the things he does are boring. All he does is fight Eggman, with the only other  antagonists being the Deadly Six and Infinite and I don't think we need to say they're not...good.

 

1 minute ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

If Sonic is boring, then give him an actual challenge he has to overcome. I mean, there's a reason the Adventure games are so well regarded, because that's what they do well; they give Sonic large challenges he has to overcome and he's not an awkward dork or anything like that.

While I agree , I think sonic and his friends can be more than just that. Sonic characters for me , have always had the potential to have expanded characterization. And while they can also be " lets fight an actual challenging bad guy " they can also be " Lets also try and be relatable people somewhat " 

1 minute ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

 

What you described works well for a parody or SOL sitcom, which Boom is. But not really for an engaging action-adventure. And I'm just kind of tired of ironic and self deprecating heroes because they're just so saturated in media nowadays.

What are you talking about? One there are plenty of action adventure shows, comics, even movies that have what I described. Spiderman enter the damn spider verse has a meme about miles doing some weird akward as shit his uncle taught him with a girl and that shit won an academy award my guy.  You can totes do character action stuff and also be silly character focused and charming.

This is ontop of that happening isn't self deprecating or ironic, just because something bad happens to a character in a story doesn't mean that story is makng fun of that character in a thing beyond that immediate moment, it could just be purely comedic in its own right or a chance to grow a character. But the idea that sonic facing some adversity in life is some how self deprecating is nonsense.

And yes , sometimes self deprecation does get a bit annoying. But I would make the argument it isn't as much as you think and a lot of heroes are moving the opposite direction, while also being a bit human and having flaws. Taking ones self seriously still is becoming the thing to do again.

And as for sonic, yes the constant self deprecation from the twitte and such can get annoying sometimes. But I would argue its annoying because of the quality of the games we have been getting. But this is another discussion

2 minutes ago, SenEDDtor Missile said:

Silver or Tails or Amy being dorks makes more sense anyways. Tails the geeky dork, Amy the love struck fangirl genki girl dork, and Silver the dork knight hero wannabe.

...Eh sonic can be dork, shadow can be a dork. Relegating that to certain types of characters limits others. I like shadow, but you know amy touched his bike and lost his shit and it was funny one time, oh hey hypothetical scenario.  Shadow could be really into comic books, its a really dorky thing to do and yes you can get a chuckle out of it.  But it also be a means to explain what else shadow does in his spare times, and how he relaxes. Maybe he reads hero comics because he wants to be seen like one of them one day, there is a lot of things you can do with small details like that if you allow the characters to actually expand.  You can have characters engage in acts that have them drop their usual and get a bit weird touch on aspects we don't really see. Sometimes that requires getting a bit dorky.

[Kuzu]

I wouldn't mind a story where the villain is a well intentioned dictator that while he is oppressive, he's actually keeping things in check.

And Sonic being who he is, would kick his ass as usual only to realize he's unleashed something arguably worse. Knuckles gives Sonic shit for it and decides to go on his own and even Tails is like "bro wtf".

The second half of the game is that the town or whatever is nobody wants to help Sonic and he has to fight alone to overcome the threat. Maybe it's a ploy setup by Eggman or something.

[Dr. Detective]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

Lost World had problems but Sonic both being wrong and getting taken to an emotional low like that was interesting. I was actually pretty fascinated by it when I first saw it. I'd never really seen that outside of the comics and brief moments in Unleashed. Having a story where Sonic is just kind of destroying everything trying to overcorrect was at least a unique take and I actually liked how it was executed in the later parts where both Talis and Eggman seem to get disposed of due to him being wreckless. The resolution just doesn't really follow through on that which leaves a sour taste. 

 

I wouldn't mind them taking another crack at it.
 

Yeah. I have nothing but praise for the idea and the execution of some of those scenes.

The problem was that the game didn't seem to know that was the story it was telling. 

Sonic kicking the conch away, reacting so fast that Tails had to save him and get captured, and basically ignoring the concern of his much smarter partner were all good ideas. However, the game states that Sonic's actual problem was something different than what we saw.

Sonic was the one who was the most against teaming up with Eggman. He kept calling him names and demanding that they could handle it themselves and even when he reluctantly agreed to do it, he still took a crack at him. Cut to the next scene where all of a sudden it's Tails starting a fight with Eggman and him saying Sonic trusts Eggman more than him. It's so confusing.

And the scene where Sonic reacts too fast and Tails gets captured, the first thing out of Sonic's mouth is "I'm supposed to be the fastest but I was too slow to save my buddy" and it's like... NO! 

That happened BECAUSE you reacted too fast!

Come on! 

And at the end, Sonic apologizes to Tails for doubting him over Eggman which... didn't happen. Like that literally didn't happen. 

Tails had the perfect reason for being angry at Sonic but instead he came off looking like a jerk for getting mad at Sonic over something he didn't do rather than what he actually did do. What a waste of a cool idea.