Jump to content
Awoo.

Popular and unpopular Sonic opinions you agree and disagree with!


KHCast

Recommended Posts

If a overall good car has horrid MPG, having low MPG is still bad, even though the car with low MPG may be good. It does not make MPG neutral, higher is always better as long as other variables remain constant.

The problem with this comparison is that everyone knows why bad MPG is bad. The cause and effect relationship is as obvious as it is direct.

What is the cause and effect relationship that equates linearity with inferior design? You can't say "those games were good in spite of their linearity" without establishing why it is a case of being "in spite of."

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

  • Replies 7.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Kuzu

    565

  • E-122-Psi

    416

  • CrownSlayer’s Shadow

    397

  • DabigRG

    347

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The problem with this comparison is that everyone knows why bad MPG is bad. The cause and effect relationship is as obvious as it is direct.

What is the cause and effect relationship that equates linearity with inferior design? You can't say "those games were good in spite of their linearity" without establishing why it is a case of being "in spite of."

Because more choices and having more content to explore are good things. I think that's something the vast majority of gamers would agree with. If someone prefers less choices and less gameplay, more power to them - they don't have to explore any alternate paths or anything like that. If you don't want to go see where that floating platform takes you up to in S3, you don't have to. But having the option of exploring additional pathways, and finding additional content in the level is inherently good.

That's my stance. Linearity simply offers less to explore - as long as the other factors remain consistent, nonlinearity is very good thing in games. The problem is making sure gameplay doesn't take a hit in return for nonlinearity. It takes alot of resources to develop nonlinear games in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tight and engaging design is tight and engaging design; I don't give a shit if it's constricted to one or two paths, especially since the absolute best platformers tend not to be all that open in regards to the space you can travel anyway. Rayman Origins and Legends, the NSMB games, Galaxy, the original Crash Bandicoot games, Super Meat Boy, Donkey Kong Country Returns, the list goes on and on. And in Sonic's case, whenever the levels do open up into these sprawling labyrinths, there's nothing interesting to see or do on them that you cannot find on one or two major paths through a stage. They're there just to be there and be impressive. More platformers have come along since the 90s and have done a hell of a lot better than the classic games with a whole lot less in terms of navigable area, so I can't get with this constant derision of linearity.

I agree with your stance regarding multiple paths, but you lost me once you said that there have been plenty of platform games that "have done a hell of a lot better than the classic games". Maybe the classic Sonic's games arent necessarily litteraly the best platform games ever made, but i think they definitely still belong at the very cream of the crop of the genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with your stance regarding multiple paths, but you lost me once you said that there have been plenty of platform games that "have done a hell of a lot better than the classic games". Maybe the classic Sonic's games arent necessarily litteraly the best platform games ever made, but i think they definitely still belong at the very cream of the crop of the genre.

I agree. I'm hard pressed to think of any platforming games much better than S3K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

]

It's not just the "Fiona is mutilated without rhyme or reason to generate animosity between Sonic and Tails either", you could even see it as a way of expressing, surprise surprise, pro-Sonally leanings because no time is wasted before Sonic gets back with Sally i.e The very next issue.

Ridiculous.

Pretty sure they didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they didn't.

Verified. The next issue has them on a sting operation against Mogul and his hired goons, no getting back together there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because more choices and having more content to explore are good things. I think that's something the vast majority of gamers would agree with. If someone prefers less choices and less gameplay, more power to them - they don't have to explore any alternate paths or anything like that. If you don't want to go see where that floating platform takes you up to in S3, you don't have to. But having the option of exploring additional pathways, and finding additional content in the level is inherently good.

That's my stance. Linearity simply offers less to explore - as long as the other factors remain consistent, nonlinearity is very good thing in games. The problem is making sure gameplay doesn't take a hit in return for nonlinearity. It takes alot of resources to develop nonlinear games in comparison.

Tornado summarized my issue with the whole MPG analogy much better than I would've so I won't respond to that post. Regardless, exploration as a concept is only as inherently good as what it adds to the central gameplay and how it rewards the player. If there is nothing worth exploring or if the experience of playing can survive intact without all of the extraneous level design, then exploration as a concept has largely failed that particular game. You will not find a whole lot of people willing to defend Unleashed's medal system as a means for exploration and thus saying it's a better game than Sonic Colors on this front alone, because these exploratory elements roughly obscure the point of the game or make the flow more convoluted in certain instances. All in all though, "linearity = bad, exploration = good" is much too simple a view to game design to be reliable indicator of quality.

I agree with your stance regarding multiple paths, but you lost me once you said that there have been plenty of platform games that "have done a hell of a lot better than the classic games". Maybe the classic Sonic's games arent necessarily litteraly the best platform games ever made, but i think they definitely still belong at the very cream of the crop of the genre.

I do not say this to say that the classics are bad. I say this to make a point that the classics aren't the only platforming games worth looking at as well as vent my frustration at the implication that- because the classics are both good and open-ended- that linear platformers automatically have inherently lesser value, or are less fun, or are bad, or cannot be used as inspiration for the franchise going forward. There are amazing platformers that are open and there are amazing platformers that are linear. There are platformers that are indeed better than the classics. There's a nice crop of excellent platforming material being put out there today that Sonic could take inspiration from that I get miffed and frustrated when people imply or say that doing anything outside of what the classics did in terms of level design or control is automatically wrong or worse.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tornado summarized my issue with the whole MPG analogy much better than I would've so I won't respond to that post. Regardless, exploration as a concept is only as inherently good as what it adds to the central gameplay and how it rewards the player. If there is nothing worth exploring or if the experience of playing can survive intact without all of the extraneous level design, then exploration as a concept has largely failed that particular game. You will not find a whole lot of people willing to defend Unleashed's medal system as a means for exploration and thus saying it's a better game than Sonic Colors on this front alone, because these exploratory elements roughly obscure the point of the game or make the flow more convoluted in certain instances. All in all though, "linearity = bad, exploration = good" is much too simple a view to game design to be reliable indicator of quality.

I agree wholeheartedly with most of your post. Nonlinearity has no point, if areas meant for exploration don't bring the same level of gameplay, or ruin the existing level of gameplay.

But this does not mean that nonlinearity is not inherently good. When assessing factors, you must assume other variables remain constant, such as the quality of gameplay ( such as was not the case in Unleashed, which you mentioned. )

Edited by hangarninetysix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not say this to say that the classics are bad. I say this to make a point that the classics aren't the only platforming games worth looking at as well as vent my frustration at the implication that- because the classics are both good and open-ended- that linear platformers automatically have inherently lesser value, or are less fun, or are bad, or cannot be used as inspiration for the franchise going forward. There are amazing platformers that are open and there are amazing platformers that are linear. There are platformers that are indeed better than the classics. There's a nice crop of excellent platforming material being put out there today that Sonic could take inspiration from that I get miffed and frustrated when people imply or say that doing anything outside of what the classics did in terms of level design or control is automatically wrong or worse.

This probably comes from the fact that Sonic is a different type of platformer from the rest, what works for one series may not necessarily work for another. The reason the games you listed have such interesting linear platforming because there's a lot of thing to do in the level, but Sonic can't really have things like that without drastically slowing down the pace of the game, which is completely missing the point of Sonic to begin with. I don't think linearity in itself is terrible, but bland linearity is not something this series should strive for and even if you feel the classics didn't do exploration as good as you'd hope, the level isn't a boring straight pathway.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree wholeheartedly with most of your post. Nonlinearity has no point, if areas meant for exploration don't bring the same level of gameplay, or ruin the existing level of gameplay.

But this does not mean that nonlinearity is not inherently good. When assessing factors, you must assume other variables remain constant, such as the quality of gameplay ( such as was not the case in Unleashed, which you mentioned. )

You've still not really made an argument on why non-linearity is always good and why linearity is always bad, even if you proceed to consider all other variables of a game equal. You say that it's because "it's good to give the player more choices than less choices," but this doesn't address any entire genres or separate titles that explicitly rely upon constricting the players' focus for the sake of functionality or addressing thematic qualities, much less how any of these appropriate titles could possibly be good as a result of being linear.

The fact is, you're looking at this in a completely unrealistic vacuum. Not every single game proceeds to gain anymore inherent quality from topping on more and more choices for the player to handle in the midst of gameplay, just like how not every game ever proceeds to become more enjoyable from using polygons instead of sprites, or using more cutscenes, or using higher numbers of stages. These things all possess marginal utility and appropriate times and places depending upon the title or genre.

This probably comes from the fact that Sonic is a different type of platformer from the rest, what works for one series may not necessarily work for another. The reason the games you listed have such interesting linear platforming because there's a lot of thing to do in the level, but Sonic can't really have things like that without drastically slowing down the pace of the game, which is completely missing the point of Sonic to begin with. I don't think linearity in itself is terrible, but bland linearity is not something this series should strive for and even if you feel the classics didn't do exploration as good as you'd hope, the level isn't a boring straight pathway.

I've not said that everything that works for every other platforming series will necessarily work for Sonic. I'm saying that we've got a lot more material to potentially examine than what we've been led to believe by people who insist the only games Sonic can emulate or borrow from is merely other Sonic games. And frankly, the fact that Sonic is a "unique" franchise is just a cop-out answer; none of the games or series I've listed are completely identical to one another for whatever reason(s), but they nonetheless possess similarities as platformers that are universal or interesting in their own right and can be borrowed considering he is ultimately a platforming franchise too, as people will be quick to remind you.

The classic games also had plenty of areas in them where the pace of the game was significantly slower than the titles we have today. They're filled to the brim with sections that are basically traditional platforming or sprawl to the point of facilitating careful consideration and precision platforming; they're not 100% downhill or straight lines, after all. The classics alone, as well as continuous calls for the modern games to disappear, are proper cases that you can slow Sonic down and not completely break the design.

As for blandness, well that's something that should be avoided regardless of how you design your levels. xP

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not said that everything that works for every other platforming series will necessarily work for Sonic. I'm saying that we've got a lot more material to potentially examine than what we've been led to believe by people who insist the only games Sonic can emulate or borrow from is merely other Sonic games. And frankly, the fact that Sonic is a "unique" franchise is just a cop-out answer; none of the games or series I've listed are completely identical to one another for whatever reason(s), but they nonetheless possess similarities as platformers that are universal or interesting in their own right and can be borrowed considering he is ultimately a platforming franchise too, as people will be quick to remind you.

It's not really a cop out because it's a legit answer, Sonic games by definition are fast paced experiences, and thereby different from other platformers, I'm not saying Sonic can't take influence from other platforming genres, but not if it compromises the pacing of the game, something that has happened in the past.

The classic games also had plenty of areas in them where the pace of the game was significantly slower than the titles we have today. They're filled to the brim with sections that are basically traditional platforming or sprawl to the point of facilitating careful consideration and precision platforming; they're not 100% downhill or straight lines, after all. The classics alone, as well as continuous calls for the modern games to disappear, are proper cases that you can slow Sonic down and not completely break the design.

Yes, and if I recall levels like Marble and Labyrinth zone are generally seen as inferior to levels like Green Hill or Spring Yard. As far as the Modern games are concerned, that's more of a problem with the severe focus on speed, and little to nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the opinion that the Tails Doll is cute and not scary at all. He's slow in the game but he's cute... please stop with the Tails Doll creepypasta. It's lame.

Edited by HippyAmy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the opinion that the Tails Doll is cute and not scary at all. He's slow in the game but he's cute... please stop with the Tails Doll creepypasta. It's lame.

I can agree with this for the most part.

I'm finding the Tails Doll curse pretty annoying now. It was funny the first couple of times but now people milked it out too much. :/

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an opinion that's sure to make some people cringe: I am not looking forward to the Eddie Lebron Sonic Fan Film.

I this an unpopular opinion? Because I'm pretty sure most people aren't.

Im interested to see what his vision of a Sonic film would be, it's not an official work, so it isn't really hurting anyone.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've still not really made an argument on why non-linearity is always good and why linearity is always bad, even if you proceed to consider all other variables of a game equal. You say that it's because "it's good to give the player more choices than less choices," but this doesn't address any entire genres or separate titles that explicitly rely upon constricting the players' focus for the sake of functionality or addressing thematic qualities, much less how any of these appropriate titles could possibly be good as a result of being linear.

The fact is, you're looking at this in a completely unrealistic vacuum. Not every single game proceeds to gain anymore inherent quality from topping on more and more choices for the player to handle in the midst of gameplay, just like how not every game ever proceeds to become more enjoyable from using polygons instead of sprites, or using more cutscenes, or using higher numbers of stages. These things all possess marginal utility and appropriate times and places depending upon the title or genre.

I don't understand why you're so vehemently against this concept. How about a game everyone here should know. Would it be better or worse if the player could choose to play Spring Yard after Green Hill instead of Marble? If you like the pacing with Marble after Green Hill, then go for it. But if the player doesn't want to, they have a choice to play Spring Yard instead. And with the gameplay remaining the same, I fail to see how giving the player nonlinear choices is going to screw him or her over.

Edited by hangarninetysix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I this an unpopular opinion? Because I'm pretty sure most people aren't.

Im interested to see what his vision of a Sonic film would be, it's not an official work, so it isn't really hurting anyone.

I can't see if it's popular or unpopular. However, I did say "sure to make some people cringe," not "most."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why you're so vehemently against this concept. How about a game everyone here should know. Would it be better or worse if the player could choose to play Spring Yard after Green Hill instead of Marble? If you like the pacing with Marble after Green Hill, then go for it. But if the player doesn't want to, they have a choice to play Spring Yard instead. And with the gameplay remaining the same, I fail to see how giving the player nonlinear choices is going to screw him or her over.

I'm against the concept because it's just plain ol' logically unsound. You continue to insinuate that linearity is always and unequivocably bad in every single circumstance imaginable when this isn't true in actual practice because you keep admittedly talking about the concept in a vacuum with complete disregard for real world applications and results (as you continue to state "bar all other elements being equal"), as well as its effect on other characteristics or the purpose of the game.

A car racing simulator's purpose is undermined when it gives the player the "choice" to use supersonic jet planes instead of cars. Tetris becomes worse if you give the player the "choice" of which blocks to choose. Portal's narrative and potentially the game as a whole would not be as strong if you had the "choice" of playing any level in any order and missing out on experiencing the actual progression of the story and in-game narrative moments and puzzles due to the context being lost. Your working logic is way too dependent upon pure hypotheticals for me to take any stock in your argument when we're discussing existing games.

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

I'm against the concept because it's just plain ol' logically unsound. You continue to insinuate that linearity is always and unequivocably bad in every single circumstance imaginable when this isn't true in actual practice because you keep admittedly talking about the concept in a vacuum with complete disregard for real world applications and results (as you continue to state "bar all other elements being equal"), as well as its effect on other characteristics or the purpose of the game.

A car racing simulator's purpose is undermined when it gives the player the "choice" to use supersonic jet planes instead of cars. Tetris becomes worse if you give the player the "choice" of which blocks to choose. Portal's narrative and potentially the game as a whole would not be as strong if you had the "choice" of playing any level in any order and missing out on experiencing the actual progression of the story and in-game narrative moments and puzzles due to the context being lost. Your working logic is way too dependent upon pure hypotheticals for me to take any stock in your argument when we're discussing existing games.

It wouldn't be undermined at all. You could always just choose to drive the cars. Or use normal blocks. Or play through the story progression rather than your own mix of levels. If that's what you want, then do it. No problem. But if someone else might want to use different vehicles, or different blocks, or not play through the story mode, what's it to you? Letting them have a choice is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not how people play games. When you've given a person a blatantly obvious solution that allows them to solve a problem in the easiest manner possible, they are almost always going to use it. What you're now arguing is that game balance is actually a completely unnecessary component for a game developer to take into account so long as you've got two or more choices. Your argument is becoming more and more ludicrous by the post.

  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^You know, it's funny how I hear most fans say Fiona became a better character when she switched sides and yet as you pointed out, it still comepletely contradicts her entire stance on disliking selfish or self-serving characters such as Scourge. I will say she was very dull and only served as Sally's "replacement" when she was with the FF's, but was more on the shitty writing the comic had at the time.

I disagree. Fiona's change makes sense when you remember her backstory which Penders and Boilers didnt't. It never made sense that Fiona would be a freedom fighter.

As for Fiona not liking people like Scourge, well who says that her views on guys can't change over time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sonic Adventure is more glitchy.

I've fallen through the dock many times in Adventure while in 06 that same section with the whale that chases you, never happened.

Plus Sonic always seems to be drawn nears walls and I'm always having to fight for control.

Sonic Adventure is glitchy, but it's no where near as glitchy as Sonic 06. You can even stand in the middle of a loop in Sonic 06. The physics are completely broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not how people play games. When you've given a person a blatantly obvious solution that allows them to solve a problem in the easiest manner possible, they are almost always going to use it. What you're now arguing is that game balance is actually a completely unnecessary component for a game developer to take into account so long as you've got two or more choices. Your argument is becoming more and more ludicrous by the post.

This is not even remotely true. Don't know what to say. People often choose to do harder things in games for the challenge. If they player wants to take an easy path, let them. If they want to take a hard path, let them.

And I didn't say anything that game balance was unnecessary or anything even remotely close to that... At this point, I think you're just arguing for the sake of being contrary. You brought up the example of a player choosing to use different tetris blocks, or play portal levels differently, or play different vehicles in a car simulator. People play mods all the time, and often times they are more challenging...

I don't know what else to say on the topic. If people having a choice of how to play their games offends you, so be it. Apparently giving the player different options is equivalent to throwing game balance out the window even though I said nothing of the sort...

Edited by hangarninetysix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't be undermined at all. You could always just choose to drive the cars.

This is you pretty much saying that you see no problem with Turn 10 throwing in supersonic jets in a car racing sim, vehicles which are ridiculously faster than any existing car to the point of making the actual game of Forza as we know it pointless, as well as missing the point that jets do not even belong in the game in the first place. You said this was perfectly fine because you could "choose to have a car," completely missing my point and implying that a game being imbalanced to the point of undermining its own design is okay so long as you have some "choices" in the matter to either play as the gimped car or with the obvious choice of the jet plane. You are literally advocating this sort of stuff with your argument as you are currently wording it.

And let's not talk about me being "offended" when you're the one who's been completely intolerant for any sort of linearity in a game to the point of saying the stuff that I've parsed from your post.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.