Do people still think Sonic Adventure's a good game?

[PKGaming]

I like Sonic Adventure for nostalgic reasons, but purely for nostalgic reasons. As I grew up, I fully became aware that it hasn't aged well. I feel like it's The King of Not-Aged-Well. I remember this game was amazing back then, but looking at it now, it's kind of a mess... It has so many problems that even games older than it did better. I think I loved it so much back then simply because it was Sonic in 3D and the graphics looked amazing back then.

I'm bringing this up because today Game Grumps decided to start a playthrough of the game. Immediately I knew that this wouldn't be good... When they played through Sonic 3, for the most part, I did think they were being a bit too nitpicky. But with this, even though it pained me to hear them crap all over the game, I couldn't properly defend anything they were saying (except when Arin died on Chaos Zero......really Arin?). Some people are saying the wall-glitch was forced and done on purpose, but from my experience, it can easily happen. If you're not holding up on the analog stick or holding it in a weird direction, you clip through the wall. I know it can easily be avoided by just holding up...but a glitch that severe should NOT happen simply because the player forgot to hold up. A glitch like that should only happen if something really strange occurred or if the player REALLY forced it to work. A game shouldn't be so unstable that a glitch like that can occur by one simple mistake.

Edit: I suppose I'm using GG as an example because they properly showcased all the game's problems that one could experience in the first 10 minutes, not because I care about their opinions specifically. Before even watching, I knew that they'd make fun of the voice acting, character animation, graphics, and I knew that they'd run into that wall glitch, because these can easily be someone's first impressions of the game. I don't feel like it's a unique GG reaction. 

But I know there are people who do still believe it's a good game, and I'm wondering what it is that draws you guys to it so much and what it is the game did so well. 

Edited July 19, 2015 by PKGaming

[krazystitch]

I still think that Sonic Adventure is a good game even today. It's a little dated with mouth sync in cutscenes and graphics and such, but I still think most of the mechanics and level design are fun. The game does have its own glitches, but I can't remember any game breaking ones from the few times I've played through this game.

Honestly, I really don't see Game Grumps as a good source of whether a game is good or bad. Their main purpose is to entertain and sometimes they joke and very specific things and blow them up to sound like something so negative that it's painful. Not to mention they aren't quite the best players in the world, but people watch them anyways because of the commentary. Game Grumps run into a lot of glitches and pin point a lot of the stupidity above all else because that's the focus, not essentially finishing games (Because there are tons they've just left behind)

So, yeah, I do think Sonic Adventure is still good in its own way and it has stood the test of time in some ways more than others. Some people still really like it and I can get why. It's fun.

[Badnik Mechanic]

On the mobile so this will be short.

Sonic Adventure is a good game. But technically it has A LOT to answer for.

I think it got very lucky with reviews back in th3 day since there was a lot less focus on the technical performance on games... today.

No way would it get away with it.

 

[Komodin]

Sonic Adventure is very much a product of its time. It hasn't aged nearly as well as games like Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time or Banjo-Kazooie, and even by the standards of the day, it was pretty messy in terms of glitches and errors.  That doesn't mean that I've never had genuine fun with it, though.

[Diogenes]

It's not a game I can give my unqualified support to, no. It's a game that I have fond memories of, it's a game that I think has some genuinely good ideas, it's a game that I feel tried its best to do what it set out to do...but it's not a game I'd recommend to anyone, unless they were already a fan of Sonic and somehow missed it, and even then with major caveats. There are just too many problems with it, in both design and execution. People may have been able to overlook them when the game was new and we were still exploring the brave new world of 3D gaming, but the collision detection alone dooms it from any modern perspective.

[ThePrinceOfSaiyans]

No, I wouldn't consider it a good game by today's standards, but I still think it's incredibly fun. The level design feels more open to exploration, but still gives you speed and platforming. Sonic Adventure is the closest we've come to a game that plays like Sonic 3 and Knuckles, but in 3D, it's just unfortunately hampered by glitches, which I agree are overblown, but are still a problem. Beyond that, I liked the game's story and characters. Giving an origin for the Master Emerald and the destruction of the Echidnas was interesting and the characters had consistent, likable personalities. Beyond all this, I just have fond memories of the game. This was the first video game I ever beat, and this was my first introduction to Sonic, ignoring the Sonic Adventure 2 demo. How can I not love this game? It introduced me to my favorite video game character of all time, Sonic the Hedgehog. 

[Zavok the SpinningSilver]

I think Adventure 1 is still a good game. It isn't outstanding, but I still enjoy it.

The ambition here is admirable and the gameplay is still fun after all these years. While the voice acting, lip - syncing and in game animations are a mixed bag for me, the soundtrack is still a grade A winner. I won't lie and say it hasn't shown its age, but there are pros and cons aplenty either way. 

[Tornado]

Conceptually it was the closest the franchise ever got to a 3D classic Sonic game. But oh man were they outreaching their grasp when actually making it.

 

 

 

 

But as an aside, who gives a shit what some Internet "celebrity" thinks anyway? Adventure is a horribly dated, not entirely thought through game because it is one. If you can put up with its idiosyncracies (some of which notably bad even at its original release) and its poor production values, you can still get enjoyment out of it. It isn't any more or less "bad" because some guy with a microphone tried to rip off the Top Gear schtick.

[PKGaming]

Honestly, I really don't see Game Grumps as a good source of whether a game is good or bad. Their main purpose is to entertain and sometimes they joke and very specific things and blow them up to sound like something so negative that it's painful. Not to mention they aren't quite the best players in the world, but people watch them anyways because of the commentary. Game Grumps run into a lot of glitches and pin point a lot of the stupidity above all else because that's the focus, not essentially finishing games (Because there are tons they've just left behind)

I'd usually agree that Game Grumps isn't a good source on a game's quality either because they really can make some good games look bad/boring. But with this game...I just feel like this could easily be someone's first experience with the game, not just Game Grumps. Say someone wanted to play a retro Sonic game, during the era that many claim to be good times, and stuff like what happened in the video happen to them. I think it could easily happen because 1. Sonic isn't the easiest to control, especially when the game's trying to transition him from on-rails to free roaming and vice versa. I specifically remember years ago when me and my brother were really little, back when the game first came out, and my brother said "Wow! This is awesome! Sonic's so fast I can hardly control him!" I wanna go back in time and tell my brother's younger self that that's not a good thing... And 2. Like I said before, that wall-glitch and many other glitches can happen pretty easily. The game isn't very stable. I suppose I'm using GG as an example because they properly showcased all the game's problems that one could experience in the first 10 minutes, not because I care about their opinions specifically. Before even watching, I knew that they'd make fun of the voice acting, character animation, graphics, and I knew that they'd run into that wall glitch, because these can easily be someone's first impressions of the game. I don't feel like it's a unique GG reaction. 

Edited July 19, 2015 by PKGaming

[CottonCandy]

Sonic Adventure didn't aged well and I knew this way before GameGrumps even considered playing the game. Is it a good game? In terms of fun value, it's decent. I can go back playing Sonic adventure and still have fun with it. Yeah, the game is buggy but I don't remember it being as bad as sonic 06. In general, I don't think Sonic Adventure is a horrible game. It was just a product of it's time, I can say the same about the other games I grew up with. 

My opinion about the game won't change just because gamegrumps showcased the game's problems. 

 

Edited July 19, 2015 by CottonCandy

[redhellc]

Well I think the game was good and big for its time. Now it's aged a little yeah, but I can still have fun with it more than I can have with SA2 that's for sure.

In terms of glitches, while I can see the game has them it never hindered my experience. In fact most of them I only encountered them when I was actively looking for them, something that wasn't needed in games like 06.

But to be honest I think what makes me a little upset is the fact that the re-releases don't address these kind of issues and are merely weak ports of ports.

 

Edited July 19, 2015 by redhellc

[Bowbowis]

Sonic Adventure is like a house built from one of the finest blueprints ever drafted, and then constructed out of rusty nails and rotten wood by inexperienced carpenters using tools straight out of the paleolithic era. That is to say that, on a conceptual level, it's still one of the best Sonic games to date. In execution however it's bogged down by some severe technical issues stemming from several factors, ranging from an inexperienced dev team to hardware limitations. I still think that if SEGA ever decide to buckle down and remake this game, ironing out the issues it has instead of simply settling for a half-assed port, that it could be a serious contender for greatest Sonic game ever (although hopefully they'd take the OoT 3D approach and leave in some of the fun glitches like Tails in Emerald Coast).

[Shade Vortex]

It definitely hasn't aged well and has a myriad of problems. But the Sonic and Tails gameplay at least, are still enjoyable for me. And to a degree, I still like playing as Amy or Gamma.

But nowadays, I can't stand treasure hunting or especially fishing in a Sonic game. I just can't tolerate genre roulette of any sort anymore- if I wanna play a specific kind of game, I'm going to play that kind of game. So when I want to play a Sonic game, I want to play a platformer that has a good level of speed, but also has a good amount of platforming.

Although, I will say that at the very least, the treasure hunting in SA1 is so much better than in SA2. Not only because the radar shows all three emeralds at once, but also because you go through stages that aren't super open/confusing, they're still designed like Sonic's stages were to a degree.

[shdowhunt60]

It's a technically flawed game. But that doesn't mean that it isn't fun. I still think that Adventure succeeds in many ways that most modern Sonic games fail on. It's an Adventure in every sense of the word, and it creates an experience that I feel is worth having. I think the nostalgia clause is a bit of a copout. I've known a lot of people pick up the game and have fun with it. That, to me, is not an indicator of it being a bad game.

[Osmium]

I have very mixed feelings about Adventure. 

Adventure is certainly a very ambitious game, I don't think anyone can really oppose that. The cutscenes and voice acting are extremely dated and I think everyone knows about that now. 

The stages of Adventure are I think are well thought out (in places)and can be fun to play through. But some of the glitches I come across are really aggravating and just make me want to stop playing altogether. Some of the ideas used in some stages are really broken in my experience. Most of the bosses are very boring and slow and are unfun to play.

Like others have said above me, there are some good designs and ideas put into the game, but there were plenty of bad ones too, and it is a mess of a game. Some of it's ideas were good on paper but turned to not work well. Very bad execution. 

Whenever I play, I have periods of fun between periods of aggravation, and I can't say it's good. Definitely not terrible, but around meh for me. I think people really were lenient towards it when it came out just due to the fact it was the first 3D Sonic game and in fact the first main title Sonic game in over 4 years.

Edited July 19, 2015 by Osmium

[Badnik Mechanic]

Well Game Grumps said this...

Ok since this has already started I think this needs to be said, since I see a lot of people still dismissing this as being biased or trying to say GG were deliberately looking for problems.

There is this HUGE misconception about the GG video that they said SA1 was shit or terrible or something else just because they don't like Sonic or without reason... Well... they sorta did but unless you actually bother to watch the video you can't really fault their criticisms.

The video is just over 10 min long, with around 8 or 9 given to actual gameplay, during this time the following happens.

• During the Chaos 0 fight, the camera clips through the floor and makes the game look/feel sickly. 
• After the chaos 0 fight they laugh at Sonic's victory pose which to be honest does look a tad goofy.
• Then they comment on how stupid/silly this looks.

• Anyone want to argue with that? Also, this has always looked stupid, it has always looked silly, age has nothing to do with how stupid this looks.
• Then they comment on how weird the NPCs look/act in this section, and frankly, they're right, the kid they talk to does these really weird gestures, and how there are two NPC's standing together, who are exactly the same which looks odd, then there's that random lady stood in the pool which looks really strange.

But it's when the Emerald Coast stage starts that they really have problems. 

Then the level starts and... initially, they don't have any problems... then they get to a notoriously buggy part of the game, they enter a segment where if you push certain buttons Sonic will clip through the wall and die, this happens on the Gamecube version and the PS3/Xbox ports, unsure about the Dreamcast version. This happens 3 times in a row, they even deliberately slow down to try and avoid this but you can see the game effectively 'pushing' Sonic through the wall.

They then get past this and enter a scripted section, but they don't know it's scripted so they try to control Sonic... then shit hits the fan, Sonic randomly falls through the giant loop, then teleports to the top of the loop outside of the scripted segment, No seriously, he falls through he floor then flies to the top, it's the Sonic Adventure version of that Knuckles bit in their Sonic 06 paythrough, they can control Sonic on top of the loop, but because it's hard to get down, they fall through the stage and die resulting in a game over.

Now I can't remember when exactly they say this, but at one point there is a 'This is worse than Rise of Lyric.'

Considering all this happened in only 8 min of gameplay, how is this not a justified initial criticism of the game? 

All these problems have nothing to do with the game 'not aging well' these are problems which have always existed and always been in the game, with todays focus on technical performance, noway would any reviewer let the game get away with these problems. Hell pretty much all of their complaints are what we've been saying for years.

So let's look at this another way, say this was your first experience of playing a game, would you think it was acceptable? Regardless as to whether you played it in 1999 or 2015.

And if you think that you wouldn't find it terrible or laugh at how bad it was, I direct your attention to when we got that footage of Rise of Lyric a day before it was released. 

Edited July 19, 2015 by Hogfather

[Solly]

Sonic Adventure is very much a product of its time. It hasn't aged nearly as well as games like Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time or Banjo-Kazooie, and even by the standards of the day, it was pretty messy in terms of glitches and errors.  That doesn't mean that I've never had genuine fun with it, though.

Pretty much this. It's glitchy, it's got really goofy voice acting, the controls and level design are lacking, and the camera is really bad. But it's a lot of fun for me, and to the game's credit, it's very ambitious. 

I don't really enjoy looking at games as technical achievements first and foremost, and while I think there's a definite need to be objective at times, I also believe the most important part of any game is what you take away from the experience. Sonic Adventure is kind of a mess, but it's one I really like. 

I can't comment on Arin's viewpoints. I don't intend to really watch the videos, but I'm sure he makes a lot of justifiable complaints, probably in addition to a few completely ridiculous and indignant ones. But it's not as if he's the first or last person to criticize this game, so I don't really know why everyone makes a big deal out of him giving his opinion. 

[PKGaming]

Ok since this has already started I think this needs to be said, since I see a lot of people still dismissing this as being biased or trying to say GG were deliberately looking for problems.

There is this HUGE misconception about the GG video that they said SA1 was shit or terrible or something else just because they don't like Sonic or without reason... Well... they sorta did but unless you actually bother to watch the video you can't really fault their criticisms.

The video is just over 10 min long, with around 8 or 9 given to actual gameplay, during this time the following happens.

• During the Chaos 0 fight, the camera clips through the floor and makes the game look/feel sickly. 
• After the chaos 0 fight they laugh at Sonic's victory pose which to be honest does look a tad goofy.
• Then they comment on how stupid/silly this looks.

• Anyone want to argue with that? Also, this has always looked stupid, it has always looked silly, age has nothing to do with how stupid this looks.
• Then they comment on how weird the NPCs look/act in this section, and frankly, they're right, the kid they talk to does these really weird gestures, and how there are two NPC's standing together, who are exactly the same which looks odd, then there's that random lady stood in the pool which looks really strange.

But it's when the Emerald Coast stage starts that they really have problems. 

Then the level starts and... initially, they don't have any problems... then they get to a notoriously buggy part of the game, they enter a segment where if you push certain buttons Sonic will clip through the wall and die, this happens on the Gamecube version and the PS3/Xbox ports, unsure about the Dreamcast version. This happens 3 times in a row, they even deliberately slow down to try and avoid this but you can see the game effectively 'pushing' Sonic through the wall.

They then get past this and enter a scripted section, but they don't know it's scripted so they try to control Sonic... then shit hits the fan, Sonic randomly falls through the giant loop, then teleports to the top of the loop outside of the scripted segment, No seriously, he falls through he floor then flies to the top, it's the Sonic Adventure version of that Knuckles bit in their Sonic 06 paythrough, they can control Sonic on top of the loop, but because it's hard to get down, they fall through the stage and die resulting in a game over.

Now I can't remember when exactly they say this, but at one point there is a 'This is worse than Rise of Lyric.'

Considering all this happened in only 8 min of gameplay, how is this not a justified initial criticism of the game? 

All these problems have nothing to do with the game 'not aging well' these are problems which have always existed and always been in the game, with todays focus on technical performance, noway would any reviewer let the game get away with these problems. Hell pretty much all of their complaints are what we've been saying for years.

So let's look at this another way, say this was your first experience of playing a game, would you think it was acceptable? Regardless as to whether you played it in 1999 or 2015.

And if you think that you wouldn't find it terrible or laugh at how bad it was, I direct your attention to when we got that footage of Rise of Lyric a day before it was released. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yes! This is the reason why I used GG as an example. I'm well aware of how stupid the Grumps can be, but I can't honestly blame them for what happened in the video. These are issues that anyone could run into playing the game for the first time.

[Hero of Legend]

SA1 and 2 are like in my top 5 games of all time, but I am fully aware of how glitchy SA1 is. Thing is, the game's so wonderful that it's easy to look past them, you know they're there, but you accept them and laugh at them and don't let them turn your thoughts and make something you love all of the sudden be awful you know?

Rise of Lyric is a horribly bland game so there isn't that major saving grace. It's a bland game that's horrifically broken. Sonic '06 at least is almost a "so bad it's good" sort of thing. Maybe because of how bad the story is and what not, I don't know, on top of the obvious glitchfest. Maybe RoL will become '06's successor and have that same honor, I don't know. '06 has its great soundtrack though.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Hero of Legend

[Failinhearts]

I still had a great time with the majority of SA1. I enjoyed the soundtrack, Sonic segments, Tails segments, Knuckles segments, Gamma segments, even the Amy segments. Who could forget the Chao Garden as well? That was adorable.

So yeah, I can't speak for anyone else and the game is by no means perfect, but I still like Sonic Adventure.

[Phos]

It's a game that I wish they had built upon the success of rather than the failures. It has some conceptually good levels let down by a combination of "first 3D game" problems and and very poor (even for the day) technical prowess. That's how I've always thought of it, grumps or no. 

To put it more shortly, instead of getting better versions of speed highway's "at dawn" (act three), we got worse versions of the first two acts. 

Oh ueah, and it's always been my impression that the GameCube version was more prone to bugs such as falling through the ground. Don't recall that being an issue on Dreamcast, for me at least. 

Edited July 20, 2015 by Phos

[Brad]

Komo summed it up perfectly. It's just a product of its time. The first 3D adventure when 3D was relatively new - and almost certainly uncharted territory for Sonic.

It wouldn't be acceptable on any level today. I personally don't find it that enjoyable anymore either outside of the Sonic and Tails campaigns and see very little reason to revisit them. SADX's new coat of paint can't disguise those age related faults.

[shdowhunt60]

So... Yeah, can we get a remake of this game? I don't care by who, by fans or by SEGA, I just feel the game really needs it.

[Kuzu]

I severely doubt it. But yea, like Komo said, its just a product of its time that is horribly outdated by today's standards.

[PKGaming]

I also agree that Sonic Adventure needs a remake. It desperately needs one. And they need to change a LOT of stuff to make it presentable by today's standards.