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

[Komodin]

To put it simply, if Sonic Team expects me to pay $60 for their Sonic game, then I should expect them to put in all of their effort into producting it. At this point, having a game where only its gameplay is competent just won't cut it for me and more. I want a game that handles all fronts (gameplay, story/writing, visuals, music, etc.) well, and seeing as the development members at Sonic Team are being paid to produce quality products, it shouldn't be such a pipe dream to expect them to actually do do.

[Diogenes]

Who even thinks of stretchy punches or top heavy movement when they think of werewolves, anyways? Shouldn't be about agility more than anything?

Well stretchiness was pretty arbitrary, but being a bug hulking brute is a pretty reasonable interpretation of a werewolf, I'd say...

[Shaddy Zaphod]

I imagine professor Lupin, usually. But Sonic wouldn't seem like a werewolf in the first place. He just feels like...a really boring version of Sonic.

[Wraith]

I actually like how the Werehog's design came out and the stretchy arms were a neat idea. The execution was just all over the place, though. 

Wouldn't mind too much if they tried it again, but I can also understand why they wouldn't want to. 

[shdowhunt60]

 lag due to poorly optimized visuals.

I honestly have to disagree with this one. It isn't that Unleashed visuals were poorly optimized, it was that they were too advanced to begin with. By all means, if Unleashed was released on PC, then I have no doubt in my mind that it would have the same sort of reputation as Crysis got. And I also have no doubt that on a more modern system like the Xbox One and the PS4 that it would run at full-HD 60fps, easily.

Unleashed was basically made to sell the Hedgehog Engine, just like Crysis was made to sell Cryengine. And for the time, the Hedgehog Engine was pretty damn advanced. Sonic Team used to go around and give presentations to demonstrate the benefits of things like Global Illumination.

In fact, check out this presentation that the Sonic Retro guys found on the Hedgehog Engine. It showcases Camelot from Sonic and the Black Knight ported over to Unleashed Engine. It looks pretty unbelievable, and they did nothing to alter the geometry or the textures.

http://forums.sonicretro.org/index.php?showtopic=34585

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Being too advanced for the console they were on is still poorly optimized. Because if you don't have a computer good enough to run a game, it can be your fault. But they don't sell consoles that are more expensive and have better processors.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Shaddy

[Tara]

Indeed, part of the reason '06 was so broken was because it tried to implement more than the 360 could handle.  Knowing your console's limitations and accommodating for them is an important part of game design.  So I echo that Unleashed's visuals were poorly optimized in the context if its intended platform, which in turn does notably (but arguably not as severely as others) bring down the experience.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Honestly, if we're on the subject of remaking games, everything from SA1 to Lost World should be up for remakes to correct their faults.

Aside from Azoo's post on SA1, imagine that same artstyle and design choices brought over to SA2. Multiple optional characters where Tails is out of his walker, Eggman has more mech choices, and Knuckles and Rouge have a gameplay that works complementary to the overall Sonic gameplay instead of a treasure hunt. The story is made more coherent, GUN humans (can we also have anthro soldiers pls?) and mechs are more cartoony while their actions are still horrific, better use of Knuckles and Rouge's involvement in the plot, and so forth.

Heroes? Same as above, but with more variety for different teams so that they're less the same as each other (while of course keeping the general gameplay the same). Transfer some elements from the Adventures, make the teams and level design more flexible and accomodating so that you aren't SOL if you happen to lose a character, LESS FUCKING RAIL-GRINDING IN EVERY LEVEL AFTER RAIL CANYON, more competent story. You know the drill.

Shadow the Hedgehog? Actually pretty easy thing to do. First, give more focus to Sonic and Eggman instead of treating them as irrelevant, no amnesia for Shadow, and instead of Black Arms being aliens, why not have them as a rogue section of GUN responsible for commission Gerald for Project Shadow and the Eclipse Cannon? Also, no guns - you want Shadow to shoot people, the motherfucker can shoot lightning from his fingertips and nuke people with his body whythefuckwouldyougivehimagun!?!?!? And something needs to be done with those vehicles like the jeep that were flat out useless most of the time.

Sonic 06? ...okay, this will take a lot more work honestly, so lets move on.

Sonic Unleashed? Honestly had things well done, just make the Werehog move faster and hit harder (makes no sense how normal Sonic is suppose to be weaker than the Werehog, yet he can one-hit KO enemies that the Werehog needs several punches to kill). And redesign levels accordingly.

And you get the idea onward.

...Man, looking back, it all just really goes all over the place after SA2, doesn't it?

[Tara]

I think pretty much any game can have a remake, but I don't think any game outright needs a remake as desperately as SA1.  Recent ports of SA2 have been extremely kind to it, and while there are a number of things that the later games could rather easily improve upon with a dedicated remake, there is no game that has managed to simultaneously age so tremendously poorly while still having quite the fantastic legacy and (positive) overall impact on the series as SA1.  Not to mention, most of its design concepts and mechanics are still solid principles that make up the skeleton of what could definitely be an awesome game if it were made today.  Simply put, SA1 isn't a game that would just benefit from a remake, but in the age where we're drawing close to the 20th anniversary of the title, it desperately needs a remake.  It's probably the only game in the series that I would ever wholeheartedly support a complete remake for, as opposed to simply being apathetic but not against.

[LindseyWalker]

You know, I don't think it's a conspiracy theory to say that Arin is deliberately trying to make the game look as terrible as possible. Arin's persona hates the Sonic franchise, he doesn't like any of the games, and most of his fans hate the Sonic franchise too because it's in 'vogue' to criticise Sonic as a franchise lately and due to his influence. He's admitted that he intentionally plays off his persona for comedic effect in his videos, like virtually all Youtubers, so I really don't think it's a massive stretch to think that Arin is intentionally portraying the game in as poor a light as possible. I don't think he's intentionally running into glitches, but he is deliberately playing the game poorly and presenting the game in as poor a light as possible.

Sonic Adventure is a buggy game but it's nowhere near as buggy as Sonic Boom or Sonic 2006 (not even close) and in a normal playthrough I honestly rarely run into these crippling bugs. I don't think it has that much more crippling bugs than a game like Jax and Daxter or Spyro the Dragon. I don't even have any nostalgia for this game so it's not like I'm an apologist.

I just find it fascinating that people have this obsession with proving Sonic Adventure is a bad game.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not to mention, most of its design concepts and mechanics are still solid principles that make up the skeleton of what could definitely be an awesome game if it were made today.

Um, that is very debatable. Only parts solid and worthwhile would be Sonic's base gameplay. Everything else isn't that clean cut in what was the beginning of what we're now seeing the absolute worst of. Tails's flight and Knuckles's gliding were decent in their jumps to 3D, but have the potential to completely render level design either pointless, bland, or annoyingly cheap if not designed to match this. I'd argue that's why they had Tails race Sonic/Eggman or gave Knuckles the treasure hunting gameplay to accomodate that considering how that would work if you allowed them to run free in most of Sonic's normal "get to the goal" stages without them - at best, they'd likely break the levels to where Sonic is seen as the least interesting of the playable characters. Designing 3D levels to accommodate a character who can only run and jump, a character that can fly, and a character that can glide and climb is a daunting challenge when some can navigate better through the game than others.

And with that said, while it would without a doubt benefit from a competent remake that would work around those very flaws, SA1 isn't that desperately in need of one than any other game after it. The reason being that if you could overhaul SA1 to be even better than it originally was, you'd go even further using it as a springboard to do the same to the succeeding games like Heroes (and to a stretch ShTH AND 06) after having used SA1 as a successful testbed to transfer those principles onto them - you'd essentially be fixing the identity crisis the games are currently suffering from, so it be doing a much bigger favor continuing this overhaul with other titles than just leaving it at SA1.

Edited August 9, 2015 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Tara]

I was primarily referring to Sonic's gameplay style.  Apologies for not making that clear.

I fail to see the reasoning behind remaking one of the most beloved games in the franchise would necessitate or make plausible doing the same for games with that were either significantly less well received or just weren't quite as important to Sonic's history to begin with.  As I said, I'm not against it, but if they did remake SA1 and use it to springboard into other games, I would rather they use it to make new titles in SA1's vein and expanding upon the continuity thusly.  But that's just me.

[Diogenes]

And with that said, while it would without a doubt benefit from a competent remake that would work around those very flaws, SA1 isn't that desperately in need of one than any other game after it. The reason being that if you could overhaul SA1 to be even better than it originally was, you'd go even further using it as a springboard to do the same to the succeeding games like Heroes (and to a stretch ShTH AND 06) after having used SA1 as a successful testbed to transfer those principles onto them - you'd essentially be fixing the identity crisis the games are currently suffering from, so it be doing a much bigger favor continuing this overhaul with other titles than just leaving it at SA1.

Ugh, no, god, that's a fucking nightmare. I could roll with an SA remake because I feel the ratio of good ideas to bad execution is pretty high, but the idea of them spending years trying to salvage even more deeply flawed games as if they could somehow erase the effects of the originals is like looking directly into hell.

[C.J]

Who even thinks of stretchy punches or top heavy movement when they think of werewolves, anyways?

Shouldn't be about agility more than anything?

I agree but I actually think the Werehog could have had the best of both worlds. Off topic but In terms of agility, I think we saw glimspes of this in a few cutscenes where Sonic was quite swift and quick in his werehog form (The scene where he rescued Amy and the scene where caught Chip). Gameplay wise, the jumping sections are quite slow and they didn't really execute or develop his agiltiy any further than his dash move. I think while sticking with the same werewolf interpretation, they could have also have added some athleticness/flexibility to him. Maybe it would have been a bit rough around the edges but I do feel that there was untapped potential there. The idea of stretchy arms, increased physical strength with that type of speed blended together could have had potential to create some fun action events and sequences. While still slower than his regular form, the pacing could have been much faster like the way it was demonstrated in those cutscenes.

 

 

 

[LindseyWalker]

Ugh, no, god, that's a fucking nightmare. I could roll with an SA remake because I feel the ratio of good ideas to bad execution is pretty high, but the idea of them spending years trying to salvage even more deeply flawed games as if they could somehow erase the effects of the originals is like looking directly into hell.

I think it would be better to make a spiritual remake rather than an actual remake of Sonic Adventure anyway. It's better to salvage the elements of Sonic Adventue that are actually conceptually good (i.e. Sonic's gameplay) rather than remake the whole troubled game.

[azoo]

There are four reasons I see SA1 deserving a remake that set it apart from the other games that followed it:

1 ) It was the first 3D Sonic game, and thus it's significance in the series is not only really high, but it's significance to the gaming community is too. The title is practically iconic at this point. It was a game that represented not only the beginning of the 'modern' Sonic but Sega's last great era as a console developer.

2 ) For it's time it was a very well-loved and well-recieved game, but is now viewed as a very glitchy, poorly aged and (to some) barely playable title. Standards have changed so much for gamers that many players try going back to what they viewed as an amazing game and now think of it as much worse than they remembered, which sours the experience.

3 ) The story, gameplay, and overall scope of Adventure is one of the most ambitious the series has ever had (as well as a natural evolution of the buildup in the Genesis titles), and to remake it would be to rekindle that ambition and breathe new life into not only the remake, but probably the series as a whole. Especially if it's well recieved.

4 ) The majority of the problems with the game are related to aging and time/budget constraint and not poor design. The only actually very poor design decision made in the game was Big's gameplay, and since that's just one thing to fix (and a small one at that, given Big's relevance to the game), it's not quite a big deal.

Games like Sonic Adventure 2 and onward being remade would not only be excessive to worry about remaking as well, but also be different in the case that UNLIKE Adventure, it's issues are very much not related to aging and time/budget constraints, but just poor game design. There'd be a significant amount more than one thing that'd need a total rehaul in an Adventure 2 remake, and any game past that has so many design flaws and major problems that'd need redoing that you'd be better off making new games that stayed the hell away from them.

Suggesting games past SA1 deserve a remake too would make one game's detour into remaking a classic for a modern audience become some long-winded spiral into dwelling on fixing past mistakes that can't be forgotten. Adventure only has one part people don't remember fondly, and it's not heavily ingrained into the rest of the game. The others? Not so much.

That also said, SA2 is another game that has aged well enough and had well-handled enough ports that it doesn't really need an update, either. The Steam/PS3/360 version of SA2 and the Steam/PS3/360 version of SA1 are world's apart in quality, and I'm talking about both the game and the port.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Azoo

[LindseyWalker]

There are four reasons I see SA1 deserving a remake that set it apart from the other games that followed it:

1 ) It was the first 3D Sonic game, and thus it's significance in the series is not only really high, but it's significance to the gaming community is too. The title is practically iconic at this point. It was a game that represented not only the beginning of the 'modern' Sonic but Sega's last great era as a console developer.

2 ) For it's time it was a very well-loved and well-recieved game, but is now viewed as a very glitchy, poorly aged and (to some) barely playable title. Standards have changed so much for gamers that many players try going back to what they viewed as an amazing game and now think of it as much worse than they remembered, which sours the experience.

3 ) The story, gameplay, and overall scope of Adventure is one of the most ambitious the series has ever had (as well as a natural evolution of the buildup in the Genesis titles), and to remake it would be to rekindle that ambition and breathe new life into not only the remake, but probably the series as a whole. Especially if it's well recieved.

4 ) The majority of the problems with the game are related to aging and time/budget constraint and not poor design. The only actually very poor design decision made in the game was Big's gameplay, and since that's just one thing to fix (and a small one at that, given Big's relevance to the game), it's not quite a big deal.

Games like Sonic Adventure 2 and onward being remade would not only be excessive to worry about remaking as well, but also be different in the case that UNLIKE Adventure, it's issues are very much not related to aging and time/budget constraints, but just poor game design. There'd be a significant amount more than one thing that'd need a total rehaul in an Adventure 2 remake, and any game past that has so many design flaws and major problems that'd need redoing that you'd be better off making new games that stayed the hell away from them.

Suggesting games past SA1 deserve a remake too would make one game's detour into remaking a classic for a modern audience become some long-winded spiral into dwelling on fixing past mistakes that can't be forgotten. Adventure only has one part people don't remember fondly, and it's not heavily ingrained into the rest of the game. The others? Not so much.

That also said, SA2 is another game that has aged well enough and had well-handled enough ports that it doesn't really need an update, either. The Steam/PS3/360 version of SA2 and the Steam/PS3/360 version of SA1 are world's apart in quality, and I'm talking about both the game and the port.

You know, I see this kind of sentiment a lot in the Sonic fanbase and it really does confuse me. I'm not trying to be mean here, but an actual Sonic Adventure remake makes no sense at all if you want a good game. It would probably sell well, I would give it that. I'm going to go over all your points and try to say what I mean.

1) Whilst it's a significant game I don't believe it needs a full out remake because there are far more significant games in the series. What about that long requested Sonic 2 3D remake? I'm pretty sure that would top a Sonic Adventure game in terms of its significance. The biggest draw of Generations in its marketing was playing the Megadrive levels reimagined in 3D. I'm not going to deny that Adventure was a significant game, but I don't think it's unusually pressing.

2) Part of the reason it's aged are due to fundamentally poor design decisions. There's only so many ways you can polish the genre roulette, it's just a bad design decision that's a major aspect of the game. I know everyone likes to take the piss out of Big the Cat, but it's a real problem in the game. Why remake all the poor alternate game-styles when Sonic's gameplay is far superior to all of them? If you aren't putting the genre roulette in, you aren't really remaking Sonic Adventure. It's as simple as that.

3) I agree with you on this.But we don't need a remake for that, just a spiritual successor.

4) Not true. Yes, a lot of the flaws of the game are due to the infamous bugs (a product of aging) but there are clear design flaws that are integral to Sonic Adventure. I've already talked about Genre Roulette, and it doesn't just come down to Big, it affects everyone other than Sonic and Tails (and I'm being generous letting Tails off the hook). 

I don't feel Adventure 2 is victim to poor game design any more than the original Adventure is and this argument always confuses me. The only way Adventure 2 is 'worse' than Adventure 1 is due to linearity. Yes, Adventure 2 is more linear than Adventure 1 but that being a negative is only subjective. I like the fact Sonic's levels in Adventure 2 feel a lot more concise and focused and I appreciate how every level is unique to every character so the Speed levels are really built with Sonic's moves in mind. Yes, the Emerald Hunting is worse in Adventure 2, but the alternate gamestyles have always sucked and at least Adventure 2 had 1/3rd of the game as Sonic rather than Adventure 1 having 1/6th of the game as Sonic. Admittedly, Adventure 1 had bigger levels for Sonic, but I still think Adventure 2 had more gameplay with the Speed Sections than Adventure 1 did in ratio.

Seriously, I'm yet to hear a convincing argument that Adventure 2 is victim to design flaws more than Adventure 1 is. I can understand why people would prefer the open nature of Sonic's levels, but that's just their subjective opinion and it doesn't automatically make the game objectively better than Adventure 2, as though somehow it's less victim to fundamental design flaws.

I'd rather see a spiritual successor. Let's look at what the Adventure titles did well and use that as a conceptual springboard, but please, let's not bring back games that have such serious design flaws. It's wasted opportunity. 

[Kuzu]

Sup lil bitches, I kinda bowed out of here because of that stupid "Sonic Adventure was never good" argument, but since we've moved on from that.

Yea, I'd definitely be down with a Sonic Adventure remake; I don't think it necessarily "deserves" it more than any other game, but it is the game I would definitely like to see brought up to modern standards. Most of its problems could be easily solved by today's technology and tweaking the gameplay to accommodate the modern playstyles. Like, some sort of medium between Lost World and Generations? I'd definitely be down for that. Up to date voice acting and remixes of all of the soundtrack(imagine dat Windy Valley remix orz :V).

But an SA2 remake would be fine too, I just don't want it as badly.

[azoo]

 

1) Whilst it's a significant game I don't believe it needs a full out remake because there are far more significant games in the series. What about that long requested Sonic 2 3D remake? I'm pretty sure that would top a Sonic Adventure game in terms of its significance. The biggest draw of Generations in its marketing was playing the Megadrive levels reimagined in 3D. I'm not going to deny that Adventure was a significant game, but I don't think it's unusually pressing.

2) Part of the reason it's aged are due to fundamentally poor design decisions. There's only so many ways you can polish the genre roulette, it's just a bad design decision that's a major aspect of the game. I know everyone likes to take the piss out of Big the Cat, but it's a real problem in the game. Why remake all the poor alternate game-styles when Sonic's gameplay is far superior to all of them? If you aren't putting the genre roulette in, you aren't really remaking Sonic Adventure. It's as simple as that.

3) I agree with you on this.But we don't need a remake for that, just a spiritual successor.

4) Not true. Yes, a lot of the flaws of the game are due to the infamous bugs (a product of aging) but there are clear design flaws that are integral to Sonic Adventure. I've already talked about Genre Roulette, and it doesn't just come down to Big, it affects everyone other than Sonic and Tails (and I'm being generous letting Tails off the hook). 

I don't feel Adventure 2 is victim to poor game design any more than the original Adventure is and this argument always confuses me. The only way Adventure 2 is 'worse' than Adventure 1 is due to linearity. Yes, Adventure 2 is more linear than Adventure 1 but that being a negative is only subjective. I like the fact Sonic's levels in Adventure 2 feel a lot more concise and focused and I appreciate how every level is unique to every character so the Speed levels are really built with Sonic's moves in mind. Yes, the Emerald Hunting is worse in Adventure 2, but the alternate gamestyles have always sucked and at least Adventure 2 had 1/3rd of the game as Sonic rather than Adventure 1 having 1/6th of the game as Sonic. Admittedly, Adventure 1 had bigger levels for Sonic, but I still think Adventure 2 had more gameplay with the Speed Sections than Adventure 1 did in ratio.

Seriously, I'm yet to hear a convincing argument that Adventure 2 is victim to design flaws more than Adventure 1 is. I can understand why people would prefer the open nature of Sonic's levels, but that's just their subjective opinion and it doesn't automatically make the game objectively better than Adventure 2, as though somehow it's less victim to fundamental design flaws.

I'd rather see a spiritual successor. Let's look at what the Adventure titles did well and use that as a conceptual springboard, but please, let's not bring back games that have such serious design flaws. It's wasted opportunity. 

1 ) I don't know who's honestly been asking for a 3D version of Sonic 2. Even if they did, there's no point. The classics have aged very, very well and remain great. They don't need full-on remakes, besides those remasters Taxman & Stealth were doing.

And yeah, Adventure is very significant, if even not considered significant enough. It was probably the most major turning point the series took besides being created: going 3D and embracing story/atmosphere on the forefront, and (for it's time) doing a pretty dang good job at it.

2 ) I already mentioned that Big's gameplay was a problem. I haven't denied that, and mentioned in my own post that it'd be one thing they'd have to fix. However the genre roulette in SA1 as a whole wasn't even that extreme at all, as almost everyone except Big played mostly like Sonic but with different objectives and attributes/abilities. And while that sounds different enough, their movement was still momentum-based and their jumping mechanics all still felt the same, so it was the same basic controls despite that.

Adventure 2, in comparison, plays like 3 completely different games. Sonic and Shadow are smoother-ish in movement, Knuckles and Rouge have very twitchy and overwhelmingly responsive controls, and Tails and Eggman play like clunky mechs; with the latter two gameplay styles not even trying to reserve any Sonic-isms to how they control. That's what makes them feel so out of place, combined with the changes also made to accomodate to their style (having no slopes/loops in those stages, for one).

And that's why besides Big, the other characters honestly don't bother me too much. Sure, Amy could go with being a little bit faster, but that's about all I got to complain about.

3 ) And I don't disagree with that. I'll elaborate on that in a second.

4 ) Then all this really comes down to perception on if you think Adventure 2 is a better game in regards to concepts/ideas than the first Adventure or not. I don't think it is, but you do. Different strokes, and that's fine.

Honestly, my entire point here isn't that I need a remake of Adventure, nor that I wouldn't prefer a spiritual successor that takes a lot of the same ideas and improves it. Let's be real here, I'd prefer that over anything else. 

What I am saying though is that if we were ever given the opportunity to see a Sonic game remade, Adventure is the game that deserves a remake over any of the other choices there could be. It's got a lot to give, and despite having more on the good side of good:bad ratio than it in terms of ideas (IMO), it hasn't lasted through the test of time nearly as well as it's sequel has. So while a lot of games being remade (Heroes, 06, etc) would be a lost cause to anybody except probably the fanbase, Adventure is the only one I see that's worth it.

tl;dr I'm not saying it's necessary. I'm saying it'd be nice.

 

Edited August 9, 2015 by Azoo

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Ugh, no, god, that's a fucking nightmare. I could roll with an SA remake because I feel the ratio of good ideas to bad execution is pretty high, but the idea of them spending years trying to salvage even more deeply flawed games as if they could somehow erase the effects of the originals is like looking directly into hell.

---

Diogenes, are you shitting me? You have been one of the most forefront members arguing that a flat out reboot could improve the franchise, even holding some semblance of that to this day. Yet I suggest something that's strongly akin to that, for practically the same reasons, and somehow it's a nightmare? Why the U-turn now?

 Nevermind that you guys completely missed my point. I'm not talking about salvaging what the games post-SA2 have brought, but to continue the ideas and mechanics that would have been brought forth after remaking SA1 in remakes of successive games. So I fail to see how that would look like hell. SA2 especially considering there's far less to overhaul than with SA1 with it having already stripped down a good chunk of SA1's worse parts - that's suspciously coming off like the usual fare of SA2 bashing to me.

[Diogenes]

Diogenes, are you shitting me? You have been one of the most forefront members arguing that a flat out reboot could improve the franchise, even holding some semblance of that to this day. Yet I suggest something that's strongly akin to that, for practically the same reasons, and somehow it's a nightmare? Why the U-turn now?

There's no U-turn. Remakes are not a reboot. A reboot would be to go back to the start, strip out most of the existing expectations for the series, and try to put the basic pieces together in a way that actually makes sense (rather than just accumulating over time like a katamari). If you wanted to include Shadow, for example, in the rebooted series, you wouldn't "remake" SA2, you'd rewrite Shadow to fit the new 'verse and write a new story to introduce him, one that has no obligation to even remotely resemble SA2's story.

Shit, man, in the first post of mine you linked I said the most important thing is to not cling to the old continuity. Setting out to recreate/"fix" specific games is exactly that mistake.

[LindseyWalker]

Diogenes, are you shitting me? You have been one of the most forefront members arguing that a flat out reboot could improve the franchise, even holding some semblance of that to this day. Yet I suggest something that's strongly akin to that, for practically the same reasons, and somehow it's a nightmare? Why the U-turn now?

He said that remaking 3D games post Sonic Adventure would be a nightmare, not remaking Sonic Adventure.

I could roll with an SA remake because I feel the ratio of good ideas to bad execution is pretty high, but the idea of them spending years trying to salvage even more deeply flawed games as if they could somehow erase the effects of the originals is like looking directly into hell.

He's addressing this point of yours specifically, that they could use a Sonic Adventure remake as a springboard to remake the other 3D titles like Heroes, Shadow and even Sonic 06:

The reason being that if you could overhaul SA1 to be even better than it originally was, you'd go even further using it as a springboard to do the same to the succeeding games like Heroes (and to a stretch ShTH AND 06) after having used SA1 as a successful testbed to transfer those principles onto them - you'd essentially be fixing the identity crisis the games are currently suffering from, so it be doing a much bigger favor continuing this overhaul with other titles than just leaving it at SA1.

I'm not sure if this is all some big misunderstanding. Are you saying you want games like Heroes or Shadow to be remade, because that's the message some of us are getting. If you just mean that we could use the lessons learnt from remaking Sonic Adventure on new titles then I think we would be cool with that

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Adventure 2 deserves a remake a bit less than 1, but it could still do really well. In fact, it would probably sell better regardless. And honestly, I don't think Heroes would be so bad to remake. It's not remembered generally badly like the 3D games after it, and in terms of actual design, there's much less to do when you think about it. A lot of the game's problems came more from the controls or structure than core gameplay design.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

There's no U-turn. Remakes are not a reboot. A reboot would be to go back to the start, strip out most of the existing expectations for the series, and try to put the basic pieces together in a way that actually makes sense (rather than just accumulating over time like a katamari). If you wanted to include Shadow, for example, in the rebooted series, you wouldn't "remake" SA2, you'd rewrite Shadow to fit the new 'verse and write a new story to introduce him, one that has no obligation to even remotely resemble SA2's story.

Shit, man, in the first post of mine you linked I said the most important thing is to not cling to the old continuity. Setting out to recreate/"fix" specific games is exactly that mistake.

In the point that I'm making, that's hardly any different from a remake of those titles considering it would be done at the start and putting them together in a way to make sense. And the line blurs a lot: some of the elements that got mucked up would be tossed out for something else (like rewriting the entirety of ShTH as I made in my initial point) while other elements that worked would be preserved, such as the Adventure titles, which would be the only part of the old continuity "clung to" but with better clarity and coherence. And the intent was never to recreate games like ShTH or Sonic 06 in the same form as we originally had them, but to do them over completely from scratch, story, gameplay, even the game's very name, etc, while using lessons learned from a recreated SA1 to build from. In otherwords, while a remade SA1/2 would be an enhanced version that fixes their problems, beyond those two games would be different, so a new ShTH =/= original ShTH, for example.

[KHCast]

So then why not just make a completely new game that reboots, that doesn't have any ties a previous bad game, instead of waste assets and money completely remaking games that were duds? It's literally like those people that want a 06 remake. You're basically asking for a new game.