Sonic Boom (Untagged Spoilers)

[Stardust]

3 hours ago, Mcbasilrocks said:

It really upsets me seeing the fanbase so totally divided over Boom, with a lot of volatility from both sides. If anything, a new direction for the series (complete with a CGI cartoon) should be something we all unite behind, because, sadly enough, the realistic truth is that Sonic is an ailing brand. If it's going to survive and maintain its relevance, it needs to do stuff like this, which is also why everyone's so frustrated at the show's mismanagement.

 

 

No, it doesn't. The writing in Boom is of very low quality. It's as if the producers made no effort to come up with an interesting cartoon. If the intent was to make a cartoon, Sega could hire a much more competent studio than Oui-do. As it is now, the show's terrible. Sonic has been turned into some sort of third rate stand up comedian, with awful puns being spewed every minute. 

However, I agree with you when you say that if Sonic as a brand is going to survive, Sega and Sonic Team need to change the current direction the franchise is heading. That doesn't mean, however, that they should settle for mediocrity.

 

[FriendBot]

And this is why comedy is incredibly subjective, someone like me would find Boom to be an absolute riot being pretty witty with its humor at times but with a good amount of other people, they would find it incredibly lame and stuff. 

Frankly, I'm just glad there's a comedic Sonic cartoon that's ACTUALLY funny (sorry AoStH, you may be weird as fuck and can be sweet at time; but you were never funny). 

[RLS Legacy]

16 minutes ago, Stardust said:

The writing in Boom is of very low quality.

I think at least in terms of sophistication, it's a good deal wittier than a lot of children's television. They keep the toilet humour to a bare minimum for one thing.

And the jokes are hardly aimed at kids most of the time; could the average 10 year old tell you what a Gilligan cut is? Or what 'fiscally motivated' means? Probably not, and yet these are two things that Boom has made gags out of. There are some really good creative minds and talents on the writers' team, so I don't think it's quite fair to label the writing 'low quality' based on all this.

If you want an example of crappy writing on kids' TV, check out practically anything ranging from the Powerpuff Girls reboot to every single goddamn tween sitcom on Disney Channel. That's bad quality incarnate.

[FriendBot]

Frankly, if you want low-quality Sonic cartoons; Sonic Underground is the king of shitstorm and if you want pretty lame comedy, AoStH (personally) tops it. 

It's so formuliac and predictable on its comedy, it's no longer funny and gets tiresome after 78 episodes of the same thing of "Sonic goes in disguise and tricks the literally braindead robot goons*

Though I will say "I'm over there" from the first episode is the best joke in the show's run but sadly, the best joke is in the first episode.

[blazefan519]

46 minutes ago, Stardust said:

That doesn't mean, however, that they should settle for mediocrity.

No one is settling for mediocrity. Could it be possible that people like this show because it is of good quality and the writing staff show a lot of care and heart in this series? According to you, that's not the case, which is ridiculous. This show does tackle more adult subjects, like in Just a Guy, where it talks about how overly sensitive today's culture is. And in a more recent episode Nutwork, where it talks about how media outlets show things that aren't important and should be focusing on more relevant issues. All of this would go over a child's head, but for older audiences, we understand what they'e talking about completely.

To just call the show terrible and to make blatant assumptions, like telling us that we settle for mediocrity is probably the lowest that you can go. If you don't like the show, fine, that's okay. But don't discredit who put their heart and soul into something or the people who like said content just because your taste is different than someone else's. That's just asinine.

I'm not the biggest fan of the Classic games, but I don't insult Classic fans for something that they truly enjoy. I think that the Adventure games are just okay, but I don't tell the people who love those games that they're settling for mediocrity and that they should accept better. In the vast world of opinions, people can like what they like. Comedy is subjective. Linking gameplay is subjective. There's no need to shove down people's throats how you feel about something.

[CottonCandy]

2 hours ago, Stardust said:

No, it doesn't. The writing in Boom is of very low quality. It's as if the producers made no effort to come up with an interesting cartoon. If the intent was to make a cartoon, Sega could hire a much more competent studio than Oui-do. As it is now, the show's terrible. Sonic has been turned into some sort of third rate stand up comedian, with awful puns being spewed every minute. 

However, I agree with you when you say that if Sonic as a brand is going to survive, Sega and Sonic Team need to change the current direction the franchise is heading. That doesn't mean, however, that they should settle for mediocrity.

 

Well, as other have said before, comedy is very, very opinionated. What I might find funny may be terrible  to you. What you might find funny may be terrible to me. There's nothing wrong to not like Sonic Boom. I completely understand why people are so against it. Personally, I can't recommend the show to a lot of people because of that. 

Look at how I felt about Sonic X or Underground. I think they're terrible shows but I wouldn't say they're completely unappealing to the masses or failures. There are people who enjoy x or underground. So it's a bit unfair for me to say that those two had zero effort put into them as fact. 

[SSF1991]

Quote

You can also criticize the direction a series is going. Also continuing doesnt even mean good.

Yes, and again, people can feel the direction the series is just fine. It goes both ways, and you keep ignoring this. How many times do I need to say "no one's angry at the criticism"?

Quote

But you can totally think its having a bad effect on the franchise. You can also think its not in sega's best interest. Rumor has it, sega themselves doesn't think sonic boom is in their continued best interest. Those are ok opinions and you can argue them. But you dont have to do either. You can think its not doing well and its bad. That's totally fine. No one has to like what you like, no one has to find it benificial either. That's all there is to it.

Yes, and people can argue that the show is good to them. Why is feeling good about a product a bad thing? Again, no one's angry at the criticism. People are angry that they aren't allowed to disagree with it. All your posts tell me is that people are allowed to legitimately hate on the show, but those who legitimately love the show are "blind fanboys" who "don't accept criticism" when that has been far from the case.

4 hours ago, Shadowlax said:

Sonic is a product, we dont need to unite behind anything, and what sonic needs is either decided by sega, the market or both. And whether people like it is another story. That's what that response is to . Not anything you wrote.

I realize that this was directed to someone else, but I still wish to throw some remarks in because I have quite a response to this.

I hated All Stars Racing Transformed, but it still ended up being a success. I was very critical of it when it came out, but was accepting of the fact that people love the game and I was all the more happy for Sonic because at least ASRT was doing well and I'm glad to see the franchise I love being successful. Did I feel it was going in a bad direction? No, because SEGA has proven to make great content and I know they can do it again (and they did). So, despite being vocal about my criticism, I was cool with the game due to its success. It is fine to be critical. Let SEGA know what you feel. It is also fine to cheer on Sonic when its being successful because, well, when you're a Sonic fan, would you not want the franchise you love to be successful? Why would you cheer for Sonic, a franchise you love, to fail? Because you didn't get what you wanted? That just feels like entitlement. Telling the 1,500,000 people who watched Boom on average in season one that you want Sonic Boom to fail (and believe me I've seen many TSSZ comments like this which is part of why I'm talking about this in the first place) because, to you, it sucks, is not fair to the many people who disagree. Why? Because you're not the only Sonic fan that exists. If you still love Sonic, and you still want to support him, then I think being happy for him when his products do well is just fine. It's not about "hating criticism" or even "uniting" to me. In my opinion, it's about keeping an open mind and realizing that you are not the only Sonic fan that exists. SEGA's not going to completely change their initiative because of just you. The Sonic community is just that, a community. Everyone has a say. And when you talk talk down to other fans for that, it's not going to help matters at all.

[Haalyle]

Honestly, I enjoy Sonic Boom. It basically got me out of just playing games. It's a good show and I like it. If it ends, I can see why, but I'd love it to continue.

[SonicWind]

I agree with everything said here. I know plenty of people who hate Boom, but you don't see me going around and biting their heads off because they think differently than me. I simply say "that's fine" and let them go on their way, because that's their opinion.

Differences of opinion will always be a reality, whether it's in the Sonic fanbase or real life in general. What matters is how you handle it.

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

In all honesty, I don't understand how this thread got stuck in this bizarre meta discussion of talking about opinions of opinions on Sonic Boom instead of, you know, talking about opinions on the show itself. I would understand it if someone in this thread's recent history had been insulting to Sonic Boom fans or made them feel like they have no right to their opinion, but the thing is, that hasn't happened. No one in this thread giving negative opinions about Boom has been mean about their opinion. If you feel like the assessment is unfair, biased, or bad in any way, it's obviously perfectly fine to state your opinion in that regard. But some people have really been overreacting, or saying things which seem to betray a lack of understanding of what other people have been saying. Here's a few examples:

7 hours ago, Mcbasilrocks said:

It's perfectly OK to have a negative opinion of Boom - even be vocal with that opinion - but to imply it's having a detrimental impact on the Sonic franchise and to refuse to recognise that it might be in SEGA's best interests is a bit silly.

You're allowed to have opinions on the quality of the show, but you're not allowed to have opinions on the direction of a series or whether or not an endeavor is likely to lead to long-term success? What kind of sense does that make? (Answer: None)

The only way this would ever apply is if people were literally arguing against facts, like saying Sonic Boom doesn't have a significant amount of fans or viewers, but "has a significant amount of fans or viewers" and "conducive to the long-term, broadly-defined success of a franchise and company" are two COMPLETELY different things.

3 hours ago, blazefan519 said:

To just call the show terrible and to make blatant assumptions, like telling us that we settle for mediocrity is probably the lowest that you can go. If you don't like the show, fine, that's okay. But don't discredit who put their heart and soul into something or the people who like said content just because your taste is different than someone else's. That's just asinine.

I'm not the biggest fan of the Classic games, but I don't insult Classic fans for something that they truly enjoy. I think that the Adventure games are just okay, but I don't tell the people who love those games that they're settling for mediocrity and that they should accept better. In the vast world of opinions, people can like what they like. Comedy is subjective. Linking gameplay is subjective. There's no need to shove down people's throats how you feel about something.

Slow down and read Stardust's post again. He wasn't claiming Boom fans are settling for mediocrity, but rather that Sega was. He wasn't criticizing your tastes or saying you were settling for mediocrity. In fact, he honestly wasn't being insulting in any way, shape, or form. He wasn't "shoving his opinion down people's throats". He was just stating them. If you actually slow down and read what he says, he doesn't say one single negative word about Sonic Boom fans.

2 hours ago, SSF1991 said:

Yes, and people can argue that the show is good to them. Why is feeling good about a product a bad thing? Again, no one's angry at the criticism. People are angry that they aren't allowed to disagree with it. All your posts tell me is that people are allowed to legitimately hate on the show, but those who legitimately love the show are "blind fanboys" who "don't accept criticism" when that has been far from the case.

...When has Shadowlax actually been insulting to Sonic Boom fans or indicated that they're "blind fanboys"? 'Cause I'm not really seeing it.

~~~

Now, there have been plenty of instances in this thread of people arguing with others' opinions in a sensible way. But it seems we've also gotten a little wrapped up in a weird meta discussion and in the process, I honestly feel like what non-Sonic Boom fans have been saying has been misunderstood, misinterpreted, and overreacted to in the process. There hasn't been anyone in this thread acting like Sonic Boom fans are bad for liking Sonic Boom or anything remotely of the sort, and yet there's been a reaction as though there has been. Maybe it's all just an innocent misunderstanding, but either way, it's got to end. Because frankly, this is pointless.

This is a thread for discussing a cartoon, people. Let's get back to doing that as quickly as possible, and let's try harder to understand what people are actually saying and not overreact, okay? I'm not saying the Boom-dislikers said nothing wrong or questionable, but they were never actually trying to demean Sonic Boom fans or acting like their opinions are invalid, so no one should react as though they had. Again, MANY people were perfectly okay and simply gave counter-arguments; let's stick to that, and stay away from this strange, and partially misunderstanding-and-overreaction-based, meta stuff.

[SSF1991]

I don't get why people have to be direct with their wording for things to be "seen". I mean, I get that it wasn't an outright insult (i.e. Shadowlax didn't outright say "blind fanboys"), but seeing how much it was shoved in my face about how fine it is for the Boom haters to have a point and criticize, despite me clearly saying that's not the point, it really rubbed me the wrong way. It's not what was said, it's how that stood out to me.

That and there was this.

10 hours ago, Shadowlax said:

I think you mention yourself earlier that you have a fan have no obligation towards the qualitative testing of something sega brings out. You are also as a fan  , or people like you are not obligated to like said thing. Whether you think people should like it or no, it doesn't make people like something, and that's just reality.

Maybe the awkwardly phrased English caused a misinterpretation or misunderstanding, I even spent a bit even trying to understand what it meant before reaching the conclusion I did in my reply, but that's where the debate I was involved with began to turn in that direction..

56 minutes ago, Monkey Destruction Switch said:

I'm not saying the Boom-dislikers said nothing wrong or questionable, but they were never actually trying to demean Sonic Boom fans or acting like their opinions are invalid, so no one should react as though they had.

Well, people disagree with that interpretation. And if they do feel that way, then I don't see why they're not allowed to react naturally to this. We will all interpret to posts in different ways, but that's not a bad thing at all. I learned that the hard way. lol

Either way, whether you feel it went that route or not is up to you. But I don't interpret things the way I do to overreact or anything. I do admit that sometimes I'll misinterpret things by accident, but eh. It happens. Nevertheless, the debate was rather peaceful so meh. There's nothing more for me to really say on the matter anyway, as we'd just be going around in circles, if we haven't already. But I do agree that this has been going on too long and, especially, off-topic/meta.

[Red Hot Jack]

Anyway, as Bill Freiberger pointed out, the ratings for Boomerang should be compared to the ratings of other shows on the same channel, not comparing them to CN which is a wider network.

[Sega DogTagz]

^which begs the question -- Does anyone know where to find those numbers?

[SonicWind]

I suppose that would make sense-- what would be considered successful ratings on Boomerang would definitely be a failure on CN. Perhaps it's best to think smaller and do as Bill says.

I still say there needs to be more reruns and promotion, though-- on Boomerang and CN-- and better timeslots for the latter. And SEGA should do their part, as well.

[RLS Legacy]

Oh, wow. Since this thread seems to have devolved and spiralled a little since my last post, I just wanna take a moment to apologise if I upset or rubbed anyone the wrong way earlier. Wasn't the goal. Sometimes my reliance on good old-fashioned practicality isn't what people want to hear, and I recognise that.

Regardless, I agree we should seek out some comparative Boomerang ratings. If Boom is at least doing really well on there, then we have ourselves a minor victory. Small steps, people. Small steps.

[MysteriousGirl 92]

If there was anything you could fix in Sonic Boom, what would it be?

[SonicWind]

I like the show the way it's been; I don't really feel that much needs changing, and it's improved quite a fair bit, judging from the season 2 episodes we've seen.

[MysteriousGirl 92]

SonicWind, what did you like about the show?

[SonicWind]

Well, it has its fair share of funny moments, for one.

And I'm liking the improved amounts of polish in visuals and animation season 2's had.

[MysteriousGirl 92]

I suppose so. I just feel like it has more bad moments than good moments. I'd rather have a good show with a few bad moments. But that's just me.

[RLS Legacy]

I suspect that a fair few people would prefer the show to have more good than bad, percentage-wise.

Out of academic curiosity, what do you consider the 'bad moments'?

[MysteriousGirl 92]

Terrible jokes, bad morals, awful character development (or, in this case, derailment) and excessive torture on characters that is hard to watch.

[FriendBot]

"excessive torture"? Are we even watching the same show?!

[MysteriousGirl 92]

Sorry, I meant emotional and mental torture. Infrequently physical (Alone Again. Unnaturally).

[FriendBot]

Emotional/mental torture? Again, are we watching the same show?

I don't see it, I really don't get why people take such an offense on how "mean spirited" the show is. You can't make comedy when everyone is being nice to one another, small jabs here and there does not equate to "torture", that's such a ridiculous accusation to make in my eyes.