According to Sega's Twitter, they don't hold the rights to SatAM

[Blazey Firekitty]

I'll still hold out hope for a SatAM-based spin-off someday :3 Weirder things have happened.

Like Sonic beginning a game by swallowing a chili dog whole as if he were a duck.XD

[Greg the Fancat]

Yes, I meant homage - thank you Kitty.

End of the day SEGA are not going to tear up their game formats just so you can have Sally Acorn in a game Greg, its not going to change and thats me out of this topic. By all means keep complaining you cannot have your way.

Uh.... Hmm.... Right then. Moving on.

So then, judging from what Nuckles just said, apparently SEGA could do an Archie Sonic comic game if they wanted to.... But they won't.

Fine... After all, reinventing Sonic for the umpteenth time is better than building off of a comic and show that has remained concsistent for years (note the sarcasm). Aw well... I should be happy. Because then I wouldn't have to worry about Sonic Team butchering the Freedom Fighters and all other characters. But that's only because of SEGA's disregard for quality because they want to aim DIRECTLY at the '12 and under' group.

Sigh... I need to think some things over.

[Saint Nathan]

Oh really?

http://img198.imageshack.us/i/sally3.jpg/

http://img39.imageshack.us/i/sally1a.jpg/

http://img198.imageshack.us/i/sally2q.jpg/

Official picture from SEGA World amusement Park in Sydney, Australia. Photo was taken in 1996. SEGA of Japan DID endorse this.

So..... Hey, you know.... AAUK, you're from Europe being in the UK. Here is a statue from Europe from 1991.

Were you aware of this?

So.... Yes, SEGA owns the cast of the Freedom Fighters.

Just because they have the image does not mean they own it. AoSTH was the FACE of Sonic for a while.

Also, hint for ya, Sally Acorn was the name of the animal that lept out of badnicks BEFORE AoSTH. So they own the trights to her name at least, but not to both seperate charecters.

[Miko]

They probably don't own the distribution rights. That doesn't mean they have no right to the storyline or characters.

[redmenace]

Just because they have the image does not mean they own it. AoSTH was the FACE of Sonic for a while.

Also, hint for ya, Sally Acorn was the name of the animal that lept out of badnicks BEFORE AoSTH. So they own the trights to her name at least, but not to both seperate charecters.

Actually, only on SEGA West and that design only survived in Europe. She was a man in Japan, named Ricky. So in the original story, Sally Acorn never existed. What existed was Ricky.

A man. Think about that.

[FeathersMcGraw]

Yeah, the squirrel from the early games was called Ricky everywhere, the Sally Acorn that ceramic statue depicts is the one from the Fleetway comics, who was essentially just a small bit-part character who spouted the usual "Robotnik's ruining our home!" stuff for a few issues.

Edited August 26, 2009 by FeathersMcGraw

[Miko]

Actually, only on SEGA West and that design only survived in Europe. She was a man in Japan, named Ricky. So in the original story, Sally Acorn never existed. What existed was Ricky.

I cringe when people talk as though one storyline for the games was somehow more "original" but I do think that both sides had the first squirrel as a guy. Does this mean Sonic/Sally qualifies as yaoi to all the people who justify it being "first"

...I can see that last comment getting blown way out of proportion.

They didn't change the games format for Amy. More like they changed Amy (from Sonic CD) from her manga self, so she can fit into the games the way they wanted

Manga Amy came first. Even if we ignore publishing dates all the game characters were drawn on-model. Amy isn't because Amy hadn't been created. And even if we want to ignore Amy, there's no way you're getting around Charmy. The manga appeared many years before Charmy made an appearance in Chaotix and the design was quite different.

Edited August 26, 2009 by Miko

[Solly]

Fine... After all, reinventing Sonic for the umpteenth time is better than building off of a comic and show that has remained concsistent for years (note the sarcasm). Aw well... I should be happy. Because then I wouldn't have to worry about Sonic Team butchering the Freedom Fighters and all other characters. But that's only because of SEGA's disregard for quality because they want to aim DIRECTLY at the '12 and under' group.

Don't really see how introducing the Freedom Fighters will suddenly improve the quality.

Yes, I meant homage - thank you Kitty.

End of the day SEGA are not going to tear up their game formats just so you can have Sally Acorn in a game Greg, its not going to change and thats me out of this topic. By all means keep complaining you cannot have your way.

Your signature goes hand-in-hand with this post. Edited August 26, 2009 by The Soldier

[Blazey Firekitty]

I cringe when people talk as though one storyline for the games was somehow more "original" but I do think that both sides had the first squirrel as a guy. Does this mean Sonic/Sally qualifies as yaoi to all the people who justify it being "first"

...I can see that last comment getting blown way out of proportion.

It's official. Sally Acorn is the Sonic fandom's equivalent of Birdo.

Male? Female? Who knows?

[Greg the Fancat]

Uh huh.... Yeah.... With or without Freedom Fighters, we don't need a reinvention with every new title. My point still stands about the reinventing of this franchise.

It's official. Sally Acorn is the Sonic fandom's equivalent of Birdo.

Male? Female? Who knows?

No.

[Solly]

Uh huh.... Yeah.... With or without Freedom Fighters, we don't need a reinvention with every new title. My point still stands about the reinventing of this franchise.

Which is why I don't understand you connecting the Archie comics with the franchise being reinvented. You can create consistency between games(in terms of setting and gameplay) without any elements of the comics at all.

[Mikeikon]

Yeah, the squirrel from the early games was called Ricky everywhere, the Sally Acorn that ceramic statue depicts is the one from the Fleetway comics, who was essentially just a small bit-part character who spouted the usual "Robotnik's ruining our home!" stuff for a few issues.

The American Sonic Bible has her as "Sally Acorn," and the 1991 Promo comic pictures her with a pink bow on her head. She's "Sally Acorn" in the UK Stay Sonic handbook as well. So no, she was never known as "Ricky" in the west.

Doesn't count, Sega threw all that out when Sonic Adventure came about, EXCEPT for Eggman having the Robotnik surname, but that's about it.

"Doesn't count?"

So they can't do it again because they already did it before?

If Sega scrapped the Adventure universe for SatAM/Archie (which, to be clear, isn't what we're arguing for in the first place) you wouldn't consider it legit... yet, you acknowledge that that's exactly what happened back in 1999, and you have no qualms about it. That doesn't add up.

End of the day SEGA are not going to tear up their game formats just so you can have Sally Acorn in a game Greg, its not going to change and thats me out of this topic. By all means keep complaining you cannot have your way.

It's disappointing to hear something like this coming from you. Especially since you know you're fighting against an argument that was never made. Perhaps you don't realize how utterly jerk-ish that sounds.

[KittyNakajima]

The American Sonic Bible has her as "Sally Acorn," and the 1991 Promo comic pictures her with a pink bow on her head. She's "Sally Acorn" in the UK Stay Sonic handbook as well. So no, she was never known as "Ricky" in the west.

"Doesn't count?"

So they can't do it again because they already did it before?

If Sega scrapped the Adventure universe for SatAM/Archie (which, to be clear, isn't what we're arguing for in the first place) you wouldn't consider it legit... yet, you acknowledge that that's exactly what happened back in 1999, and you have no qualms about it. That doesn't add up.

It's disappointing to hear something like this coming from you. Especially since you know you're fighting against an argument that was never made. Perhaps you don't realize how utterly jerk-ish that sounds.

This topic, again? Geez...

Anyway, I won't get into what I've said before, but I will say in AAUK's defense that the only reason he probably said it was because some folks came into this topic seeing that silly little tweet as Sega saying they don't own the rights to the characters/story featured in SatAM or something of the like. Some folks took to having to drag some massive fan wank huevos around to "prove" in some shape or form that SEGA did indeed own the characters, when that was never the point of the tweet to begin with.

Just a simple misunderstanding blown into something bigger than it really was and that's that.

[Mikeikon]

Anyway, I won't get into what I've said before, but I will say in AAUK's defense that the only reason he probably said it was because some folks came into this topic seeing that silly little tweet as Sega saying they don't own the rights to the characters/story featured in SatAM or something of the like. Some folks took to having to drag some massive fan wank huevos around to "prove" in some shape or form that SEGA did indeed own the characters, when that was never the point of the tweet to begin with.

Just a simple misunderstanding blown into something bigger than it really was and that's that.

You're right--he never said that Sega didn't own the characters, but some people took it that way. So what's wrong with some SatAM fans trying to correct the misunderstanding? AAUK's last comment didn't exactly serve to diffuse the issue.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Mikeikon

[Frieza]

Maybe Sega can't create DVDs of the cartoon, but i think they still could use the charecters from the series if they wanted to in a game.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Frieza

[Mikeikon]

Maybe Sega can't create DVDs of the cartoon, but i think they still could use the charecters from the series if they wanted to in a game.

Yes. They can't create DVDs of it because Shout Factory currently owns the DVD rights. That's all AAUK was saying.

(And as we can see, people are still confused about this)

[Genesis]

"Doesn't count?"

So they can't do it again because they already did it before?

If Sega scrapped the Adventure universe for SatAM/Archie (which, to be clear, isn't what we're arguing for in the first place) you wouldn't consider it legit... yet, you acknowledge that that's exactly what happened back in 1999, and you have no qualms about it. That doesn't add up.

Clearly if Sega did that, then yeah SatAm would be legit. They didn't say it wouldn't be IF that were to happen. But since it's obvious that hasn't happened, no it doesn't count. SatAm was never canon to the games to being with. Anybody can clearly see SatAm and the games prior to SA1 had nothing to do with each other in terms of characters and story. (with the exception of Sonic Spinball.) I don't see why argue a subject that no one was really talking about. No one is saying they can't do it again. In fact there is another topic here talking about what if Sonic got another reboot and should it happen or not.

It's disappointing to hear something like this coming from you. Especially since you know you're fighting against an argument that was never made. Perhaps you don't realize how utterly jerk-ish that sounds.

Oh come on... He didn't sound jerkish at all. Greg made it obvious that he wanted Sally/Freedom Fighters in the games in his previous posts and AAUK responded to it. A concerned fan misunderstanding is one thing. Blowing things out of proportion for things that weren't even said (like Sega not owning the characters) is another. AAUK was just being honest. it's true people don't always get their way, thats not being harsh, that just how life is.

EDIT:

(And as we can see, people are still confused about this)

Who's fault is that? This topic already made it clear that Sega could not release the DVDs or the show if they wanted to. AAUK said that (I think he said it twice) as well as some of the other members of this forum.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Genesis

[Mikeikon]

Who's fault is that? This topic already made it clear that Sega could not release the DVDs or the show if they wanted to. AAUK said that (I think he said it twice) as well as some of the other members of this forum.

Who's fault is that? I don't know, willful ignorance, perhaps. People not reading carefully enough. It's certainly not the fault of SatAM fans trying to set the record straight in response to all this "OMG YES!! SEGA DOESN'T OWN SATAM!"

Edited September 5, 2009 by Mikeikon

[KittyNakajima]

Who's fault is that? I don't know, willful ignorance, perhaps. People not reading carefully enough. It's certainly not the fault of SatAM fans trying to set the record straight in response to all this "OMG YES!! SEGA DOESN'T OWN SATAM!"

Um...okay? Tone over the internet can be hard to gauge, but I was pretty sure those type of remarks were highly sarcastic/jestful in nature. The only reason this would be an issue would be because some of the over eager fans started rolling in wanting to throw their heuvos around and well...yeah. I've already explained it before. I'm starting to sound like a broken record.

Meh. This is getting silly. The misunderstanding as far as I can see has been cleared up and trying to bring it up again is just going in circles. Maybe this topic should be closed to avoid it kicking up again due to said ignorance.

[Greg the Fancat]

Hey! Hey! Hey! You know, I now have a big question that I want AAUK to answer.

What canon is there to the games anyway? No, think about this. Ever since Sonic Heroes, SEGA has been going on about reinventing the series, yet they can never seem to grow used to one single universe. The only time we ever had a set universe recently was the Adventure series and Shadow the Hedgehog (to an extent). As shocking as it is, SEGA has made more multiverses than imaginably possible, moreso than Dic did back in the 90s. So now.... I wonder....

...Why would we have to tear up the game formats to have a SatAM themed game? Answer me that. As it seems, you just told me that you want to sweep anything and everything SatAM under the carpet and forget it ever existed. Well, AAUK... I demand an answer. If SEGA owns the characters, then how come they haven't made use of them in the games, seeing as Sonic doesn't truly have a set canon within the games. What conflict even exists here?

[Flyboy Fox]

You can't be serious. Even I, a diehard SatAM/Archie fan, can see how impossible the SatAM universe would be to integrate with the current SEGA gamesverse. There is actually some continuity between the games, and the cast particularly has remained fluid yet with a backbone of central characters. SatAM's cast is COMPLETELY different, and even those that are the same are actually irreconcilably different as counterparts.

If you can't see that SatAM is far FAR more removed from the games than most games in the current chronology are, then I'm not sure what it is that you are seeing.

The only way a SatAM-themed game would work is completely stand-alone, and even then it's unlikely to garner enough interest, being so far removed from the main franchise.

[Aquaslash]

The only way a SatAM-themed game would work is completely stand-alone, and even then it's unlikely to garner enough interest, being so far removed from the main franchise.

I'm going to have to disagree here. The big hook for Sonic is not the story, but the gameplay.

The story could be set in Never Never land if it wanted to. All the public will care about is how well it plays.

In fact, they could retcon the entire storyline to be like the comics. If it were backed up by the best Sonic gameplay imaginable, the only people who would bitch would be the diehard fans, and I think it's been made clear that they are the VAST minority.

Of course, that'll never happen, because Sega writers are idiots, and their programmers tend to be bigger idiots, but still.

I really don't get these big giant hissy fit threads over the storyline, I really really don't :/

[Flyboy Fox]

I'm not so sure that the gaming public as a whole would be able to adjust to such a giant change within the franchise. I do not think a SatAM or especially comics-based retcon would go down well at all. Which is a shame because I'd love to see such a thing... but as you said, gameplay is the main point.

And that is exactly why it wouldn't work. The comics particularly are far too complex for such simple mechanics. Even SatAM doesn't lend itself well to the chipper and cheerful Sonic vibe. Other franchises have gone down the srs retcon with their cartoony characters (see Conker, cough) and it doesn't work. It didn't work with Shadow, and it wouldn't work for Sonic.

SatAM has a completely different feel to it than Sonic mainstream. If you really think they could be swapped out under peoples' noses and only the 'diehards' would complain, I don't know what I can say to that.

[Greg the Fancat]

I'm going to have to disagree here. The big hook for Sonic is not the story, but the gameplay.

The story could be set in Never Never land if it wanted to. All the public will care about is how well it plays.

In fact, they could retcon the entire storyline to be like the comics. If it were backed up by the best Sonic gameplay imaginable, the only people who would bitch would be the diehard fans, and I think it's been made clear that they are the VAST minority.

Of course, that'll never happen, because Sega writers are idiots, and their programmers tend to be bigger idiots, but still.

I really don't get these big giant hissy fit threads over the storyline, I really really don't :/

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I though am one of those diehards, but would I complain if the game was necessarily good? I have to say this. If it was good, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it. Still, I just don't like seeing the most developed incarnation of Sonic being used ONLY for the comics. If anything, I would love to see a spinoff, and even more would like to see SEGA switch over to the comics storyline if that spinoff turned out successful. Problem is, SEGA isn't exactly a risk taking company. They've been playing in their comfort zone what with gimmicks like Werehog and the sword. If its popular people will buy it. Even if the content containing that popular element is bad... Then again... Knowing that, they could screw up any of the charm that SatAM and the comics has.

That also brings up your point about the script writers and programmers. They are simply incompetent and cannot live up to the expectations of the Sonic fanbase. But that's because they've been avoiding what Sonic is this whole time. After all, whatever happened to all the concepts from the classic games? Poof. They're gone. We don't save flickies anymore, we blow up any robot that stands in our way even if it looks like a knockoff of something else (a certain enemy from Heroes looked an awful lot like a Gundam to me. Those big tall ones you know?)

[Phos]

Make SatAM part of the cannon? More useless characters! Just what Sonic needed!

Edited September 5, 2009 by Phos