Sonic Forces Impressions

[Graystripe2000]

1 hour ago, Soniman said:

Never thought I'd see this fanbase praise the critics for bashing a Mainline Sonic game, just goes to show how much of a rock bottom reputation this game as made for itself 

Well, NintendoLife already got bashed for it, so I guess this evens things out.

EDIT: Found another preview. 

http://www.justpushstart.com/2017/06/e3-2017-sonic-forces-looks-like-step-right-direction/ 

EDIT 2: Found yet another one. 

https://www.pcmag.com/review/354388/sonic-forces-for-playstation-4 

There's a strong foundation here, and a lot of potential for offbeat fun we haven't yet seen in an official Sonic game. We won't know how well those things will really mesh until Sonic Forces comes out this holiday season.

[PKGaming]

3 hours ago, OcelotBot said:

Which is what we've been trying to tell Iizuka for ages and it's about time he catches on. It's the gameplay from Sonic 1 to 3K which sets the standard. Always has.

If Mania gets critical acclaim (which seems all but guaranteed at this point) and Forces gets a crap reception (which also feels guaranteed because of the wide-spread criticism) then maybe...just maybe...they'll finally catch-on and realise something is seriously wrong and that it's time for change.

Mania could end up doing more good than we could have ever dreamed of by showing-up just how flawed the 3D games really are.

But I feel like if that does happen and SEGA's reaction is "From now on, we'll focus on 2D Sonic games and not 3D.", that will also be met with extreme backlash. Remember how people were really disappointed with Mania's initial reveal because they thought that it was the BIG Sonic game Sonic Team had been working on for years? People only warmed up to Mania because they soon found out it wasn't the only Sonic game we were getting. That to me was a clear sign that if SEGA decides to focus on 2D Sonic design in the future, the fanbase will not be happy about that. 

[Speedi]

38 minutes ago, PKGaming said:

But I feel like if that does happen and SEGA's reaction is "From now on, we'll focus on 2D Sonic games and not 3D.", that will also be met with extreme backlash. Remember how people were really disappointed with Mania's initial reveal because they thought that it was the BIG Sonic game Sonic Team had been working on for years? People only warmed up to Mania because they soon found out it wasn't the only Sonic game we were getting. That to me was a clear sing that if SEGA decides to focus on 2D Sonic design in the future, the fanbase will not be happy about that. 

This is also what I'm afraid of. Sonic Team always takes extremely radical approaches to problems that always end in controversy. Nobody liked Sonic friends in 06? Get rid of them completely and never try anything with them again. I REALLY hope Iizuka doesn't think the problem is that it's not 2D enough. Like people have pointed out already, we don't like Classic Sonic JUST because it's 2D, it's level design and gameplay variety that doesn't completely change the way the game plays that we keep going back to those 26 year old games for.

[Milo]

2 hours ago, Soniman said:

Never thought I'd see this fanbase praise the critics for bashing a Mainline Sonic game, just goes to show how much of a rock bottom reputation this game as made for itself 

I know you said mainline, but I do recall most fans seemed to be in full agreement with reviewers when it came to trashing Boom: Rise of Lyric (and Boom: Shattered Crystal to a lesser extent).

1 hour ago, PKGaming said:

But I feel like if that does happen and SEGA's reaction is "From now on, we'll focus on 2D Sonic games and not 3D.", that will also be met with extreme backlash. Remember how people were really disappointed with Mania's initial reveal because they thought that it was the BIG Sonic game Sonic Team had been working on for years? People only warmed up to Mania because they soon found out it wasn't the only Sonic game we were getting. That to me was a clear sing that if SEGA decides to focus on 2D Sonic design in the future, the fanbase will not be happy about that. 

Some people thought that was the big game and were disappointed until Forces was revealed, yes; but arguably there were much more people who gave a largely enthusiastic response to the game's reveal. You're only referring to a selective response to Mania's unveiling.

And people have actually been criticizing recent 3D Sonic games for having too much 2D in them, as far back as Colors. If Sega/Sonic Team's response to Mania performing well and Forces performing poorly is that people don't want 3D Sonic, that's on them for continuing to misinterpret complaints/fan feedback (yet again). Not the fault of Mania, the reviewers, or the fans. Heck, it's technically not even Sega's fault by this point either--Sega of America were instrumental on getting a new classic Sonic project by Taxman and Stealth off the ground in the first place, and that was an venture that many classic Sonic fans called for in the wake of Sonic 4's release.

[Graystripe2000]

3 hours ago, OcelotBot said:

If Mania gets critical acclaim (which seems all but guaranteed at this point) and Forces gets a crap reception (which also feels guaranteed because of the wide-spread criticism) then maybe...just maybe...they'll finally catch-on and realise something is seriously wrong and that it's time for change.

I wouldn't say anything's ever guaranteed. After all, who knows what could happen once reviewers get the game?

[Cornelius Fudge]

1 minute ago, Operationgamer17 said:

I wouldn't say anything's ever guaranteed. After all, who knows what could happen once reviewers get the game?

It seems that anyone who were lucky enough to have some physical interaction with the game had something positive to say about it. As long as the game doesn't deviate and changed its focus entirely, it should be fine.

[PKGaming]

A bit of a topic change, but is it really true that in Forces, you can no longer pick up your rings when you get hit? You just lose all of them and that's it? WHY!!? What's even the point of collecting rings then? 

[NoKaine]

20 minutes ago, PKGaming said:

A bit of a topic change, but is it really true that in Forces, you can no longer pick up your rings when you get hit? You just lose all of them and that's it? WHY!!? What's even the point of collecting rings then? 

Well, you can still die (though they got rid of lives). Some Avatars can keep rings or collect them again.

[Speedi]

27 minutes ago, PKGaming said:

A bit of a topic change, but is it really true that in Forces, you can no longer pick up your rings when you get hit? You just lose all of them and that's it? WHY!!? What's even the point of collecting rings then? 

There's no lives anymore so I guess they didn't see the point. Or it's just a WIP that wasn't put into the E3 build because it isn't finished yet. But rings are used for more then just getting extra lives, they also help guide the player through level design or clue them in on secrets. 

[Mad Convoy]

Just now, PKGaming said:

A bit of a topic change, but is it really true that in Forces, you can no longer pick up your rings when you get hit? You just lose all of them and that's it? WHY!!? What's even the point of collecting rings then? 

Presumably, its because such a feature is not needed now that Forces doesn't have a lives system. In Sonic 1 and Sonic 2, where the ring recollection was introduced, if you ran out of lives, you had to start over from the very beginning. And lives were not easy to find (though you could collect 100 rings to get an extra life). Therefore, letting you pick back up some, but not all, of the rings you lost was an anti-frustration feature to keep you from suddenly dying to enemies that make you lose a lot of rings at once if you get hit by them while at the same time providing negative consequences for poor play. Sonic 3 and Sonic 3&K were capable of saving, so running out of lives wouldn't set you back as far as Sonic 1 and 2. However, you'd still have to redo a lot if you lost all your lives, so the ring recollection feature was kept. Same goes for Sonic Adventure 1, Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic Heroes, and Shadow the Hedgehog. Sonic 06 marked the first point where ring recollection was pointless, though not for the same reason as later titles but rather because the game was incredibly cheap and they tended to disappear a lot more quickly than other Sonic titles. After 06, extra lives got a lot easier to find and on top of that, due to the way saving worked in the post-06 games, you got to keep all the extra lives you collected in a level regardless of if you completed it or not and even if you powered off the console. (I exploited it to get 80+ lives in Unleashed, most of which came from one section of a Day Stage in Apotos). There were also more rings laying around so it was easier to find more if you lost them. This trend continued on with Colors, Gens, and especially Lost World-- pretty much any Sonic game with a lives system. Games without lives systems that simply plop you near where you died if you die (Sonic and the Secret Rings, Sonic and the Black Knight, Rise of Lyric, etc.) generally didn't let you recollect rings because the problem that ring recollection is meant to solve simply doesn't exist. And really, thank god-- for all of RoL's faults, it at least had the mercy to not to force you to slog through a level or hub all over again if you got hit with no rings on hand or otherwise die (which can happen for very cheap reasons) like Sonic 06 did.

All in all, not letting you recollect rings adds difficulty for games that don't make you restart the whole game or a level when you lose all your lives. You still get the benefits of rings, but now you have to play well because you aren't getting any of them back if you screw up. It also trims a feature that wasn't necessary anymore given the higher availability of rings now than back when the feature was implemented in Sonic 1. Given the type of game that Forces is, I think it is good that you can't recollect rings.

[PKGaming]

7 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

Well, you can still die (though they got rid of lives). Some Avatars can keep rings or collect them again.

I know you can still die, but the benefit to ring collecting was so when you get hit, there's not just one ring you gotta chase after, you have a bunch you can pick back up. But if they all just disappear upon getting hit now, what's the point of rings? Might as well go full Mario and give Sonic 2-hits via mushrooms since that's essentially how rings work now.

[NoKaine]

24 minutes ago, PKGaming said:

I know you can still die, but the benefit to ring collecting was so when you get hit, there's not just one ring you gotta chase after, you have a bunch you can pick back up. But if they all just disappear upon getting hit now, what's the point of rings? Might as well go full Mario and give Sonic 2-hits via mushrooms since that's essentially how rings work now.

Yeah, I'd prefer if it was like Unleashed and only took of some rings.

[Speedi]

I kinda doubt not being able to pick up rings will even matter considering that Sonic Team literally just scatters them in large quantities all over the levels anyways. It'd be nice if they actually made ring placements more deliberate, especially considering that using rings to get boost energy is gone now. Like using them as a reward for clearing a tough platforming section or clueing the players in on secrets like red rings or alternate pathways. Stuff like that gives them more of a purpose then just an extra hit.

[Sega DogTagz]

Lets not forget that some of the games introduced rings as currency in the hub world / menus. Stockpiled rings could be used to buy powerups, unlockables and all sorts of goodies in Generations for example.

By putting in a ring shop, you'd have plenty of incentive to not get hit and hoard those rings. Particularly if they bait the shop with decent goodies. Shoot, unlockable stuff for your avatar would be perfect. Want a pair of red Sonic sneakers? 1,000,000 rings. Nuff said.

[Graystripe2000]

Guess what game's on this list. 

https://www.gamespot.com/gallery/the-25-greatest-things-about-to-happen-to-your-nin/2900-1318/7/

[ChikaBoing]

Critics imo never had good grasp on good level design in platformers in the past given how Handheld Sonic games (and Colors), NSMB and Kirby games were never critized for having level design that could be more memorable.

[Tracker_TD]

Time to add another preview to that compilation post I did...

Waypoint - "Mario vs Sonic in 2017 Is Looking Mightily One-Sided"

Quote

Sonic Forces, based on everything I've played so far—one three-dimensional level as Sonic, running through a city in the middle of a robotic invasion, replayed again as a whip-lashing custom avatar; and a classic-styled 2D boss fight against a twin-staged Robotnik with a penchant for chucking bloody great rocks the way of Sega's speedy mascot—is not good. Like, really not good. Like, potentially a genuinely bad game in waiting. Like, I have been watching everything I can of it, reading articles by the dozen, and have sat down with people from Sega about it, and I still cannot fathom who the heck this game is for.

 

[Graystripe2000]

Comparing this to Mario Odyssey is like comparing Apples to Oranges. The two games are nothing alike. 

[Soniman]

Just now, Operationgamer17 said:

Comparing this to Mario Odyssey is like comparing Apples to Oranges. The two games are nothing alike. 

A good game and a bad game are very diffrent from each other I agree

[Tracker_TD]

1 minute ago, Operationgamer17 said:

Comparing this to Mario Odyssey is like comparing Apples to Oranges. The two games are nothing alike. 

You're right; one's good, and one's bad!

[CANNED LAUGHTER HERE]

EDIT: Damn it all Soniman

[TheOcelot]

1 minute ago, Operationgamer17 said:

Comparing this to Mario Odyssey is like comparing Apples to Oranges. The two games are nothing alike. 

Yeah, one is a delicious juicy orange and the other is a rotten moldy apple XP

[Graystripe2000]

All that aside, though, I do agree with @SSF1991 that you can't just say "this game isn't great" without an explanation. Saying "I don't know who this game is for" isn't going to cut it with everyone reading the preview.

[Indigo Rush]

That review, while not quite as insightful as I'd like, certainly echoes a sadly depressing vibe surrounding Forces as of late. At least they liked Mania?

[Bobnik]

13 minutes ago, Operationgamer17 said:

All that aside, though, I do agree with @SSF1991 that you can't just say "this game isn't great" without an explanation. Saying "I don't know who this game is for" isn't going to cut it with everyone reading the preview.

Except in most of the more negative previews the reasons were mostly level design (which does suck for these levels, can't argue with that one) and that controls for Modern are worse than before (arguable, but I haven't played Forces, so I wouldn't know if more loose is better in this situation)

The Waypoint impressions don't really elaborate on WHY the game is bad, they just repeat "the game is bad" with different wording. Hell. Nintendolife was more insightful, and that was contradictory to his feelings on Colors.

Then again, impressions/previews are not the final saying, many previews end up being false after the game release.

[Graystripe2000]

2 minutes ago, Bobnik said:

Except in most of the more negative previews the reasons were mostly level design (which does suck for these levels, can't argue with that one) and that controls for Modern are worse than before (arguable, but I haven't played Forces, so I wouldn't know if more loose is better in this situation)

The Waypoint impressions don't really elaborate on WHY the game is bad, they just repeat "the game is bad" with different wording. Hell. Nintendolife was more insightful, and that was contradictory to his feelings on Colors.

I was referring to the Waypoint preview when I said that.