What YOU Think of Sonic Forces

[Badnik Mechanic]

11 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

Fix the problems? Overall design choices won't change but at the least they're polishing the game.

As many people as there are in Sonic Team? (What does the number of people matter?)

Ok... I'm going to respond to this in reverse order because it will make the most sense.

"As many people as there are in Sonic Team" 

Right... this is not how a game development team at the size of Sonic Team works, even an indie game unless it was being made by a very small team, and by small we're talking numbers you can count on one hand, would all drop what they were doing and work on one problem.

A team the size of Sonic Team would be subdivided into different sections and work on different parts of the game. Now I don't even want to try and accurately guess how subdivided this is... but a basic example would be, you have a stage in which a character runs up a hill... what should happen is the character sticks to the path and continues along the straight X axis... but for some reason he's being shot up as if it's a jump. 

Everybody working on that one stage, doesn't then drop everything to try and fix that, it would likely be one guy, maybe 2 at the most. Those two people might only ever work on one part of one stage of a game, or they might work on multiple parts but not the same parts as the other. 

Basically, think of the Sonic levels as this.

Green Hill = Car (Barry, Mike, Bill work on this)

Chemical Plant = Train (Trevor, Harry, Sally work on this)

Park Avenue = Plane. (Horace, Sarah, Joe work on this)

Different machines with different staff on it. Yes some of the practices and standards are the same, but in terms of where everything is, those people know it better than the other guys. 

So say the Car gets a problem.... why on earth would those guys who made the plane drop everything and come running to fix it when they don't really know much about it? In time they'll get it, but no way would they drop everything to fix a problem as the primary response.... maybe if it was taking a long time to resolve resources could be shifted... but as a first response? Not a chance.

Now... the next part 'polishing the game' what does this mean? This is just a general term used to describe final stages of development and final refinements, it is not used to describe major changes or changes that would likely impact other complete aspects of the game. So what is this statement even in reference to? 

I don't think you have much understanding of how 3D game development in a large team works due to what you've said in this post. Because based on what I know about it, and from what my experience is, not many of the problems people have with the game will end up being fixed.

[NoKaine]

2 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

If you read my whole post you'd see how far the comparison actually goes. If you disagree that in both games the combat bogs down the experience you can argue that, but you're not going to convince anyone by just ignoring it.

I didn't ignore it. As I said, the comparison stops at guns. It doesn't use guns the same way, it doesn't play the same way. It has guns. Shadow has guns. But they're not the same. "bogged down by weapon-based combat" Why not just "bogged down by combat"? You'll catch more fish (geddit? I hate Big's story) with that.

The Avatar gunplay, if you can call it that, at least doesn't slow the player down. I'd prefer though if he had more attack options.

[Indigo Rush]

11 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

Interesting how you claim I'm dismissing opinions while you literally just dismissed all of my post. At least I said what I thought was wrong.

You don't even defend it, apparently me pointing out flaws or what I don't like about an opinion is a sin.

"Petty rhetoric" Is that what we call criticism now? Oh and as I thought you were willing and ready to shout down any positive previews (not reviews, there's a difference...) I would post anyway.

Hahahaha, alright famiglia, fine.

Look man, I'm sorry that I dismissed your argument. For what it's worth I don't really think you're doing anything wrong here, I just really can't be arsed to care, specially since MadConvoy came along and provided a much better and more cordial rebuttal, which I respect that much more.

My main point isn't that Sonic Forces doesn't have positive previews, and that Colors/Generations didn't have any negative ones; the point is that neither games to my recollection had a huge onslaught of negativity leading up to their release like Forces has. That's all!

That's all it's about.

You don't need to keep cutting into me, amico. Consider me out of the convo.

[Badnik Mechanic]

8 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

The Avatar gunplay, if you can call it that, at least doesn't slow the player down. I'd prefer though if he had more attack options.

Actually if you take the time to actually look at the game play... you'll notice that the play moves significantly slower when the weapons are activated.

Furthermore, when the weapon is activated, it does not auto-lock and move to other targets, the player must manually make the adjustments in order to aim the weapon. The lock on icons you see are for the homing attack like attack and not the primary weapon fire.

So the buddy gunplay is significantly slower than both Sonic's.

The only time the gunplay is significantly faster or on equal term to the Sonic gameplay is when the game reverts to 2D mode, and the reason for this is that the enemies are in a single file line, so the round from the gun takes out several robots at a time without the need for the player to move the character towards the danger.

[Diogenes]

Just now, NoKaine said:

I didn't ignore it. As I said, the comparison stops at guns. It doesn't use guns the same way, it doesn't play the same way. It has guns. Shadow has guns. But they're not the same. "bogged down by weapon-based combat" Why not just "bogged down by combat"? You'll catch more fish (geddit? I hate Big's story) with that.

I say "bogged down by weapon-based combat" because it's bogged down by weapon-based combat. That's nothing but stating that the game is what it is, there's no nefarious purpose in pointing out that the Avatar character uses a weapon to fight. Comparing it to ShtH is relevant because they share a problem, even if not every last element of them is the same.

Just now, NoKaine said:

The Avatar gunplay, if you can call it that, at least doesn't slow the player down.

That's not what I've heard.

Quote

The Avatar’s stage, on the other hand, was even worse. Speed is put on the back burner - which is a good idea in theory - but there’s no speed at all beyond a handful of CPU-controlled manoeuvres that have plagued Sonic games for well over a decade now. Instead you have to use your weapon - the demo we played offered a choice of a flamethrower or an electric-like whip - to swat away foes like wet tissue paper, and each activation of said weapon slows you down, meaning the core mechanic of the Avatars has nothing to do with speed. It feels worryingly similar to Shadow the Hedgehog on the GameCube, which isn't something to be too thrilled about in this writer's opinion.

[NoKaine]

2 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

Hahahaha

Look man, I'm sorry that I dismissed your argument. For what it's worth I don't really think you're doing anything wrong here, I just really can't be arsed to care.

You seem pretty, uh, aggressive for someone who "can't be arsed to care".

[Indigo Rush]

5 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

You seem pretty, uh, aggressive for someone who "can't be arsed to care".

And you seem pretty invested for someone who joined literally 2 hours ago.

I don't know you, you don't know me. You might find out that I'm not such a bad hombre and simply love challenging people. There's no bad blood. Capisce? Enjoy it here. 

[NoKaine]

15 minutes ago, Mayor D said:

Actually if you take the time to actually look at the game play... you'll notice that the play moves significantly slower when the weapons are activated.

Furthermore, when the weapon is activated, it does not auto-lock and move to other targets, the player must manually make the adjustments in order to aim the weapon. The lock on icons you see are for the homing attack like attack and not the primary weapon fire.

So the buddy gunplay is significantly slower than both Sonic's.

I did see gameplay, every video in fact, thank you Mr. Passive Aggressive.

The flamethrower only moves somewhat slower than normal. I'd argue the lock-on isn't necessary for that weapon particular, since it shoots at a straight line. Despite the gun's limitations, the 3D combat section was cleared out easily.

Buddy in general plays slower than Sonic. I honestly can't say if it'll work out too well though.

Also, to comment on your other post, you took "As many people as there are in Sonic Team" a bit too literally. No, obviously, the graphic designers and music producers aren't going to fix Park Avenue. But the people who thought of the level, made the level, and finished the level, well at least they'll try. The game isn't finished-- it doesn't even have a release date yet-- so yes, it's very possible that the game can be polished, improved, fix, even if Tom, Dick, and Harry can't bother to come to work. There's also the possiblity that the demo is not indicative of the current development anyway.

14 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

I say "bogged down by weapon-based combat" because it's bogged down by weapon-based combat. That's nothing but stating that the game is what it is, there's no nefarious purpose in pointing out that the Avatar character uses a weapon to fight. Comparing it to ShtH is relevant because they share a problem, even if not every last element of them is the same.

That's not what I've heard.

Taking that idea face value, I still find it a flimsy comparison. Well, Shadow had guns, and Shadow didn't use it well (actually I thought the general implementation was... decent, there I said it), so the comparison is apt! Okay, but if it actually doesn't even have the same problems, what value are we getting out of the comparison? What are we really comparing?

Already spoke about the Nintendo Life article too; though yes, the whip weapon definitely slows you down.

9 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

And you seem pretty invested for someone who joined literally 2 hours ago.

Oh, you don't know the half of it.

[Badnik Mechanic]

19 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

I did see gameplay, every video in fact, thank you Mr. Passive Aggressive.

Also, to comment on your other post, you took "As many people as there are in Sonic Team" a bit too literally.

 

 But the people who thought of the level, made the level, and finished the level, well at least they'll try. The game isn't finished

Excuse me? Could you be any more rude? It's called disagreeing with you based on evidence at hand. 

And no I didn't take your comment too literally, I wasn't even thinking of designers when I wrote that, I was thinking of the core team of C++ programmers and even then that's probably not a wise move since I'm unsure if at the point where Sonic Team would go back to fix a problem as to if they would be going into the actual lines of code itself or using whatever in-house tools they have to make adjustments.

Heck almost two weeks ago to the day someone else said things virtually identical to you and I had to point out that they were wrong in their assumptions.

Finally, when you say 'polishing the game' what does this mean? This is just a general term used to describe final stages of development and final refinements, it is not used to describe major changes or changes that would likely impact other complete aspects of the game. So what is this statement even in reference to? Saying the same thing you did in the post I quoted is not an answer to this question and it speaks volumes as to your understanding as to how 3D game design and development in a team works.

 

[NoKaine]

13 minutes ago, Mayor D said:

Excuse me? Could you be any more rude? It's called disagreeing with you based on evidence at hand.

You could've just said "this video shows [my argument]" or something, but instead: "Actually if you take the time to actually look at the game play", the double "actually"s and the "if you take the time" seems kind of snarky.

Quote

I was thinking of the core team of C++ programmers and even then that's probably not a wise move since I'm unsure if at the point where Sonic Team would go back to fix a problem as to if they would be going into the actual lines of code itself or using whatever in-house tools they have to make adjustments.

They probably have a lot of old, ready tools for things like bugfixing.

Quote

Finally, when you say 'polishing the game' what does this mean? This is just a general term used to describe final stages of development and final refinements, it is not used to describe major changes or changes that would likely impact other complete aspects of the game. 

Bugfixing, smoothing out level design, like moving some objects, minor changes in controls-- not like, making Sonic less like a truck, but more make the Avatar less floaty-- 

Refining the game can very much change the quality of the game or other aspects. Little touches can go a long way. A reminder that I'm speaking as someone who thinks the design is good but the implementation could be better. Of course, if you think the game is already complete trite, well...!

Quote

Saying the same thing you did in the post I quoted is not an answer to this question and it speaks volumes as to your understanding as to how 3D game design and development in a team works.

 

See, this is the kind of talk I'm taking about. "Hey, maybe the game will get better when it come--" "Don't you know how many manpower and cars go into a videogame?! You really don't get game development do you?" (like I ever actually claimed that).

Edited July 8, 2017 by NoKaine

[Sega DogTagz]

Would I be wrong in my observation if I said the flamthrower has no effect of Buddy's speed, but rather put a damper on his acceleration to a crawl?

I think its pretty clear from the videos that the game clocks Buddies footwork to whatever speed he is currently running when he activates his weapon. If you start up the flamethrower from a standstill (which happens quite a bit, especially with inexperienced players) then the character is slow to pick up speed (most likely programmed in as a natural aim assist), When Buddy is moving prior to activating the flamethrower, his speed remains at that same level, like when he is plowing through the bots down the straight path. He stays at top speed, as indicated by his speed remaining constant down the final stretch of road after he stopped spamming the flamethrower. Further evidence is seen as he blasts through the circle of badniks directly after. Slow acceleration that picks up as he uses the item.

 

The decision to build the system like that would inherently slow down gameplay, but its also clear that it was developed to cater to a spray-and-play area of effect mentality, so someone who understands that could probably get the most out of it and not slow down too much. Once you get over the tendency of coming to a complete stop to fire off your weapon, then the worst of it is already behind you. Chaining it with the homeing attack seems to be the cardinal sin of most of these stop-and-go endeavors.

[NoKaine]

4 minutes ago, Sega DogTagz said:

Would I be wrong in my observation if I said the flamthrower has no effect of Buddy's speed, but rather put a damper on his acceleration to a crawl?

I think its pretty clear from the videos that the game clocks Buddies footwork to whatever speed he is currently running when he activates his weapon. If you start up the flamethrower from a standstill (which happens quite a bit, especially with inexperienced players) then the character is slow to pick up speed (most likely programmed in as a natural aim assist), When Buddy is moving prior to activating the flamethrower, his speed remains at that same level, like when he is plowing through the bots down the straight path. He stays at top speed, as indicated by his speed remaining constant down the final stretch of road after he stopped spamming the flamethrower. Further evidence is seen as he blasts through the circle of badniks directly after. Slow acceleration that picks up as he uses the item.

 

The decision to build the system like that would inherently slow down gameplay, but its also clear that it was developed to cater to a spray-and-play area of effect mentality, so someone who understands that could probably get the most out of it and not slow down too much. Once you get over the tendency of coming to a complete stop to fire off your weapon, then the worst of it is already behind you. Chaining it with the homeing attack seems to be the cardinal sin of most of these stop-and-go endeavors.

Ah, well, I don't understand much about 3D game development, but that sounds reasonable. 

I could see a problem with this in tight spaces though.

[Badnik Mechanic]

So you read this....

And interpreted it as this...

3 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

"Don't you know how many manpower and cars go into a videogame?! 

...

People asked you about what you thought your statements meant because it would be far more patronising if they just told you or gave you a very basic explanation of a software development team on that kind of project if you then turned around and said 'well actually I have or am working on a game with a team of X number of people and have been for several years.' 

But because you didn't say that and your initial reply showed a very big lack of understanding I had to resort to the car analogy, otherwise we might be taking software development models and where exactly 'polish' would fit into that as well as analysing specifics that can be corrected that people have complained about. 

You are not the first person to have a misconception as to how game development works or how resources are managed on it, nor will you be the last. but the sooner you realise the misconceptions the sooner you'll leave that mentality and see that what we have right now will not change too much outside of cosmetic changes.

[Baconjack]

3 hours ago, Chris Knopps said:

They're trying to lure in older folks with the tone and locations, but all else is for the kiddies. Easy peasy stage layouts, easy peasy enemy placements with easy peasy AI, keep this in mind first and foremost with Forces, you're playing something with game play meant to cater to 4 - 10 year-old's.

Remember, they have only released 2 levels so far (Park Avenue and Green Hill), and these are probably designed as easy because they are meant to be the first levels in the game. Historically, when Sega has released demos of Sonic games at E3 or any other convention, they have usually displayed what will become one of the earliest levels. For Generations, the demo ran Green Hill. For Unleashed, the demo ran Windmill Isle. For Mania, even, the demo at SDCC 2016 ran Green Hill.

It's like saying that Sonic 1 as a whole is an easy game because Green Hill Zone is an easy level.

[Chris Knopps]

43 minutes ago, Sir Laptop said:

Remember, they have only released 2 levels so far (Park Avenue and Green Hill), and these are probably designed as easy because they are meant to be the first levels in the game. Historically, when Sega has released demos of Sonic games at E3 or any other convention, they have usually displayed what will become one of the earliest levels. For Generations, the demo ran Green Hill. For Unleashed, the demo ran Windmill Isle. For Mania, even, the demo at SDCC 2016 ran Green Hill.

It's like saying that Sonic 1 as a whole is an easy game because Green Hill Zone is an easy level.

Green Hill isn't all that easy really. To this day I die over that bottomless pit section with the platforms...

Act 2 is where it's at I think...?

There's a goal post amidst the platforms...

I still lose rings every time I touch the stinkin' spiked bridge.

...Zone trolls me hard to this day...

[Tara]

It's getting a little too heated in this discussion from what I'm seeing.  So I'm going to politely ask all parties to kindly calm the fuck down.  Throwing potshots at one another will not be tolerated.  Please report any instances in the future instead of getting all angsty.  Thanks.

[Chris Knopps]

Woah woah WOAH now... HOLD UP...

@Indigo Rush...

...Big is GONE...

What ludicrous world have I entered?

Who is that man with swanky glasses randomly smiling at me...?

It's no longer windy and sunny...

Taking Big away, how dare you cross that taboo line? Webber shall smite you for this infidelity...

(Just gagging here, though after so long it's a shocker to see Big gone from your pic)

That random bit of whatever out of the way...

After listening to the vocal tracks and seeing the game play, I'd have to say Modern Sonic is officially the most tolerable part of the game for me now, knowing how poorly Classic controls and how terrible the lyrics for the Avatar have been.

[Tracker_TD]

4 hours ago, Sir Laptop said:

Remember, they have only released 2 levels so far (Park Avenue and Green Hill), and these are probably designed as easy because they are meant to be the first levels in the game. Historically, when Sega has released demos of Sonic games at E3 or any other convention, they have usually displayed what will become one of the earliest levels. For Generations, the demo ran Green Hill. For Unleashed, the demo ran Windmill Isle. For Mania, even, the demo at SDCC 2016 ran Green Hill.

It's like saying that Sonic 1 as a whole is an easy game because Green Hill Zone is an easy level.

You're right, Green Hill in Sonic 1 is an easy level; but the level design isn't shit because of that. GHZ in 1 and Mania are pretty damn well designed levels, whereas just about every level we've seen from Forces looks either incredibly mediocre or just... bad.

The issue with Forces thus far isn't that it's easy, it's that the level design is bland or, in Classic's case, outright terrible.

[ChikaBoing]

I would almost be satisfied with the level designs for Modern and Avatar could but they are either too short or way less dynamic in 3D/2D shifts than in previous games. It could end up like Generations where later levels show more variety, or it will be stuck in place like Lost World.

Another question mark is Wispons. We have seen aerial traversal with light dash and burst and just lines of enemies. Seeing more variety on that end would also make me feel more positive.

[Alienrun]

12 hours ago, Speedi said:

Maybe people are just so happy to see Sonic Team go back to a working formula that they didn't pay enough attention to stuff like the level design and control. 

^This right here is what I take contention with in regards to people who praise Forces without much logical reasoning.

It seems people who are praising it are just happy to get another sonic game and that's it, they like it cause its new...(and oh boy do kids like new stuff!)

Lost Word? Boom? Pfft...those aren't real sonic games, this game has EvErYtHiNg in it including the boost so it must be good?! Right?

...I'm convinced at this point that a lot of these people don't really have standards, or at least not high ones. These people will take any sonic game as long as it faintly looks like a sonic game that in their mind is legitamate, regardless of how shallow it is.

Yeah yeah I know "fanbase split" is a thing and all...I just can't help but notice that Youtube comments of all places is where I'm seeing the most praise while everywhere else people are agreeing that the game has legitamate flaws that will hold it back in the long run, even people who are looking forward to the game can admit this!

[Badnik Mechanic]

11 hours ago, Sir Laptop said:

Remember, they have only released 2 levels so far (Park Avenue and Green Hill), and these are probably designed as easy [...]

It's like saying that Sonic 1 as a whole is an easy game because Green Hill Zone is an easy level.

Utterly nobody who has complained about Green Hill has complained about it because it's an easy level.

They've complained because it's poorly designed.

Look at this shit.

Any time you enter an S Tube you automatically get set to boost speed at the indicated point.

So why the hell do we have this?

 

Speed boosters followed by speed boosters followed by more speed boosters! What hazard justifies this? A small slope.

 

Oh hey lets put springs all over the place for utterly no reason.

Do I even need to bring up how they messed up the swing bridge or that rock?

[Sega DogTagz]

5 hours ago, ChikaBoing said:

Another question mark is Wispons. We have seen aerial traversal with light dash and burst and just lines of enemies. Seeing more variety on that end would also make me feel more positive.

On that front we have at least one other confirmed candidate. Sticking with the 3DS exclusive theme of the wispons we've seen so far, we have both the Violet Void and the Grey Quake powerups. The latter of the two seems a bit unlikely, as transferring its power over to a Wispon could be... interesting. The Earthquake could work as a ground pound area of effect attack and the traversal could grant the ability to scale walls, but I'm not seeing that as the most likely candidate. The violet void however is a natural fit. The Void power could allow you to pull off a vacuum type gun and suck in all the enemies in your path. Maybe even shoot them back out as ammo. The levitation of the power would serve as the aerial traversal mechanism. We have also seen a mockup of the Avatar character holding a purple wispon. Its either the Frenzy or the Void. My money is on the void.

So that puts us at a minimum of three wispons to choose from. Burst, Lightning and Void.

And thats only if they stop at the 3DS wisps. A good handful of the more common little guys also fit the bill and would easily make the transfer over to the wispon side of  things. Cyan Laser and Indigo Asteroid are good places to start and I would be utterly shocked if I didn't see Yellow Drill, the single most versatile traversal wisp in the arsenal. Water and ground stages are built for the guy.

[Mad Convoy]

6 hours ago, Alienrun said:

...I'm convinced at this point that a lot of these people don't really have standards, or at least not high ones. These people will take any sonic game as long as it faintly looks like a sonic game that in their mind is legitamate, regardless of how shallow it is.

This is really the only part of your post that I object to. Note that what I'm about to say is influenced by negative experiences in the past where I was lectured about how I didn't have standards or needed higher standards just for liking Boost games, Sonic Lost World, and Boom TV no matter how polite, balanced, or well-sourced I was, and you are free to call me out on it if it lead me to a poor conclusion or misinterpretation in this context.

I find that when people discover that something they dislike has fans, they tend to assume that it has to be because they have lower standards when really they simply have different standards. In the case of Sonic Forces, people generally fall on a spectrum from technician to performer. Those who are or have aspects of the technician pay attention to one or more of the following: how the levels, graphics, and gameplay are designed, the tone and quality of writing, whether or not the game was plotted well, what the technical performance of the game is (eg, if the game lags and when, what sort of glitches are present, etc.), the composition of the soundtrack, and the mapping and feel of the controls. They might be entertained by a game or parts of a game, but they will not consider a game to be anything worthwhile unless it is sufficiently well-conceptualized, well-designed, and polished to their standards. Meanwhile, those who are or have aspects of the performer pay attention to one or more of the following: how enjoyable each section is to them, what parts of the game made them laugh, cry, smile, etc. and whether that was in a positive or negative way, and how enjoyable the game is overall. Contrary to popular belief, they are willing to acknowledge when a game has a bad concept, poor design choices, or was poorly polished-- however, so long as the game is effective in providing entertainment throughout, they will consider a game to be good and worthwhile.

Both could see positives and negatives in Forces. The technician would be impressed by the PS4/XB version's 60FPS and detailed graphics and potentially feels that the controls are better than Colors/Gens., but could also find the soundtrack to be messily composed, the controls to be clunky, and the level design incredibly poor. The performer might find the different gameplay styles, music, graphics, etc. to be enjoyable despite the problems... or shallow in light of the problems and thus boring.

The above is a simplification and most people have aspects of the technician and performer, as well as different standards and expectations for different franchises and genres. It should be pointed out that most people on the internet (like those Youtube commenters you mentioned) are not industry professionals or familiar with all the rules of writing, and as a result, they tend to write things that seem shallow or poorly reasoned when in fact there was a logic to their opinion, they just didn't state it well or didn't feel the need to show the logic to their opinion. 

I'm pointing this out because you seem to be saying that those who feel positive about Forces without elaborating much on why are just feeling that way because its Sonic. Its really presumptuous. It comes off like you're demanding that everybody who reacts to Forces has to explain themselves, and yet not applying that standard to those who feel negative about Forces. And, well, unless the opinion is given in a context where the writer is expected to give good detail (such as a professionally written gaming article, or a forum post on SSMB and forums with similar policies to SSMB), the writer shouldn't have to justify their viewpoint on Forces, positive or negative, and explain that he or she does have standards just because some random person on the internet thinks that he or she deserves an explanation for disagreeing with him or her. Because I've been there and its not pretty.

Again, my past experiences with people declaring that others have low or no standards are definitely coloring this post, so please tell me if I misinterpreted or otherwise got something wrong.

[Alienrun]

26 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

This is really the only part of your post that I object to. Note that what I'm about to say is influenced by negative experiences in the past where I was lectured about how I didn't have standards or needed higher standards just for liking Boost games, Sonic Lost World, and Boom TV no matter how polite, balanced, or well-sourced I was, and you are free to call me out on it if it lead me to a poor conclusion or misinterpretation in this context.

Good gosh this is a good post...

If it makes you feel any better, I too took a bit of contention with that very paragraph. What it really boils down to is a over generalized look at the kind of people I saw in this mindset, (I ironically didn't explain myself) but there is a bit of truth to it...so I suppose I should explain that better...

Also, apologies about the boost thing, chances are those people weren't trying to understand you and were just mindlessly pushing their agenda OR didn't realize it was bothering you.

30 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

I find that when people discover that something they dislike has fans, they tend to assume that it has to be because they have lower standards when really they simply have different standards. In the case of Sonic Forces, people generally fall on a spectrum from technician to performer. Those who are or have aspects of the technician pay attention to one or more of the following: how the levels, graphics, and gameplay are designed, the tone and quality of writing, whether or not the game was plotted well, what the technical performance of the game is (eg, if the game lags and when, what sort of glitches are present, etc.), the composition of the soundtrack, and the mapping and feel of the controls. They might be entertained by a game or parts of a game, but they will not consider a game to be anything worthwhile unless it is sufficiently well-conceptualized, well-designed, and polished to their standards. Meanwhile, those who are or have aspects of the performer pay attention to one or more of the following: how enjoyable each section is to them, what parts of the game made them laugh, cry, smile, etc. and whether that was in a positive or negative way, and how enjoyable the game is overall. Contrary to popular belief, they are willing to acknowledge when a game has a bad concept, poor design choices, or was poorly polished-- however, so long as the game is effective in providing entertainment throughout, they will consider a game to be good and worthwhile.

Both could see positives and negatives in Forces. The technician would be impressed by the PS4/XB version's 60FPS and detailed graphics and potentially feels that the controls are better than Colors/Gens., but could also find the soundtrack to be messily composed, the controls to be clunky, and the level design incredibly poor. The performer might find the different gameplay styles, music, graphics, etc. to be enjoyable despite the problems... or shallow in light of the problems and thus boring.

The above is a simplification and most people have aspects of the technician and performer, as well as different standards and expectations for different franchises and genres. It should be pointed out that most people on the internet (like those Youtube commenters you mentioned) are not industry professionals or familiar with all the rules of writing, and as a result, they tend to write things that seem shallow or poorly reasoned when in fact there was a logic to their opinion, they just didn't state it well or didn't feel the need to show the logic to their opinion. 

I'm pointing this out because you seem to be saying that those who feel positive about Forces without elaborating much on why are just feeling that way because its Sonic. Its really presumptuous. It comes off like you're demanding that everybody who reacts to Forces has to explain themselves, and yet not applying that standard to those who feel negative about Forces. And, well, unless the opinion is given in a context where the writer is expected to give good detail (such as a professionally written gaming article, or a forum post on SSMB and forums with similar policies to SSMB), the writer shouldn't have to justify their viewpoint on Forces, positive or negative, and explain that he or she does have standards just because some random person on the internet thinks that he or she deserves an explanation for disagreeing with him or her. Because I've been there and its not pretty.

Again, my past experiences with people declaring that others have low or no standards are definitely coloring this post, so please tell me if I misinterpreted or otherwise got something.

I see where your going with the technician/preformer analogy, and I agree with it for the most part. But I've come to understand that its a little more complicated than that, as you mentioned. More so I feel your explanation on the preformer side seems just a little too vague and slightly misleading.

For example...When I first played Freedom Planet I was on quite the emotional high, so much so that to this day it has become my favorite game. It wasn't until later that I realised I didn't have the balls to explain my feelings about the game to other people, and what it really came down to when I did was just my personal experience/build up that allowed me to get that much enjoyment out of the game in the first place. (This doesn't mean I don't like it logically, its just not relevant to what I'm saying here.)

TL;DR It was all in my head...games don't give people emotion, that's on them. People will make a concious choice to emotionally invest themselves in whatever they want...and usually in the case of pre-built video game hype, people will set themselves up to that expectation.

This is fine and normal though, people change and thus our tastes for games should constantly change in order that we evolve and achieve a sense of progression. Its part of why people play games in the first place I think. (There's also social and immersion reasons but you get my point.)

...

Basically I bring that up to try and justify that in a way I'm pushing the technitian narrative going forward, but I think that in of itself can apply to art appreciation as a whole, so in that regard there isn't really a limit to how the technitian is described. Nevermind the fact that the Preformer sub-category doesn't account for replayability or judging a game after you are done with it (AKA thinking about it fluidly) based on your description of "enjoying each part of the game as you go".

Granted I think both are important, I just felt the way you described them to be a bit off, but maybe that's just me...

...

In regards to those comments though I'm very aware of how easy it is to misunderstand people online and the lack of emotional communication that takes place via text. But some comments I saw were a bit rediculous...some people were legit exited about seeing sand in green hill zone. Not just in the moment...but so much so that it justifies everything else wrong with GHZ's inclusion...and I quote:

"I REALLY think that the sand in the backround is really interesting and I think it will be interesting to find out what it is/why its there when the game comes out." (not exact quote but eh)

This guy here isn't just interested to see sand in the backround...he's interested solely because its a mystery AND the sheer act of solving the mystery is "interesting" as well. (nevermind the fact it probably won't be thought out that much in the actual game)

This is what I mean when I say "low standards" or "no taste". You could have put ANY thing new in green hill and this guy would be exited, simply because its technically new and he hopes that the game will be clever enough to give a satisfying conclusion...it reaks fanboyish levels of appreciation for the series. To be frank the only reason this is a point of contention for me is because I myself used to be like this and it pains me to see others go through the same crap only to one day look back and regret the whole endeavor...

Maybe my standards are too high? Maybe because I actively try to improve myself as a person I just naturally think these things more...IDK for sure.

And yes I am self aware enough that this one example I brought up is still subjective...quite literately the defenition of "different taste", but if that's the case then let me ask you this...

When is it okay for me to tell someone they have bad taste? When can I push my own agenda? When do we reach a point where everyone isn't mindlessly screaching "It's just my opinion" and people start actually beliveing in what they believe in, instead of holding back they're actual thoughts. It should go without saying that when I say someone has bad taste, its my opinion, but that doesn't mean I don't think its true.

Like...I'm pretty sure we can all agree most kids have "bad taste" in the sense that they don't have as much exposure to games as adults AND less time to process what they have experienced. This is what I mean by standards...when the metric for a game being good is limited to what one knows about sonic then that to me is low because while I do like sonic a lot there is so much more to gaming that just this franchise...Its a point of comparison...in a way you could say I'm inderectly comparing myself to them because I think to myself "oh...I've been there before, good gosh is he always going to be like this/will he regret this." Or "OMG that statement is so backwards!"

TL;DR Its less the people making simple statements and more the people that actually do bother to put up an argument, but do nothing but parrot the same stick over and over again at nausiem and aren't really talking to you. (seems to be the main cause of problems around here now that I think about it.)

57 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

It should be pointed out that most people on the internet (like those Youtube commenters you mentioned) are not industry professionals or familiar with all the rules of writing, and as a result, they tend to write things that seem shallow or poorly reasoned when in fact there was a logic to their opinion, they just didn't state it well or didn't feel the need to show the logic to their opinion. 

Oh...that is a really good point now that I think about it.

Honestly I think when I was a teen, I only responded to disputes that were directly targeting me, while now I actually try to have a normal conversation...that might be one indicator on my part of what's changed.

...

To be honest part of me does want to understand these people better, but sometimes I reach a point where I feel I can't or I don't even care about the situation myself...maybe I get the feeling they don't care to and thus can't be bothered playing a game of pull and swing trying to figure out what they are thinking only for them not to tell me.

Like...I met someone in real life once and one of his favorite games was 3D World, he was passionate about it too, my immidiate thought was "Um...does this guy have better standards/if only I could show him better games that I consider better!" Is that wrong to think?

Maybe...possibly...part of me says yes, the other IDK. If anything sometimes these people take very very VERY specific things about games way too seriously and I start to question how I should approach them, AKA fanboy mentality once again.

IDK I might be over thinking this. I think most of what you said makes sense, I was just explaining myself...tell me what parts make sense or not and what you agree/disagree with! : D

[Cornelius Fudge]

I love the soundtrack for the Avatar's stages, but I can't help but feel that the Avatar is essentially a slower version of Modern Sonic with a few nifty gadgets and less emphasis on 3D. The gunplay serves a similar purpose as the boost does by blazing through enemies except at the expense of speed instead of a boost of speed and the game deliberately places more obstacles in the Avatar's path to slow him down in areas where the level design is literally similar to that of Modern Sonic's 2D sections. I like the added addition of the wispons and the grappling hook, but it still feels empty.