The State of Sonic The Hedgehog 4

[Sonikko]

1 hour ago, JezMM said:

To be fair at the end of the day matters are always more nuanced than an overall score.  Sometimes one pivitol thing can wreck the rest of the game - for example in Unleashed I argue the biggest issue was how the game taught the player how to play it.  A lot of issues with it are solved after you put the time in to learn all the nuances that the game sadly doesn't prepare you for upfront (boost management, unlocking Werehog combos etc).

It's true that sometimes a game can be dragged down by something that doesn't make the overall experience worse, but maybe you're forgetting sub dips to 10 fps in framerate with Unleashed, sliperry and imprecise controls (did the Werehog lock on never missed for you? It happened to me all the time) and arbitrary medals collecting. Those are all things that ruined the game for many reviewers.

And if we're not going to just look at the score and analyze the titles on a game per game basis, then we're going to see that even each one of those games had some kind of issue, not small ones. Stuff that you wouldn't find in other competent platformers, and stuff that surely isn't required for a Sonic game to be good.

Sonic Adventure 2 had the terrible genre roulette, 14 levels in total are Sonic gameplay, the other half of the game (maybe more, I don't remember the exact number now) was composed of clunky slow mechs and dispersive treasure hunts. Now anyone might have enjoyed those, but it's like a 20 hours long Mario game. 10 Hours it's Super Mario, 10 Hours you're playing a bad version of Ratchet and Clank.

Sonic Advance is the closest modern 2D title to the classics, and even then the level design while not bad, isn't as good. The game's pace is slower overall and it feels clunkier. It did many good things, it handled the characters well, Amy fits in as a Hard mode, the art was good and all, but it still had its flaws.

Sonic Colours had very blocky and generic platforming, something that any other game could have done. It had multiple plaths but each one of them was as blocky as the main path, Wisps that weren't really power ups, but flow breaking minigames that totally changed up how the game worked and could've been expanded into their own game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8k2ocRWGZs 

The 3D sections were non existent, automated, or completely mindless and unuseful, while the 2D ones were as un-Sonic-y as it gets. May have been a competent platformer but I barely consider it a Sonic game.

Sonic Generations is what I consider the best one in the modern era (Unleashed, Colours, Gens, Lost World) and even then it had some blatant flaws. Classic Sonic is wonky, the levels are automated, the level design is padded, the game itself is padded with missions that most of the time weren't really fun to play. 

I'm not dissing Sonic games out of spite or hate, I'm a fan just as much as everyone on here. I love Sonic and I've supported SEGA for what's now more than 15 years. I'm just tired of accepting mediocrity when the rest of the videogames industry has so so much more to offer.

Why am I still a Sonic fan you might ask. Well Sonic has potential, inexpressed potential that I see in each game. I supported the series because I don't want it to die, but I can't bring myself anymore to spend 60€ day one for what looks like to be an average game at best.

 

15 minutes ago, Paaaaaaaa said:

Sonikko is right you know. I find that people who are okay with the kind of mediocrity Sonic offers don't play much else

Thanks.

[Bobnik]

27 minutes ago, Paaaaaaaa said:

Sonikko is right you know. I find that people who are okay with the kind of mediocrity Sonic offers don't play much else

I mean, I played some platformers, even Mario and Kirby games, it's not like I only play Sonic games. It's just, I dunno, don't find them as fun as Sonic games? Yeah, I know, I'm weird, but still. Like. I haven't finished any Kirby game and only finished Super Mario World, but I finished most Sonic games, so at least it's doing something right for me.

 

But whatever, my tastes are shit anyway.

[Sonikko]

4 minutes ago, Bobnik said:

I mean, I played some platformers, even Mario and Kirby games, it's not like I only play Sonic games. It's just, I dunno, don't find them as fun as Sonic games? Yeah, I know, I'm weird, but still. Like. I haven't finished any Kirby game and only finished Super Mario World, but I finished most Sonic games, so at least it's doing something right for me.

 

But whatever, my tastes are shit anyway.

Mate, nobody here is saying your tastes are shit. I've lost count how many times I've said "you like what you do nobody's saying anything against that".

Even if I don't like a game, I can be objective about it and say that it's pretty good and competent at what it does, and vice-versa. If I like a broken game, or a game that doesn't do anything to go higher than mediocrity, I'll still like the game, but I can judge it for what it is.

I don't understand why some people make things a personal matter.

EDIT:
I just get triggered because you have no idea how it is being on the other side. When you're criticizing a game you're constantly being called "ungrateful" (for what I wonder, eh), "not a fan", "a hater", and all those things, and I really can't stand it anymore. I just see things for what they are and my eyes are not clouded by hype or blind love.

[Endy]

27 minutes ago, Bobnik said:

I mean, I played some platformers, even Mario and Kirby games, it's not like I only play Sonic games. It's just, I dunno, don't find them as fun as Sonic games? Yeah, I know, I'm weird, but still. Like. I haven't finished any Kirby game and only finished Super Mario World, but I finished most Sonic games, so at least it's doing something right for me.

 

But whatever, my tastes are shit anyway.

play more games, play better games

[JezMM]

38 minutes ago, Paaaaaaaa said:

play more games, play better games

People can still enjoy Sonic games in spite of their flaws despite playing other, significantly less flawed games regularly.  Like I adore a lot of masterpieces of video game design, but something about Sonic satisfies me in a way I can't get from any other series, even when it's at it's most mediocre.  Like there is no doubt in my mind that classic Sonic and Mania are "better" than Sonic 4, but I still just... like Sonic 4 as a platformer.  I still enjoy it and if I was reviewing it would be able to give it's pros and cons pretty equal focus.

Playing better games doesn't negate your experience with middle-of-the-road ones if they have a certain appeal to you that makes dealing with the flaws worth it and better than nothing.  And the fact that you like them doesn't necessarily mean you don't expect better of future games.

 

 

[Sonikko]

3 hours ago, JezMM said:

People can still enjoy Sonic games in spite of their flaws despite playing other, significantly less flawed games regularly.  Like I adore a lot of masterpieces of video game design, but something about Sonic satisfies me in a way I can't get from any other series, even when it's at it's most mediocre.  Like there is no doubt in my mind that classic Sonic and Mania are "better" than Sonic 4, but I still just... like Sonic 4 as a platformer.  I still enjoy it and if I was reviewing it would be able to give it's pros and cons pretty equal focus.

Playing better games doesn't negate your experience with middle-of-the-road ones if they have a certain appeal to you that makes dealing with the flaws worth it and better than nothing.  And the fact that you like them doesn't necessarily mean you don't expect better of future games.

 

 

That is perfectly fine and exactly what I've been saying all along. Enjoying a game is fine, but saying Sonic 4 is better than Mania from a design standpoint is just blatantly false. 

I was counter argumenting that, not the fact that people like Sonic 4. Anyone can play, watch and listen to whatever they feel like to, honestly. Hell I like b-tier horror movies, but I don't go around saying they're Oscar material (I'm not referring to you or anyone in particular).

The issue comes up when people just flat out accept mediocrity knowing that's exactly what it is. I mean, would you want the franchise to have stagnated in what 2006 and Sonic 4 had to offer or would you want the series to reach its full potential?

That's the point I'm trying to get across, settling for mediocrity just because the other attempts have been flat out broken and then shouting at people that set their standards a little bit higher than "just ok, not broken" is not a good attitude.

People don't want to hear they can't like something when I have never said anything like that, and likewise I don't want to hear I have to like something pretty mediocre, and that's not even trying, to be a real fan (or else I'm ungrateful, whatever that means), when greater and better are just waiting to be discovered.

I repeat, I'm not referring to you, my comment just stemmed from yours.

[Tornado]

8 hours ago, Sonikko said:

Mario. Any Mario platformer. The worst that series has ever seen is the New Super Mario branch, and even then those are great games.

No they're not. They are more technically proficient than Sonic 4, but most of them were just as creatively bankrupt and phoned in.

[Sonikko]

Just now, Tornado said:

No they're not. They are more technically proficient than Sonic 4, but they are just as creatively bankrupt and phoned in.

They are literally the worst among the titles I mentioned. I have personally played the DS, Wii and U games, and the worst one of the three was the Wii version. The DS was good and the Wii U one is way better. I have no idea if NSMB2 is any good since I've never played it.

Even then Mario has always had the same tropes since Mario 3, the gameplay stems directly from the classic Mario games, and even if the physics are different they still feel like Mario games (sure, that's because Mario is a lot less reliant on physics than Sonic ever was, but still). Some levels might be uninspired in the Wii game, but the other two I mentioned are pretty good at what they do.

Sonic 4 and NSMB had a similar artstyle for example, but while Sonic 4 looks all over the place with the characters not blending in with the backgrounds, the plasticky fake look that doesn't mix up well with the realistic style some textures were going for, and it being overall a mess in the visual department, NSMB looks coherent with itself and it doesn't look like a parody of the earlier iterations. The WIi U Game does look pretty good actually.

The Mario team might not have been at its best with NSMB but they clearly knew what they were doing a lot more than Dimps ever did with Sonic 4.

Besides that, merely saying they're more technically proficient than Sonic 4 is already saying a lot.

[Tornado]

7 minutes ago, Sonikko said:

Besides that, merely saying they're more technically proficient than Sonic 4 is already saying a lot.

Certainly isn't saying "even those are great games" for someone acting like the adjudicator of quality.

[Sonikko]

Just now, Tornado said:

Certainly isn't saying "even those are great games" for someone acting like the adjudicator of quality.

I've explained why I think those titles are much better, competent and coherent games. And if of all the discussion that was on here, the only thing you're mentioning is NSMB then I don't know what to tell you.

I was saying, data at hand, that every single major 3D game has been average or slightly above that, and that Sonic 4 is an incompetent platformer that doesn't even know what it wanted to do in the first place, gameplay-wise and art-wise and that even NSMB which is the worst branch of the Mario series, which consinsts of pretty safe but good platformers, is much better than what was set to be the sequel to Sonic3&K.

If you or anyone doesn't agree, that's totally fine, I'm not some kind of messiah and I never claimed to be one. But if you don't agree, provide something to back up what your argument is.

[OkamiODonnell]

10 hours ago, Indigo Rush said:

Bud-dy

Didn't your family teach you that lying was wrong

I'm just going by what I've seen some people say. Those aren't my thoughts. It's just that I've seen some people prefer 4 over Mania in some cases. While I don't know exactly why, it must be because some people compare the games with each other. I've seen arguments about the rehashed stages and bosses in both. 

[Indigo Rush]

Better get on those citations, amica 'cause I haven't seen Jack, Diddly or Squat of people prefer 4 over Mania. Anecdotal evidence doesn't cut it here.

[kadybat]

The unfortunate truth is I can't replay Sonic 4, no matter how many times I've tried. Every single time I try giving it another go, either Episode 1 or 2, I find myself frustrated by basic level design mistakes, irritating music, and piss-poor physics. I have a similar problem with Generations, at least as far as physics are concerned, in that modern Sonic Team doesn't seem to understand how classic Sonic is supposed to feel. There's this massive gap between my expectations for how Sonic should roll and jump in a 2D space and how he performs in Generations and 4.

At least in Generations, however, the level design is honestly super interesting and really dynamic. You look at levels like Classic City Escape or Classic Crisis City and you've got these really fun spaces that bring to mind actual classic moments with clever new twists. In addition, the music in Generations is brilliant, and deliberately recalls classic melodies like Endless Mine in a gambit to feel authentic. In 4, you have shoddy synths and poorly implemented Mega Drive drum samples. See the screenshot below? Sonic shouldn't look like that. Autoscrollers with multi-hit badniks and bottomless pits that require caution signs? Really?? That has nothing to do with the open-ended, multi-tiered stages in the classic games that encourage exploration and multiple playthroughs. Meanwhile, Classic City Escape challenges players to go for the high path and see what it has to offer.

Let's talk specifically about each episode, shall we? Sonic 4 Episode 1 is a game with no identity. Its stages, butchered and poorly rendered versions of stages from 1 and 2, are unoriginal and offer no interesting twists on the formula. The only original thought in any of those stages - the minecart from Lost Labyrinth - was so ridiculed after the leaked PartnerNET build that it was scrapped from almost every version of the game's release. Lost Labyrinth's final gimmick - the torch in Act 2 - is merely an annoyance. The game is short, rather ugly, none of its bosses are unique, and its story is basically non-existent.

Episode 2 at least offers a unique start. White Park and Sylvania Castle have interesting stage themes that aren't seen a lot in Sonic games. Unfortunately, the music is still uninspired, and the follow-up levels are a poor Oil Ocean rehash, Sky Chase again, and Death Egg again. It's just, boring. The physics aren't improved in any way, and worse, the Tails partner gameplay is just awkward. The roll mode is so strange, and its coerced use in White Park Act 1 is honestly just grating. Meanwhile, Taxman's solo Tails control makes so much sense that it feels like a natural part of the originals. At the very minimum there's some sort of story, even if it's just Sonic CD again.

Yes, Mania and 4 both have rehashed levels, but they take an entirely different approach. Mania offers new twists on those old stages - underground and outdoor sections where there were none, zip lines and other new gimmicks, Portal-inspired jellies, new bosses, and well-done remixed music. 4 just has Green Hill Zone with an overly-shiny coat of paint, an inane soundtrack, a boring layout, and bad physics. I can already tell Mania is a game I'm going to want to play over and over again. Sonic 4 just disappoints me more and more every time I go back.

[Mick]

Sonic Mania is Sonic Mania.  Sonic the Hedgehog 4 is Sonic the Hedgehog 4.  That's pretty much it.

[Cyalume]

As a matter of personal preference, for some reason or another I actually quite enjoyed Sonic 4 Episode I, and even enjoyed it much moreso than the sequel. Not much else I can add beyond that, just wanted to throw some S4 love in here since the thread seems relatively devoid of it. I wish I could've played S4:E2 without Tails, though, as I wasn't really too big on the team-up mechanics. 
 

Quote

Better get on those citations, amica 'cause I haven't seen Jack, Diddly or Squat of people prefer 4 over Mania. Anecdotal evidence doesn't cut it here.

I've seen similar to what Okami is claiming before as well. Some people just prefer one game to the other; don't be a jerk.

[Indigo Rush]

18 minutes ago, Cyalume said:

I've seen similar to what Okami is claiming before as well. Some people just prefer one game to the other; don't be a jerk.

I'm asking for citations for an unfounded claim. I don't rightly care if someone likes one over the other.

I'm saying that anecdotal evidence does not work here.

[Cyalume]

The claim is "some people prefer Sonic 4 to Sonic Mania". In what way can you provide citations for this? A link to a review? I see no reason why anecdotal evidence wouldn't be sufficient; they're not attempting to prove objectively that one game is better than the other, they're claiming that they know of other people who enjoy product A more than product B. I see no difference in this situation, and something akin to me saying "my buddies all think that Sonic 06 is better than Sonic Colors", and you saying "prove it". 

[Indigo Rush]

The problem is in the context of the argument, not the fact that someone might prefer one over the other. Sure, someone may like Sonic 4 over Sonic Mania. I can't pretend that can't happen, of course! But the problem begins when you rely on a not-so-obvious preference in stead of a citable fact. This then fails to be an argument, and proceeds to become a hypothesis. You can provide citations by compiling posts, quotations, chatlogs, blogs, videos, and many other bits of recorded communication to back something like this up. He's not just saying someone has a preference, he's presenting this as if it's a fact that sways his argument. It is a fallacious argument if there's no substance behind it. It shouldn't have been brought up, and it's a fallacy that I really have a disdain for around these parts. It's simply a subjective metric (a very fringe, improbable one) that is purported to have a meaning in OP's thread, yet it's not a strong one to begin with.

The quote was:

On 7/7/2017 at 2:48 AM, OkamiODonnell said:

Some believe Sonic 4 outweighs Mania for a lot of reasons.

I'm asking for what those reasons are, and who those people are, because I have not seen them. That's literally all I'm asking, because otherwise this is a useless metric at best, and a fringe opinion at worst.

You simply can't expect a debate to work on this sort of rhetoric. You just can't.

[Badnik Mechanic]

39 minutes ago, Cyalume said:

 "my buddies all think that Sonic 06 is better than Sonic Colors", and you saying "prove it". 

So link us to the conversation where they said that?

I mean come on, it's really not hard, just link us to a topic in which most people are saying so, i's really not hard to do. lol I really don't get why soo many people do this, he's talking as if it's something he's read online... so go link us to that topic or forum? Or Facebook group. God I can link to people who want a new Sonic riders game. It's really not a hard thing to do.

Or just one post? 

[Dizcrybe]

The state of Sonic 4? It's dead. Completely. Never coming back. We'll get a third Adventure game before Sonic 4 Episode III. Arguably the name alone made it DOA.

[molul]

16 hours ago, Foxboy Mick said:

Sonic Mania is Sonic Mania.  Sonic the Hedgehog 4 is Sonic the Hedgehog 4.  That's pretty much it.

I'd say "and Sonic 4 is NOT Sonic 4"

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

Honestly, I'm not sure if Okami was really trying to argue anything with his assertion about some people preferring Sonic 4. He didn't seem to be using it to make some grander point about anything. It doesn't seem like he was trying to start a debate, seems more like a general observation. Though granted, it does seem hard to believe and I'm really curious as to the reasons, so being more specific couldn't hurt. At the same time, I feel that people are overstating the need to cite because there doesn't seem to be an actual argument here, unless I'm missing something.

[StaticMania]

16 hours ago, Foxboy Mick said:

Sonic Mania is Sonic Mania.  Sonic the Hedgehog 4 is Sonic the Hedgehog 4.  That's pretty much it.

If that really was the case, a topic like this wouldn't even exist.

Sonic 4 is Sonic 4, Sonic Advance is Sonic 4, Sonic Mania is Sonic 4...it's whatever.

Even Sonic & Knuckles is Sonic 4.

[Indigo Rush]

4 minutes ago, StaticMania said:

If that really was the case, a topic like this wouldn't even exist.

Sonic 4 is Sonic 4, Sonic Advance is Sonic 4, Sonic Mania is Sonic 4...it's whatever.

Even Sonic & Knuckles is Sonic 4.

Depending on your point of view, Sonic 3 is Sonic 4.

[Agie]

The state of Sonic 4 now is that I think any plans that might have been for an Episode III will either be repurposed for an entirely separate project, assuming they don't abandon them altogether. And even then, it'd be just that; separated from Sonic 4 entirely. That's as far as any signs of life go, to be frank.