Jump to content
Dejimon11

IDW's Sonic the Hedgehog

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Jack at the Cinema said:

I'm not following, don't be cryptic, are you still talking about the mandates around Sha... I mean, various characters, or something else? I'm hearing baseless rumors that the Warp Topaz is needed for some retcon due to Sega and canon... Not sure if it's true, but the possibility is definitely there.

The basic thing about the Warp Topaz (that I've picked up since I'm unable to buy the book monthly) is its now been established to be able to alter reality so now some people are thinking there will be a cosmic retcon. To the point where some are spouting a conspiracy theory that Sega are going to merge continuities to have a unified one which is...stupid. 

Now personally I'm expecting the next "season" to have some reality warping shenanigans but not like a complete reboot 3 freaking years into the books run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2020 at 3:17 PM, Sega DogTagz said:

The comics have already expanded on that though. Amy and Sonic have been through battlefields where Amy confirmed that they lost a lot of good people while Sonic was away. It heavily implies a significant death toll.

And there we see the problem with merging Saturday Morning Cartoon Eggman with Cruek Butcher Conqeror Eggman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Eggy is a killer. Wow.

Wasn't that clear since Egg Grapes in Archie preboot? Everything he did to echidnas? Blowing up Antoine? Robotization, Legionisation, freezing 
Tassle Boy" in his own body?

Or let me put it simpler: wasn't Flynn's Eggman always psychopath with a lot of comedy to him? And been absolutely praised for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MetalSkulkBane said:

So Eggy is a killer. Wow.

Wasn't that clear since Egg Grapes in Archie preboot? Everything he did to echidnas? Blowing up Antoine? Robotization, Legionisation, freezing 
Tassle Boy" in his own body?

Or let me put it simpler: wasn't Flynn's Eggman always psychopath with a lot of comedy to him? And been absolutely praised for that?

Yeah but Archie eggy explicitly wasn't game Eggy. He was the american Julian who bodyswapped. Even postboot he was still Satam robotnik with a better design.

The game Eggman has always run on the idea that nobody dies onscreen. And even in Forces Infinite was the one who had all the kills. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, thumbs13 said:

The game Eggman has always run on the idea that nobody dies onscreen. And even in Forces Infinite was the one who had all the kills. 

Which is all fine and dandy. Firing a nuke into downtown station square is perfectly acceptable because the unspeakable devastation it will cause happens off screen.

Its one thing to hand-wave the lack of casualties due to Chaos flooding a city, or Eggman blowing up the planet to set Dark Gaia free, but lets not act like Game-Eggman doesn't have a body count and/or the ability to rack one up too. Sonic specifically accuses him of plotting Genocide at one point in Lost World. That's not a word you throw around unless you think someone is capable of that kind of bloodshed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DabigRG said:

Aren't they the same? :lol:

Not really. The Sonic games before Forces have been careful to not have him do anything that would mean him not being in prison or dead breaks the wall of disbelief too hard. Even in something like SatAM he's not shown racking up a notable bodycount. Hence introducing villains like Chaos or Black Doom who can be killed or otherwise get a final ending that removes them as a threat.

This goes differently in comics but they either have Eggman in a position of power and influence where Sonic can't touch him or lock him up, or even kill him.

 

35 minutes ago, Sega DogTagz said:

Which is all fine and dandy. Firing a nuke into downtown station square is perfectly acceptable because the unspeakable devastation it will cause happens off screen.

Its one thing to hand-wave the lack of casualties due to Chaos flooding a city, or Eggman blowing up the planet to set Dark Gaia free, but lets not act like Game-Eggman doesn't have a body count and/or the ability to rack one up too. Sonic specifically accuses him of plotting Genocide at one point in Lost World. That's not a word you throw around unless you think someone is capable of that kind of bloodshed.

The missile he launched just comically crashed with no big boom. Even made the splatting sound.

The point is that Sega of Japan/Team Naka's Eggman is a Japanese Saturday Morning Cartoon villain ala Team Rocket. Even something like blowing up Prison Island can be waved off as G.U.N. being shown as corrupt so Eggman doesn't become irredeemable by doing so. Trying to reconcile this with how the Big Egg's been established to be in Western interpretations falls apart since there's the obvious problem of how he hasn't been killed or imprisoned yet and how this current arc will end without him getting either.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The full extent of Eggman's actions are never fully explored in the games to maintain the lighthearted atmosphere. Even his "serious" portrayals like SA2 never steer that far, and he's comically hammy and over the top.

 

It's only in the West when he gets portrayed as a genocidal dictator, and he's treated as a far bigger threat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Almar said:

Not really. The Sonic games before Forces have been careful to not have him do anything that would mean him not being in prison or dead breaks the wall of disbelief too hard. Even in something like SatAM he's not shown racking up a notable bodycount. .

 

 

The joke is SatAM stands for Saturday Morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kuzu said:

The full extent of Eggman's actions are never fully explored in the games to maintain the lighthearted atmosphere. Even his "serious" portrayals like SA2 never steer that far, and he's comically hammy and over the top.

 

It's only in the West when he gets portrayed as a genocidal dictator, and he's treated as a far bigger threat. 

And honestly eventhough he's not normally portrayed as a dictator in the games when you think about the stuff he's done it's pretty messed up.

It always confuses me that people don't count the things he's done as threatening or scary just because jokes are made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SBR2 said:

And honestly eventhough he's not normally portrayed as a dictator in the games when you think about the stuff he's done it's pretty messed up.

It always confuses me that people don't count the things he's done as threatening or scary just because jokes are made.

Maybe because the games usually don't take it as seriously or address it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SBR2 said:

And honestly eventhough he's not normally portrayed as a dictator in the games when you think about the stuff he's done it's pretty messed up.

It always confuses me that people don't count the things he's done as threatening or scary just because jokes are made.

Because you're not supposed to think about the stuff he's done. You care when he has a gun to Amy's head, but no one really cares about the realistic affects blowing up the moon should have had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are we not suppose to think about the stuff he’s done when he does it onscreen?

That’s stretching a little too far.

Him blowing up the moon was portrayed just as serious as him holding a gun to Amy’s head in the same game—they both showed he has a means of taking innocent lives if his demands are not, and all he really needs is a reason. It’s all about either stopping him or at the very least not giving him a reason to carry his threats out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

You're not supposed to overthink it. Take the game's tone at its word, don't assume the existence of bodies that are never seen or referenced in any way.

That’s not even overthinking. Regardless of if we’re shown bodies or not. He doesn’t have to show someone dead for us to know what holding people at gunpoint or a moon-shattering laser can imply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Implications are one thing, but they never actually lead where they could, because this isn't the kind of series where the villain is going to shoot a 12 year old in the head. Eggman's a bad guy, he does bad things that, in the real world, would lead to people being killed, but he gets stopped before that happens, because this is a series about colorful superpowered funny animals, not a gritty drama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Implications are one thing, but they never actually lead where they could, because this isn't the kind of series where the villain is going to shoot a 12 year old in the head. Eggman's a bad guy, he does bad things that, in the real world, would lead to people being killed, but he gets stopped before that happens, because this is a series about colorful superpowered funny animals, not a gritty drama.

No, the implications don’t lead to where they could because the whole point stopping it before it does and with consequences on the rare instances they do, not because of what series this is—we just had a movie of this series literally a few days ago where something like that happens to said character’s mother figure before their eyes and it winds up heavily implied she’s not alive.

That is no longer an excuse. We’re not saying it should go the realms of, for instance, Tom Clancy’s tone in terms of killing people—you’ve known this for years and we need to stop acting like that’s the series we’re wanting to revel in (much less one with a comic that’s undergoing zombie apocalypse that is anything but bright and sunshine).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

No, the implications don’t lead to where they could because the whole point stopping it before it does, not because of what series this is

Right the point is that they stop it before it happens, that's the point of the series, that the heroes win and save everyone (that isn't an evil monster) pretty much all the time.

1 minute ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

—we just had a movie of this series literally a few days ago where something like that happens to said character’s mother figure before their eyes and it winds up heavily implied she’s not alive.

That is no longer an excuse.

What happens in one continuity does not necessarily apply to other continuities. And my point is not that no character is ever allowed to die in Sonic, but that the realistic outcomes of these kinds of actions do not necessarily apply because this is an un-real series that deliberately avoids those kinds of tragic outcomes.

Spoiler

Looks like we don't even see what happens to owl mom anyway so who knows if she's actually dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Right the point is that they stop it before it happens, that's the point of the series, that the heroes win and save everyone (that isn't an evil monster) pretty much all the time.

In addition to consequences when they fail, which can lead to things like the loss of loved ones to a plague.

Quote

What happens in one continuity does not necessarily apply to other continuities. And my point is not that no character is ever allowed to die in Sonic, but that the realistic outcomes of these kinds of actions do not necessarily apply because this is an un-real series that deliberately avoids those kinds of tragic outcomes.

 

And that just isn’t true. Being an un-real series doesn’t mean they deliberately avoid it. That’s entirely based on whether they’re willing to go through with the act or not and explore the tragic outcomes—the entire reason why conflict (and thus the overall story) exists in the first place.

We’ve seen this in the Lion King (twice), and that’s an un-real series. So again, that’s not an excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

In addition to consequences when they fail, which can lead to things like the loss of loved ones to a plague.

Literally everybody is going to be back to flesh and blood by the end of this arc.

3 minutes ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

And that just isn’t true. Being an un-real series doesn’t mean they deliberately avoid it.

But this is the kind of un-real series that has avoided it, far more often than not. Blow a chunk out of the moon and then immediately forget about it because it doesn't affect anything. "All's well that ends well", as they stand in the flooded ruins of a city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Literally everybody is going to be back to flesh and blood by the end of this arc.

Okay? Everyone knows that. That doesn’t mean the heroes always win (flawlessly at least).

Quote

But this is the kind of un-real series that has avoided it, far more often than not. Blow a chunk out of the moon and then immediately forget about it because it doesn't affect anything. "All's well that ends well", as they stand in the flooded ruins of a city.

No it is not, and you know it.

This series has had characters die, or make heavy implications they may have died—Shadow’s sacrifice being one before actually turning out alive, E-102 Gamma being another, Maria, The Duke of Soleanna, even Sonic himself. And the tragic consequences of those are often explored, so this series in fact does not avoid it.

The fact that I even have to list this is telling. You blow a chunk out of the moon and keep in mind Eggman is holding the world hostage, “All’s well that ends well,” as they stand before a flooded city because far worse would’ve happened if nothing was done to stop the cause that wrecked it.

EDIT: Typing on phone can be ass...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, my point is not that no characters are ever allowed to die. It's that you should not act like the worst possible outcomes of the villain's actions were ever seriously on the table. Eggman was never actually going to get to laze entire countries off the map in SA2. This isn't the kind of series that would do that kind of massacre. You're not supposed to look at that and seriously consider the staggering loss of life, the enormity of the tragedy, that would occur if it happened in real life; you're supposed to take it as the over-the-top doomed-to-fail supervillain plan that it is. Eggman isn't a horrifying monster, he's a clown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Again, my point is not that no characters are ever allowed to die. It's that you should not act like the worst possible outcomes of the villain's actions were ever seriously on the table. Eggman was never actually going to get to laze entire countries off the map in SA2. This isn't the kind of series that would do that kind of massacre. You're not supposed to look at that and seriously consider the staggering loss of life, the enormity of the tragedy, that would occur if it happened in real life; you're supposed to take it as the over-the-top doomed-to-fail supervillain plan that it is. Eggman isn't a horrifying monster, he's a clown.

I made my edit because my phone deleted a few paragraphs in a refresh, but the outcomes of the villain’s actions are on the table because he made a show of force showing what he’ll do. He’s literally holding guns to people, threatening lives, causing wars, launching missiles, and wrecking cities no differently than any other villain before or after him, and the series makes it threatening enough that you should know he needs to be stopped by any means necessary.

So, Eggman being a clown doesn’t make him less of a horrifying monster—hell, there are other fictional actual clowns that are leagues more terrifying (I.e. the Joker). It doesn’t matter if he’s laughing mad or looks silly doing—this guy is holding people hostage and blowing up moons and planets. That is a dangerous threat only a sociopath would do, even if fictional, and the story makes it clear enough. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Implications are one thing, but they never actually lead where they could, because this isn't the kind of series where the villain is going to shoot a 12 year old in the head. Eggman's a bad guy, he does bad things that, in the real world, would lead to people being killed, but he gets stopped before that happens, because this is a series about colorful superpowered funny animals, not a gritty drama.

Well it wasn't the head but... i mean....maria...

While I disagree with your notion that actually having consequences is some how a gritty drama, even if those consequences are grim. I do agree with the notion that has been posted in the thread when it comes to eggman, you take it at face value. He's team rocket, if you look at them plainly they work for a pokemon trafficking ring run by an international criminal organization and often use somewhat leathal means to do that trafficking. However, you are not supposed to look at them like that, they are funny goof balls who try to steal pokemon and fail. And eggman is a crazy funny doctor that tries to take over the world, and fails. The other villians, government organizations, extra dimensional gods ect, can be that serious sinister enemy that is desired. But eggman himself isn't to be taken seriously really. 

And it says a lot that at least my anecdotal experience, the most interesting eggman stuff  to people in this arc is him being so incompetent about the situation and not thinking ahead. Yelling about how he could beat that blasted hedgehog a while ago but he wants to one up him. Eggman himself is not serious , and never really does take the situation that seriously. This is opposition of the eggman morality plotline about whether he should have lived or died, which funnily enough died itself. While that isn't the sole fault of anyone writing, I do think people just don't find that question about eggman interesting.

And i'm not trying to say something about people who feel a way about eggman. Your opinions are very valid and your views on this weird series we like are too. But I feel as though much like the people who insist he be called robotnik are stuck on weird contradictory marketing of  a character that hasn't been relevant since the 90's, and its 2020. While i'm the number one guy of " hey this series can do serious things sometimes " maybe taking the funny doctor at face value is how he was intended to be taken and how narratives work best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.