Gaming media that isn't Classic biased?

[knuckles20]

I'm honestly curious to know if there are any notable sties or journalists that do not share or against the "Classic Sonic is best. Sonic was never good in 3D. Sonic's friends are stupid. etc" mentality.

I'm talking about press that are more likely to get SEGA's attention. Because of the media it portrays all sonic fans who just want the first game to be rehashed repeatedly with nothing more.

But as we know too well the fandom is actually splintered. Notably some who are ok with the current direction, and some who view it as a regression.

Why am I asking for this:

IGN doesn't speak for me as a Sonic fan.

Game Grumps doesn't speak for me as a Sonic fan.

Any of the gaming sites who say "Sonic was never good in 3D" speak for me as a Sonic fan.

I'm asking for anyone with notable presence that will speak in favor of complex plots, multiple playable characters; i.e. why Adventure era has fans.

If there isn't anyone that fit the bill that's fine cause at least I can hope the IDW comics can maintain what got me in the Sonic in the first place.

[Bomber Blurr]

I want to say SomeCallMeJohnny, or ClementJ64....

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Johnny and Clement are really too good for this fanbase, honestly

[Fr0zenanus]

look up journalism sites prior to 2004/2005 maybe?

[Blue Wisp]

3 hours ago, knuckles20 said:

Game Grumps doesn't speak for me as a Sonic fan.

Why would you do this in the first place? Arin outright dislikes Sonic games. 

But yeah go with Johnny or Clement. Johnny is MVP, I love him. 

[Tracker_TD]

So basically: "I need stuff that agrees with me, rather than stuff that challenges me to think about the stuff I like critically." Got it. Is confirmation bias the word? 

You never think like, maybe those people aren't "biased"? Like, maybe they just consider the Classic games to be better structured, with more consistent gameplay and a narrative that isn't naff, with fair reasons for said opinions? Man, what a concept!

Anyway yeah, SomeCallMeJohnny's neat. He won't open with the "3D Sonic was never good" but he still gives a fair critical analysis of any game he plays, what works, what doesn't, and whether he can generally just recommend it.

[The Deleter]

Yeah, unless you find someone who has grown up specifically with the modern games, you won't find anyone like that constantly advocating for storylines and characters past the classic trio out there. It just doesn't appeal to the older audience gaming journalism is composed of, due to no small part how those elements are actually executed in the games. You have reviewers like Johnny, but even he doesn't really take a position advocating for them.

Best bet is to wait for the generation who was raised on them to become better established in the industry, probably, but even then there's no guarantee that people who grew up with those elements will be willing to stand up for them in the critical department...

[knuckles20]

29 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

So basically: "I need stuff that agrees with me, rather than stuff that challenges me to think about the stuff I like critically." Got it. Is confirmation bias the word? 

You never think like, maybe those people aren't "biased"? Like, maybe they just consider the Classic games to be better structured, with more consistent gameplay and a narrative that isn't naff, with fair reasons for said opinions? Man, what a concept!

Anyway yeah, SomeCallMeJohnny's neat. He won't open with the "3D Sonic was never good" but he still gives a fair critical analysis of any game he plays, what works, what doesn't, and whether he can generally just recommend it.

That doesn't mean I'm gonna change my opinions just to match theirs. Is it really a problem that I wanna hear from someone high up that isn't "Sonic's friends suck. Sonic was never good in 3D." Because I"m sick of that crap. That mentality killed Sonic games for me.

And yes I do think they're biased. They're biased against other characters playable, against 3D and I mean purely 3D and just want Sonic to be stuck in his safe little bubble where he can relive 1991 all the time.

 

[Tracker_TD]

5 minutes ago, knuckles20 said:

That doesn't mean I'm gonna change my opinions just to match theirs. Is it really a problem that I wanna hear from someone high up that isn't "Sonic's friends suck. Sonic was never good in 3D." Because I"m sick of that crap. That mentality killed Sonic games for me.

You don't need to change your opinion because a reviewer thinks differently; but brushing it off as "bias" rather than their thoughts having any merit is straight-up daft. 

[Blue Wisp]

31 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

You never think like, maybe those people aren't "biased"? Like, maybe they just consider the Classic games to be better structured, with more consistent gameplay and a narrative that isn't naff, with fair reasons for said opinions? Man, what a concept!

Ain't that biased.

Let the guy watch whatever he wants good heavens. If he doesn't like the "3D was never good" crowd what are you going to do? You shot yourself on the foot with that last part. 

[knuckles20]

Just now, Tracker_TD said:

You don't need to change your opinion because a reviewer thinks differently; but brushing it off as "bias" rather than their thoughts having any merit is straight-up daft. 

Why not? They pushed SEGA to regressed the games like the good ol' Genesis days and we've been stuck in nostalgia suck up ever since.

 

[Tracker_TD]

4 minutes ago, Hard-Boiled Wisp said:

Ain't that biased.

Let the guy watch whatever he wants good heavens. If he doesn't like the "3D was never good" crowd what are you going to do? You shot yourself on the foot with that last part. 

I'm not saying he can't watch what he wants, that'd be absurd; but brushing off all criticism of these games as "bias" is dumb. 

Cant quote particularly well on mobile, but also; if Mania is a "regression," then SEGA need to "regress" more often, because sweet damn.

[knuckles20]

Just now, Tracker_TD said:

I'm not saying he can't watch what he wants, that'd be absurd; but brushing off all criticism of these games as "bias" is dumb. 

Is it that hard to believe that the bias exists when big sites like IGN still feed into the "Sonic shitty friends" mentality?

Or praise good 3D games like Generations when half of it isn't in 3D?

[Blue Wisp]

6 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

I'm not saying he can't watch what he wants, that'd be absurd; but brushing off all criticism of these games as "bias" is dumb. 

Cant quote particularly well on mobile, but also; if Mania is a "regression," then SEGA need to "regress" more often, because sweet damn.

Maybe he ain't like Mania. That's fine if he doesn't. I like both styles so I don't care but that almost felt like jumping at his throat for what he thinks. 

In one hand, I have to agree a little bit that while the games are good, I'm a bit tired of seeing Green Hill and throwbacks all over the place. I would prefer new tropes, new level themes, but eh, what can you do. It's the cost of success. Mania's new stages are the highlights for me, I wish it had more. .

[Tracker_TD]

4 minutes ago, knuckles20 said:

Is it that hard to believe that the bias exists when big sites like IGN still feed into the "Sonic shitty friends" mentality?

Or praise good 3D games like Generations when half of it isn't in 3D?

IGN aren't biased against the 3D Sonic games. They're "biased" against Sonic games they perceive to be naff. And it just so happens there's been a lot of 3D Sonic games that can somewhat easily be considered naff.

The "Sonic's shitty friends" trope is largely on SEGA for utilising said friends so poorly; the reviewer is just doing their job and giving their opinion on said aspect.

[Indigo Rush]

No, there's no big gaming media outlet that thinks the Adventure/06 series of games are anything worth returning to.

The monotonous rhetoric is frustrating, but beneath the bullhorn lies a very palpable truth that the Classic Sonic games are fundamentally better designed down to their very core, and the concepts utilized in the jump to 3D are fundamentally abrasive to not only Sonic's original philosophies, but general game design logic altogether. Anyone who's put serious effort into deconstructing the problems of the Sonic series have come to similar conclusions. I won't deny that there'll be the odd chucklehead looking to get a rise out of people, but on the whole they aren't wrong. 

If you want to be told that the Adventure era games and the inner machinations of Sonic Team at the time were anything remotely sensible, you're not going to find it from a genuine critic. Random YouTubers spouting that sort of narrative exist, though. Good luck on your search.

[Tracker_TD]

4 minutes ago, Hard-Boiled Wisp said:

Maybe he ain't like Mania. That's fine if he doesn't. I like both styles so I don't care but that almost felt like jumping at his throat for what he thinks. 

In one hand, I have to agree a little bit that while the games are good, I'm a bit tired of seeing Green Hill and throwbacks all over the place. I would prefer new tropes, new level themes, but eh, what can you do. It's the cost of success. Mania's new stages are the highlights for me, I wish it had more. .

That is my entire point.

Him not liking Mania is fine; but me brushing it off as some "Adventure fanboy bias against Classic Sonic!" would be utterly deranged. Likewise, brushing off critic opinions of the Adventure era onwards as "Classic bias against Modern Sonic!" isn't particularly sharp. 

[knuckles20]

9 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

IGN aren't biased against the 3D Sonic games. They're "biased" against Sonic games they perceive to be naff. And it just so happens there's been a lot of 3D Sonic games that can somewhat easily be considered naff.

The "Sonic's shitty friends" trope is largely on SEGA for utilising said friends so poorly; the reviewer is just doing their job and giving their opinion on said aspect.

And the problem with that it makes it that harder for SEGA to get out of their comfort zone. They've been stuck into "Suck up to classic fans" since Colors. 

Not sure if you've noticed but there fans who are getting tired of the classic pandering. And the point of this thread was to see if there were any big gaming journalists who aren't part of group who wants to keep Sonic in 1991.

I'm not gonna call the Adventure games perfect, but I still believe that the formula can has the potential for the franchise to grow and not be hampered by critics who want Sonic stuck in the same place for over a decade.

Also I wanna make this clear: I have no hate for Mania. I'm honestly more frustrated with Forces than I am with Mania. Mania know what it wants to be. Forces failed with me because that first trailer I thought that SEGA finally understood what adventure fans wanted but screwed the pooch the moment Classic Sonic showed up.

[Tracker_TD]

Just now, knuckles20 said:

And the problem with that it makes it that harder for SEGA to get out of their comfort zone. They've been stuck into "Suck up to classic fans" since Colors. 

Not sure if you've noticed but there fans who are getting tired of the classic pandering. And the point of this thread was to see if there were any big gaming journalists who aren't part of group who wants to keep Sonic in 1991.

I'm not gonna call the Adventure games perfect, but I still believe that the formula can has the potential for the franchise to grow and not be hampered by critics who want Sonic stuck in the same place for over a decade.

Iterating on a formula that works isn't "pandering" or "sucking up," that's "logical game design."

Mania does a hell of a lot to evolve beyond what was set in 1991. By this logic the Adventure formula is worthless to return to, because why bother; it'd just be going back to 1998!

[Indigo Rush]

8 minutes ago, knuckles20 said:

Not sure if you've noticed but there fans who are getting tired of the classic pandering. And the point of this thread was to see if there were any big gaming journalists who aren't part of group who wants to keep Sonic in 1991.

1991 Sonic would be awful. No spin-dash? 16 bit forever? No multiple characters? No cutscenes? Golly. 

Good thing that's not what they're asking for.

There's more to it than the surface-level details. 

6 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

Mania does a hell of a lot to evolve beyond what was set in 1991. By this logic the Adventure formula is worthless to return to, because why bother; it'd just be going back to 1998!

Nostalgia pandering needs to stop; what we need is for Sega to return to the games from 18 years ago!

 

 

 

 

 

...so, can we cut the crap and actually discuss why critics and the like want Sonic's classic game design to be the forefront? Can we acknowledge that there's more to it beyond nostalgia? Because if all you have against it is aesthetics and story related, then I don't see a big case for discussion. It's been done to death. Less checkerboards, less 2D, more cutscenes, more characters. Like... is that all you have for us? Cool. I can dig that. The end. Give me something better.

[Blue Wisp]

2 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

1991 Sonic would be awful. No spin-dash? 16 bit forever? No multiple characters? No cutscenes? Golly. 

And no recovery frames when hitting a spike. 

brrrr

[The Deleter]

Journalists don't want to keep Sonic in 1991 constantly, either. By the time Forces comes out, I guarantee you several reviewers will start to get tired of the nostalgia pandering in the form of green hills and chemical plants, and list it as a negative. Especially hot off the heels of Mania, where the new stages were the biggest highlight for most, and the execution of the old stages mattered more than just the inclusion. Just because they make judgement on what is the most solid form of Sonic and prefer the series to return to such a style, doesn't mean they support stagnation at all.

[knuckles20]

16 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

 

...so, can we cut the crap and actually discuss why critics and the like want Sonic's classic game design to be the forefront? Can we acknowledge that there's more to it beyond nostalgia? Because if all you have against it is aesthetics related and story related, then I don't see a big case for discussion. It's been done to death. Less checkerboards, less 2D, more cutscenes, more characters. Like... is that all you have for us?

The problem is that they're no sign of expanding the games outside of "remember the classic era?". Why can't you understand that people appreciate the adventure games outside of nostalgia?

I expected this kind simplicity from Mario. What got me into Sonic from those games was that the plots were more than "recuse the princess again", the characters who had their own motivations, it felt like the world was growing with every new game. To me, Sonic was the anti-Mario. 

People say that the adventure formula is "flawed". But I feel that the formula can be improved instead of just giving us bare bone content.

Sonic is more that just the gameplay to me. Because if that the only thing he can have, if he has to be so simplified to be good where only gameplay matters then why not just play Mario games.

[Indigo Rush]

1 minute ago, knuckles20 said:

The problem is that they're no sign of expanding the games outside of "remember the classic era?". Why can't you understand that people appreciate the adventure games outside of nostalgia?

I understand and respect that people like Sonic Adventures 1, 2 and 06, among others. I was 8-16 years old during that time period, and I lapped it up just like everyone else.

I also happen to think that the aspects of the Adventure games that are worth salvaging would render the Adventure series unrecognizable. I've grown to listen to analysis and take criticism to heart. The hard truth is that they haven't aged well. You could pick up Adventure 1 and polish it pretty nice with a remaster, but you're still stuck with a game that decided to divert the attention from the "Sonic" part of the "Sonic" game, to make it a winding narrative that's far-removed from the original game's tone and setting.

This isn't to say you couldn't make an Adventure 3 or something that hits a home run with a consistent gameplay style with a fitting narrative and different characters, it just wouldn't greatly resemble the original Adventures beyond the title. 

[Tracker_TD]

13 minutes ago, knuckles20 said:

If that the only thing he can have, if he has to be so simplified to be good where only gameplay matters then why not just play Mario games.

...because I want to play Sonic games? 

Mania is a game with a pretty damn nice amount of content; it's got several extra modes, methods of changing aspects of the gameplay itself, several movesets for Sonic (in addition to 3 unique playable characters), not to mention plenty of levels, each expansive in design, and in addition iterates on the formula by adding new abilities such as the Drop Dash, and introducing an upgraded form of Blue Sphere with new item types and such. The plot is there, and while flawed due to missing transitions, gets the job done with a decent narrative that avoids being overbearing or unfitting.

Mania absolutely expands the games; it's just not the expansion *you* want, so you brush it off, and chastise reviewers that appreciate it of "bias."