Jump to content
Awoo.

Sonic Forces - Space Port Gameplay


Patron

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

There is,  I went to one. I learned things, about video game design an art in general. 

Sometimes people would bring in some shit they shatted up last minute and they would get better responses than someone I know worked hard on theirs and looked better, them's the breaks. No one is obligated to appreciate what you perceive as quality or the work you put in, and no one is obligated to not indulge in things you don't think have quality. 

Its up the beholder, life is hard, thems the breaks

Alright, I see your point.

But you're moving this matter on a totally hypotetical level, when Forces isn't that abstract.

Take a look at this post I made:

38 minutes ago, Sonikko said:

00:00-00:06 hallway with homing attack chain

00:06-00:12 3 springs camouflaged as a grappling hook thing

00:12-00:19 hallway with rows of uninteresting enemies that just stand there, you can one-shot them

00:19-00:22 the most basic form of platforming in existence 

00:22-00:32 a 10 seconds long completely automated sections, 3 boostpads one after the other

00:32-00:34 oh hey an hallway with enemies, where have I seen that again?

00:34-00:41 grinding section where nothing is going on, literally nothing. Grappling Hook Spring at the end.

00:41-00:44 drill boost, one button press

00:44-00:48 again, a 3 platforms vertical jump. Wow. Such depth.

00:48-01:08 20 seconds of cutscene with one button prompt in the middle

01:08-01:11 Grappling Hook, again, completely automated, it's like a spring.

01:11-01:14 hallway with enemies, again

01:14-01:19 automated section with 5 boostpads, one after the other

01:19-01:19 Homing attack

01:19-01:28 either very basic platforming or automated drill boost

Literally everything about this is wrong. Let's count how many seconds are automated and don't require player input: 51 if you don't count the last bit, 1 whole minute if you include the drill boost.

1 minute out of a 1:28 minutes footage.

That's bad. No matter how you look at it.

It's supposed to be a game, a platformer (so not a game that doesn't require major inputs), and you can go ~1 minute out of 1:28 without doing anything significant.

It literally plays itself.

Meanwhile take a look at any Mario game, why doesn't it feel the need to do it?

Which is the better game?

EDIT:
All that Sonic Forces has going on is... it looks flashy. That's it. When you break it down to what you're actually doing as a player, it's as bad as it gets.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GUN Commander said:

Neither do I. It's exciting, the music is great, and the bit with the train provides just the bit of spectacle I actually rather enjoy from 3D Sonic games and why I like them over the 2D ones so much. I was a little "meh" at first way back when they first revealed it (largely due to Classic Sonic related reasons), but the more they show, the more excited I am.

It honestly befuddles me. Rarely do I see gameplay footage get released and not even half an hour later there's images with Microsoft Paint edits circling any number of things going "This is wrong! This is wrong! That's wrong too" accompanied by an army of "This is the WORST GAME I'VE EVER SEEN" type stuff. You usually have to get like, Marvel VS Capcom Infinite with the weird Chun-li face or the Sonic Boom E3 Demo (both of which had something extraordinarily wrong, like "drama behind the scenes" wrong) in order to garner these responses but with Sonic Forces, it seems that all it has to do is show up and suddenly everyone is shooting at it. Part of me thinks the Mania fans feel weaponized and instead of letting 3D fans enjoy what they enjoy, they want to straight up kill 3D Sonic so that only THEY are happy... then another part of me says "This is like Nintendo hating... it's "cool" to hate Nintendo, in fact it's what you're "supposed" to do.". Then comes theresponses with paragraphs of "It's bad because it's bad and game design, level design, fundamentals, and you're stupid if you don't see that it is, etc" and I'm confused all over again.

Cool music, cool stuff happens, you defeat enemies while avoiding obstacles and moving fast. Seems to work well enough. I'm honestly not offended. Not handing out "best game ever" awards, but not offended, in fact, excited.

@Lord-Dreamerz

I think this level is just inoffensive. It isn't perfect but still looks enjoyable. And this is coming from someone that isn't interested in buying Forces.

About the music, I didn't like it that much. After Aqua Road, I expected something a bit more exciting and fast.

3 hours ago, Mayor D said:

You press a button and skip out huge segments or instantly pass through enemies without any thought or additional input from yourself.

How do you get any enjoyment from that other than the visual effects?

Eh, I don't have nothing complex or special to justify this. The Drill Wispon just reminds me of the boost mechanic in Sonic Rush and I really liked that game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cayenne said:

Eh, I don't have nothing complex or special to justify this. The Drill Wispon just reminds me of the boost mechanic in Sonic Rush and I really liked that game. 

This isnt Sonic Rush and it works differently.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scar said:

Are they even trying any more?

Oh they are. They're trying

Spoiler

to kill off all interest in Boost gameplay

Spoiler

And yes Diogenes I know they're late to the party

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mayor D said:

This isnt Sonic Rush and it works differently.

Did he say it was Sonic Rush and worked the same? Because it sounds to me like he liked a thing because it reminded him of something else he liked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Scar said:

Are they even trying any more?

With all these reused assets and recycling? Clearly not.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scar said:

Are they even trying any more?

I believe they are, absolutely. I personally see tons of genuine effort being put into this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Blue Blood said:

With all these reused assets and recycling? Clearly not.

Looks like it. Every single stage so far apart from the Casino Forest looks like it reuses assets from Generations. Fuck, Casino Forest might even just be Planet Wisp assets at night, plus bright lights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scar said:

Looks like it. Every single stage so far apart from the Casino Forest looks like it reuses assets from Generations. Fuck, Casino Forest might even just be Planet Wisp assets at night, plus bright lights.

Casino Forest reuses a lot of assets from Lost World.

Park Avenue is pretty new. The Death Egg Robos are retooled from Generations, but it's otherwise original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FriesWithoutKetchup said:

I'd say that it depends on the type of arguments they use, but when it comes to things being 'good' or 'bad'... yes, I think that all of that is entirely subjective.

And I know that the critiques given here are based on past experiences, and that everyone comes in with references, expectations, standards, and awareness. I come into Forces with my own sets of.. well, all of those. xD And complaints about a level *can* be subjective. I think maybe we just have different interpretations about subjectivity and objectivity.

And I believe citing subjectivity is an objection, when the criticisms being made are that things are objectively bad or wrong. A lot of this *is* preference because two people are looking at the same thing, and coming away from it with totally different opinions. I look at the footage of Sonic Forces and I see linearity for sure, levels that seem way too short, and enemies that seem too easy... but I also know that that's just how I personally see it. While saying that the stages are linear is definitely pretty objective, whether or not that's good or bad is subjective.

I hope this is making sense as I type it all out, and that I don't sound confusing.

You do realize things being accepted as objective (good, bad, etc.) are specifically based on the type of arguments people use, right? If Jack declared "all chairs are made of steel", and Jill responded to Jack by showing them a chair made out of wood, are you really going to claim Jill's response to Jack is one of subjectivity? Do you really think the example of a wooden chair was a call based on personal tastes? Jill's wooden chair doesn't challenge Jack's comment because the wooden chair is an example of Jill's opinion. Jill's wooden chair challenges Jack's comment because it demonstrates Jack's statement as false. Chairs not made out of wood do exist.

To direct this closer to Sonic Forces, people (myself included) have described Forces' level design as poor and one explanation as to why is because the game uses several speed boosters in its levels. This is a pretty cut-and-dry observation not made on preferences. Even people who don't think the level design is bad can admit that statement --the many speed boosters-- is true about the game. Subjectivity can be used as an argument for statements made with prescribed tastes, but the two examples I listed don't refer to anything myself or other people like or dislike.

And while practically anything out there is subjective, subjectivity isn't a free ticket to throwing out an entire argument. Game reviews are neither a document of itemized checklists, nor are critics saying "heck if I know on whether the game is good or not". There's subjectivity, and then there's common accepted understanding. It's entirely possible to dislike a film, like, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark, but also acknowledge it's considered an excellent film by almost everyone else. Same for the inverse, like enjoying Yooka-Laylee while also handling people telling you it's not an incredible game.

  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The level design in Forces is looking progressively more like it was put together by interns. Even Lost World's level design required more player input to successfully run through, and that game was significantly linear as well.

Nothing about this looks impressive or fun in any right. Yeesh.

3 minutes ago, Scar said:

Looks like it. Every single stage so far apart from the Casino Forest looks like it reuses assets from Generations. Fuck, Casino Forest might even just be Planet Wisp assets at night, plus bright lights.

The character portraits in Casino Forest are pulled from the casino stage in Lost World, and I believe some of the flora is pulled from Silent Forest.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yeow said:

You do realize things being accepted as objective (good, bad, etc.) are specifically based on the arguments those people use, right? If Jack declared "all chairs are made of steel", and Jill responded to Jack by showing them a chair made out of wood, are you really going to claim Jill's response to Jack is one of subjectivity? Do you really think the example of a wooden chair was a call based on personal tastes? Jill's wooden chair doesn't challenge Jack's comment because the wooden chair is an example of Jill's opinion. Jill's wooden chair challenges Jack's comment because it demonstrates Jack's statement as false. Chairs not made out of wood do exist.

To direct this closer to Sonic Forces, people (myself included) have described Forces' level design as poor and one explanation as to why is because the game uses several speed boosters in its levels. This is a pretty cut-and-dry observation not made on personal tastes. Even people who don't think the level design is bad can admit that statement --the many speed boosters-- is true about the game.

Anything can be considered subjective, but subjectivity isn't a free ticket to throwing out an entire argument.Game reviews are neither a document of itemized checklists, nor critics saying "heck if I know on whether the game is good or not". There's subjectivity, and then there's common accepted understanding. It's entirely possible to dislike a film, like, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark, but also acknowledge it's considered an excellent film by almost everyone else. Same for the inverse, like enjoying Yooka-Laylee while also handling people telling you it's not an incredible game.

In that case you just used, you're talking about whether something exists or not. Of course chairs not made out of wood exist. I don't believe I ever talked about arguing that things existing was objective or subjective... in this example, what I was talking about would come up more if it were about steel chairs being BETTER than wooden chairs, or vice-versa. I don't believe that objective things don't exist at ALL in the world, I just believe that value judgement about things are entirely subjective.

And again, I'd never say that 'the levels don't have speed boosters in them' is a subjective opinion - they're clearly there. Whether that's 'good' or 'bad'? That depends entirely on who you ask.

And of course it's not a free ticket to throwing out an entire argument. I wasn't trying to imply such, and I don't believe I did.

Raiders of the Lost Ark being considered an excellent film by almost everyone else... doesn't make the movie itself an objectively good movie. It just means that most people liked it for whatever reasons. The general, accepted consensus about the quality of something doesn't equal said thing actually *being* that way inherently.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Promotion 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Clewis said:

The level design in Forces is looking progressively more like it was put together by interns. Even Lost World's level design required more player input to successfully run through, and that game was significantly linear as well.

Nothing about this looks impressive or fun in any right. Yeesh.

The character portraits in Casino Forest are pulled from the casino stage in Lost World, and I believe some of the flora is pulled from Silent Forest.

The character portraits are a pretty minor thing. The models and textures for the ruins flora as you say are either directly lifted or lifted and spruced up a bit. It's lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looks quality. 

But seriously. I really just don't care, it looks fun (and most importantly it was fun to play last time I had my hands on it) so that is really that's all that matters to me at the end of the day. 

t certainly isn't broken and doesn't function so terribly or plays itself to the point of you feeling in no control at all. And it's not awful by any real quality standards of a video game title in my opinion. I think maybe it's fair to say Sonic Forces is a game that is a lot tamer to play (as far as we know so far) than the general tone and setting it is placed in, which is a bit of a weird mismatch. 

I think Sonic Team could (and) have produced better, sure. But I'm still happy to reserve judgement for the full final product as a cohesive package to sink my teeth into when it's released. 

  • Thumbs Up 4
  • Promotion 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Clewis said:

The level design in Forces is looking progressively more like it was put together by interns. Even Lost World's level design required more player input to successfully run through, and that game was significantly linear as well.

Nothing about this looks impressive or fun in any right. Yeesh.

The character portraits in Casino Forest are pulled from the casino stage in Lost World, and I believe some of the flora is pulled from Silent Forest.

The character portraits are a pretty minor thing. The models and textures for the ruins and indeed the flora as you say are either directly lifted or lifted and spruced up a bit. It's lazy.

3D Sonic games have never done this in the past. Forces has not had the four year development cycle we originally assumed it had.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Blue Blood said:

The character portraits are a pretty minor thing.

Yeah, you're right. They've just always stuck out to me since it doesn't make much sense from an in-universe standpoint, but then again it didn't make any sense in Lost World either, so whatever. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Blue Blood said:

The character portraits are a pretty minor thing. The models and textures for the ruins and indeed the flora as you say are either directly lifted or lifted and spruced up a bit. It's lazy.

3D Sonic games have never done this in the past. Forces has not had the four year development cycle we originally assumed it had.

I think there's another game already in development, being made by the Generations team. A weird choice given this one's epic plot, but I find it hard to believe that Sega would let four years go by and only have this to show for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, FriesWithoutKetchup said:

In that case you just used, you're talking about whether something exists or not. Of course chairs not made out of wood exist. I don't believe I ever talked about arguing that things existing was objective or subjective... in this example, what I was talking about would come up more if it were about steel chairs being BETTER than wooden chairs, or vice-versa. I don't believe that objective things don't exist at ALL in the world, I just believe that value judgement about things are entirely subjective.

And again, I'd never say that 'the levels don't have speed boosters in them' is a subjective opinion - they're clearly there. Whether that's 'good' or 'bad'? That depends entirely on who you ask.

And of course it's not a free ticket to throwing out an entire argument. I wasn't trying to imply such, and I don't believe I did.

Raiders of the Lost Ark being considered an excellent film by almost everyone else... doesn't make the movie itself an objectively good movie. It just means that most people liked it for whatever reasons. The general, accepted consensus about the quality of something doesn't equal said thing actually *being* that way inherently.

My examples and questions about the steel chairs (as well as the Forces dash panels) was in response to you saying that subjectivity can be used as an objection when a statement is objectively bad or wrong. I'm using those examples to argue that citing subjectivity as a rebuttal to wrong statements does not make sense. Pointing out heavy dash panels use exist in Forces and are not all wooden chairs are not made of steel are respectively correct and incorrect. Since you said subjectivity can be used as an rebuttal for incorrect statements, I am asking you what exactly is subjective about the statement that "all chairs are made out of steel"?

And saying Raiders of the Lost Ark isn't a good movie in spite of many people (film critics, general audiences, film historians, etc.) saying otherwise is an example of using subjectivity to dismiss an argument. You're claiming a lack of objectivity on the quality of a film even when the existence of evidence exists pointing it in one direction has been presented. Claiming subjectivity on the film's reception and then using that to offer no other argument on why Raiders of the Lost Ark is not a good movie is effectively an argument in lieu of an argument; and an excellent reason for me to place Mighty No. 9 next to Rayman Origins and declare them as equals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Whatever the WhoCares said:

I think there's another game already in development, being made by the Generations team. A weird choice given this one's epic plot, but I find it hard to believe that Sega would let four years go by and only have this to show for it. 

Dude, forget about it. There is no Generations Team or Colours Team or whatever. THIS game is what Sonic Team is giving us four years after SLW and six years after Generations. This bland and forgettable looking platformer which has had no improvements made to its gameplay since 2011 is all we’re gonna get for now. 

Edit: Actually, it might become less forgettable if the story is good (or bad).

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Blue Blood said:

The character portraits are a pretty minor thing. The models and textures for the ruins and indeed the flora as you say are either directly lifted or lifted and spruced up a bit. It's lazy.

3D Sonic games have never done this in the past. Forces has not had the four year development cycle we originally assumed it had.

Not assumed, we were told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gabz Girl said:

Dude, forget about it. There is no Generations Team or Colours Team or whatever. THIS game is what Sonic Team is giving us four years after SLW and six years after Generations. This bland and forgettable looking platformer which has had no improvements made to its gameplay since 2011 is all we’re gonna get for now. 

Edit: Actually, it might become less forgettable if the story is good (or bad).

You might be right, but I still find that hard to believe. Unless this game is packed with content and it's a quantity over quality situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MudHunter said:

So IGN and Gamespot gave their impression

https://www.gamespot.com/amp-articles/watch-sonic-forces-new-chemical-plant-zone-level-i/1100-6454108/

http://m.ign.com/articles/2017/10/17/sonic-forces-lightning-whip-is-super-satisfying

Overall I think Sonic Forces is gonna be in between Lost World and Generations regarding reviews (something like lots of 7/10)

Huh, IGN has been oddly positive about Sonic Forces. It's strange and ironic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Yeow said:

My examples and questions about the steel chairs (as well as the Forces dash panels) was in response to you saying that subjectivity can be used as an objection when a statement is objectively bad or wrong. I'm using those examples to argue that citing subjectivity as a rebuttal to wrong statements does not make sense. Pointing out heavy dash panels use exist in Forces and are not all wooden chairs are not made of steel are respectively correct and incorrect. Since you said subjectivity can be used as an rebuttal for incorrect statements, I am asking you what exactly is subjective about the statement that "all chairs are made out of steel"?

And saying Raiders of the Lost Ark isn't a good movie in spite of many people (film critics, general audiences, film historians, etc.) saying otherwise is an example of using subjectivity to dismiss an argument. You're claiming a lack of objectivity on the quality of a film even when the existence of evidence exists pointing it in one direction has been presented. Claiming subjectivity on the film's reception and then using that to offer no other argument on why Raiders of the Lost Ark is not a good movie is effectively an argument in lieu of an argument; and an excellent reason for me to place Mighty No. 9 next to Rayman Origins and declare them as equals.

Objectively bad and objectively wrong are two very different things. I'd say that it's a lot easier to prove that something is objectively wrong than to prove something is objectively bad, if we're talking about 'wrong' in the sense of being false. The dash panels in Forces are BAD is not a correct or incorrect statement, it's a subjective opinion. There are no dash panels in Forces at all is an incorrect, veritably false statement. I don't think there's anything subjective about 'all chairs are made of out steel' as a statement.

But... it's *not* dismissing anything. It's just offering a different opinion about something. If one person says they like something, and another says they dislike something, I dont' see how that's dismissing an argument.

Honestly, this whole thing is starting to become very confusing to me...

I've never seen Raider's of the Lost Ark, so I can't really say one way or another if I think it's a good movie or not. I'm talking more generally. Everything pointing in one direction doesn't make something objectively good or bad, it just means that the general consensus about it is one way. I don't believe that movies, games, songs, etc. are inherently, objectively bad or good. They just exist, and then people come along and place value judgements on them. If enough people happen to agree one way or another about something, then it creates a general consensus... but that doesn't create real, actual objectivity. It's still a consensus made up of people's personal opinions.

And if someone puts those two games as equal in their own eyes... it doesn't really matter, because that's their opinion. It only really matters if they put themselves in a position where they have to justify and explain why they think that way.

I don't really understand what issue you're taking with what I've said. Could you please tell me what, in the simplest possible terms, you object to that I've said about Sonic Forces? I'm having trouble keeping up with everything, since this has gotten extremely philosophical and gone way past just stating opinions.

 

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.