Who is your least favorite Sonic character?

[batson]

56 minutes ago, dbzfan7 said:

I'll quickly go over Orbot and Cubot and just say they wouldn't bug me so much if they at least had a reason to exist outside of being for conversation. They do nothing, succeed at nothing, and basically just make Eggman look stupid. Have them at least pilot badniks or do something to make them have a reason to exist. Even Scratch and Grounder seem to have more reason to be lackies than those two and they're purposely played up to be bumbling and stupid.

You're right. Even after all these games we don't know what exactly Orbot and Cubot do. We've seen them do menial labor like cleaning, but surely Eggman must have regular "mindless" robots to do this for him? Why did he went through the trouble of creating those two sentient, speech-capable robots for no good reason? Seriously, Orbot and Cubot just suck.

[E-122-Psi]

I don't hate Orbot and Cubot at all but I do admit like other characters, it feels like they have a more lasting impression because of side media. Sonic Boom seemed to grasp a more worthwhile role for them (likely because it was comedic as whole) while in most of the games they tend to just be comic relief. They work as someone for Eggman to interact with but otherwise don't contribute much effective. Even just seeing them pilot the odd early stage mech in place of Eggman would work. I mean it's not like Boom even remotely altered their characters to work.

[thumbs13]

Yeah, they left no impression on me pre-Boom. Before I wrote that other post, I actually forgot they were in Forces. 

I feel like they only exist because these games need more characters, which is also a result of Sonic's friends getting the can. I think it's telling that in games like Generations or Rise of Lyric, when Eggman has someone else to work with, they just don't exist. It's also why they don't do anything in TSR, I guess, because Eggman has Zavok and Dodonpa to talk to. In the comics, Snively and then Starline served their role, so they were reduced to background roles, which might be a pattern. 

[E-122-Psi]

For reasons mentioned earlier, I also admit I didn't like the X version of Shadow AT ALL. It was trying to do his game role but REALLY exaggerated the erratic shifts between 'good' and 'evil'. Shadow when doing morally ambiguous acts in the games at least has some degree of reservation and emotional conflict, even in ShTH a lot of his worst acts are down to gameplay rather than story. X Shadow on the other hand is just unfettered and malicious.....but then suddenly he isn't. And everyone is fine with that. He'd beat up Chris gratuitously or take perverse pleasure hunting down Cosmo for killing sport, and people would still think he's awesome. The definition of a badly written anti hero.

Even in Free Riders, where he and Rouge are weirdly flanderized into dog kickers, people are at least calling out how abhorrent they are.

[Shadowlax]

On 5/2/2020 at 8:28 AM, batson said:

Please explain why you dislike a character, otherwise this topic will probably get closed due to being a "list topic".

If you are refering to me I can explain sally's dad, locke and geoffry in one go.

All characters due to the author shown as virtuous or " doing it for their own reasons " or "not that bad" but are completely and utterly shitty people that deserve the most contempt. I'm a guy who likes anti heroes, edgelords and the like. Its my jam, so when I see this sort of shit it ticks me off something particular.  Locke is an abusive lying asshole, Sally's dad is an authoritarian, and geoffry is a fucking rapist and just all around shit person. And the story on occasion is like " hey come guys I mean come on, I mean they are bad but come on " . No narrative , fuck them.

When I read this shit as a kid I obviously wasn't as...verbose as I am now. Clearly I didn't quite get why I hated them to full effect, but even as a kid I got the idea of " the story keeps trying to tell me they are good, but they literally do nothing good and make everyone else sad who I actually like and just aren't fun"

16 hours ago, E-122-Psi said:

Those sorts of characters kinda bug the hell out of me as well, though generally it's more often when main characters do it. It tends to be REALLY detrimental when the writers unironically put a main character in a 'don't question them, they're ALWAYS right' type role, especially since a lot of the time they're not consistent enough with their likability enough to make them NOT feel like designated heroes. I mean Locke and Max at least got some moments put against them since they ended up antagonising the main cast at times (hell Locke DIED as a redemption act), but the main cast often are the guys you're MEANT to side with.

Sally and Sonic had similar priggish or hypocritical moments in the comics where the story still wanted them to be the 'right' side or just neglected to give them consequences, and while not to the same degree, I found Sonic (and by extension his closest friends) to be a bit insufferable in Sonic X as well. Even Sticks I think would have worked better if they DIDN'T do the 'cloudcuckoolander was right all along' twist a few times and she got a comeuppance for being an abrasive loon sometimes. These characters just weren't on the ball enough that you didn't want them taken down a peg every once in a while, and even if they were, they'd probably be way too insufferably perfect and boring to work as a main character. 

That said, HATE is a REALLY strong word for these characters.  I don't think I HATE any of them, if anything the characters that draw me the least I tend to just be apathetic towards (Chris Thorndyke is a dull character but he doesn't agitate me that much). If anything it's characters I want to like but don't meet their potential that bugs me WAY more.

Its a narrative trap even good writers can fall into. ( if i'm being honest IDW sonic might fall into it depending on how the next story and subsequent story ends ). Its never fun when it happens and I feel like it cheapens or devalues the character.

[E-122-Psi]

I think it's when the writers become too used to playing a character according to a formula or set role instead of making their personality drive how things work. Even worse when they still try to give them a lot of spotlight regardless of being unable to figure out how to deal with these writing limitations.

Geoffrey was designed to be an antagonist for the large part, while even Sally feels like a straight man they tried to make into co-lead (the writers' later attempts to prove they could make her flawed felt kind of 'lost'). Sticks is by far one of the least aggravating cases I mentioned but even then she felt like the one of the main Boom cast the writers were least interested in fleshing out (she's kind of the same deal as Pinkie Pie where she's better as a gag character rather than a protagonist, only Pinkie at least got SOME effective deconstructions or moments of being forced down to earth). Locke is pretty much just an example of Archie's convolution and trying to add way more complicated and pretentious backstory than was necessary.

51 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

If you are refering to me I can explain sally's dad, locke and geoffry in one go.

All characters due to the author shown as virtuous or " doing it for their own reasons " or "not that bad" but are completely and utterly shitty people that deserve the most contempt. I'm a guy who likes anti heroes, edgelords and the like. Its my jam, so when I see this sort of shit it ticks me off something particular.  Locke is an abusive lying asshole, Sally's dad is an authoritarian, and geoffry is a fucking rapist and just all around shit person. And the story on occasion is like " hey come guys I mean come on, I mean they are bad but come on " . No narrative , fuck them.

Why can I now only vision Penders going "Hey come on, relaaaax guuuuuy" in a South Park Saddam voice?

[Diogenes]

7 hours ago, DabigRG said:

Didn't it do that though? I seem to recall his hair wrapping back with the rest of his spines while running in particular, but fanning out when using his powers.

I think they flex a little bit, but it's almost unnoticeable. Nowhere near the prototype design I mentioned.

52 minutes ago, E-122-Psi said:

Even in Free Riders, where he and Rouge are weirdly flanderized into dog kickers,

People really exaggerate what Free Riders did with them. The worst they do is not be very polite and not care much about the random robot they rope into their team (y'know, the kind of robot that in any other Sonic game you'd smash through dozens of without a thought?).

[E-122-Psi]

5 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

People really exaggerate what Free Riders did with them. The worst they do is not be very polite and not care much about the random robot they rope into their team (y'know, the kind of robot that in any other Sonic game you'd smash through dozens of without a thought?).

I think it's that this robot is heavily implied to be sentient (before the ruse is revealed) and unlike any of the other Egg Pawns, isn't out to kill the heroes itself. Much like when Storm and Knuckles were apologetic about trashing one by mistake in the first Riders or when Amy feels bad for Gamma in Adventure.

Shadow and particularly Rouge's card carrying 'we so don't give a shit' attitude felt more callous and excessive in that light. We get it, you're the jerk team. Usually though, the jerk team gets a satisfying comeuppance.

[DabigRG]

6 hours ago, thumbs13 said:

They were only spotlight stealers in Colors. Lost World had them there, but Eggman and Sonic and Tails shared a majority of their scenes, so they didnt do much. They flatout were nonexistant in Forces, and they got one or two lines in TSR and Fire and Ice. I can see why people dislike them, but they got better with time, I'd say.

 

2 hours ago, dbzfan7 said:

The Deadly Shits are the worst. I mean there's other characters I hate like Elise, Chris, Cosmo, Sticks, Boom Knuckles, Marine, Mephiles, Orbot and Cubot but nothing beats the Deadly Shits. 

Why Cosmo?

2 hours ago, dbzfan7 said:

I'll quickly go over Orbot and Cubot and just say they wouldn't bug me so much if they at least had a reason to exist outside of being for conversation. They do nothing, succeed at nothing, and basically just make Eggman look stupid. Have them at least pilot badniks or do something to make them have a reason to exist. Even Scratch and Grounder seem to have more reason to be lackies than those two and they're purposely played up to be bumbling and stupid.

 

1 hour ago, batson said:

You're right. Even after all these games we don't know what exactly Orbot and Cubot do. We've seen them do menial labor like cleaning, but surely Eggman must have regular "mindless" robots to do this for him? Why did he went through the trouble of creating those two sentient, speech-capable robots for no good reason? Seriously, Orbot and Cubot just suck.

 

1 hour ago, E-122-Psi said:

I don't hate Orbot and Cubot at all but I do admit like other characters, it feels like they have a more lasting impression because of side media. Sonic Boom seemed to grasp a more worthwhile role for them (likely because it was comedic as whole) while in most of the games they tend to just be comic relief. They work as someone for Eggman to interact with but otherwise don't contribute much effective. Even just seeing them pilot the odd early stage mech in place of Eggman would work. I mean it's not like Boom even remotely altered their characters to work.

 

54 minutes ago, thumbs13 said:

Yeah, they left no impression on me pre-Boom. Before I wrote that other post, I actually forgot they were in Forces. 

I feel like they only exist because these games need more characters, which is also a result of Sonic's friends getting the can. I think it's telling that in games like Generations or Rise of Lyric, when Eggman has someone else to work with, they just don't exist. It's also why they don't do anything in TSR, I guess, because Eggman has Zavok and Dodonpa to talk to. In the comics, Snively and then Starline served their role, so they were reduced to background roles, which might be a pattern. 

In Orbot/SA-55's case, he was there to both give Eggman someone to rant at while in his base and keep up with logistics & probabilities as Eggman oversees his many big operations. He also seems to occasionally program the next big invention, run tests, and occasionally links with other mechs that fight Sonic. And him smacktalking Eggman occasionally made sense in that he's basically doing his job most of the time, but Eggman's ego and temper often means he gets enough abuse to be snide towards him--which originally earned MORE abuse.

Cubot is more superfluous because he's seemingly there to be a second lackey that's not on either of their levels, but he in particular also kinda shows the weirdness of how these two are used? It was basically with his inclusion that they kinda got a bit demoted to comic relief commentators and the stories slowly began to include/emphasize other villainous forces for Eggman to interact with again. What's extra weird is that he seems to have super strength in a few cutscenes, but he's certainly not meant to be a fighter and doesn't even bother operating other mechs outside of that brief moment with the Crabmeat.

Overall, I feel that they like other characters were a solid idea that actually added a little something, but then got muddled as time went on.

[Diogenes]

14 minutes ago, E-122-Psi said:

I think it's that this robot is heavily implied to be sentient (before the ruse is revealed) and unlike any of the other Egg Pawns, isn't out to kill the heroes itself. Much like when Storm and Knuckles were apologetic about trashing one by mistake in the first Riders or when Amy feels bad for Gamma in Adventure.

Shadow and particularly Rouge's card carrying 'we so don't give a shit' attitude felt more callous and excessive in that light. We get it, you're the jerk team.

It's not even like they're that hard on it, it's mostly "keep up or we'll ditch you" type stuff. I just don't see why people point to this as some kind of moral line being crossed considering what they've gotten up to in other games.

[DabigRG]

2 hours ago, Shadowlax said:

If you are refering to me I can explain sally's dad, locke and geoffry in one go.

All characters due to the author shown as virtuous or " doing it for their own reasons " or "not that bad" but are completely and utterly shitty people that deserve the most contempt. I'm a guy who likes anti heroes, edgelords and the like. Its my jam, so when I see this sort of shit it ticks me off something particular.  Locke is an abusive lying asshole, Sally's dad is an authoritarian, and geoffry is a fucking rapist and just all around shit person. And the story on occasion is like " hey come guys I mean come on, I mean they are bad but come on " . No narrative , fuck them.

When I read this shit as a kid I obviously wasn't as...verbose as I am now. Clearly I didn't quite get why I hated them to full effect, but even as a kid I got the idea of " the story keeps trying to tell me they are good, but they literally do nothing good and make everyone else sad who I actually like and just aren't fun"

Its a narrative trap even good writers can fall into. ( if i'm being honest IDW sonic might fall into it depending on how the next story and subsequent story ends ). Its never fun when it happens and I feel like it cheapens or devalues the character.

 

1 hour ago, E-122-Psi said:

I think it's when the writers become too used to playing a character according to a formula or set role instead of making their personality drive how things work. Even worse when they still try to give them a lot of spotlight regardless of being unable to figure out how to deal with their more negative qualities.

Geoffrey was designed to be an antagonist for the large part, while even Sally feels like a straight man they tried to make into co-lead. Sticks is by far one of the least aggravating cases I mentioned but even then she felt like the one of the main Boom cast the writers were least interested in fleshing out (she's kind of the same deal as Pinkie Pie where she's better as a gag character rather than a protagonist, only Pinkie at least got SOME effective deconstructions or moments of being forced down to earth). Locke is pretty much just an example of Archie's convolution and trying to add way more complicated backstory than was necessary.

Why can I now only vision Penders going "Hey come on, relaaaax guuuuuy" in a South Park Saddam voice?

To both give Mr. Penders a previous benefit of doubt and also somewhat ignore him in the other direction, I too get the vibe that some writers don't intend to fall into those traps and it's something that, as you said, comes from following a formula, evolves into a solid preference over time, or straight up happens beneath their notice until it's brought sufficiently enough to hopefully get them to reevaluate as possible.

I've already been over Geoffrey, so address the others a little more. Sometimes characters like Max or to give a recent example Chief Cruz are doing their best to address matter as firmly as possible, but they get too caught up in their need to be a strong leader and/or account for the mistakes of the past that become too dogmatic and shut out viewpoints that could be more effective if handled the right way. Now to be fair, the intent of these characters is be wrong for understandable reasons, but sometimes it ends up being annoying since not only are they being stubborn because "Hrrgh, but muh pride", but they're also walking into problems that don't always need to be.

Sticks is less problematic for a number of inherent reasons, but I will say I see where Psi and I think X were coming from. It is factual was initially an admitted partial author Avatar, a little on the gross side, sometimes unhelpful/detrimental, was played either a little too straight or a little too crazy, and super hostile, to the point that attacking Knuckles happened enough times to make you wonder if she actually had something out for him. She did have a noticeable shift in conduct come Season 2 that was nice, but it is a little sudden and it's kind of a waste that there wasn't some clearer development and payoff that got us there.

And lastly, Locke is a weird case since though I remember and enjoyed a good bit of the Knuckles comic, I don't really remember much from him outside of his conversation with his father, the circumstances of how he raised Knuckles, and the fact that them reuniting was a milestone, so take me with a certain grain of salt. But if I had to pin him on something, it is the need to have mysterious story development, yes, and the scope of what the character is getting away in an underspoken way? Again, it's been a while, but there was some awareness and commentary on how the Brotherhood underneath himself were a little equivocal and hypocritical, with Locke himself going an extra mile in regards to what he did to Knuckles. This was seemingly kinda diverted when Mr. Penders started to channel his own father into him later on and thus got pretty protective of the character--looking at the Dark Legion civil war revival for example, I could sorta see his viewpoint of "that's not how Locke would've talked to Knuckles about that" since he created and largely defined him, but then obvious compromise aside, I can't really remember much in the way of continuous heart-to-hearting going on outside of said Issue 25. Add in the 25 years later memorium story, what became of the Guardian in the main book, and yes, even where it's led us and...it's a trifle.

[DabigRG]

58 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

It's not even like they're that hard on it, it's mostly "keep up or we'll ditch you" type stuff. I just don't see why people point to this as some kind of moral line being crossed considering what they've gotten up to in other games.

I think a defining point of concession would be how the other characters take notice of the shape B was in and repeatedly ask them to help him out since he was still their teammate, which they were flagrantly apathetic or dismissive about.

[E-122-Psi]

I think the recurrent problem with the franchise is that the majority of its morally ambiguous characters that are meant to have sympathetic traits tend to just do a nice thing at the right time and then have their callous moments handwaved. I mean this sometimes works okay when directly treated as a redeemer, but when done in a more spurious or temporary way, comes off a bit like a get out of jail free card. There are times where for the sake of sympathy you want them to face proper consequences for their actions. No one likes a karma houdini.

Sticks is one of the more simplistic to examplify given Boom's more comical writing and archetypes. I mean I get the archetype, the enigmatic crazy/dumb guy who for some reason still says the right thing or can weirdly bend the universe to their whim. They're fun in doses, take Pinkie Pie and Spongebob, but I think the balance there is that the writers do still understand that they are annoying little shits if overdone, so still have moments the role is reversed onto them. Sticks is balanced in terms of usefulness, but she's oddly the only Boom character that isn't deconstructed or 'loses' an episode (and ironically most of the others do when against HER). Even times another character had moral ground she still overpowers the plot (Tails was the woobie in 'Translate This', her smugly trashing the bot anyway was funny standalone, but yeah, there should have been ONE point in the series after where she got what was coming to her). Plus it was weird to have the paranoid nutjob of the group the MOST complacent character, they could have done some real funny Dale Gribble type stuff with her paranoia but it was squandered by this formula being on full-time.

Sally is similarly a case of the straight man that they wanna make a main character, but sort of struggle against breaking her archetype and making her naturally complicated and flawed. They still wanna maintain a hierarchy by default. Also they tend to pound on standard straight man defects like being condescending and snide that are pretty standard in other fictional works but, similar to Stick's archetype, do usually get at least some rebuttal along the line eventually. Twilight Sparkle has the same priggishness as Sally for example, but the writers know it, they don't treat it exclusively as 'the temperament justified when dealing with fools' and she does get her break the haughty moments or times she is called out for talking down to everyone or being a huge hypocrite. Hell even in some times she IS in the right, she is often reminded she can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. That they are willing to make some jokes at this character's expense similarly makes this character seem more vibrant and fun, while with Sally the insistence on keeping her dignity makes her a bit boring (though SatAm Sally was at least a neurotic grouch sometimes).

Shadow, Rouge, and to some degree Silver were the anti heroes of their story, doing morally dubious acts but then turning good at the most pivotal moment. Granted Silver got read the riot act over his shtick HARD in the comics, a humbling that made him far easier to pity than his cliche 'too cool to be a real apology' in Next Gen, and Shadow being openly 'evil' in his own game sort of ended up a formality since the final ending still ignores that canon. Geoffrey was arguably the same deal, being a more anti hero-ish character who they thought would just have a harmless 'edge' to them so long as he redeemed himself at the right time.

I could argue the fact that Shadow rarely getting comeuppances or dealt a bad hand in a non-tragic way has led to stated cases of inflexibility. Boom made him an outright villain but then by their own admission had to struggle to make him part of the show's humour.

Locke is pretty much a backstory character that I think they had complicated too much to even deal with properly. i struggle to keep up with the echidna lore in the comics. I do sometimes feel like Penders and Bollers were just shifting in bizarre plot elements after the other sometimes without thinking about actual characterisation besides, again, simplified archetypes without the context and development. Julie-Su was similarly just an 'edgy action girl' that was mostly there for show than depth for example.

Sonic X Sonic I kinda consider a similar example, since for the large part, he has a lot of traits other Sonics do, like being cocky, trollish and just doing whatever the hell he wants, if anything they're downplayed from other renditions. Just the simplified and idealistic handling of this Sonic means he is almost never called out or faces repercussions, at least not besides from characters who are clearly his butt monkey and treated as just talking through their ass (eg. Knuckles, I mean who listens to him?). Sonic is a lovable rogue, but generally in all other versions, there's at least a few odd times his recklessness or arrogance backfires and brings him down to earth. Just those token moments may not SEEM like a great deal of his limelight but they are key to giving some humanity and set a limit to what he can get away with.

See how this combines against Sally in Satam for example. Sure for reasons stated it's annoying Sally is right nearly ALL the time in Season Two, but Sonic is a smug little prick, and sometimes even right for the wrong reasons in Season One. That ego being enabled would be insufferable. It works to have BOTH of them taken down a peg on different occasions.

[Big-C]

I know Boom is pretty much irrelevant now but if I had a least favorite character, it would definitely be Boom Shadow. He was a one dimensional prick who hated friendship for whatever reason and he just so happened to be furry Vegeta. Honestly, he had no reason to be in the Boom universe except for fan service. 

[E-122-Psi]

25 minutes ago, Big-C said:

I know Boom is pretty much irrelevant now but if I had a least favorite character, it would definitely be Boom Shadow. He was a one dimensional prick who hated friendship for whatever reason and he just so happened to be furry Vegeta. Honestly, he had no reason to be in the Boom universe except for fan service. 

Admittedly I would have preferred another character to have been adapted over Shadow (or even just Vector to get more appearances). I mean it was obvious they had to dance around Shadow a lot for a comical work. He had the odd comically serious moment but was otherwise the least compatible character to choose from.

 

Oh and in subject with TV shows, can I just say that Dulcy is one of THE most annoying Cree Summer roles I've ever seen? (And yes I can stand Elmyra.) She repeats the same catchphrase and it's never funny ONCE, and she's in this awkward middle ground where she's neither competent enough to justify her presence nor is she enough of a butt monkey like Antoine to balance out her annoying qualities.

[batson]

28 minutes ago, Big-C said:

I know Boom is pretty much irrelevant now but if I had a least favorite character, it would definitely be Boom Shadow. He was a one dimensional prick who hated friendship for whatever reason and he just so happened to be furry Vegeta. Honestly, he had no reason to be in the Boom universe except for fan service. 

I have to admit that Boom Shadow is one of those characters that I really enjoy on an ironic level. Like you say, he is just this dark guy that hates friendship, and it's, to me, really enjoyable in an unintentionall way. Shadow's cutscenes were by far the most entertaining ones in RoL.

[Sega DogTagz]

Big. By a country mile. Its not even close. 

Its not like I don't give the guy a chance. I always come back around an re-assess my take of all the characters after a decent amount of time has gone by. 99 times out 100 I end up hating the ground Big walks on. Everything from his "why is that here" gameplay in Adventure to his slow, dim-witted personality traits just is designed to make me not like the character. I can't fathom why anyone thought his concept was a good idea. He's just a waste of space and his slow speech pattern means he overstays any welcome the second he opens his mouth.

I thought there might be a teeny bit of hope for him after that TSR overdrive short. I thought he was charming and well implemented there - but any and all goodwill that established immediately got nuked to high heck and back by his role in the game itself. Every cutscene in TSR that involved Big was a painful bore. I get it. He's simple and pure. I don't need to slog through him cloud watching to get that to sink in.

I think my main issue with Big is that he brings nothing worthwhile to the table. Other characters I dislike, like say Hamlin for example actually contribute. The bring contrasting visions and are developed enough to at least give them a purpose as to why they behave in a manner I dislike. Big is just... simple. There is no reason for him to be around. His companionship isn't thrilling. His skillset can be replicated elsewhere. He's just here. Its frustrating.

 

 

[Bowbowis]

8 hours ago, Diogenes said:

I think they flex a little bit, but it's almost unnoticeable. Nowhere near the prototype design I mentioned.

I don't hate his design but seriously, that one is way cooler.

 

8 hours ago, Diogenes said:

People really exaggerate what Free Riders did with them. The worst they do is not be very polite and not care much about the random robot they rope into their team (y'know, the kind of robot that in any other Sonic game you'd smash through dozens of without a thought?).

7 hours ago, Diogenes said:

It's not even like they're that hard on it, it's mostly "keep up or we'll ditch you" type stuff. I just don't see why people point to this as some kind of moral line being crossed considering what they've gotten up to in other games.

The thing is Team Dark really weren't actively rude in previous games. Shadow can be prickly and somewhat extreme in his methods, but he was typically portrayed as more of a taciturn utilitarian than an outright amoral asshole. Rouge is more morally flexible, but on an interpersonal level the worst she did was sassy teasing rather than straight up insults as in Free Riders. On top of being verbally abusive they also show no concern when E-10000B is on the verge of breaking down, Team Dark can be aloof but they're not sociopaths. In fact, showing empathy to robots is something Shadow and Rouge in particular have a history of doing, including Omega, Emerl, Metal Sonic (at least in Shadow's case), and even Shadow himself (when Rouge believed he was an android). Beyond being a dick move it's also stupid. Even if they don't personally care about E-10000B it's still their teammate so they have a vested interest in having it perform optimally. They also know that they'll be disqualified if they don't have three team members,so even if they're confident they can win without its assistance letting it reach the point where it becomes unable to race would still (and nearly does) cost them the Grand Prix. They're not just going out of their way to be assholes, they're going out of their way to be assholes to their own detriment, which just makes them even bigger assholes.

[Stritix]

Probably Sticks or Lyric. Both are generic and one dimensional. I just find both unappealing and uninteresting. Coincidentally they are both from Sonic Boom

[Iko]

I generally like all the characters, but there are some that I like less than others. Here a list of my least favorites (I'm only counting the most recurring ones, because stuff like Princess Elise or Hatsun the Pidgeon will probably never return so it's pointless to talk about them; also game characters only):

Amy: I'm not a fan of all the characters who are based on someone else instead of being fully original and then get the main-character treatment; I also don't like when fictional stories have female characters who are meant to be equivalent of the (male) main character but female. From Minnie Mouse to Ms Pac-Man, to wathever you can think of. It's an incredibly boring stereotype and I'm not interested in that. Amy is a bit more than just "female Sonic", she recieved some more development through the years and several games (and her modern design along with the hammer helped to differentiate her a bit more), but I still see her as a female counterpart to Sonic who exists just to be "the female" of the group. She has changed personality several times through the franchise's history, and the one she currently has is IMO pretty bland, though she gets shoehorned a lot in main roles. I don't hate her, but I would prefer if she was used less and became more side character than, I mean, the unofficial leader of the resistance. Gameplay-wise, I like her, I liked her in Advance 1 and partially in Sonic Adventure too (but there she was slower and the puzzle based levels didn't help).

Shadow: Sonic but dark and edgy; I liked him in SA2 because he was supposed to be a one time thing (you know, like Shadow Mario in Super Mario Sunshine). When they revived him (nullifying the epicness of his sacrirfice at the end of SA2) and rewritten his backstory introducing alien and even more government stuff, they IMO completely ruined the character and the purpose he was created for. Now he's meet a similar fate as Amy: he's shoehorned in most Sonic media because he looks cool, but his personality became bland and he's just there for the sake of it. He really jumped from one of my favorite characters to one of my least favorites. Gameplay-wise, he has some potential to be kinda unique, but he's always just a Sonic clone... I know he's supposed to be "Dark Sonic", but he has chaos powers and those hover shoes that can be used for creative gameplay ideas... they just don't do it.

Metal Sonic: I never liked this model of "Mecha Sonic" much, I always prefered the one from Sonic & Knuckles as it looked more like a deadly machine. Anyway, Mecha Sonic, Silver Sonic, Mecha Knuckles and so on, I prefered when Eggman created one different "Sonic" model in each new game, it was interesting to see what Eggman came out with each time. Now that they are sticking with Metal Sonic, it's just boring. Also he's another of those characters, "Sonic but evil robot", I already talked about that. You know what, call me crazy but I'd much prefer if Metal Sonic's role was completely replaced by Orbot & Cubot. Yes, Orbot & Cubot... they have simple and geometrical shapes, they can assemble to bigger mechanical bodies and become minibosses and bosses just like Eggman with the Egg-Mobile. Use them and be creative, SEGA.

The Deadly Six: I find the Deadly Six uninspired and quite boring (and stylistically unfitting/clashy with the design of the other Sonic characters). I don't know what else to say... I just prefer other villains and other characters in general

Vanilla & Chocola: This is probably the first time I mention this online, I never complain about this because they rarely get a role nowadays. I don't dislike them, though, while it makes sense for them to show up occasionally (at least Vanilla, when Cream is involved), I still think that's totally unnecessary to have them around. Vanilla is Cream's mother, ok... it's a nice little trivia to know, but her story was in Sonic Advance 2, it ended in that game, Sonic saved her, now there's absolutely no reason to have her around, because she has no fighting skills and usually having her around means damsel in distress cliche. Chocola is even more unnecessary because it's just Cheese 2.0. Having Vanilla around in games every time Cream is involved is like having the GUN president around every time Shadow appears because he works for him. Maybe if a game has hub worlds with NPCs it would be ok to have her at her home if it's part of the game's world, but that's it, I prefer her and chocola not to be involved in the main plot of a game (unlike Sonic Heroes); if anything give Gemerl more screen time instead.

 

Quote

I generally like all the characters

But in some cases I properly dislike some. Examples:

Eggman Nega: No need to have an Eggman recolor, especially when he occasionally comes with a Metal Sonic recolor too. Totally pointless character that IMO should not exist. The Blaze's dimension equivalent could have been Captain Whisker alone without having to say he's been built by an Eggman recolor. Say he's been built by a pirate scientist hundreds years ago and if they have to show the scientist's design by flashback, make him look nothing like Eggman.

Classic Sonic as a stand alone character: just no, there's one Sonic.

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

Omochao because they're annoying and I'm not crazy about the design.

I normally don't like for posts to be this short, but in all honesty, how much is there to say?? xP

[Cuz]

On 5/2/2020 at 6:12 AM, batson said:

Personally, the character that just irks me more than any other is Chip. The character is supposed to be cute, but to me he just fails at it in all regards. First there is his design with that incredibly wide mouth.

Preach! I've never been able to truly get behind that mutant chao. While it's not his voice for me it comes down to him looking over-designed, and I've always been sore about his overall place in the story. I mean did we really need a new character to go palling around the globe with Sonic? Those were quality interactions that could of been crafted around Tails, and/or Amy, not this one-and-done celebrity guest star, and no him secretly being a giant golem who punches Midgard serpents out for a living does not score any points with me. 

[batson]

8 hours ago, Iko said:

Eggman Nega: No need to have an Eggman recolor, especially when he occasionally comes with a Metal Sonic recolor too. Totally pointless character that IMO should not exist. The Blaze's dimension equivalent could have been Captain Whisker alone without having to say he's been built by an Eggman recolor. Say he's been built by a pirate scientist hundreds years ago and if they have to show the scientist's design by flashback, make him look nothing like Eggman.

 

 

Oh yes, Eggman Nega. I forgot about him. But yeah, that is one character that should never have been created. My biggest gripe with him is that he cheapens Eggman as a villain. I mean think about it: Eggman Nega is Eggman's evil twin. Eggman, a villain, has an evil twin. What does that say about Eggman?

[thumbs13]

9 hours ago, batson said:

Oh yes, Eggman Nega. I forgot about him. But yeah, that is one character that should never have been created. My biggest gripe with him is that he cheapens Eggman as a villain. I mean think about it: Eggman Nega is Eggman's evil twin. Eggman, a villain, has an evil twin. What does that say about Eggman?

That doesn't really work. The games in which he's portrayed as worse than Eggman are the games in which he's not Eggman's dimensional counterpart. In Rush and the sequel, he basically had the same role as Classic Eggman in Generations.

[Big Panda]

On 5/2/2020 at 9:47 PM, DabigRG said:

Maximilian or Nigel?

One’s a doting father with the mannerisms of Nigel Thornberry, the other is a batshit tyrant who wanted to commit mass murder and push his daughter into arranged marriages.