The Fallen Cast...

[Frozen Nitrogen]

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, Frozen, you'd prefer that, rather than try to change the characters, the games better explain the motivations of the characters, since we know relatively little about them as they are?

Kinda, but I'm well aware that comes with its own set of problems. Delving into Sonic or Robotnik's motives, for example, could skirt very close to giving them a Freudian Excuse, which in turn skirts very close to giving them backstory. And I'm not a fan of that ploy for much the same reason I'm not a fan of permanent development - it's basicly the same thing, you're just changing them into the past rather than into the future.

I guess what I'd really like is for some situational variation that allows them to act differently. Not so much that the characters change; rather that the stories you put them in change, so they're required to make more subtle judgements than:

"Shall we go and stop Eggman? y/y?"

Again, SatBK did this well (or at least better than most). Merlina had genuinely good intentions, and by pitting Sonic against a villain who was a little more than a cartoonish parody of mechanophilic evil, we got to learn something about Sonic's worldview. It's concievable that a more Lawful Good protaganist would actually have sided WITH Merlina and wished her well in the infinite delaying of fate she was trying to pull off. Merlina actually reminds me of Tikal in that sense, because she essentially did the same thing: by sealing Chaos in the Master Emerald, Tikal was simply keeping him in infinite abeyance, rather than facing up to the end of her world. Indeed, Sonic and Tikal did actually have that very disagreement in SA1; Tikal says they have to re-seal Perfect Chaos while Sonic says they have to fight him, to finally deal with "the way he feels inside".

This is much more explicit in SatBK though, where Sonic isn't above turning Excalibur and ramming a large sword through a well-intentioned young woman, intentionally bringing about widespread death and the destruction of a fairytale kingdom. We get to see Sonic being willing to play the villain (he even says this), and we get to see him forgiving and even comforting his defeated foe right at the end. This was probably the most "d'awwwww, Sonikku! " I'd ever felt about the little hedgehog (after watching the cutscene with a large glass of brandy to purge the otherwise overwhelming taste of cheese off my pallete), and it all comes from putting him in a situation just a little bit different from the orthodox "Teenage speed-freaks beat up a fat, elderly man" shtick.

SO I GUESS what I want is variety. Plonk the mice in a different maze and see where they go.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Frozen Nitrogen

[Diogenes]

Having a character develop a trait DURING ONE GAME is all well and good

What?! Really? If you're just going to have it show up in one game and then snap back to normal by the next, what was the point of doing it in the first place?

[Frozen Nitrogen]

What?! Really? If you're just going to have it show up in one game and then snap back to normal by the next, what was the point of doing it in the first place?

...because then you saw it happen?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

...because then you saw it happen?

And what if that trait developed actually turns out to benefit the character even more? Why would you just restrict it to one game rather than keep that trait to work alongside the other likable traits in future games?

Edited July 4, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Frozen Nitrogen]

And what if that trait developed actually turns out to benefit the character even more? Why would you just restrict it to one game rather than keep that trait to work alongside the other likable traits in future games?

Did anyone actually read the rest of my paragraph on that point? ONE MAN'S DEVELOPMENT IS ANOTHER MAN'S DERAILMENT.

I'll give you an example (even a hard one, because almost everyone liked this): SA1 Tails. Over the course of the game he convinces himself to become independent and not rely on Sonic for everything anymore. Who could object to that?

Well, when the end result is that Sonic and Tails barely seem to know each other outside of Eggman-smashing work any more, I could. An independent Tails means a Tails that is no longer following Sonic around everywhere he goes like an adorable Sonic 2 puppy. Every time Sonic says "Hey Tails, long time no see" my blackened heart shrinks just a little bit more, 'cos it means they haven't been chilling OVA-style like inseperable bros since the end of the last adventure. Are you really happy to have sacrificed that relationship on the altar of independent Tails' trans-game character development? Really? Really?

I would be reluctant to go about changing what the characters are because we have come to like them well enough as they are. ALSO, what they already are hasn't really been explored to any extent. We basicly know how the characters react when faced with "Eggman is a bastard" as their perilous situation, AND NOTHING ELSE. We don't know what they do on their days off; we don't know what they do when the nature of the villainy isn't clear cut; we don't know how they interact with each other (even Knuckles & Tails, heroes #2 and #3, have never really... spoken to each other for more than a sentence); yadda yadda yadda.

I'd say delving into all that would be a far richer and far more natural method of fleshing the characters out than putting Amy in the army.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Frozen Nitrogen

[Chaosmaster8753]

Merlina actually reminds me of Tikal in that sense, because she essentially did the same thing: by sealing Chaos in the Master Emerald, Tikal was simply keeping him in infinite abeyance, rather than facing up to the end of her world. Indeed, Sonic and Tikal did actually have that very disagreement in SA1; Tikal says they have to re-seal Perfect Chaos while Sonic says they have to fight him, to finally deal with "the way he feels inside".

Huh, never thought of it that way...

[Frozen Nitrogen]

Huh, never thought of it that way...

Neither had I, until I started writing that post.

YOU'VE SEEN IT; YOU CAN'T UN-SEE IT!

[Diogenes]

Did anyone actually read the rest of my paragraph on that point. ONE MAN'S DEVELOPMENT IS ANOTHER MAN'S DERAILMENT.

I just think that's a really cowardly way to look at fiction. Watching characters grow from their experiences, when well written, will usually strengthen your interest in a character. It's taking a risk, sure, but so is any sort of change; unless you'd be fine with each game being a xerox of the last, you've got to be willing to take that chance sometimes.

[Frozen Nitrogen]

I just think that's a really cowardly way to look at fiction. Watching characters grow from their experiences, when well written, will usually strengthen your interest in a character. It's taking a risk, sure, but so is any sort of change; unless you'd be fine with each game being a xerox of the last, you've got to be willing to take that chance sometimes.

I hope the highlight itself enables me to rest my case in the context of this franchise.

Hi I'm Tails! I used to be a cute woodland sidekick and now I drive a walking tank.

Behold my 'character development', fools, and weep tears of blood.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Frozen Nitrogen

[Rusty Spy]

Having a character develop a trait DURING ONE GAME is all well and good

Then I'm pretty sure your fine with Shadow still going angsty over MARIAAAA! and WHO AM IIIIII!!!! and TEH TRUF ABOOT MAH PAST!!!!

Well, when the end result is that Sonic and Tails barely seem to know each other outside of Eggman-smashing work any more, I could. An independent Tails means a Tails that is no longer following Sonic around everywhere he goes like an adorable Sonic 2 puppy. Every time Sonic says "Hey Tails, long time no see" my blackened heart shrinks just a little bit more, 'cos it means they haven't been chilling OVA-style like inseperable bros since the end of the last adventure. Are you really happy to have sacrificed that relationship on the altar of independent Tails' trans-game character development? Really? Really?

Frankly, I like the idea that Tails is a CHARACTER himself and not just Sonic's GO-GO-GADGET-HELICOPTER backpack he once was.

This statement in itself is oddly contradicted by how you ALSO said you wanted to see the characters fleshed out more and given more depth.

As you put:

Plonk the mice in a different maze and see where they go.

And in the end I find this a bit odd overall, since it's pretty much never SHOWN that Sonic and Tails hardly see each other much at all, nor did that change the way they interacted in the games, aside from Chronicles, and well, yeah.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Black Spy

[Frozen Nitrogen]

Then I'm pretty sure your fine with Shadow still going angsty over MARIAAAA! and WHO AM IIIIII!!!! and TEH TRUF ABOOT MAH PAST!!!!

Yep.

I think Shadow abandoning his past at the end of his eponymous game was stupid, callous, and destroyed most of what made him interesting.

Frankly, I like the idea that Tails is a CHARACTER himself and not just Sonic's GO-GO-GADGET-HELICOPTER backpack he once was.

He could be his own character if you'd just let him talk to someone other than Sonic for more than half a second. Hence my desire to explore who he is rather than wildly veer away from who he is.

And in the end I find this a bit odd overall, since it's pretty much never SHOWN that Sonic and Tails hardly see each other much at all, nor did that change the way they interacted in the games, aside from Chronicles, and well, yeah.

HNNNNGGGGGG

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Did anyone actually read the rest of my paragraph on that point? ONE MAN'S DEVELOPMENT IS ANOTHER MAN'S DERAILMENT.

Yes, I most certainly did. And really don't agree with it.

I'm with Diogenes on how I find it a cowardly way to look at fiction, in addition that I don't see derailment if you add on newer traits while keeping the older ones. I look at derailment more into changing just about every aspect of the character into newer ones, changing their whole character in the process into something entirely different. Of course, not everyone sees it that way, nor do I expect them to.

I'll give you an example (even a hard one, because almost everyone liked this): SA1 Tails. Over the course of the game he convinces himself to become independent and not rely on Sonic for everything anymore. Who could object to that?

Well, when the end result is that Sonic and Tails barely seem to know each other outside of Eggman-smashing work any more, I could. An independent Tails means a Tails that is no longer following Sonic around everywhere he goes like an adorable Sonic 2 puppy. Every time Sonic says "Hey Tails, long time no see" my blackened heart shrinks just a little bit more, 'cos it means they haven't been chilling OVA-style like inseperable bros since the end of the last adventure. Are you really happy to have sacrificed that relationship on the altar of independent Tails' trans-game character development? Really? Really?

I understand where you're going, but the thing is that none of that has happened even when Tails was more independent. Being independent doesn't meant that he would be going seperate ways from Sonic, it means that he can do even more difficult tasks by himself rather than support Sonic when he's around. He can still be around following Sonic to help him out, but he doesn't always have to rely on him if he can do it himself.

I would be reluctant to go about changing what the characters are because we have come to like them well enough as they are. ALSO, what they already are hasn't really been explored to any extent. We basicly know how the characters react when faced with "Eggman is a bastard" as their perilous situation, AND NOTHING ELSE. We don't know what they do on their days off; we don't know what they do when the nature of the villainy isn't clear cut; we don't know how they interact with each other (even Knuckles & Tails, heroes #2 and #3, have never really... spoken to each other for more than a sentence); yadda yadda yadda.

I'd say delving into all that would be a far richer and far more natural method of fleshing the characters out than putting Amy in the army.

Or we could do all of the above if all of that turns out to work for them.

Amy doesn't have to change her whole character if she does join the army, she could still maintain her whole character while having a greater sense of control and discipline of herself. Meaning, she could still keep her crush on Sonic, and if there is a mission involving him she could be the first to volunteer for it just to so she could see him once again. If attacked, she could be even more of a challenge to whomever she's fighting and put her on the similar scale as other more combat capable characters; that's not saying she doesn't know how to fight, but if she were to go toe-to-toe against another character that wouldn't break a sweat fighting her, then they would in fact wet themselves seeing her in action against them.

Any other traits of hers you like? I want to see what other ways she could maintain them even if she was in the army.

Yep.

I think Shadow abandoning his past at the end of his eponymous game was stupid, callous, and destroyed most of what made him interesting.

Technically, it was his own game that did that. But that's up for another discussion.

Edited July 4, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Frozen Nitrogen]

I'm with Diogenes on how I find it a cowardly way to look at fiction, in addition that I don't see derailment if you add on newer traits while keeping the older ones. I look at derailment more into changing just about every aspect of the character into newer ones, changing their whole character in the process into something entirely different. Of course, not everyone sees it that way.

I hope you understand my skepticism here, because pretty much every instance of alleged "development" in the franchise pretty much HAS proven to be whitewashing one trait and painting on a new one - often a less appealing new one. Tails' adorable sidekick-ery replaced by "Look I'm Eggman but good"; Eggman's eco-cidal sociopathy replaced with kliche komic kookyness; Sonic 'nature defender' replaced with Sonic 'the self-absorbed jerk', etc.

I have no objection to Sonic having more than one trait at once - that is, an eco-warrior with an occasional jerk-ass streak - but that's not what seems to happen.

It may be that we're talking at cross-purposes, as I realise myself that the distinction I'm making is increasingly subtle. Let's see if I can articulate it like this:

What I would like to see is characters which - when you explore them - are shown to have multiple facets. Tails can be a genius mech-builder, but this should not preclude him from following Sonic around like an excitable puppy. Shadow can live in the present and blow things up for GUN, but this should not prevent him from occasionally waxing angsty about his dead best friend and creator.

What Sonic "character development" seems to do is hammer square pegs into round holes, sandblasting previous traits into oblivion. "We need a goodie tech guy, Tails is it! I don't care if he was Pixel-brain before, now he's smarter than Robotnik, shut up". "Knuckles was a proud warrior race guy tragically brainwashed by a master-manipulator BUT NOW he's an infamously gullible comic relief butt monkey LOL!"

THIS is what I object to. Character "development" in this series is all to often character "reprogramming" with a healthy dollop of Flanderisation thrown in.

And that's pretty lame.

[Rusty Spy]

Yep.

I think Shadow abandoning his past at the end of his eponymous game was stupid, callous, and destroyed most of what made him interesting.

So rather than embrace character development (read: make into a BETTER character) you'd rather cling onto the same personality traits they came with, no matter how bad and stale they have become over time?

Rather than GO ANYWHERE with his past (which was BEGGING for development like a hungry dog stratching at the door to a Kibbles n' Bits factory), you'd rather him spend the rest of his days constantly going on about nothing but his past, while simultaneously never doing ANYTHING about it, ruining and decaying his character FAR more than it has had to actually provide some development?

The TRAGIC PAST!!! schtic he's had going on since his introduction had gotten stale and only made his character more shallow by making it his defining character trait, and him developing out of it was inevitable, lest he sink even farther into the pit he already fell into after Heroes. He has only gotten better because he STOPPED the decline and opened his character up to development towards a BETTER character who DOESN'T need to rely on his DARK AND MYSTERIOUS PAST to make him interesting.

I hope you understand my skepticism here, because pretty much every instance of alleged "development" in the franchise pretty much HAS proven to be whitewashing one trait and painting on a new one - often a less appealing new one. Tails' adorable sidekick-ery replaced by "Look I'm Eggman but good"; Eggman's eco-cidal sociopathy replaced with kliche komic kookyness; Sonic 'nature defender' replaced with Sonic 'the self-absorbed jerk', etc.

That is not true. These characters still have these traits, the only problem is that they are overshadowed by the newer development they've made. It's not a matter of the character being stripped of these aspects of them, it's the way they are written into the story that puts puts minimal focus on their old traits while giving too much focus on the newer traits they have gained.

But honestly, you LIKED Shadow being the token Emo Teen with a Dark And Troubled Past all the time rather than being a character that works PAST that and makes a FUTURE for himself?

Edited July 4, 2010 by Black Spy

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

^Hey dammit, we're talking about AMY ROSE here, not Shadow! Let's get back to the focus here.

I hope you understand my skepticism here, because pretty much every instance of alleged "development" in the franchise pretty much HAS proven to be whitewashing one trait and painting on a new one - often a less appealing new one.

That's kinda why I made this topic in the first place.

It may be that we're talking at cross-purposes, as I realise myself that the distinction I'm making is increasingly subtle. Let's see if I can articulate it like this:

What I would like to see is characters which - when you explore them - are shown to have multiple facets.

What Sonic "character development" seems to do is hammer square pegs into round holes, sandblasting previous traits into oblivion.

THIS is what I object to. Character "development" in this series is all to often character "reprogramming" with a healthy dollop of Flanderisation thrown in.

And that's pretty lame.

Then we're pretty much in agreement in terms of what we support in general development-wise, to a large extent. I'm more of a "keep the old, add the new" kind of person, although I have some big exceptions.

I wouldn't want Amy to change if she joined the army, or became Tails assistance, or anything you wanna name it. I'd like her to be what I identify as Amy, but one who's not afraid to explore into other areas despite who she is and do newer things in conjunction with the older traits she has. I'm pretty much like that for practically all the characters.

Edited July 4, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Rusty Spy]

^Hey dammit, we're talking about AMY ROSE here, not Shadow! Let's get back to the focus here.

Well then you sure as hell know who your gonna shine the spotlight on after this.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well then you sure as hell know who your gonna shine the spotlight on after this.

Yep. Hate to break it to you tho, it's not gonna be Shadow (and I'm not telling who it will be, so don't bother asking).

I'd rather it be someone less predictable than that, not to mention I would have to reinforce the "keep it neutral" guideline with an iron fist if it was him due to him being such a marmite.

Edited July 4, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Rusty Spy]

Yep. Hate to break it to you tho, it's not gonna be Shadow.

I'd rather it be someone less predictable than that, not to mention I would have to reinforce the "keep it neutral" guideline with an iron fist if it was him due to him being such a marmite.

Well then, I sure hope the next character comes as a 'big' surprise.

[Frozen Nitrogen]

That is not true. These characters still have these traits, the only problem is that they are overshadowed by the newer development they've made. It's not a matter of the character being stripped of these aspects of them, it's the way they are written into the story that puts puts minimal focus on their old traits while giving too much focus on the newer traits they have gained.

In that case I think we agree. I remain concerned that many of these 'developments' magic new personality traits out of the air, whole-cloth, as the plot demands, though. No-one is going to convince me that Tails' SA2 (or even SA1) techy-ness is natural trait evolution from the ability to fly a plane in S2. It wasn't even his plane!!

But honestly, you LIKED Shadow being the token Emo Teen with a Dark And Troubled Past all the time rather than being a character that works PAST that and makes a FUTURE for himself?

All the time, not so much. A proportion of time consistent with the massive, soul-crushing emotional impact it had on him? Yes.

My favourite ending to Shadow's game is the one where he becomes Guardian of the ARK, wandering the empty station for all eternity, haunted by the ghosts of his own past.

[Phos]

So would we be in agreement for not shoehorning characters in general or do we oppose each other in that regard? I for one am against it, however, I'm not sure where you stand on it.

It's not just an all or nothing thing, for all these other characters you list, you have to drag in this and this and that (Like GUN for Shadow, no thanks), Knuckles is a lot easier to fit into a script. You maybe need to give lip service to explain why he's there, but even without it there are reasons for him to just show up regardless.

You've said this before, but I've never actually tried to understand what you're seeing.

What is it about her new design that makes her look creepy?

The eyeliner along with the form of her quills creates a strange separation between the lower part of her head (her face and the sides of her head) and the upper part (quills and cowlick and ears and such). It makes it look like she scalped someone and is wearing it as a hat. Also not helping: She never seems to emote with her brows (making it look even less like a part of her) or eyes. She just has that stare...

When I'm not seeing that, I'm seeing how her quills curl much more tightly than any of the other characters, making them look like little tentacles or something.

However, you're making her out in a more negative light than she is. Is there anything she could do in the future to make her characterization better?

She could start behaving more naturally, for one.

I feel that this shows that there's a problem, not just with Amy, but with the whole series, in that, as much as the series likes to talk about always moving forward, nobody grows or changes for the most part. I can kind of understand if some people prefer it that way, but it can get dull.

Do they actually say that? Outside of song lyrics, I can't think of any particular places where they did that. SatBK kind of did that, but it didn't really explain why change was important (change is one of the requirements for life).

I wonder if the nose pieces on her glasses ever get stuck in her nostrils.

Yes, I'll fly the flag for the "stasis supporters". One man's character development is another man's character derailment - I recall all the fun raegfights civilized debate I had with El Gran Gordo about softening Eggman. Having a character develop a trait DURING ONE GAME is all well and good (Tails SA1 springs to mind), but when you make it stick and carry over, not only are you going to piss off the people who considered it derailment, you're also gonna confuse the shit out of people who didn't play that one game.

I think the problem with Robotnik's softening isn't that it happens, but how it happens. Or rather, how it doesn't happen. It essentially took place between Adventure 2 and Heroes during the recipe for disaster that was Sega wanting more continuity in Sonic and simultaneously making Sonic X. Eggman was more affable than evil in Sonic X, and given the context of a kids show like Sonic X, he kind of has to be. That much is fine, the problem came from when this bled into the game Eggman with no real reason. At the end of Adventure 2, he pulls a gun on Amy and is recognized as being malicious enough to make good on his threat, In Heroes, he forgets that the threads on a doorknob are stripped (blah blah blah Metal Sonic blah blah blah excuses) and hires the Chaotix to get him out.

[Rusty Spy]

In that case I think we agree. I remain concerned that many of these 'developments' magic new personality traits out of the air, whole-cloth, as the plot demands, though. No-one is going to convince me that Tails' SA2 (or even SA1) techy-ness is natural trait evolution from the ability to fly a plane in S2. It wasn't even his plane!!

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

And I just reminded Black Spy that this is about Amy...

It's not just an all or nothing thing, for all these other characters you list, you have to drag in this and this and that (Like GUN for Shadow, no thanks), Knuckles is a lot easier to fit into a script.

I wouldn't call it an "all or nothing" deal, but there is a common ground that keeps a lot of the characters on the same level. A lot of characters have something about them that play as a factor in how they're good enough to appear. Knuckles has the ME, Blaze has her seperate dimension, Silver a different timeline, Rouge with GUN, etc. Each of their traits differ in terms of what they are, but they have one major thing in common: that these traits must have some involvement in the plot as to why the character is around.

If it's easy for X character to appear, whom has something connected to their character that would be under some serious questions without it, then its easy for another character who has a similar connection under their own wing. You can't just make one character an exception and keep everyone else bounded to other things that limit where they could appear, that's practically on the line of favoritism unless you're willing to allow the other characters to appear without regard of the very attributes that determine whether or not a character could appear. Are you okay with that?

You maybe need to give lip service to explain why he's there, but even without it there are reasons for him to just show up regardless.

Every character who's name isn't Sonic, Tails (to a lesser extent), or Eggman needs some lip service to explain why they're there, and it depends upon what goes on in the plot to determine who is good enough to appear and who isn't.

Aside from those three characters, there are no exceptions as far as I look at it. No character is too good enough to go without any lip service to appear in the plot.

The eyeliner along with the form of her quills creates a strange separation between the lower part of her head (her face and the sides of her head) and the upper part (quills and cowlick and ears and such). It makes it look like she scalped someone and is wearing it as a hat. Also not helping: She never seems to emote with her brows (making it look even less like a part of her) or eyes. She just has that stare...

When I'm not seeing that, I'm seeing how her quills curl much more tightly than any of the other characters, making them look like little tentacles or something.

I'm just not seeing it in that light. As far as knowing that you don't like her new design, I can't see any of bad aspects you see because I can't look at it that way. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that end.

She could start behaving more naturally, for one.

Is that all? Because as I see it, every character could do that in order to improve themselves.

Edited July 4, 2010 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Dejablue]

I like 'Jerk with a heart of gold' sonic a little more than 'omg lets be friends and save the world' sonic

In regards to Tails. It'd be cool if he were independent because I think with a little work he could be his own game hero. He' can still be Sonic's best bud too. I don't see why one has to be sacrificed for the other.

Shadow feels like a lost cause to me. If he can create a new identity I'd accept it. I mean honestly how long can someone angst over a tragedy in their lives. A long time yes but not forever. People who never heal from past woes have issues. Or just become annoying.

As far as Amy Rose is concerned...hmmm I dunno. How do you guys feel about her comic book incarnations? Do think those would translate well into the games?

Edited July 4, 2010 by Dejablue

[Phos]

And I just reminded Black Spy that this is about Amy...

Whatever character you want to put in the subtitle doesn't matter so much to a subconversation about the nature of good character development.

Having a big rock that barely anyone knows about and even fewer have a reason to take is not comparable to dragging in GUN. This is not a question of GUN being unbelivably, this I'd a case of GUN being perhaps the worst thing to happen to the franchise. They had this story about a hedgehog who saves the world, so they decided that what this story needed was a Tom Clancy organization (who employed Gerald Robotnik who is somehow Ivo's grandfather even though the family tree seems to stop with Maria).

Anyone announcing that that they are from the future invariably reminds me of that naked guy from Reno 911 with the Uzi (I'm from the future! *sprays gun into the air*), but I can't hate Silver. Actually, the naked man probably helps him. The problem with being from the future is that it's hard to come up with reasons for him to be there, there aren't that many possibilities. In Knuckles's case, he has to leave an island that, via the plausible deniability of it floating around could be near by whatever is happening anyway.

Is that all? Because as I see it, every character could do that in order to improve themselves.

There's nothing in particular I want out of Amy, as long as they do that much I'll probably be fine with it.

If you don't see her design as creepy, I can just bring up all the other things I don't like about it. First off, pidgeon feet? Really? Here's an interesting though experiment: have you ever seen a single piece of fan art that has actually shown this trait? It seems to me as though no one but Mr. New Design Designer (Mr. New Design Designer!) likes them. Then there's the matter of her rooster crown thing she's got on her head. I can understand that they didn't have enough polygons for anything else on the dreamcast, but they really need to do something different with that, what am I looking at (I have the same problem with Tails's new design also).

Edited July 4, 2010 by Phos

[Dejablue]

Really I think what'll save these messed up characters is simply a person who can write well with what they are given. Like...really well.

Kind of like how Toy Story characters are well written when none of the toys have a back story or anything. They're just toys. But you love them anyway.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Dejablue