Which criticisms towards the series do you disagree with?

[Core]

- I must say, Yahtzee's kinda pathetic for picking on Colors just for having cutscenes you can apparently skip. This is yet another nitpick that's technically been in the series ever since 3 & Knuckles.

You know, if cutscenes are bad, skipable or not, that's a valid thing to complain about.

[Ebby]

I am serious, if some greedy corporate media giant such as Disney buys the Sonic franchise then I won't be pleased. It would be a nightmare if that happens, and I hope it doesn't become a reality.

As long as the games are good I'll be fine.

[SykoTech]

I disagree with the "too many characters" complaint. Especially when Sonic has hardly any, at leas not compared to Transformers, which has a nigh infinite cast.

Well, the Transformers cast was always a large group of heroes working together, much like the X-Men. Can't really expect people to complain about what was essentially the point from the beginning.

A more reasonable comparison for Sonic would be Batman or Spider-Man. Those guys began as solo heroes as Sonic did. Aside from a couple of sidekicks/teamups, Spidey and Bats still remain independent most of the time. Sonic...not so much. Sega has been trying to fix that nowadays, but I can't really think of anytime between 1998 and 2006 in which Sonic didn't have his "friends" floating around.

[Vec]

I disagree with the "too many characters" complaint. Especially when Sonic has hardly any, at leas not compared to Transformers, which has a nigh infinite cast.

And now the new Spyro game will feature 32 playable characters. Imagine if Sega ever do that, they'll go and burn Sega of Japan/America/Europe for that!

Edited February 11, 2011 by Vec

[Dr. Crusher]

I definitely cannot stand it when people hate Sonic 2006.

Looks like someone can't take an opinion. I may find someone liking the game bizarre, and I certainly won't hide my thoughts from them, but I won't go "BAWW I HATE YOU."

I mean, come on. Why does this game deserve all the hate when it still has good points despite what haters say?

Because the bad dwarves the good. For every good feature, such as the music, there's about five more bad features, such as glitches, and not even the "good/fun" kind of glitches. It doesn't help when said "bad features" tend to relate to the more important aspects of the game. You know. Like the gameplay. Or the story.

Sure, you may not like the glitches, bugs, loading times and control problems, but deep underneath those flaws are all the good stuff.p

You shouldn't need to dig at all, let alone so much, to find the good stuff. A truly wonderful game should have those factors from the very beginning. I could easily say "Hey guys, Superman 64 controls like shit, and every time he flies through a ring God kills a kitten, but it DOES have little plus points if you search reallllly hard!" It's just not worth the trouble.

Heck, there are many licensed games and other poor games that are more poor quality then this.

Which still makes this one worse because it was a game series to begin with.

Licensed games tend to suck anyway (with notable exceptions such as Batman: Arkham Asylum), and they still do good with their comics/films/shows/whatever media they originated from. Sonic... not so much. He is overall a game series. And if you can't even do well at your usual job... well.

From what I have seen, E.T. for the Atari 2600 is the worst quality game ever made, not Sonic 2006.

That's like saying "I drink a bottle of piss everyday. The piss today tasted like piss, but I'll tell you what - that piss was certainly better piss than the piss I had yesterday."

While it’s nice to point out flaws in a game, you shouldn’t be so mean about it, because it will make you look nothing but a heartless moron.

What goes around comes around. A crap game gets crap reception. Fantastic game gets fantastic reception. We're not heartless, we're just angry. And we would go ahead and try to "move on", but unfortunately SOMEONE always brings it back up in order to "defend" any non-existent dignity it previously had.

Besides, you should be happy because SEGA has learned from their mistakes and are actually making better games then what they used to.

Agreed. The only good thing that came out of the game - it made SEGA realise.

But then it would have been even better if they had just made consistently good games and didn't need to "remember" or "realise" anything at all. Even Mario Sunshine wasn't that bad.

If that makes you feel better I also like the other Sonic games, too, including your beloved classic games that we all grew up with.

Don't patronise us. Just because I like the Genesis games the best doesn't mean I hate every single other thing Sonic-related.

Don't be upset with me for liking this game.

How about you stop being upset with us for not liking it? I have a friend that likes Sonic 2006, and I myself despise the game, and yet we still talk and laugh with each other.

Because unlike many other Sonic fans, I know what the series is all about, and I also know how to respect games and accept them who they are.

I really hope you're not trying to pull the "I'm a TRUE Sonic fan" card.

I’m not weird nor insane for liking Sonic 2006, people.

That's fine. Just stop shoving it into our faces repeatedly. The more you keep asking "WHY DOES SONIC 2006 GET HATE????" nonstop, the more the hate tends to increase. It's just a massive backfire.

It is my opinion and I actually know how to think, instead of doing nothing but be negative, throw tantrums and write endless drama about it like everyone else.

So anyone who likes the Genesis games and whatever else (including anything modern!), or just people that don't like Sonic 2006, are a bunch of cross-eyed elephants in clown suits that dribble on their feet 24/7? And while there are some that might take it too far, there's also those (such as yourself) that give the game more bad publicity. Again, backfiring at it's worst.

Haters are going to hate no matter what, and the best thing I can do is to ignore them.

"Ignoring" is the opposite of what you're doing right now.

In fact, by making a massive rant about the dislikers, you've completely contradicted yourself.

Also, just a personal nitpick - cheap and repetitive uses of HATERS GONNA HATE C'MON GUYS LET'S MATE make me boil.

If that is not enough, here are more criticisms or opinions that also irritate me:

The recent Sonic games suck!

Very well.

SatAM is better then all the games!

Very well.

The gameplay in the recent games is terrible!

Very well.

Sonic 4 sucks because they used the green-eyed Sonic 2006 design for Sonic instead of the classic design!

Very well.

No! Sonic has green eyes and he looks the same he did in recent games! I want the old classic design back!

Very well.

Sonic must look like a poorly-drawn 1920's cartoon character!

...You better not be dissing Steamboat Willy.

Sonic should be in a crossover with Kingdom Hearts! (Um, I think not)

...Okay.

Tails/Cream is canon, deal with it!

Fan Pairings.

Serious Business.

Knuckles/Rouge is canon, Shadow/Rouge isn't!

Would it be redundant if I said "Fan Pairings. Serious Business." again?

Doesn't matter. I've already technically said it again anyways.

Sonic should unite with all the cartoon stars that I grew up with!

...What?

All the Sonic TV shows should join the Disney Afternoon lineup!

...What?

SatAM has the best VAs and better then the rest!

Gameplay. Then controls. Then characters. Then story. Then sound. Then graphics. Then voices.

SatAM character designs are better then what you see in the games, especially all the recent games!

Very well.

Bring back the SatAM voice cast to reprise the roles of Sonic/Tails/Robotnik/whoever is from the games!

When you pinch Sonic voices, the fans pinch back!

SatAM is better then every other Sonic anime/TV show!

Very well.

Disney should buy the rights to Sonic! They should make a Sonic movie!

Okay, seriously - what is your problem with Disney? What was it exactly that they did to anger you so?

And in all honesty... I wouldn't mind it. I'd be up for such classic ditties as No One Like Shadow and The World's Greatest Master Plan. Plus Mephiles would die by falling off a cliff like a retard. Who wouldn't pay to see that?

All the other SEGA franchises are forgotten because everyone loves Sonic better!

Very well.

Sonic is a casual game, not hardcore!

Meh. Sonic may be "above" Mario in whatever imaginary steps people think of for age ratings, but like the plumber, Sonic should IMO be aimed towards everyone, not just adults or kids.

I miss my nostalgic feeling!

Again, I could easily respond with "I miss my grimdark feeling!"

Waahhh! Waahhh! Ohboohoohoohoo! Sniff!

You could have just said that and not bothered with the rest of your words. It would have saved precious time on both our parts.

Oh geez, people. Stop whining already! And to be honest, nobody cares.

You still don't sound "uncaring" to me. You said you were ignoring us, right? This isn't ignoring.

It is better to accept the Sonic series the way it is instead of trying to change it to something it's not.

So if there was a Mario game that revolved around him making bridges by using icicles and realistic hummers whilst defeating armies of Halo-esque aliens by using a sword and with no Bowser/Toads/Goombas/Mario powerups/Mushroom Kingdom/etc in sight, would you just say "No guys! This is a good game, and it's got everything Mario! You must accept how it is!"... would you?

You just can't do that. Gameplay styles and the rest are subjective, but as with Mario's platforming and Link's adventuring, Sonic is at heart a speedy platformer, and if there's a gameplay style that's fresh but also compliments Sonic's usual gameplay at the same time, sure, why not. That would be great. Brilliant. Magnificent even. But you can't look at a Sonic game with every genre imaginable in it but speedy platforming and say "Accept it. It's better this way." It's just stupid.

And by the way, while the alternate gameplay styles are opinion-rated like everything else, "something it's not" sounds more about them than it does about Sonic combining fast speed and heavy platforming.

People complain about silly things no matter what, and I wish they would have happy thoughts rather then being so angry over the look of a fictional blue hedgehog.

"But I swear if those dastardly fiends at Disney get hands on the hedgehog, there'll be pitchforks in the street. Let's see if Pixar can still make a tear-jerking blockbuster when they're calling for firetrucks."

Sonic is still Sonic, no matter the design.

"Still, I'll bust a cap if there's any lamps containing Robin Williams or lions throwing other lions off cliffs. Because then it's just not Sonic anymore."

Then again, why the heck is the old designs so important to you?

The same reason why lots of people, including yourself apparently, care so much about the voices.

It may be because you’re a bunch of nostalgia nerds, but there are no problems with new designs, people (Besides, they’re easy to accept and I have gotten used to new designs and changes since Sonic and company looked this way back in the Sonic Adventure days).

It may be because we might just not like some of the newer games because they suck, not because they're simply "new" or "modern".

As with hating, stereotyping seems to go both ways.

Also, I don't hate SatAM (I actually like it as much as the other Sonic shows), don't get me wrong, but it gets too much praise and attention then it should deserve and it's like no one cares about all the other Sonic shows anymore.

Okay, fair enough. I will admit that I'm more of an AoStH person, and I didn't even know much about SatAM until a few years ago. I consider the OVA to be better too, and also serves as an example of how to do Metal Sonic right.

But that's it. Underground and Sonic X? Inferior. Partly for the lack of evil and deep Jim Cummings, but obviously there's plenty more problems with both of them than that. One of them happens to look suspiciously like Sor-... ...ooohhhh, so THAT'S why you hate Disney!

I'm also sick and tired of people thinking that SatAM is better then the games when the fact that it's not canon to the games' story and it's just an animated TV show adaption of a video game franchise and nothing more.

Well... I would agree with SatAM constantly being "shoved" into the game canon by fans, but on the other hand I always dreamed of fitting in the OVA, so...

I know people have their opinions, but still. I'm sick of nostalgic whiners moaning all the time and I wish they would accept changes and what the Sonic franchise is.

So what is the Sonic franchise? How would you describe it in your own words?

Changes are inevitable, of course. But we want the right kind of changes. Contrary to popular belief, not all fans of the Genesis games want all future games to be exactly like them in every shape possible. We want them to move forward as well, but not at the expanse of forgetting about the gameplay, characters, story tones and all the rest that originally made up the hedgehog's gaming travels. There's good change (using characters wisely, fresh-but-complimenting gameplay), and there's bad change (using all characters randomly and repeatedly, completely 100% different gameplay). We want the former.

I apologise for such a massive waste of my own posting.

EDIT:

- I'd apply this to just about any fanbase, but I kinda hate it when people think that just because we like something post-Genesis Sonic that we're delusional or something. Maybe it's just me, but I really can't stand people putting down others just for having different views from them.

However there's just as much mindless bashing on the other end. Anyone who likes the Genesis games nowadays is immediately called "retro" or "classic". Even the ones that like some of the recent ones. I myself like the Genesis games as well as the Advances/Rushes/Unleashed/Colours, and I still get called "retro", and apparently I'm a cause of SEGA "going backwards".

Edited February 11, 2011 by Dr. Crusher

[Ebby]

I disagree with people who think Treasure Hunting has more to do with Sonic then the Werehog Levels.

[ChikaBoing]

It's just that people give ridocioulus reasons why Treasure Hunting fits in more with Sonic.

Like:

"Hot and cold is arcade gameplay, perfectly suited for Sonic especially in free roaming stage design. (giving you a direction in a free roaming stage so the pace resembles that of a linear stage)

it's also original and

Works perfectly in a 3D platformer. (you have to think 3D dimensionally)

It also keeps you moving around, instead of just going directly to wherever the emerald is. (which would be boring and render pointless having free roaming maps)"

"The Treasure Hunting stages are a better concept than Werehog because they actually focus on aspects centric to the Sonic series: exploration, huge levels, high speed and platforming. The levels in the original Sonic games were huge and there were tons of multiple paths to choose from. Of course, you were rarely tasked to search for and find things in these levels, but the similarity remains. Unlike simple and repetitive Werehog, the treasure hunt levels actually have you in control of a character that can move fast, in a wide, open-ended environment with a lot of multiple paths, puzzles, and platforming. While it may not have been executed in the best way, this is a lot more original and true-to-Sonic than any recent Sonic game can ever hope to say. I personally found these sections(especially Knuckles' levels) to be the funnest part of the game, even though I do understand that not everyone likes to explore, and some of the levels were executed poorly (Egg Quarters, the time limit in Security Hall). Even though you hated them, they are far more original in concept and true to the Sonic name than Werehog ever was."

I won't go on about how they are wrong in my view, but that's just way too far-fetched, I don't care.

BTW those comments are referring to SA2Treasure Hunting.

Edited February 11, 2011 by ChikaBoing

[AlphaRuby]

The whole "This game suks cos it dosn't hve classic sonic! Classic sonic make game so much better!" rubbish.

You know what game had Classic Sonic in it before Generations?

This piece of crap:

I'll leave it at that...

[Tornado]

That's not a particularly clever rebuttal. Not even to the ridiculous strawman argument you were making it against.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Gilda

[WarioBone]

Shall we also mention Mario? The entire cast of characters in that series from RPG's to the Platformers to the Sports games likely outnumbers Sonic's main games cast by 3 times over if not more.

Except none of them ever appear again outside of cameos.

Look at the Olympic games cast. Sonic's leaving out Espio, Charmy, and Rouge. Mario leaves out, what, Birdo? Rosalina? The core cast of the Mario games is very much set in stone, while the main games consistantly feature only Mario, Luigi, Bowser, and Peach (and sometimes Yoshi, as a power-up). Even series bigs like Wario don't appear in the main games anymore (although he has his own franchise now), while others are around simply to pad the spin-offs' rosters (Daisy, Birdo, Waluigi).

Actually, Sonic and Mario are kinda in the same boat now, except no one complains about Mario. :V

(Wario should totally be in the next main series game as a boss or something, that would be THE SHIT.)

[SilJeff]

1. That all of the alternate play-styles are the worst thing on planet Earth. I mean, sure, they aren't Sonic's play-style, but I still think they aren't bad at all, a lot are really fun IMO...

2. The "too many characters" complaint

3. That if you like any post-Genesis (to quote a previous post) games, you are bad and are one of the problems with the franchise. I hate elitists from both sides of the fence, but the majority of the time, I hear stuff like that from Classic Elitists instead of the opposite from Modern elitists

4. (This is one I ALWAYS seem to get from people trying to defend the abomination that is Sonic 06) That in order to be a "true" Sonic fan, you have to like ALL of the Sonic games, including Sonic 06.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Mr.Snarf

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Sonic doesn't need a story.

My argument is that Sonic has always had stories in his games, they were just very simple ones and they did not rely on cutscenes and dialogue to tell them, much like any other platformer of that time period. If Sonic didn't have a story, then what would be the point in going through the game? It would just be a bunch of levels with no rhyme or reason, and it would be very bland at best.

Now if you told me that the stories need to be improved in terms of writing and dialogue, then I might agree.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Enigmatus

[-blank-]

The 'too many characters' argument. Mario has five times more characters than Sonic and no one complains about them. =|

[NGw00d]

The 'too many characters' argument. Mario has five times more characters than Sonic and no one complains about them. =|

The thing about that is while Mario may have more characters, his games don't force you to play as them and they usually only appear in spin-offs. I do agree that its a stupid criticism to have along with the "Sonic doesn't need a story" one.

[Someguy]

Not entirely sure if it fits here entirely or just within the various character criticisms, but the thing that annoys me the most but gets no rebuttal is the "multiple characters must be 100% optional" thing. Sonic 3 & Knuckles had "100% optional" characters... but if I remember right you didn't experience much new with Tails, it was mostly Sonic's levels on easy, no real exclusive paths. Meanwhile, as a kid I went forever not knowing Knuckles essentially had his own set of level layouts and boss things, and given the amount of money poured into games that is something they do not want someone doing nowadays. Relatedly, S3K forced you to play alternate playstyles before getting the true ending too, while Sonic Adventure technically let you get to the credits without ever touching anyone else but Sonic. You could say Big was essentially a special stage, pun not intended.

If, rather than "alternate playstyles" we got fun variations of the same playstyle(go from point A to point B, no wildly different physics, huge speed slowdowns or heavy focus on shooting etc but still having more than just reskinned Sonic while keeping homing attack and boost on someone like Tails as some have actually suggested) would a game in which you change from Sonic to Tails to Knuckles or even someone like Shadow or Blaze throughout the story really be a problem?

Though I like the idea of trying a modern take on the Sonic/Knuckles path splits, I also like the idea of levels which are entirely built for them, working around the oddities that "point a to point b in 3D" might make for someone who can fly everywhere vs someone who can climb indefinitely and someone who is more stuck to the ground. Either way, I think that, if they made each character interesting yet not an entire genre change, there wouldn't be some horrible issue with having to play as someone other than Sonic, so long as they play enough LIKE Sonic.

[WarioBone]

The 'too many characters' argument. Mario has five times more characters than Sonic and no one complains about them. =|

Immediately after my two or three paragraph explaination on why it isn't the case with Mario. But NGw00d beat me to it, it looks like.

S3K forced you to play alternate playstyles before getting the true ending too,

And by true ending, you mean a picture of Sonic, Tails, and Knuckles standing on the S3&K logo. It changed the ending none whatsoever. It was more a "Hey, cool, you beat it with everyone! Good for you!"

Edited August 13, 2012 by Billionaire Playboy Wario

[Phos]

Well, Sonic doesn't need a story...

[WarioBone]

Well, Sonic doesn't need a story...

Sonic doesn't need cutscenes. But without a story, what's the point of the game happening at all?

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Well, Sonic doesn't need a story...

If Sonic didn't have a story, then what would be the point in going through the game? It would just be a bunch of levels with no rhyme or reason, and it would be very bland at best.

I said this a few posts up. If they never added in a story to begin with, like for games like Terraria or Minecraft, I wouldn't mind as much, but they did add stories, and taking them out now when they have been ingrained in Sonic for so long would frankly be a stupid decision.

Edited August 13, 2012 by Enigmatus

[Blacklightning]

but if I remember right you didn't experience much new with Tails, it was mostly Sonic's levels on easy, no real exclusive paths.

I dunno about you, but in Sonic 3 I found plenty of advantages to use Tails over Sonic, including routes that the latter wasn't designed to be able to use. And S&K wasn't even built with Tails in mind anyway so much as it was a bonus for owning both games, so for that it's really more of a question of "what did you even expect?"

Meanwhile, as a kid I went forever not knowing Knuckles essentially had his own set of level layouts and boss things, and given the amount of money poured into games that is something they do not want someone doing nowadays.

Hey, it's not their fault if you lack the initiative to play certain characters on show. I mean, holy crap man, did you really just blame the developer because you deliberately refused one of the options given to you all those years and ended up missing content because of it? What more do you want them to do? Shove in a message made of neon lights saying "HEY FUCKSTICK, PLAY THIS CHARACTER BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED WITH HIM YET"?

Relatedly, S3K forced you to play alternate playstyles before getting the true ending too

This is a pretty gross overestimation of what an "alternate playstyle" actually is. Changing a single midair move between characters is not an alternate playstyle. Changing the very core fundementals of the game between characters so much that you can't even jump on things with some of them, much less roll or utilize slope physics, is an alternate playstyle.

Saying you had to play them all to get a true ending is also completely false, as they all had good endings more or less unique to each character. Well, Sonic and Tails switch positions, granted, but nonetheless you still don't have to play both to achieve genuine closure.

[Wittymations]

"Sonic shouldn't have a story."

He's had a story since his Gensis days. Even Sonic 1 -- albiet it that was more of a test rather than a full blown thing. Sonic 2 was more in focus and went straight to Sonic 3 and Knuckles.

[Someguy]

And by true ending, you mean a picture of Sonic, Tails, and Knuckles standing on the S3&K logo. It changed the ending none whatsoever. It was more a "Hey, cool, you beat it with everyone! Good for you!"

Actually I meant(and should have said) last story, the Doomsday battle. If I remember right it's totally ignored if you don't get Super/Hyper Sonic's boss, which requires Special Stages. I'm just saying that if you want to be technical you had to play different gameplay styles(the Special Stages) to get the "real" ending, that might have somewhat inspired the whole "play as everyone for true story" thing, the characters replacing the now story-locked Emerald collecting.

I kinda forget how that ties into my argument beyond "Sonic Adventure was more S3&K style than you'd think"... though I realize it was apparently a pretty poor argument anyway given the other response, lots of exaggeration... sorry.

[Old dead account]

I disagree with the saying that Sonic games suck just because of the fact that other characters are even present. I think IGN docked point from generations just because Cream was there. Seriously? Talk about unprofessional.

Also, "Sonic doesn't need a story. He just need to run through loops and collect rings" yeah, bullshit. Would you belive me if I said there was even a song about this? Complain about cutscenes and VAs if you want but not for the simple fact that it has a story. Japanese manuals IIRC, had a more detailed story too for the genesis game that spread beyond a blue guy that collects gold rings and fights an obese guy.

[Phos]

Sonic doesn't need cutscenes. But without a story, what's the point of the game happening at all?

If Sonic didn't have a story, then what would be the point in going through the game? It would just be a bunch of levels with no rhyme or reason, and it would be very bland at best.

I said this a few posts up. If they never added in a story to begin with, like for games like Terraria or Minecraft, I wouldn't mind as much, but they did add stories, and taking them out now when they have been ingrained in Sonic for so long would frankly be a stupid decision.

I'm basically talking semantics here.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

The 'too many characters' argument. Mario has five times more characters than Sonic and no one complains about them. =|

Um, not that I agree with their being too many characters, but exactly how often does Mario use its larger cast of characters that you claim? They hardly go beyond Mario, Bowser, Luigi, and Peach as the primary characters in its series.