The Classic Series vs. The Advance Series

[Kuzu]

After lurking on the Sega Forums for a few months, I've noticed that they treat the Adv. Series as if its God's gift to the series, and having played all three I don't see what's so special about them, or what makes them better than the classic series(Maybe as good as the classic series, but not better), I admit they were fun to play, and it was fun playing as Amy & Cream, but it was also fun playing Tails & Knuckles in Sonic 3 & Knuckles, so I came to get a second opinion. What makes the these games good?

[Indigo Rush]

Sonic Advance sticks to the classic formula. People like the classic formula.

Sonic Advance 2 and 3 were a little too different, if you ask me.

[Tobbii]

I'm not a big fan, they're okay but... I prefer the Rush series actually.

But I did like Mecha Knuckles in SAdv.

[Agent York]

Now I wouldn't say they were better than the Classics though opinions may vary, but I thought they were some wonderful handheld titles. Sonic Advance 1 is my personal favorite and on my list of "Top Sonic Games" personally... It does a good job at capturing the classic formula on a handheld while not carbon copying it and also modernizing it a bit with the recent release of Sonic Adventure 2. I think it had good level design, good character selection and individuality and replayability, good music, some great boss battles, and is just a very charming package as a whole.

Advance 2 is faster but my least favorite of the 3, though these days it kind of feels like Sonic Advance 1 meets Sonic Rush. Sonic Advance 3 I like a lot as well, though it is kind of a more strategic Sonic game... Like there are a lot more moments in the game you have to think what you have to do next more than any other Sonic game, think ahead of what character combo might be best, lot's of gimmicks to use in the stage. I think of it as a very techy Sonic game. one that does very well in some aspects but misses a few notes.

I will say I really enjoyed the trilogy as a whole even though the first one was my favorite.

[Diogenes]

I don't think the Advances are very good. The first is a competent if uninspired entry; it plays mostly like the Genesis games, it's just not as good. 2 is when things started to go downhill (literally), with too much focus on speed (plus the absolutely horrible special stage entry system). 3 is a bit better, but the partner gimmick is...gimmicky.

[T-Min]

They're not as good as the classics, but I have a large soft spot in my heart for the Advance series (well, 1 and 3 anyway), the first one in particular because of its similarities with the Genesis games. Advance 2 just bored me. All I felt like I was doing was holding right the whole time with very little interaction. Advance 3, though, I actually liked a lot. I feel like it combined the the second one's speed with the first's platforming rather well, but YMMV, I suppose.

[Tobbii]

Okay, am I the only one who actually picked up Advance on release and though "This feels nothing like the original classics."? xD

I liked it, as I stated before, but I can't say it felt like a classic Sonic game at all. Maybe I just had a bad memory, haven't played it in a few years now.

[thesketchsector]

I enjoyed all the Advance series games, although 1's my favourite because of the anticipation I had for it and the hours of fun I got out of it.

Vs. The classic series I'd say the gameplay's obviously going to be different because it's on Handheld but it's not necessarily bad.

I'm going to say that Sonic Advance 1 is my favourite handheld Sonic game.

[Tornado]

The first game is a carbon copy of Sonic 2 design sensibilities with some Sonic 3 ideas thrown in for flavor, but for the most part only done competently rather than exceptionally (though it does do a few things better than Sonic 2).

The second game is one of the few really innovative games in the series, but those innovations are not thought out very well in many instances.

The third game is one of the worst games in the entire series.

Edited May 7, 2011 by Tornado

[Kuzu]

Okay, am I the only one who actually picked up Advance on release and though "This feels nothing like the original classics."? xD

I liked it, as I stated before, but I can't say it felt like a classic Sonic game at all. Maybe I just had a bad memory, haven't played it in a few years now.

Maybe. ITs the closet of the three that actually felt like a classic game, in terms if physics and level design. Hell I considering it more of a Sonic 4 than the actual Sonic 4.

[Mega]

Triple Trouble is more like Sonic 4 than the actual Sonic 4.

So's Pocket Adventure, and it's rehash central.

That being said, I haven't played the Advance games myself, but I doubt they have the massive scale of Sonic 3& Knuckles.

[Kuzu]

The first game is a competent carbon copy of Sonic 2 design sensibilities, just not done as well.

The second game is one of the few truly innovative games in the series, but not thought out very well in many instances.

The third game is one of the worst games in the entire series.

In terms of design? I can't see it, almost no levels in Adv. 1 remind of Sonic 2.

Ehh, I liked the trick system(Best one in the series), but that's about it, I just mostly remember holding mostly right to win.

Its a step down from the first I admit, but I don't see what makes it so damn bad.

Triple Trouble is more like Sonic 4 than the actual Sonic 4.

So's Pocket Adventure, and it's rehash central.

That being said, I haven't played the Advance games myself, but I doubt they have the massive scale of Sonic 3& Knuckles.

Triple Trouble...Gotta play that again actually.

At least the series had orignal zones rather than just straight up rehashes.

You really should play them, I don't think its as good as Sonic 3 & Knuckles either, but it comes pretty damn close.

[Tobbii]

Triple Trouble is more like Sonic 4 than the actual Sonic 4.

So's Pocket Adventure, and it's rehash central.

That being said, I haven't played the Advance games myself, but I doubt they have the massive scale of Sonic 3& Knuckles.

I always forget SPA, I loved that game.

[Rusty Spy]

Its a step down from the first I admit, but I don't see what makes it so damn bad.

The controls were far worse, the level design was overly convoluted and had no sense of direction, meaning 99.9% of the time you had NO idea where you are, or where you were, or how far you were in the level, and the team gimmick was a cool idea spread too thin.

[Kuzu]

The controls were far worse, the level design was overly convoluted and had no sense of direction, meaning 99.9% of the time you had NO idea where you are, or where you were, or how far you were in the level, and the team gimmick was a cool idea spread too thin.

A little stiffer, yeah, but not that much worse really. That only applies if you're looking for Chao, which I admit is a pain in the ass, but every other time, the standard solution is GO RIGHT. And yes the Team gimmick could've been used a lot better.

I said it was a step down from the original, I never said it was perfect.

[Rusty Spy]

A little stiffer, yeah, but not that much worse really.

No, not stiffer, you slide all over the place. Basic platforming is hell because of how hard it is to stop him in mid air. The controls are FAR worse, and it's extremely noticeable and SERIOUSLY hurts the game.

I said it was a step down from the original, I never said it was perfect.

Believe me, there's at least a page and a half's worth of reasons why Adv 3 fails REALLY hard.

[Kuzu]

Believe me, there's at least a page and a half's worth of reasons why Adv 3 fails REALLY hard.

I've got time.

[Sean]

I've got time.

You don't want to get Tornado, me, or anybody else started on this. Try the search function and see what hilarity comes up!

[azoo]

Sonic Advance can be sort of comparable to the original 3, and could've been a really good Sonic 4. However it's still dull compared to S1-3K and SCD. The other two? Nah, they just kind of suck.

You don't want to get Tornado, me, or anybody else started on this. Try the search function and see what hilarity comes up!

Speaking of which, please don't get me started on it.

I don't think you want to get me started on Sadv3. I believe I could be the one that loathes this game more than anyone else on this message board.

[PC the Hedgehog]

Anyone who complains about Dimps being virtually unable to mimic classic Sonic physics needs to go back and play Sonic Advance 1.

[metaXzero]

I understand Sonic 4 (which I still think regardless gets too much hate) but did the Advance trilogy REALLY need to exactly like the Genesis games?

[Sean]

Anyone who complains about Dimps being virtually unable to mimic classic Sonic physics needs to go back and play Sonic Advance 1.

They adamantly refuse to replicate such design however, and it's been nearly a decade since Sonic Advance came out. So Dimps is pretty much all but entirely impotent now. They're like the M. Night Shyamalan of games.

I understand Sonic 4 (which I still think regardless gets too much hate) but did the Advance trilogy REALLY need to exactly like the Genesis games?

Nah, they just need to be good. Which they're not: two of them are mediocre and the other is horrible.

Conversely, I enjoyed Sonic Rush Adventure despite not liking most of anything else Dimps put out beforehand. Or since.

Edited May 7, 2011 by Sean

[Rusty Spy]

Anyone who complains about Dimps being virtually unable to mimic classic Sonic physics needs to go back and play Sonic Advance 1.

I don't complain about them being unable to replicate classic physics, I complain about them being unable to make good games.

And btw, Advance's physics were too floaty and didn't allow for much inertia.

Edited May 7, 2011 by Black Spy

[Old dead account]

Not as good as the classics IMO, but Advance 1 does stick to the classic forumula and Amy innovated the gameplay a little bit sort of like Tails & Knuckles did in S3&K. Advance 2 and 3 are different but not bad.

[Tornado]

In terms of design? I can't see it, almost no levels in Adv. 1 remind of Sonic 2.

I can't see how you don't. Just as an example, Neo Green Hill has wholesale copies of entire sections from Emerald Hill, and shares many little bits and pieces in addition. The boss for the level is even similar to the one from Emerald Hill.

Also, I was speaking design as a broad term. Not specifically level layouts and the like, but also how it plays.

Ehh, I liked the trick system(Best one in the series), but that's about it, I just mostly remember holding mostly right to win

The trick system isn't what I was talking about (and it debuted, for the most part, in the original game anyways).

I've got time.

Type Sonic Advance into the search bar and see what comes up. I'm sure nearly every topic related to any of the three games has a rant about it by myself, Sean or Black Spy in it. In fact, there was a topic earlier in the year specifically about Advance 3 where all three of us really let loose on it. Though as a taste:

A little stiffer, yeah, but not that much worse really.

Not "a little stiffer." Loose to the point that precise platforming is practically painful to do. Which is almost certainly the exact reason that Sonic Advance 2 didn't try to do it.

Anyone who complains about Dimps being virtually unable to mimic classic Sonic physics needs to go back and play Sonic Advance 1.

No one said that Dimps couldn't do it. The problem isn't even that Dimps doesn't do it (because that isn't necessarily a problem by itself), but that they haven't even bothered to do it for games that they by definition should have done it for.

I understand Sonic 4 (which I still think regardless gets too much hate) but did the Advance trilogy REALLY need to exactly like the Genesis games?

No. I love Rush Adventure, and that is barely anything like a Genesis Sonic game. I love Advance 2 (in small doses), and that is only slightly more like a Genesis Sonic game. But attempting to design the game as if it is one of the Genesis games when it plays almost nothing like it is a pretty bad idea.

Edited May 7, 2011 by Tornado