Jump to content
Cstyler

The distinctive features of SA-games

Recommended Posts

Anyway, that's pretty sad that Sonic Team discarded the SA-formula after the S'06 failure. I hope that some day Iizuka will wake up and find out that there are a lot of forgotten SA-fans who need to be satisfied.

But they've not gotten rid of the SA Formula, it's been constantly changing and evolving throughout every Sonic game up until the present day. SA 2 is a radically different direction to Sonic Adventure, but heroes, 06, Unleashed and even colours are just an evolution of that. The adventure formula didn't go anywhere, just the word adventure did, the formula just happened to evolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The adventure formula didn't go anywhere, just the word adventure did, the formula just happened to evolve.

In the gameplay way. But there were no more thrilling storylines since 2006. Again, maybe it's just I've grew up, but why do I still admire the SA/SA2/06 plots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing. Why then many retro fans don't consider Sonic Advance as a part of the retro series in that case? And then why retro fans often say "We've been waiting a game with retro gameplay for 16 years"? What is the difference between these retro fans and SA fans who don't perceive S06 as SA3? And why no one ever spoke to retro fans something like "We already have a Sonic 4, and it's Sonic Advance" when they talked about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Man, it's like Classic Sonic's black eyes. Lame, but important. Maybe you just have to be a SA-fan to understand me.

Ok, whoa. Hold up here. One of my favorite games happens to be Sonic Adventure 2 Battle, which (while it has "Battle" tacked on the end) is an adventure game. Therefore, I am an Adventure fan. However, I don't understand you. I don't get how Crush 40 doing the theme, how how the box art style, and and how a voice in a menu makes a game an Adventure game.

Also, I've got a question for you. Let's say that SEGA makes a Sonic Adventure 3 (and actually names it "Sonic Adventure 3"). When the game comes out, it does not have Crush 40 doing the theme, the box art style has a 3D picture of Sonic, there's no voice in the menu, and there's no Chao garden. Would this game not be Sonic Adventure 3 then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing. Why then many retro fans don't consider Sonic Advance as a part of the retro series in that case? And then why retro fans often say "We've been waiting a game with retro gameplay for 16 years"? What is the difference between these retro fans and SA fans who don't perceive S06 as SA3? And why no one ever spoke to retro fans something like "We already have a Sonic 4, and it's Sonic Advance" when they talked about it?

That kind of discussion happen before S4 and probably still does now. Regardless, the classics have a much narrower definition thus stricter standards for what's required for a title to be considered a classic game. On the other hand, no one here has been able to name even five exclusive, series-defining similarities between SA1 and SA2, nor has anyone been able to explain away the rampant differences the two titles share. Even the OP admitted his feelings about the subject were more based on nostalgia than any significant amount of objectivity. It's not an equivalent situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehm, Kiberbot. People say that ALL THE TIME.

It's even been in the status updates about 3-4 times in the last few days.

Maybe now people are talking about it, but at the time of the announcement of Sonic 4, and before it, personally, I do not remember such a moments. And this still does not compare with talks about SA3, where at least one user will leave the post with cover of S06 in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no one here has been able to name even five exclusive, series-defining similarities between SA1 and SA2

1. Playing as various characters with some major differences in gameplay. (Exclusive to SA since I consider 2006 as SA3)

2. Focusing on having an ongoing story that can be viewed from more than one characters perspective. (Exclusive to SA since Heroes didn't focus hard on the story but held most focus on the gameplay)

3. The story tells a story of a being from the past. (Same thing as with the 1st point)

4. Finding upgrades to the characters throughout the game, some that are optional.

5. Chao Garden

Good enough?

Maybe now people are talking about it, but at the time of the announcement of Sonic 4, and before it, personally, I do not remember such a moments. And this still does not compare with talks about SA3, where at least one user will leave the post with cover of S06 in any case.

People talked about games like Sonic Advance or even Sonic Triple Trouble being Sonic 4 since the communities started.

Edited by Tobbii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11175918.jpg

Another awesome distinctive feature of the SA-games is the escape from some homicidal thing in the first level. And the thing is have to be original, not a copypaste like in S’06!

Yo dawg, I herd you like

11175918.jpg

, so I put an

v5ijkl.png

in your

11175918.jpg

so you can

11175918.jpg

while you

v5ijkl.png

:D

Edited by Tatsumaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Playing as various characters with some major differences in gameplay. (Exclusive to SA since I consider 2006 as SA3)

2. Focusing on having an ongoing story that can be viewed from more than one characters perspective. (Exclusive to SA since Heroes didn't focus hard on the story but held most focus on the gameplay)

3. The story tells a story of a being from the past. (Same thing as with the 1st point)

4. Finding upgrades to the characters throughout the game, some that are optional.

5. Chao Garden

Good enough?

Your post is difficult to comprehend. I'm asking for five similarities between only SA1 and SA2 that do not show up in any other main installment, which means all of your bullet points sans the fifth are out.

Furthermore, you missed the second part of my statement, which was to be able to explain away SA1 and SA2's differences; Specifically, note the differences and explain why the similarities take precedence over them instead. Only then will Kiberbot have made a point evoking true equivalence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know Jesse Ventura was a Sonic Adventure fan.

Seriously, though, even I agree with you a bit, Cstyler, but your claims are sounding ridiculous. There were no hub-worlds in Sonic Adventure 2 even though there were in the original. That's one of the biggest differences, yet you ignore it because it doesn't support your theories.

True. In a way, Sonic Adventure 2 wasn't much of an Adventure without its hub worlds...! ^^

Don't get me wrong, though. The Sonic levels in SA2 are in a way much more enjoyable than his own levels in the first, but without any hub worlds, I felt rather limited. It was way too linear, in a way.

This coming out of an Adventure 1 fanboy. xD

Edited by Tatsumaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your post is difficult to comprehend. I'm asking for five similarities between only SA1 and SA2 that do not show up in any other main installment, which means all of your bullet points sans the fifth are out.

But back when SA2 was released all those bullet-points stood quite well.

After all, it's obvious that Sega just decided to ditch the name after SA2 rather than ditch the concepts. So if I am to point out what SA1 and SA2 had that was part of "their" series I actually have to view it as it was in 2001 when they decided to release a sequel named just that.

Are there differences? Absolutely, I do agree. But those 5 simillarities between SA1 and SA2 was indeed "exclusive" when SA2 was released, justifying the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But back when SA2 was released all those bullet-points stood quite well.

After all, it's obvious that Sega just decided to ditch the name after SA2

How is that obvious again...?

Dude, I'm just saying...

How can you explain that if SEGA never got tired of labeling the Genesis games as Sonic 1, 2, 3, 3 & Knuckles?

They should might as well ditch the name Sonic or Sonic the Hedgehog altogether, don't you think?

If SEGA really needs to label a game that's part of an already existing series, they have to write the name of the game, and its number, so people don't get lost.

In this case, Sonic 06's style is indeed the same as Adventure's, but it has nothing to do with the series, at all. Sure, Chaos in Space exists and all, Shadow is part of the game, but I can't see how 06 is Adventure 3. If it were like that, then that would mean Heroes is the real SA3, because it has Shadow in it, and ShtH is SA4 because it has Shadow in it. Just because it has some small elements that are part of previous games doesn't necessarily mean it's an addition of that series in specific. Sorry if that's not what you meant, but I'm a bit confused myself. XD

Edited by Tatsumaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is that obvious again...?

Dude, I'm just saying...

How can you explain that if SEGA never got tired of labeling the Genesis games as Sonic 1, 2, 3, 3 & Knuckles?

They should might as well ditch the name Sonic or Sonic the Hedgehog altogether, don't you think?

If SEGA really needs to label a game that's part of an already existing series, they have to write the name of the game, and its number, so people don't get lost.

In this case, Sonic 06's style is indeed the same as Adventure's, but it has nothing to do with the series, at all. Sure, Chaos in Space exists and all, Shadow is part of the game, but I can't see how 06 is Adventure 3. If it were like that, then that would mean Heroes is the real SA3, because it has Shadow in it, and ShtH is SA4 because it has Shadow in it. Just because it has some small elements that are part of previous games doesn't necessarily mean it's an addition of that series in specific. Sorry if that's not what you meant, but I'm a bit confused myself. XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But back when SA2 was released all those bullet-points stood quite well.

After all, it's obvious that Sega just decided to ditch the name after SA2 rather than ditch the concepts. So if I am to point out what SA1 and SA2 had that was part of "their" series I actually have to view it as it was in 2001 when they decided to release a sequel named just that.

Are there differences? Absolutely, I do agree. But those 5 simillarities between SA1 and SA2 was indeed "exclusive" when SA2 was released, justifying the name.

Edited by Nepenthe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said it's obvious they just decided on ditching the name rather since every game since has gotten their own names. :P SEGA probably wanted more freedom with it.

Well, as to whether or not there is a Sonic Adventure 3, that's a pretty interesting debate.

Games that could be "considered" SA3:

Hereos because it's a direct sequel

Shadow because of the darker tone

2006 for all the reasons I listed on the last page (why I 'consider it' to be SA3)

or maybe even Sonic Advance since it had various characters and a Chao Garden.

We will probably never get a Sonic Adventure 3 in name, but people seem to really want it even though the series have lived on in other differently named installments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm realigning this post so that I easier can respond to it.

You're dodging. The passage of time and changing standards are irrelevant to the conversation in two ways.

First, the fact that SA1 and SA2 were the only two 3D Sonic games at the time did not weaken the case that each title's differences made for a particularly disjointed series compared to the classics, because those differences existed regardless of series' age.

Edited by Tobbii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've seen some of my posts around here you know Heroes is my #1 hated Sonic game, but that doesn't make it any less of a sequel.

Edited by Tatsumaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... What? ... Cream... Never was in Sonic Adventure: Director's Cut. ... Vat. I got lost here, please re-elaborate your statement.

Edited by Tobbii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is. Replay it. She was added in there for the DX version.

Huh, didn't know that. Well, I technically don't have the game. ^^

I have the Dreamcast version, but not the new one.

But I have played it for a while to know that there's added things in the game, such as the SEGA Game Gear games and such.

But, from what you've told me, Cream the Rabbit sounds like some character like Metal Sonic was in SA2:B: an unlockable that has nothing to do with the story. Unless I'm mistaken.

But hey, on the bright side: I learned something new today :D

Edited by Tatsumaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.