To those of you who still LIKE Sonic Adventure 1...

[Speederino]

Is the PS3 port worth getting if you still like the Dreamcast version? Everyone seems to think this port is really bad, but reviewers seem to dislike it because they just don't think the game has aged well. Among fans, I vaguely recall people saying it was glitchier and just not as good as the Dreamcast version. Personally, I think the game has aged perfectly fine on Dreamcast, so I just want to know how this is as a port.

I've run out of room around my TV, and I don't really want to have to go through the trouble of unplugging a system and hooking up the Dreamcast every time I want to play Sonic Adventure. I do it fairly often, but not often enough for me to keep it front of the TV.

EDIT: This was probably the wrong area to post this in. Sorry, I haven't logged on here in a while, feel free to move it.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Speederino

[Blue Blood]

It's the PC version, which is the GCN version with less graphical effects and the usual Tails in Emerald Coast glitch fixed. Very lazy, shoddy and showing it's age. Buy it if you want.

[DaBatGuy]

It plays almost exactly like the original but at 60 fps. However almost nothing has been done to modernize it(no widescreen, no online features, etc.). If you want the trophies go for it, otherwise just stick to the DC version.

[Speederino]

I'm still on a standard TV, so thankfully widescreen isn't really an issue for me. Was the GC version really that much worse? I played that once like eight years ago, and I was just happy to play the game again since at the time I thought my Dreamcast was broken. Suffice it to say, I don't really remember how the two versions compared.

[Sapphire]

I was thinking about getting it for the trophies alone, but I haven't yet, seeing as I have 5 copies of the game already.

[Indigo Rush]

For the record, the XBLA version runs far smoother and less twitchy than the PC version. Maybe it's like that for the PSN version as well. Can you try a demo?

[Speederino]

I'm not sure PSN ever actually got a demo. I'll check really quick. (I don't have a 360)

Nope, all they have is a trailer.

[Robogaman]

I'd say its worth buying. If you liked SA1, go for it.

[T-Min]

If you already have the DC version, then no, you shouldn't get the XBLA version. The controls are way more slippery, and it's craptastically glitchy.

[eXtaticus]

Though the Xbox 360 version does run at a clean, crisp 60 frames per second and doesn't suffer from the clipping problems of the PC port from which it is derived, there's no ignoring that it is, in all essence, a stripped-out Sonic Adventure DX, and it has all of the hallmark bugs and shoddy graphics to prove it - despite the occasional drops in frame rate on the Dreamcast version, I highly recommend its unfiltered and unaltered glory over what is essentially a filtered-down slap-dash port of a slap-dash port of a slap-dash port; you'll find that the original is a far more refined and generally more fun experience to play.

[Speederino]

^ This is going to be a little bit off topic, but I think eXtaticus's sig might actually offer a solution to my space problems. Seriously, what's the worst that could happen?

So it's mostly sounding like I shouldn't get this so far. I really do wish I had access to a demo.

[eXtaticus]

Eh, Sony obviously saw that picture before designing the PS3 and decided to make the thing curved as a result of it; sometimes, that company genuinely doesn't make the same mistake trice.

But seriously; what's the point in a console (or any kind of disc player) with an expensive front-loading CD tray if you can't stack stuff on top of it? Surely a more sensible solution would have been to go with a cheaper lid-style design?

Edited June 10, 2011 by eXtaticus

[Speederino]

It's like they knew that some people have space issues. I mean my gaming area already looks messy enough with three consoles and a jungle of cords, but thank's to the convenience of the PS2's flat surface, two consoles look like an extra-tall single console. With six controllers. And two disk trays.

[Double Agent Motobug]

>: I liked the Xbox360 (And by extension, PS3) port. It's framerate was smoother than the PC and Gamecube one, and the additional bonus of achievements/trophies was nice. =) Chao Gardens on HD consoles were nice, too! For some reason, I enjoyed Gamma's stages and story a TON more than I ever did before as well. Also, the 360 version is the first time I'd ever 100%'d the game. =D (er well, that I got all the emblems, still working on Metal's missions)

So that's a positive from me. =O

EDIT: And there was that nasty rumor that Sonic could only travel in the 8 d-pad directions, which is not true! =) Full 360º movement on the control stick.

Edited June 11, 2011 by Aptiva

[goku262002]

The only thing good that came out of the PC version was hacking, using a fully playable and non-glitched up supersonic in levels is great.

They say that the truly superior one is the GC version. all other ports were just copy/paste of the less then great PC version.

...But someone at Retro is going through the process of fixing all the problems in the PC version. If you guys have the PC version, you should go check it out.

Edited June 12, 2011 by goku262002

[Blue Blood]

For the record, the XBLA version runs far smoother and less twitchy than the PC version. Maybe it's like that for the PSN version as well. Can you try a demo?

Get a better PC. The PC version runs at a perfect 60fps.

[Tobbii]

I prefer the Dreamcast version overall, but I use the PC version for modding and the 360 version as I'm a sucker for having everything easy at hand. Sonic 1, 2, 3K, Adventure, 2006, Unleashed or Sonic 4? Just boot up my 360! That's how I like it.

[Indigo Rush]

Get a better PC. The PC version runs at a perfect 60fps.

[Blue Blood]

Oh, it runs 60 fps on my computer, too. I meant to say the controls are smoother.

[JezMM]

Somewhat related: Most of the hacks I've seen look tacky and silly (mostly just character recolours) BUT if there ever WAS a cool mod, does anyone know how compatible that sort of stuff is with the latest "Dreamcast Collection" Steam re-release? It's only £6 so considered getting it sometime once playing the GameCube version finally manages to become too inconvenient to deal with.

[Speederino]

I believe there's a Super Sonic mod. That might be worth checking out.

[eXtaticus]

Honestly, if you want to play Sonic Adventure on a PC and you have a semi-powerful rig, then you shouldn't have any trouble at all emulating the far superior Dreamcast version on something like NullDC - I really do recommend it over the all-too-numerous DX ports...

EDIT: Also, NullDC can force the game to run in widescreen at any resolution, and the PC version's executable can be very easily altered (with SADX Tweaker - search it on Sonic Retro) so that it also allows for this - another reason to ignore the recent Xbox and PS3 re-releases.

Edited June 14, 2011 by eXtaticus

[Lightspines]

It's the PC version, which is the GCN version with less graphical effects and the usual Tails in Emerald Coast glitch fixed. Very lazy, shoddy and showing it's age. Buy it if you want.

This. Also, for those of you that are undecided between the 360 and PS3 version:

I own both 360 and PS3 versions, and the PS3 version seems to be the worse port, as if it was released as a beta. The PS3 version has a black screen while loading, (While the 360 version has 'Now Loading' text at the bottom), and the PS3's resolution is smaller. Not just that, but the menu's are slightly different and the PS3 version isn't as vibrant as the 360 version.

You can also play it in full screen by switching your console to 4:3.

[Sonowske]

Could someone please elaborate - whether it be through a detailed explanation, a series of pictures, or both - on why Sonic Adventure DX/XBLA/PSN is inferior to the Dreamcast version? I just wanna see for myself. I would download an emulator, but ISO's are piss-hard to run.

At least for the case of the XBL/PSN port, the game wasn't properly built for the systems. I'm not sure why DX is viewed as inferior. From what I remember, the original was really glitched out, and that the DX port fixed most of the glitches and even redid the character models. The DX port seems fine to me, which I play on my PC.

[Aleekun107]

I finally downloaded it on XBLA in the Sonic's 20th Anniv Sale for 640 MS Points including its Metal Sonic add on (Same price as the Death Egg Add-on in SASAR).

A great amount considering the whole thing including the Metal Sonic add-on costed 1200 MS points (800 for the game but no add-on) and I couldn't be bothered to pay for the add-on.

The port is just like the DX version from what I've played with some of the fun glitches fixed which was a bit dissapointing (No Tails in Emerald Coast? D:) and it is starting to show its age by now, but its nowhere near as broken as IGN made it out to be.

Whats strange is that in the end of the credits when it says copyright, it says 'Copyright SEGA/Sonic Team 2003'. I don't understand how they couldn't have changed that to 2010 or 'Copyright SEGA/Sonic Team 2003, 2010' or something? But its a minor nitpick.

The download content (Add-On) I'd go for ONLY if its price is reduced as its just basically the extras the Gamecube version had minus the Game Gear games which was a bit of a letdown with no new content available.

I don't know if Dreamcast DLC is different from the DX game or made much of a difference, but I would have liked to see that happen to non DC owners. At least leadeboards were a nice addition despite it being hacked, though not as bad as Sonic 4s leaderboards.

In general, it really depends how much you loved SA1 and if you really want to play it again on XBLA/PSN as there isn't too much difference from the Gamecube or dreamcast game. Even though, in my opinion, its a a bit of an overrated sonic game (Due to its dated ness and glitches I can bump into), its still quite a fun game when playing as Sonic or Tails and when seeing the price reduction, I went for it.

Thats really my verdict on SA1 on XBLA/PSN.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Aleekun107