Sega: Sonic Quality to Be 'Fixed Over Time'

I should report abuse.

 

<!--quoteo(post=336841:date=Jul 31 2009, 09:55 PM:name=Insert Coin(s))--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insert Coin(s) @ Jul 31 2009, 09:55 PM) </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->

I should report abuse.
[/QUOTE]
It is harmful to minors.

 

Too bad the game still blows on all accounts.

 

Hey guys. Hey, hey, hey guys? You uh realise we stopped being the target demographic when we turned 13, right? Sega has always, always milked Sonic. When we were 5, we didn't know any better because, guess what? We were the target audience. It wasn't until we were a bunch of jaded twats that we started to go "WAAAAAH ITS NOT SONIC".

Now, this doesn't give Sega any excuse to keep making shitty games, but when their core audience is gonna buy the games anyways? It doesn't give them any reason to try making great games either. Lemme put it like this: When we grew up with Sonic, we were in the throes of the 16-bit console wars. Sonic needed to be good because SEGA wanted to come out on top. Sonic needed to be better than Mario so people would buy their consoles. SEGA is now no longer in the console market. They don't need to beat Mario or anyone else, they just need to maintain the status quo. Simple as that.

Also, alot of the people who worked on Sonic when we were kids? Yeah, not there anymore. Obviously, that charm that made the games fun thanks to our amazing Nostalgia-Vision wasn't handed down to next in line to develop for the blue needlemouse.

What am I getting at? Stop hoping that Sega is gonna make Sonic for you. We've been at this since what.. 2002? 2003? Some as early as 1999 (you know the fags that said Sonic died with the Genesis/Mega Drive), and start hoping Sega starts at least making good games. Sonic Unleashed tried, didn't it?

K, I'm done.

 

To me that whole article states "We know there's something wrong with the series, but we don't care cause it still sells, regardless of whom to". Sadly, that's probably the reality.

 

So what you're saying is, no console, why bother?

 

Actually, if you compare sales of newer Sonic games to their logical predecessors, Sonic sales have been dropping. They've been dropping pretty badly, in fact.

 

Sort of. Sonic was Sega's cash cow for awhile and it still makes Platinum/Players Choice or whatever those new special tags are (Though the handheld games seem to be doing pretty badly at achieving this). They had more reason to worry about Sonic when they had more on the line. This only pertains to Sonic as its really the only Sega franchise I follow. I'm sure they try with other games but with Sonic, when for about 6 or 7 years, they were guaranteed a million buys or whatever it is on brand name alone. Thats faultering recently, again with handhelds and more recent console games, so hopefully it says something to Sega that the status quo needs to be topped.

 

You're basically saying that it's okay for SEGA to make bad games because they don't have a console to worry about.

Despite the fact that eventually all Sonic games will be considered bad and people should stay away from them. You know, kind of how what's going on now.

 

Its no excuse to make bad games. No one wants to play bad games.

Except Sonic fans, apparently.

 

You have numbers to back this up?

 

He's not saying it's okay, he's saying that's why they do it.

 

But don't take it as fact, either. I could easily be absolutely wrong and it could just be that everyone making Sonic games are complete pinheads. Its just a take on why things could be the way they are. I made the mistake of presenting it as fact, though.

 

Sort of. I know Sonic 06 made the platinum hits whatever thing on the 360, which I think means it sold more than a million. VGChartz puts it much lower than that, so their data for this game seems to be inaccurate, however their numbers for Sonic Unleashed totals to 2.33 million, which is pretty close to the total I've seen from Sega, so I'm assuming it's better. This isn't just based on VGchartz, though I recall seeing numbers that matched closely from more official sources. Sonic Unreleased on the 360 sold a bit over 500,000. The Wii version is a bit harder to figure out, it sold more than a million, but it also didn't sell as much as SatSR. SatSR was a pretty big seller a full two years after being released, but Black Knight barely made a ripple. A funny thing about it is that SatSR outsold the Wii version of Sonic Unleashed during the 08 holiday season. This latest batch of Sonic games kind of wandered around the bottom of the top 40 for a while, then vanished.

If you don't think my umbers for Sonic Unleashed are accurate enough, according to Sega, it totaled 2,450,000 during 08. You divide that by 3 (I'm estimating conservativly), you get around 800,000. That's a sort of best case scenario for the HD versions, which I know were outsold by the Wii version, because it was higher on the chart the whole time, till it fell off.

One more thing: Amazon was selling the game (the 360 version, and only the 360 version) for half off during the week it came out. I know it was a sale rather than a traditional price drop, but retailers pay roughly $48 for new games. Unless Amazon decided they wanted to loose a bunch of money, I'm assuming it wasn't selling and had barely any pre-orders.

It's not some kind of continental drop, but it's a clear downward trend.

Edit:

I think they're pretty clueless as well. They don't seem to see the distinction between stuff like Sonic Rush and the classics. To them, classic seems to mean "2D". Unleashed had a larger budget compared to previous games.

 

Lots of companies need to start taking focus groups with a grain of salt.

And yeah, you're right. The more I learned about God of War, the more I was put off by it's blatant ctrl + c ctrl + v of the formula. It seriously verges on plagerism.

 

I was referring to bad game-central gimmicks like guns, vehicles, werehog, and any character that plays in a way that kills the speed (like almost any non-Sonic character in Sonic 06). Fun gimmicks that have been proven to work in classic Sonic games are great.

For playable characters, all you need is Sonic. Although Tails and Knuckles are fine too, just make them selectable and not mandatory. NO VOICE ACTING, and no story text either. My favorite way of story telling in a Sonic game is what they did in Sonic 3 and Knuckles. Gesture based. It worked great and looked cool. This gesture based story has worked fine for the majority of Mario games, and it should work fine for Sonic.

 

A NEW CHALLENGER APPEARS: WALL OF TEXT


Here we are, once again moaning about how Sonic nowadays sucks and how he should go back to his origins.

BUT 1991 WAS 18 DAMN YEARS AGO. WE'VE ALREADY PASSED 3 CONSOLE GENERATIONS.

Sonic games nowadays don't get more developement time than your beloved Mega Drive games you all go apeshit about. The tiny bugs you call gameplay ruining glitches (such as the camera being stuck FOR TWO CENTISECONDS, LIEK HÖLY SHITZ) are just more obvious because, guess what?
The consoles of today are more complex than the consoles in the 16-bit era! NO SHIT!!
And it isn't actually the bugs in the Sonic games you have a problem with. The greatest problem is that you still live in the early 90's and you simply cannot accept the fact that things change over time. Sonic can't stay forever with the oh-so-perfect momentum based gameplay. It's not 1994.

Oddly enough though, if Sonic actually would've stayed with the momentum based platforming gameplay, you all would moan about that because Sonic games wouldn't have enough variety.

Sonic is for children. You know, children are those human beings who haven't reached 18. And Sonic is aimed mostly at children around 12. Sonic is not aimed at people at the age of 18-30 who grew up with the oh-so-great momentum based gameplay of Sonic 1. If you want to play a Sonic game with that MOEMTUM BASD GAMEPLAE <3333, go play Sonic 1.

Yes, I admit Sonic games aren't so great as they used to be. But video games are supposted to be about having fun, and not about moaning every fucking little bug you manage to find because you're dumb enough to trigger it.

But now, seriously; Whatever Nintendo does with Mario, it's undoubtedly fucking awesome and whoever disagrees, he's a dick. Mario had some nice changes from his original platforming style, he even gave up on eating mushrooms and turning big with them. Mario had a lot of changes, actually.

Nobody ever complained. Not about Mario, not about any other franchise that had changes.

Sonic has the slightest change in his eye colour shade, or his spike is 1 degree off from the previous Sonic game, you have half of the internet full of moans and complaints in two seconds after a new Sonic game is announced. And every new Sonic game sucks because it doesn't replicate Sonic 1's physics and gameplay 1:1.

Of course, what was I thinking. Because if a Sonic game doesn't have the fucking MOEMTUM GAMPLAE <33333 it sucks.
You have to play as the Werehog. It's a problem. But if couldn't play so much with the Werehog, what would happen? People would moan because they can't play with the Werehog. Sonic 06 was rushed, it was a problem, but I doubt it wouldn't be a problem if they wouldn't have rushed it, because it's not momentum based and introduces the new gameplay element of Silver. Holy shit, something new in a Sonic game, it obviously sucks because we live in 1992.

It's just a fucking video game.
A VIDEO GAME.
Not the end of the world, but a video game. You must've got a heaps happy life if you spend so much time moaning about a damn video game.

And no, I'm not interested in your post where you point out how much time did I spend on this post, how hypocritic I am or if you want to post a voice clip with a laughter. If you haven't got anything better to say, keep it for yourself.
Meh, disregard the post please, I had a bitchfit.

 

I'm not a fan of Mario, I've just heard that. =P