Sega: Sonic Quality to Be 'Fixed Over Time'

You're joking, right? You have to be joking. I'm getting trolled so hard right now.

No, but seriously—that's the biggest load of bullshit I've ever heard. Please take your self-righteous arrogant posts elsewhere, because on this forum we deal with facts, not baseless conjecture that uses large text to try and convey a point horribly. Show some respect to other members and they might begin to consider your viewpoints a bit more objectively.

And for the record, insulting our intelligence is being disrespectful.

 

Er... that's why no one ever even tries to discuss MG anymore. Everyone treats it as the second coming of Christ. No one admits the game had flaws and raise up a storm because of it. Seriously I've seen serious crap happening all over sites because of it.

About the franchise plummeting in sales... Unleashed beat 06 in the PS3 and has a higher climb rate than X360, without hitting shop bargains. I'd say the numbers are pretty much the same now.

About Sonic Chronicles... I don't think that game had any redeeming qualities, but that's just me.

I had a much better structured post, with quotes and everything, but my pc has been acting up, so sorry.

 

To be fair, when 06 came out, the PS3 was still brand new and still 599 US DOLLARS WRONG! The console itself wasn't selling well and the game was even buggier than the 360 version, so that's not too surprising.

Not trying to dismantle your point, just wanted to mention those details.

 

Um, on the low sales of new games, huh, Sonic Unleashed sold much more than Sonic 3... :/

 

Yeah on the ps3 version the sound in the FMV's would stutter if you were playing the game in SD and the game would run slower on a PAL SDTV just like sonic 1 did

but if you ran it in 720p the movies ran fine and the game played at its proper speed ¬_¬

 

I don't care how many fucking recolors there are in a sonic game. You don't need an army of recolors to ruin the franchise as it does a good job without their help. Bring back the Super Transformations in regular levels, get rid of the bad voice acting and shitty one liners, actually make a good story without fucking stupid gimmicks and I'll be happy. =P

 

What the fuck? The game somehow managed to go back in time and implement a LOLSLOW functionality? I wasn't aware of that before, and I think I can safely say that it's absolutely retarded.

 

That's probably because more people play video games now than back in 1994.

Mega Drive:29 million worldwide

Playstation 3:23.8 million
Xbox 360:30.20 million
That's about 54 million, 25 million more consoles combines than the Mega Drive. Of course it's sold more.

 

The thing that Sega needs to learn is that Mario 64 wasn't just a bog-standard Mario game, but in 3D, it re-invented what you had to do to "complete" a level, sonic in 3D was just "Same old Sonic, but in 3D!".

2D platformers do not a good 3D platformer make, Mario 64 worked because despite the Mario label, it was a different core game to the previous titles, Sonic Adventure sucked because Sega tried to convert a 2D game into a 3D environment.

 

Did this seriously turn into another god damn "how to fix Sonic" thread?

 

Well, Sega had managed to successfully troll us, you know...

But I mean, what more did you expect from a topic such as this? In the end it's just some "nice" (PR-wise) words from Sega without any real substance to them :S

 

Yes, I understand. I can't use "climb" in a linear way either, because it's never the same (it diminuishes parabolically until it hits bargains). Still, Sonic 06 has hit bargains in the PS3, so people would have shift more units. Isn't it a platinum hit as well or something? Not sure. Still in six months SU has got very close to one another, even with recession kicking in. So there isn't a significant decrease in sale figures. I'd say it revolves around the same number more or less (not counting wii). If SU was a bad game, then it would have decreased, but it hasn't. Surely if Sonic manages to be better in his next title, I'd say his sales will climb up as well. Sonic is a cash cow still. It needs to get some love and care now, because cash cows need to be well taken care off to continue to milk. I'd say Sonic is a stubborn cash cow. It's still here even post 2001, though there isn't anything extraordinary past this.

What? People are annoyed that each main Sonic game is very different from the last and you say something like this? It had a story, it had adventure fields, the levels were huge stll but more linear and with different missions for each character, it introduced the dash ring and the homing attack (stfu Sonic 3D) for different platform reach, etc etc.

 

This article means a lot of different things to me.

First of all, Sega's showing a lack of confidence in something that isn't even out yet. That's pretty damn weak, and it shows that they're running out of ideas. Sonic Unleashed was the closest thing they've had to a fresh start in a while, and that game, even though more well received by fans, was still slammed pretty hard. The fact that they're defending a game that isn't even out yet scares me into thinking it's not going to be that great. This is a big sign of weakness, to me.

They're running dry and still thinking they need to try too many different things, I believe. They're putting forth the effort, just not in the right place.

Perhaps it's a big mess of concepts? They're focusing too much on concepts instead of actually putting them into application and making an enjoyable experience? Honestly, I believe Sega's turned to some of us cult fanatics for answers, and that's why SU's daytime playability was so wonderful. And it's true that this place churns out so damn good material. I've played Sonic Megamix more than SatSR and Sonic '06 combined... but that doesn't mean they need to change to what we're doing or go back to 2D; they just need to put forth more effort into the game itself. Of course... I now sound like a broken record of everyone else, so anything else in this paragraph would just be ....

But about this article... I don't like it. It makes me believe they're SERIOUSLY running low on confidence in the hedgehog. Who defends something that isn't complete or hasn't been revealed yet...?

 

You know, I has been rereading the article just in case... and it looks like what Sega said was to defend their effort in Sonic Unleashed. Also it was their reply to something they have been asked, otherwise they wouldn't have said anything.

Basically this means that it's a generic reply to make good PR.

 

The trial-and-error, split-second-decision play style of Sonic Unleashed's later Daytime stages just didn't seem fun for me (though overall my opinion of the game is still pretty good). Yes, it is different from what I grew up with in the franchise, but that's certainly not the only reason I'm not too enthusiastic about where things seem to be headed.

 

Sounds almost like me. Wait...

There, that's where I recognized it.


It's kinda weird, everyone here says "Good" and "bad" as if it was defined by fact much rather than by opinion.

 

Just because you replace the title with something else doesn't make it true.

 

Makes it true to ME personally. I don't like Sonic 2 as much, big deal.

 

While it's true that a lot of people state that stuff is good or bad as it it were fact while it is actually opinion, some stuff is factually good and some is factually bad.

 

The VP makes a valid point, especially with the nearly brand new Sonic Team that worked on Unleashed. You can't dig yourself out of a rut overnight. I'm glad they at least acknowledge they have an issue.