How about this. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Novel idea, yes? Here's another. If you don't like it, stop putting down other people that do. I mean you don't have to be here, you know. You've levelled your criticism at the game. It's valid. Now move on, yea? Why hover over this thread just to tell people how shit their taste is?
Oh come on now, Aerosol... What are you even trying to achieve with that post? I'm not even calling other's taste shit, I've been beating a drum about a fundamental flaw with the development of Boost the entire time. If Forces sold 10M copies, and I didn't like them, I would shut my mouth. My point, which you claim to grasp but obviously never took the time to, has nothing to do with anyones personal anything. My point is that Boost is existentially flawed from the beginning. People are interpreting this as a personal attack and then they respond to me with faulty logic, insults, or other responses that simply miss the point, or play stupid. And on that note, I haven't told anyone to leave or stop talking, so I guess that's your prize.
In fact, Sonic Rush a DS-only game, sold just 100k less copies than Sonic Generations in a 2-year span. No concept is flawed from the beggining, everything is abstract and so, can be combined/remade/perfected.
Because you are stating your opinion as fact, and sit here repeating over and over as a response to anyone displaying satisfaction with the gameplay direction. There's no other way to take that but as an attack on someone's taste. "I like Boost" "Well it's a dead end and flawed gameplay design" "I like it and think it can be improved upon still." "Well it can't because it's flawed. So I guess you like flawed, dead-end games". Explain to me how this is not what you're saying. I'm seriously all ears. Eyes. Whatever. I didn't stick around certain threads to constantly repeat what I think is wrong with X game. I just left the thread. Or asked about the game to see if there was more to it that I'm not getting. You're not doing that and I don't see the point in whatever it is you are doing, which I clearly don't understand.
Yes there is. It's called, someone else having a different opinion. You're very intentionally taking it as an attack. An attack would be "your opinion is shit" "boost is garbage and you're stupid for liking it" etc. We're going over what we see as flaws with the boost formula and that's it. You want to paint it as an attack so you can invalidate others whose views you don't want to hear, by making it about how it's an "attack" instead of sticking to the actual subject matter. Just like you said about ignoring the boost games if one doesn't like them, you can ignore an opinion or argument if you don't like it. Boost gets a lot of opinion posts by others but you don't see us going "oh my god I'm sick of seeing your opinion on boost all the time just stop". Is that really all you have to contribute jfc. That you made up and inserted that last sentence which paints a different picture. Also that clear and thorough reasons were given to support our views instead of just saying "yeah no it's bad" or some shit. Even if that was how we saw it, who gives a fuck. If you really believe that neither view is more valid than the other, then it doesn't matter if we see it that way. They're happy with it and consider it worthwhile and that's it. If their enjoyment is shattered by our opinions about it, then either they're way too immature for a discussion about it or we actually have a point. Are you really here to police our opinions to protect others' feelings over fucking boost gameplay holy shit. That would be better than showing up just to tell people they should shutup with their opinion because it upsets you.
Why are you speaking for him. Is he your cousin? Anyway you're right I could've just ignored his passive aggressive "oh well I don't want to hear complaining about half a game" shitpost which is in the same vein as the rest of his complaints. I chose not to. I'm not sorry if that upsets you. I mean I already stated that his criticisms are valid, so I don't know why you seem to think I don't understand that. There's a difference between making your opinion heard and having nothing more to say, and sticking around to repeat it again and again, and throw in passive aggressive remarks like the aforementioned one. It veers into the realm of shitposting, which is still shitposting, even if it's ironic. I don't give a fuck about feelings about boost gameplay. No one's opinion can upset me. Seeing the same shit over and over is just annoying. If you don't have something ELSE to say, then just stay out of the thread. It's not like his was the only post ticking me off, but that "half a game" comment was the most egregious example of shitposting thus far. And it was really annoying. Also I'm sure VectorCNC can speak for himself.
See the thing about opinions and discussions is that quite often, people aren't one and done with a point. It involves dialogue, multiple statements and replies. You are bound to find that someone will not just post once and leave, but in fact, there will be a back and forth with multiple points on information, ideas, and opinions. I'm sure it can be dizzying to see someone have multiple posts on a subject, but we get used to that. And sometimes, people will pepper their views, which are bound to have some bias, with hyperbole and abrasive language. This is scary I know, but the seasoned poster, ever vigilant, knows to roll with the punches and focus on the subject matter without getting butthurt over these daunting and frightening things in internet forum posts. You do know that "half a game" view is shared by others and is not entirely unreasonable? There's arguments that can be made for it. He's not shitposting. So you're here to tell us to stop voicing our opinions because you personally find it annoying. You're here to police the posts that are "ticking you off" and to tell us to leave because of it, as you cannot handle the little spikes in what is a regular discussion. It is just soooo annoyiiiing. Like we have mods for that, you know, if it's actually a problem.
"Back and forth" is a funny way of saying "same thing over and over". And it wasn't his "half a game" opinion that I considered shitposting. I said that. I'm pretty sure I said that. In fact, I re-read what I said to be sure and yes, I definitely said that. Huh. Policing opinions? Like I give a shit. I was just giving back what he was dishing out. Never told him to leave either, but now I've stopped caring. Feel free to have the last word.
Since you politely asked Aerosol, where to begin. So I am not satisfied with Sonic's mediocrity. The series is capable of much bigger sales and higher critical reviews. Now if 2M people like Sonic games exactly the way they are, and buy them, that doesn't matter to me, because Sega is capable of achieving greater than this. This isn't opinion, this is possible. We can look at Sonic's history and where the series is today, and we can look at other gaming franchises and what has proven successful for them. Where I and others differ in opinion is how to make this possible. Some people think Sonic needs some fundamental gameplay changes, and others think that the current Boost strategy can work, that it just needs to be refined further. I am in the camp that the gameplay needs to change and this is for objective facts, not opinion. One complaint that is constantly levelled at the Sonic franchise is that the gameplay is constantly changing and it's full of half baked filler, so potential customers have a hard time knowing what to expect with a Sonic game. It is a fact that customers will be more willing to invest their time and money into a franchise when they know what to expect and that it will be a quality product. Now, Sega has admitted themselves that Boost games require an exceptional amount of development simply because the courses are so long, and they also move so fast that you only get a couple hours of gameplay out of a $60 game. Therefore, in an attempt to resolve this deficiency they compromise by inserting another gameplay style. These gameplay styles have nothing to do with boost, they merely pad the game. As well, they are almost universally derided. As well, they muddle the brand and the consumers expectations. So whenever someone defends boost, they are really defending Boost - plus X. Every Boost game has a “plus X” because it is not economical for Sega to make an entire fulfilling game of only Boost. If this was possible, Sega would have done it by now, but they haven't. They are reaching for whatever will fill the gap, and this iteration it's Sonic Generations 2 for no other reason than, it sorta worked last time, but they don't want to admit it… And even this muddles the games further because they have Modern Sonic with Classic Sonic, again, which isn't the same as Mania Classic Sonic, and why does Sonic now have 2 different Sonic's in each game, and the answer is … Boost games cost $60, not $30? So, when I talk about Boost having a critical flaw that people are overlooking, this is it. People can talk about adding more control, or less autopilot, or whatever, but unless this solves the development issues Sega has cited themselves, this will only ever solve half of the gameplay. And even if you do make Boost perfect, you then still have another nebulous half. I've yet to hear someone say, “Sega should make a full game of Boost, and charge $120 for it”. Because that is obviously stupid, yet by the same faulty logic we are supposed to accept that Sega should sell half a Boost game for $60? So in order to accommodate Boost, Sega has to continuously make this compromise to the detriment of a unified brand identity. Now some people might think, “OK, so Sega perfects Boost, then they just need to develop a worthwhile second half”. I suppose that could be an argument, but I've yet to see any viable proof of this working, and I think it would further muddle the brand, and it sorta seems like putting the horse before the cart, but whatever… This is opinion, but to me it seems that if you're going to develop worthwhile second play-style to pad Boosts shortcomings— you may as well just focus on that entirely. So to bring it home Aerosol, people like you can keep responding to me with, “There's no other way to take that but as an attack on someone's taste”, but I would suggest this is more of an intellectual challenge than anything.
You say "people like me" but you haven't clearly laid out what you're actually trying to say until now. If I keep repeating "Fire Emblem is fundamentally flawed" without really expanding on that, and in the face of different counter-arguments, and then top that off with some smug-faced crap like "well I guess you guys like flawed games. Don't wanna hear no complaining next time when the games are still flawed" then what is somebody supposed to think? It's your job to pick the right words to convey your thoughts. It's pretty easy for me to be able to tell if someone is taking something I said the wrong way, after all. If a blithering idiot like me can do it, I'm sure an esteemed gentlemen like yourself is capable of the same. I'm going to ignore the "intellectual challenge" because it's too late for me to care if that was a thinly veiled insult or not. I don't particularly care one way or another how successful this game is, I don't have a stake in arguing the merits of the gameplay style in terms of the future of the franchise in any kind of in-depth detail, though I'd wager if Sega threw the resources at a fully Boost title the same way other devs/publishers chuck money at games, you'd get exactly what you're asking for. It wouldn't be the first stupid gamble Sega has taken, at any rate. Edit: And why do you always address me by name? You probably do that with everyone and I'm not noticing till now, but it comes off as condescending. Feel free to not give a shit about that because I'm not asking you to. It's just a curiosity.
You were giving back what I was dishing out? I only "dish it out" when someone insults me or tries to misconstrue my words (just like you have been with that crap about insulting peoples tastes). I'm going to assume you were coming to a friends rescue, and/or hadn't bothered to read the conversation which preceded the "dishing". I'm over it. I pretty much repeated myself verbatim from previous, you acknowledged yourself that I'm repeating myself in your initial attack, Aerosol...
Oh man. I have never, not once, intentionally misconstrued someone's words, because I am too lazy for that shit and nobody is that important. Seriously. Coming to a friend's rescue? I love ya'll but I don't have friends I need to jump in to defend here. Please. And I'm not having a back and forth with you, so congratulations. With your last edit, you win. Have a sticker.
So the solution to a constantly changing gameplay style is to... change the gameplay style again? You're right. The Classic Sonic games never inserted another gameplay style to pad out the game, and they certainly wouldn't require it to get the good ending.
Yeah excepted that one time you stuck around Undertale thread and shitposted there for pages cause you had a gripe with a non-issue of being able to delete save files.
VectorCNC: Honestly what I'm most confused by is you keep using the excuse of "but Sonic needs to sell well" to repeat your opinions. Since when did you become a sales analyst who knows exactly what would make Sonic sell?
Felik I don't know what to say. You're right, I'm not ideologically perfect. I should drink myself to death. Sayonara, Sonic the Retro.
Dog, really? Not only did you not have to play that to beat the game, those are so minimal to the actual experience that they barely even take up 1/4 of the gameplay. Vector was clearly talking about shit like the Werehog, the Wisp, and alternate character playstyles that don't sync up with the core gameplay, that are required to even see the end of the game. You're grasping at straws now my guy.
