00
JaredAFX, on 24 March 2014 - 05:49 PM, said:
As far as SA1 and SA2 go in the consistency department, there's barely any reason to call SA2 a sequel except for that one part where the newspaper mentions Tails saving Station Square which was desperately shoehorned in just to make the connection between the two games. No one has any of their (little) character development from SA1. Even Tails who actually learned a lot about being confident and independent reverted to how he was in the beginning and just relearns it in a forced, sloppy fashion. So, basically, those couple of lines are good, but not much else.
Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 actually do have strong continuity, just not to each other. Adventure 1 really caps off the story that began in Sonic 2 and was continued in 3&K. Adventure 2 starts a new story that goes through Heroes, Shadow, and '06. But yeah, despite the names, they don't tie into each other all that much. There's also the connection of using the Emerald Shrine and stuff, but it doesn't change your point that it's not all that much. As for character development, that's essentially how it goes in any long running series. They do the illusion of development but nothing really changes. Superman's been around for over 75 years, but aside from getting some new powers, he's still basically the same person he was back in 1938. Frankly, I'm surprised Shadow got the development he did, but once he did, he was really only in one game before being shuffled away and not heard from much after that. In series like this, it's usually better to try to focus on having cool plots rather than worry about long term character development, because eventually some other writer will be in charge and ignore all that development to make things the way they perceive it. Tails learned to be independent twice, but even if it stuck when it happened, it still would have been moot come Colors, when the entire tone of the series changed entirely.