The Sonic the Hedgehog 4 Megathread

Saying Mario Galaxy is better than the classic Sonic games is a bit unfair given today's technology. If Galaxy was made with Genesis technology it'd be nothing more than running around the Scrap Brain or Carnival Night Zone wheels with 2D Mario platforming segments in between. Not saying that would be bad, just give the classic games some credit for innovative momentum platforming given the time in which they were developed.

 

I just used the galaxy games because they're my personal favorites in the mario series. However, better technology doesn't mean a better game. The galaxy series' fun comes from the brilliant level design, not the gravity. But what I was trying to say, was that expecting sonic to live up to mario in this generation where mario is above and beyond most great games, is just not going to happen. Having such high expectations can be a good thing, but in this case they may be a little too high.

 

Sonic's problem is his 3D gameplay has never been set in stone (luckily it seems that Unleasheds approach works best), Mario's 3D gameplay has been the same design since 64, it is solid and well loved for them to develop further such as in Sunshine or Galaxy. Sonic on the other hand has battled through engines that become dated and just not a good representation of his 2D gameplay.

Mario's games to me atleast contain tried and tested engines and well designed levels. This doesn't mean Sonic can never beat him. Mario's sucsess isn't a secret.

 

If you look at game rankings you will see that the Rush games hold around the range of 80% and the classic games on the genesis are around 90 precent (not including rereleases which suffer from emulation, controls not as good as on the genesis and the fact that now a days people consider the format of release carefully) the highest being Sonic 3 which holds a 97% almost a perfect game and that's without rating Sonic 3 & Knuckles as one game. Of course there is less reviews for those games given their retroness but even looking from a different point of view. The genesis games are always on the top ten lists of all Genesis games and Rush or its sequel maybe make the lower part of a top list. Of course I'm sure you could find a list to the contrary but that's the general trend I've seen.

As far as comparing it to Mario games. Back in the genesis days and some might say its Dreamcast outing (to a lesser extent of course) Sonic did compete equally with Mario or don't you remember their 16 bit rivalry? Is it really so crazy to expect good things from a series that used to be the best? I don't think so.

 

The only thing I can really say is that if this is what you think, then you have a stupidly high standard that's impossible to meet. There's not much else to it. Have fun, you'll never have a Sonic game you'll like again because you're stuck in 1994.

 

Im betting $15 on PSN, XBLA, Wiiware and $10 for Iphone. Only game on Iphone to break the $10 is Chaos Rings so I doubt Sega will do that.

 

It'll be $10. The game's likely to be 1000 Wii Points, which is £7 here.

 

Wanting a game that lives up to a 16 year old title that was developed by a very small team is a "stupidly high standard"? You know, it's not impossible - or even that difficult - to make a game that would blow the classics out of the water and leave the entirety of Retro gibbering wrecks. It's the fact that Sega simply refuses to do it (and for no good reason) that has lowered your standards.

Also, that's a pretty stupid thing to say to Overbound, of all people. He's actually capable of making a game that pwns Sonic 4.

 

Ah, yes. The lowering of standards. The smell of settling.

Totally agree with you here, Merc. That high standard can be met and we know that it can. SEGA just refuses to do it. Why wasn't this whole physics bullshit done right the first time?

 

I think that's an even more stupid thing to compare a fan game to an official game. There's no counter-argument. Fan game =/= Official game. I can make shit better than Sonic 4 too based on the opinions of some people with that argument.

Leave the fan works that are recycling graphics most of the time out of this.

Saying SEGA "refuses" to do it makes you sound just as ignorant as you claim SEGA to be.

 

If Sonic 4 didn't use Dimps and their engine, the chances of this game being good would be better. Instead, they went with the developers who programmed Rush, modified it from a DS engine to one that would do consoles and the iPhone, slapped on new art and stuff but kept the programming from the reused stuff, including the slopes and the Sonic object itself.

 

If you ask me, it's something to do with a false sense of pride. I imagine Sega wants to use something exclusive to them - something that the fans can't get a hold of and pick apart (legally, as rom-hacking isn't exactly the most legal practice), and so they chose the Rush engine. Rather than be like a fan making a fan-game or someone making a rom-hack, they opt not to start from scratch or disassemble a previous work from 10+ years and a few console generations ago.

This is my theory, however, and you can see that it's a bit flawed, but really, it's amount of plausibility is actually a bit shocking.

 

Because Splash Hill, Lost Labyrinth, Casino Street and Mad Gear are totally 100% original levels.

 

What plausability? That just makes no sense.


The Rush engine is just as "exclusive to them" as the MD Sonic engines. Both can be hacked by anyone with the correct tools.

 

It was going on for ages. Then we got to see the physics, automation and other parts that are terribly done so we stopped going on about it and focuses on the more important things. You know, like Stand-on-Walls the Hedgehog

 

Don't try to mix up my words; you know what I mean. :|

I was talking about Fan game graphics, not Sonic 4s.


Jeez, it's like you people half-ass read my post.