Discussion in 'General Sonic Discussion' started by Lostgame, Sep 24, 2020.
Advance 2 also sold over one million.
This. This this this this this this this this.
Especially in the later levels of SA2 I have to all but stop and nudge the stick precariously in several areas - this destroys the flow of the game and is one reason why I much preferred Unleashed's daytime levels to anything from SA2 (and SA1 to a lesser degree) up to and including 06.
I have played the boost games. I am right. Being able to go on a little side path that's ultimately on the same direction as the main path is still running down a hallway and the way Boost Sonic controls makes turning him literally impossible so the only turns are massive borderline-scripted drift sections (Rooftop Run) or tiny platforms with bigass walls (beginning of Speed Highway and that one section in Sky Sanctuary) so you can just hold boost and Sonic is forced to turn with almost zero loss to his speed or they just use dash panels that force you to in a different direction (the lake section of Dragon Road). If you actually plotted out the levels of Unleashed, Colors, and Generations, they would be 90% straight lines with arbitrary curves 3-4 times. They're like SA2/Heroes levels but even more linear.
Boost Sonic is Sonic Team recognizing that Adventure Sonic was a bit iffy to control at speed so they just gave up and made every level a hallway. The fact that turning is demoted to a borderline-QTE mechanic (the drift) is all I really need to say.
Oh and then with Forces they automated that, whoops lmao funny how everyone's just avoiding that elephant in the room when trying (and failing) to gotcha me
Aw yeah, baby, the classic "You like the way Adventure Sonic controls? Clearly you want it back with ZERO IMPROVEMENTS WHATSOEVER AND EVERY FLAW OF SA1 AND SA2" strawman.
I likewise had so much trouble controlling Sonic and Shadow in SA2 because of how slippery they felt. Rail grinding in particular made me so nervous in stages like Sky Rail and Final rush. I honestly feel like SA1 controlled better than both SA2 and Unleashed though. While at blitzing at high speeds Sonic will control fine in Unleashed, but the moment you have to do precision platforming in areas like Skyscraper Scamper, it falls apart. SA1 is hard to describe, but I never felt as if Sonic was careening off the edge of a platform or sliding across the level the way he would in SA2 or Unleashed. That's something that Sonic could take away from Mario: the principle that the character has to be fun to move before you base any level design off of it.
Maybe chill it with the attitude here. You're not going to win any arguments by being hostile.
This isn't how you formulate an opinion.
Or rather, that is how you formulate an opinion, but it's just that, an opinion. It's not necessarily a fact.
I actually disagree with this; going fast in Sky Deck feels extremely precarious to me because it felt like the extremely narrow catwalks you're relegated to are just made to have you clip through and die if you go too quickly...but, thinking back on it, most of SA1's levels are either wide paths (Speed Highway and Windy Valley Act 3 have the exact width come to think of it) or are on ground-level, where you're not expected to be so precise with your direction. I also feel that SA1's air control after a jump is better, which helps mitigate issues with platforming.
That's actually a really good point. I haven't played Sky Deck in a while but you're absolutely right. I guess it just reinforces the idea that level design plays a big factor into these things as well.
I will also say that SA1 & SA2 do try to mitigate this by implementing the ledge animation as a full stop which is a great move in my opinion. Why this was removed along with jumping out of the damage animations in later games kinda baffles me.
I don't understand how a topic about mismanagement at SEGA, along with missed potential and planning, keeps being derailed to gameplay styles, as it's clear that wasn't the point. Sure, gameplay styles does come under planning, but any gameplay style can be good (yes, including Boost Sonic, looking at you Frostav) with enough planning and consideration. It just requires judicious editing of content, which I feel is Sonic Team's biggest downfall; they lack the ability to be able to take the multitude of ideas they have, and cut them down to something not only manageable, but also to something that is cohesive.
I feel as though that was Sonic Forces biggest downfall; the story at it's core is fairly engaging, a rookie rising up the ranks and through the power of teamwork, they're able to stop an evil force. It's cheesy, yet can have dark elements, perfect for a Sonic story. Yet implementation of that story failed due to not only shoehorning in things that didn't need to be there (for instance, bringing back Zavoc, Chaos, etc etc, along with Classic Sonic), along with not having the guts to power through and flesh that out as far as it could go. That's all down to management, they have mandates to shove certain content in, along with not having someone to slap them on the wrist as soon as they try to add something new instead of polishing what they already have (which at it's core is engaging).
Whether you like Generations/Boost Sonic or not, the judicious editing down of content certanly worked in favour of that game, hence why it is one of the most highly rated 3D games in the series. It still holds *some* issues from above (most importantly not having the guts to power through with their story setpieces), but the core engagement of the series is there. No stapling on some forced content to pad out gametime (except the missions, I suppose). If that was the basis, I can certainly imagine a proper sequel to follow up on it would have fixed a lot of the issues people have with the game. But, due to the issues of not having the guts to power through and polish, and the issue of shoehorning in content, we received Lost World.
So yeah, that's my horrible thesis on the issue of Sonic Team and it's management; lack of guts to flesh out their ideas to their maximum potential, and mandates to include certain content which ruins cohesion.
It's funny when you use that "elephant in the room" saying, because, to keep on with that metaphor, I think no one's talking about the dragon next to it. Classic games are Sonic, Adventure games are Sonic and Boost games are Sonic the same way 3D Blast is Sonic or Sonic Battle is Sonic, because they have Sonic as the sprite or model of the playable character, but if you pay attention to what they really are, they're Sonic sub-genres of sorts, and it's just as you may like turn-based strategy but not real-time strategy; both are strategy, but not the really same thing. Is Sonic Boost? Sub-genre focused on racing challenge and spectacle with less platforming. Classic, you say? More focused on platforming, exploration and proper physics. Etc, etc. Speed may be important in all cases, but for different reasons.
The real "dragon" here is not what I just said, since you're already talking about playstyles, but, considering the fact Sonic related projects which are not an evident different genre like Team Sonic Racing or the above mentioned Sonic Battle are usually conceived as deliberate sub-genres of the "core" Sonic gameplay, which these days is just "Sonic is the playable character who can jump and he curls up when doing so", the dragon is that Sega/Sonic Team tries to sell them to us like they where the same because they have Sonic on it, with Classic Sonic being the only one getting special treatment because it's old and no one thought new games of it would sell. Like saying Smash Bros Brawl is the sequel to Sonic Battle because Sonic is a playable fighting character. And yes, they say "We're experimenting every time, we don't want Sonic to be stale, we want to attract new fans", but that's almost like saying "You'll never getting a real sequel of anything you like, keep buying our new games". That's some serious dragon here, one breathing either hipocresy or nonsense, and we don't know when it's one or the other, but no one wants to suffer a dragon's breath attack.
Would like to know the source for this one. This is the only individual sales resource I'm aware of for any of the Advance games. There are some old THQ press release statements hosted by BusinessWire floating around with some sales numbers, but they refer to the collective sales of the first two Advance games/the Advance series as a whole, rather than cite sales of individual titles.
Thank you very much (head dev of Sonic DVD over hear). Next demo will be better somewhere in 2021.
I have also played the boost games. You are wrong.
https://web.archive.org/web/20080710195807/http://www.japan-gamecharts.com/gba.php, https://web.archive.org/web/2012051...eatures/centurys-top-50-handheld-games?page=3, and https://web.archive.org/web/20090221154943/http://www.elspa.com/?i=3942. Combined, this is over one million.
Tallying the number from multiple different sources wasn’t quite what I had in mind, but that’s just me I suppose. These are good for showcasing regional sales, at the very least.
This guy doesn't/has never admitted to being wrong on here even with several people disagreeing with him or having proof of him being incorrect.
You're wasting your time.
Really got me with this checks notes ...bad DLC level in one boost game that's 2 minutes long and controls really badly.
Now post Act 1, the thing that starts off with bland hallways separated by either dash panels forcing you in the right direction or bland drift turns before a boring 2D section and more hallways outside of the city.
Lord almighty, in most other Sonic fandom places this place is the place full of genesis grognards that hate all non-Classic Sonic games. What happened?
You know, you don't HAVE to be that guy that nobody likes. You're really doing this to yourself at this point.
Add to that people here is allowed to have different tastes than you and people outside don't really know us. Acting smartass doesn't make your words a fact.
Are you saying you would prefer that? You want people to start hurling insults at you for your taste for the Adventure games? If I typed up paragraphs deriding SA1/2 as overrated, barely-playable trash with awful stories that only braindead, nostalgia-blinded morons would find any value in, and the start of Sonic's immediate drop off in quality, would you have no problem with that?
I wouldn't write that, because I love SA1/2, but I know there are people in the community that hold that exact view. If you would take offense to a scathing statement like that, why say similar things about people who like the boost games?
Separate names with a comma.