|
Post by Kulock on Dec 12, 2006 22:24:10 GMT -5
Not to be harsh, Sz, but your memory IS failing you. Reviews were NOT all "YAY! SONIC IN 3D!!!"
Hell, there were fans bitching because Sonic became a deeper shade of blue and got longer quills. TRUE SONIC FANS LIKE 'EM SHORT.
Actually, I'd sort of argue the opposite. Shadow's part is the most traditional. (In fact, the structuring of his levels versus the others is REALLY tradition for 3D Sonics.) Sonic's kind of waffles inbetween new ideas (or at least new implementations) and old, it just sucks that they didn't get the time (or didn't want to spend it) improving the attempts at new things. Mach Speed COULD'VE been fun if it weren't for things like hitting something, losing control while his hit animation plays, then dying because you couldn't jump the next thing coming up). Silver's totally new, and for all the people who say "IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE," no, it really wasn't. There was Psi-Ops (an obscure semi-bomb), and a gun in Half-Life 2. Basing a character's moves and abilities on PSI energy and physics was a NEW idea, or at the very least, required a meaty physics engine behind it. MAN did Silver's levels need more work (I just tried to improve my ranking on Egg Genesis as Silver, and that's not happening any time soon: I do so love trying to run around while the camera completely cuts me from being on-screen, and fighting Silver's confused auto-targetting with all the enemies spawning about), but it was a major attempt at something new. I certainly don't remember "Use the R Trigger to levitate and ride this box up and over obstacles" in Sonic Heroes.
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 12, 2006 23:01:26 GMT -5
Re: LotR ... did you miss the memo where people were calling RotK the best movie ever? Do you really want to argue this? No, I did not miss that. I saw lots of people calling RotK the best movie ever. They were not the people who were previously LotR fans. Those people were bitching that they "cut out half the ending."
|
|
diablohead
Active Member
Sequential Illustrator ಠ_ಠ
Posts: 249
|
Post by diablohead on Dec 12, 2006 23:02:05 GMT -5
Since the DC sonic has gone downhill in 3d games, sonic riders is the only 3d game post the DC that I think was worth the time and effort, THAT should have been a next gen title and not this.
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 12, 2006 23:31:03 GMT -5
Not to be harsh, Sz, but your memory IS failing you. Reviews were NOT all "YAY! SONIC IN 3D!!!" Hell, there were fans bitching because Sonic became a deeper shade of blue and got longer quills. TRUE SONIC FANS LIKE 'EM SHORT. Already mentioned this. And I wasn't talking about reviews, although all those were positive for SA1 as well. Probably around 8.5s, maybe a few overzealous ones closed in on a 9 out of 10. Andy: I'm not sure who in the world you talk to! Maybe one person out of 10 I knew that read the books had a problem with the movie. Hell, there were 4 in my immediate family, and the breakdown went: -sister 1 - liked the movies -sister 2 - read the books right beforehand, loved the movies, watches them way too often even now -mom - really liked the movies -me - made the mistake of re-reading the books right before RotK, partially ruined it because I was disappointed over the lack of Dunedain -- I got over it. Still one of the greatest movies ever. Alas, anecdote is not the singular form of statistic. Now, since you're already arguing "the people who liked it didn't read the book", I'll just point to its rating on say, IMDB. With such a huge sample of people, and the book being so widely known/read, it's quite a leap to say that the majority that liked the book didn't like the movie. Regrettably, this isn't exactly a subject being studied by statisticians. However ... Those Zelda fans sure hate Twilight Princess, huh Andy?
|
|
SoNick Belmont
Behind The Logo Team
Thanks again to Jolly Joes for the avatar
Posts: 1,875
|
Post by SoNick Belmont on Dec 13, 2006 0:11:13 GMT -5
Those Zelda fans sure hate Twilight Princess, huh Andy? Yeah, if only the damn game would've arrived a day tomorrow instead of today! Then I'd have my Gamecube hooked up to my new TV Tuner-type item and I'd be playing the game on my monitor instead of staring at the mass of unconnected cords sitting between my GCN and my TV, and thus I'd be able to actually play the game! [/off-topic]
|
|
|
Post by BlazeHedgehod on Dec 13, 2006 7:26:53 GMT -5
Actually, I'd sort of argue the opposite. Shadow's part is the most traditional. (In fact, the structuring of his levels versus the others is REALLY tradition for 3D Sonics.) Sonic's kind of waffles inbetween new ideas (or at least new implementations) and old, it just sucks that they didn't get the time (or didn't want to spend it) improving the attempts at new things. Mach Speed COULD'VE been fun if it weren't for things like hitting something, losing control while his hit animation plays, then dying because you couldn't jump the next thing coming up). Silver's totally new, and for all the people who say "IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE," no, it really wasn't. There was Psi-Ops (an obscure semi-bomb), and a gun in Half-Life 2. Basing a character's moves and abilities on PSI energy and physics was a NEW idea, or at the very least, required a meaty physics engine behind it. MAN did Silver's levels need more work (I just tried to improve my ranking on Egg Genesis as Silver, and that's not happening any time soon: I do so love trying to run around while the camera completely cuts me from being on-screen, and fighting Silver's confused auto-targetting with all the enemies spawning about), but it was a major attempt at something new. I certainly don't remember "Use the R Trigger to levitate and ride this box up and over obstacles" in Sonic Heroes. But even that was less experimentation. Shadow the Hedgehog attempted to completely re-invent the character of Shadow as a gun-toting car-driving lone-wolf with a dark and mature storyline. It was supposed to be Sonic's Jak II. Sonic Heroes was the biggest departure yet. Sort of a high-speed "Lost Vikings Lite" game where you're switching between three character's abilities to overcome various obstacles. Sonic 2k6, on the other hand, aspired to be Sonic Adventure 3 (though it frequently tipped it's hat to pretty much every Sonic game in the series, including Heroes and Shadow). One could argue that Mach Speed stages are simply a new take on the ol' "Something is chasing Sonic" mechanic we saw in the previous Sonic games, except now the camera is pointing infront of Sonic (most of the time). It really becomes apparant that's kind of what that is in Crisis City, when something is... actually chasing Sonic. Shadow and Silver weren't that experimental, either. It's not like Silver changed how Sonic played; Silver was just a new character to play as. Of course he'd have to do something new. Yeah, physics are a new thing, but there was more than just Psi-Ops to draw from: Half-Life 2, Doom 3's expansion, there's the upcoming Cellfactor, which lets you use PSI on physics objects to massive scale (juggling thousands of objects at once)... Shadow was a cautious blend of Sonic and his abilities from his own game, tweaked and refined. I mean, that was to be expected. It's not like they're just going to transfer the gameplay from Sonic Adventure 2 verbatim. Of course they'd change things around, but in terms of doing things completely new (as in Shadows and Heroes), the gameplay in this is relatively normal for what could be considered "Sonic Adventure 3" - just really, really, really unpolished and in dire need of some serious tweaking and retooling.
|
|
|
Post by Merry Smindmas on Dec 13, 2006 10:17:10 GMT -5
SA1? Badly received? You must be kidding me. At the time of it's release, all I ever heard was praise. Online, in magazines, from friends - nothing but praise. Maybe this is something that was exclusive to the UK, but I do somehow doubt that. The reason SADX panned was because, as Jolly said, it was a lazy port and retained the same issues as the original which by today's standards, are pretty intolerable a lot of the time.
And with regards to Andy trying to make LotR films sound like they were badly received by avid fans of the book, I've yet to see that. Most book fans were willing to overlook the omissions due to the films themselves still being stellar in their own right. So yeah, I really can't see the argument that most fans were disappointed. But hey, maybe it's a UK thing.
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 13, 2006 11:20:07 GMT -5
I was about to reply to Sz.
Then I realized I was making a post arguing about the difference between having ever read LotR and being a LotR fan, made necessary because of the same bullshit that happens every goddamn time I dare to post on the subject of Sonic around here. Which appears to have been the result, in this case at least, of somebody being ridiculously oversensitive and taking a statement about people in general as a personal attack.
BUT HAY GUYS, I'M THE GUY WHO LIKED SA2 AND HEROES, THAT MEANS I HAVE A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST EVERYONE WHO DIDN'T.
Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
Post by Merry Smindmas on Dec 13, 2006 11:26:42 GMT -5
Andy, no one's attacking you. We're just having a debate, where our opinions and perceptions differ - which admittedly is the whole foundation for a debate anyway.
AND CHECK IT OUT, I LIKED SA2 AND HEROES AS WELL, YET I DON'T THINK THAT MEANS I HAVE A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST EVERYONE WHO DIDN'T.
|
|
|
Post by BlazeHedgehod on Dec 13, 2006 12:04:23 GMT -5
I remember seeing mostly unanimous positive response from magazine reviews for Sonic Adventure 1, but most people I spoke to at school and the like seemed to hate the game.
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 13, 2006 12:08:15 GMT -5
I remember seeing mostly unanimous positive response from magazine reviews for Sonic Adventure 1, but most people I spoke to at school and the like seemed to hate the game. The "cool kids" never seemed to admit to liking Sonic back in the day. Yet I note all the nostalgic memories people post on all sorts of online forums about the games ... ;D Andy, I was not attacking you. I was attacking your opinion somewhat (if by "attacking", I mean "I think it's wrong, and here's why") and wondering where the opinion came from, but that's all. Also, Smindas: CLEARLY IT DOES, INTO THE FREEZER WITH YOU PS: the above line works best if you imagine me forcing you into the freezer as the Allen in my sig.
|
|
|
Post by Merry Smindmas on Dec 13, 2006 12:48:15 GMT -5
*trapped in the freezer*
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 13, 2006 14:42:52 GMT -5
I didn't say people were attacking me, only that, as usual, bringing up the subject of Sonic fans makes people suddenly prone to misinterpreting everything I say in increasingly bizarre ways, even though as far as I can tell I'm saying basically the same things to basically the same people who never have any trouble with this when we discuss other subjects. (Which seems to have happened again. ::sigh: In my experience, when fans (of anything) react to a new development (as opposed to remaining silent about it), there are four types of reactions, with #1 being far further from the majority than it should be: 1. Sane, rational discussion. 2. Doomsaying, an offshoot of Fandom Rule #1 (if a situation is ever unclear, assume whatever it would take to drive you into a blind rage). Fans taking every new piece of information that comes along, and assume the worst thing it could possibly mean. People who form their opinion based on these assumptions typically keep their opinion static even if the assumptions are demonstrated to be false or not as much of an issue as they thought. Shadow the Hedgehog got a lot of this, and what hatred Sonic Adventure got tended to come from this corner as well. 3. False messiah worship, essentially the opposite of #2. Fans heap all their hopes on the new development, and fully expect it to be the whatever of their dreams. It will have everything they've ever wanted, even if that isn't actually possible,, even if they don't know what they want. When the end result is less than perfect, these fans are upset that they've been "cheated" out of what they were "promised" and got this "crap" instead. Sonic Heroes and Sonic 2K6 both got a lot of this. 4. Random unilateral declarations. Fanboys, toyhacks, etc. The proportions vary a bit from fandom to fandom, but none of these elements is ever small enough to be disregarded. So, since two of them always respond negatively, there's always a significant negative element to fandom response, and since there tends to be some negativity from #4 and #1 as well... Does the silent majority follow this pattern? I care not. Accounting for them is like including vegetarians in a poll to determine whether people prefer beef or pork. They're the silent majority because they're silent.If your experience differs, then it's perfectly reasonable for you to come to different conclusions, but don't expect me to suddenly reverse my opinion. Hopefully I wasted my time by typing that.
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 13, 2006 15:27:07 GMT -5
I think you're making a mistake of assuming the groups are of equal sizes -- and also that there's no overlap.
The silent majority matters a hell of a lot in this discussion, IMO. On a large message board there may be a "things you hate about x" topic spanning 300 replies. Oh no, everyone must hate the game, you might conclude. Well, except that this hypothetical forum has 500 active members, and there were only 50 members who posted in the topic.
How can we be sure the 50 are a representative sample of the 500? The topic title and a few venomous replies have the effect of weeding out people at one end of the spectrum, and encouraging those who disliked parts of 'x' to make public their concerns. Over time, like minds congregate ... in topics, and on forums. Additionally, strong emotions are the most likely to inspire a post. This might be why longtime fans generally aren't vocal in how awesome a new game is; if it doesn't have nearly the same emotive effect the original games did ...
It really might have more to do with social psychology than anything else I can think of. Certainly, the only way to resolve this discussion for good is to hope somebody organizes a study on fan reactions -- something probably not too high priority.
We could also reason about it a little more indepth than you have (yours is sort of a characterization of message board posts, with no regard for who the posts come from, the numbers in each category, etc), and maybe come up with some better idea that way. This might be a little more scientific of an approach than what you were looking for, my apologies if that's the case. ;P
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 13, 2006 15:45:48 GMT -5
I think you're making a mistake of assuming the groups are of equal sizes I'm not. I even mentioned that the proportions vary from fandom to fandom. I suppose #4 can overlap with any of the other three, but that doesn't seem to be what you're suggesting. You're correct that the 50 aren't a representative sample of the 500, but you're making the explicit assumption that the 500 are the point, when I previously made the also explicit assumption that it wasn't.Assuming this thread is the only thread on that forum where x is discussed (which it would have to be in order for this to be a valid example), the 50 are the only ones who reacted. All groups are representative samples of themselves. Actually, that seems like it would be really interesting. Is there a way to study fan reactions in a more scientific manner?
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 13, 2006 16:24:08 GMT -5
Sure, we could do some sort of blind analysis of some popular fan boards when a new release came out.
Ala: Using as much objectivity as possible, sort posts over a period of weeks into some version of your 4 groups (which I do believe mostly work for individual posts, but not individual people ... though, sometimes a single post may start off as 1 and degrade into 2 or 3.)
This would have to be done by a group of people probably, and there would have to be significant overlap to account for possible errors, different "grading scales", etc. It could be done, though.
After that, it's more "mostly objective" measures such as taking into professional reviews to get some measure of whether the game actually was awesome (thus diminishing 2 and 3) or did in fact suck (more of 2 and 3).
It'd be a pretty messy undertaking, it could totally be done for the Wii Sonic game or something.
A more valid and scientific version, which we can't do, would relate to surveys coming with the game, or done at game retailers. Sonic Team should probably look into this.
|
|
|
Post by Evan on Dec 13, 2006 17:03:31 GMT -5
You know, I do have to admit that I like what Sonic 2k6 did with teams--it's really what I was wanting from Heroes. Being able to play as each of them normally. I wouldn't mind BEING FORCED TO PLAY AS A CHARACTER or something as long as I could play as them as they meant to be played...without all this Flying and Power crap. Knuckles and Tails still operate under that in Sonic 2k6 (and control even worse) but they had the right idea of splitting up from the team and crap.
I never even understood your griping about Adventure 2, though, Blaze, although I guess it's really just from different perspectives, is all--I enjoyed having the varying forms of gameplay. It didn't feel like "aww I was just getting used to Sonic now I have to play as Tails what is this shit" to me, but, yeah. Perspective.
I enjoyed Heroes for the large cast of characters, but they just weren't...used well. All the teams played pretty much exactly the same, their levels were just different. I enjoy the vast amount of characters if they're used correctly, but they just...weren't in Heroes. I only enjoyed Heroes for the gameplay.
I loved all the stupid characters but ehh, you know. OPINIONS LOLS
|
|
|
Post by Kulock on Dec 13, 2006 21:00:45 GMT -5
Silver needs so much more rebalancing. Sometimes you're almost constantly taking hits with him, since his most effective move is that ground shock that requires you to be kind of close, which gets him tagged by the worms all the time.
And you're locked into doing it once you start, which sucks because I just misjudged a jump in Aquatic Base, started the move, and even though I had plenty of time to react, I couldn't get him out of it in time.
|
|
|
Post by BlazeHedgehod on Dec 13, 2006 21:30:25 GMT -5
I never even understood your griping about Adventure 2, though, Blaze, although I guess it's really just from different perspectives, is all--I enjoyed having the varying forms of gameplay. It didn't feel like "aww I was just getting used to Sonic now I have to play as Tails what is this shit" to me, but, yeah. Perspective. I come to a Sonic game to play as Sonic first and foremost. It doesn't help that Shooting controls were clunky and hunting was... hunting. I'd like to keep the momentum going as Sonic, you know? Diverse gameplay or not, it was the most fun to play as Sonic and Shadow in SA2. Going from "Fast and awesome" to "slow and tedious" is not my idea of a good time. I enjoyed Heroes for the large cast of characters, but they just weren't...used well. All the teams played pretty much exactly the same, their levels were just different. I enjoy the vast amount of characters if they're used correctly, but they just...weren't in Heroes. I only enjoyed Heroes for the gameplay. Eh, the cast didn't really bother me that much in Heroes either, because it really was just four teams. It just amuses me that people go, "THERE ARE TOO MANY CHARACTERS DETRACTING FROM THE SONIC PART OF SONIC ADVENTURE" and Sonicteam goes, "Okay guys, let's DOUBLE the people in the cast, but we'll all make them play roughly the same!" Outside of BINGO Highway and Casino Park being really frusteratingly awful, and a handful of the other stages midway through the game being mostly forgettable (Frog Forest, Lost Jungle), and the graphics, my main gripe about Heroes is the fact it felt like it was trying to do a big, epic, Sonic Adventure style plotline but they simply fed all but the first and last pages of the script through a paper shredder. Like Ku said, Heroes started all this junk and it never did anything with them, especially concerning Team Dark.
|
|
|
Post by Kulock on Dec 13, 2006 22:39:29 GMT -5
I'm amused by the fact that Omega specifically carried Metal Sonic away, or at least picked him up, with Shadow right by him, and even though Shadow's met Omega in two games since, there's never been a single mention about WHAT THEY DID WITH HIM.
Or maybe some things you just don't talk about. "Look, we were drunk, his output port looked like an input..."
And that's Silver's episode... completed, at least. Still needs S-Ranking on the levels, but all the Hard Mode versions are passed. But I have determined, and this is a fact, that the person who at least laid out Silver's Kingdom Valley levels (and to a slightly lesser degree, Flame Core)... HATED HUMANITY. It's as if there is a personal vendetta against the player.
It's the little things, like the assloads of robots shooting the type of missiles that have a HUGE explosive radius when they hit anything, probably even just environment around you. Things get so bad that the framerate chugs like no other part in the game. I'm talking everything down to quarter speed in some of the final firefights. And make no mistake, there are some framerate stumbles here or there in the game (that bit with the glass windows does not play as smoothly as it did in the trailer, and you should see it when you've got an Electric Shield on). They're NOTHING compared to this.
And that's one of many joys in this level of confusing layouts, enemy respawning, forced missile grabbing (never a fun task for reasons I won't get into right now), THREE STAGE fight areas of laser/missile/mech enemies, which enjoy picking at you with their machine guns when you're not paying attention to them... the Sonic bit is a RELIEF in comparison, even if it seems like they changed the route he needs to homing attack at one point in Hard Mode to something completely inane (you have to attack sharp left to start up the string after bouncing up on a rope, which is never how it otherwise works), or maybe it was even like that in the normal stage, I can't remember.
Seriously, people may think Sonic games are weaksauce and play themselves, but the kids who actually get through this... they're going to be the tough-as-nails "ready for anything" gamers akin to the NES era. This is just friggin' HARSH. Not clever, not challenging, just harsh.
|
|