SMS, Genesis, 32X, Sega CD, Saturn, Dreamcast
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
 
Posts: 6623
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm

by Mozgus Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:48 am

SegaVega wrote:I think it's mainly popular belief that leads people into believing the 3D Sonics are no good. People start complaining about the games long before they're even released, and Sonic is such a popular character that anyone will listen to the scorn and dismiss the title. If people weren't as hypercritical as they are about random secondary facets and nuances, and looked to the core level design and play structure, they'd find much better games. Everything but the 15-year nostalgia in the "good" 2D Sonics is also in the 3D ones.

I'm fully capable of recognizing suckage without the assistance of anyone else, thank you very much.
User avatar
durkada
64-bit
 
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:46 am

by durkada Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:48 am

This post could float right into one of my questions -- is Sega dead? Yes, they continue to publish games -- but more with a zombie impulse than any inspiration. With the exception of Rub Rabbits, the only Sega games I truly enjoyed of late were Dreamcast games released on the XBOX.
User avatar
lordofduct
Next-Gen
 
Posts: 2907
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: West Palm Beach

by lordofduct Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:47 am

Mozgus wrote:
Jamestheswift wrote:
Mozgus wrote:Gameplay.
Gameplay.

I actually just played through Sonic Adventure 1 with Sonic yesturday. Truly, one of the worst games on the system.


I loved Sonic Adventure 1... different strokes for different folks I guess :P

The graphics, "adventure" aspect, and the chaos haven't aged well dude. Those were the reasons the game seemed pretty good at launch. Play the game now. None of that stuff helps when every 10 seconds the camera tries to kill you, and every 15 seconds Sonic gets caught on some invisible object.

The only thing that has been consistantly high quality throughout the franchize, is the music.


I don't know... but everyone complained about the camera in Adventure. Surprisingly Tails was the only character I ever had a problem handling the camera with and that was in adventure 2. As for Sonic it never got in the way for me.

What glitches it did on me could be premeditated... it wasn't like it was random, it was at certain parts of the level where if you went off track to where you weren't supposed to go, or you weren't moving fast enough. I for one viewed those few parts as just obstacles like any Sonic game is filled with. Instead then would practice on levels to see how well I could zoom through it and make the camera feel fluid like a film.
www.lordofduct.com - check out my blog

Space Puppy Studios - games for gamers by gamers
Zalphier
24-bit
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:39 pm

by Zalphier Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:11 am

I really liked the newer sonic games. (I think sonic adventure 1 is my favorite of the series)
I never had a problem with Camera, or "invisible objects" The Adventure series was quite fluid IMO.
I liked sonic Heroes aswell, though not as "speed based", it's still a solid game. Things change over time, sonic is simply starting to age. Now, I thought Shadow the hedgehog was ok... but it lacked some sonic level design ingrediants. Also, gameplay was a bit iffy. But if you actually gave it a chance, it's actually a pretty good game. No, not the best game in the universe. It was sorta like Tails Adventure on the GG, it's sonic, only different.

And now I'm saving up for Sonic the Hedgehog on the xbox. The only thing I'm concerned about it that new character...
I also want Sonic Rivals( but I don't have a psp, and won't for many years until each and every bug is out, and the price has dropped...seriously, a psp should not cost more than a ps2(in technological and gaming terms)) Most the games suck for it IMO.
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
 
Posts: 6623
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm

by Mozgus Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:01 am

Zalphier wrote:And now I'm saving up for Sonic the Hedgehog on the xbox. The only thing I'm concerned about it that new character...

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/ ... sp?q=sonic
Averages a 50%...the lowest average of any Sonic game in history, except for the recently released turd port of the Genesis original on GBA. Why 'save' for it?
User avatar
jemsic
24-bit
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:23 am

by jemsic Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:34 pm

My roomate has a 360 and I just got to play Sonic the Hedgehog for like, the first 5 levels or so.

My impression is that IT'S THE SAME GAME AS SONIC ADVENTURE!

Even down to that huge whale destroying the bridge as you run down the beach.

Seriously, Sega must've thought that no one ever played the DC version - cause they just released what is basically the same game with nicer graphics.
Zalphier
24-bit
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:39 pm

by Zalphier Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:47 pm

Mozgus wrote:
Zalphier wrote:And now I'm saving up for Sonic the Hedgehog on the xbox. The only thing I'm concerned about it that new character...

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/ ... sp?q=sonic
Averages a 50%...the lowest average of any Sonic game in history, except for the recently released turd port of the Genesis original on GBA. Why 'save' for it?


I honestly don't care if it got a 50% rating. I'd still like to get it. Forums are for discussing likes, dislikes, opinions, etc. They are not for trashing opinions that you don't agree with. Honestly, if I wanted someone to correct my thinking, I'd go see a doctor. Not a forum moderator. What if I said I was going to get that STH port on gba(I'm not, just saying. I already have it on genesis) would you bash that as well? Most likely, because you wouldn't agree it's a good game( not saying it is or isn't a good game, I haven't played it)
Back on the point of STH360. So what if it got a 50% rating. I just may happen to like it. Besides, going to a place like game rankings, I might as well go to x play and not play EVERY game that got below a 4/5( which is nearly all of them) when in all actuality a lot of the games they review are really solid games. Not looking to start a flame war with you mozgus, just here to say that I like the newer sonics, as I like the older ones too. This topic was made to discuss newer sonic games, and that's what I intend to do.
User avatar
jemsic
24-bit
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:23 am

by jemsic Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:01 pm

Oh, and just to clarify - I didn't mean in my earlier post that STH360 was a bad game.

It's really fun, I'm just saying that it probably deserved the name Sonic Adventure 3 instead of STH360.
Which isn't a problem for me :D, cause I loved Sonic Adventure.

And Zalphier's right. Ratings mean nothing. I'm sure that the modern gaming community wouldn't spend $60 on a new Dreamcast shooter, but I would.
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
 
Posts: 6623
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm

by Mozgus Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:19 pm

Zalphier wrote:I honestly don't care if it got a 50% rating. I'd still like to get it. Forums are for discussing likes, dislikes, opinions, etc. They are not for trashing opinions that you don't agree with. Honestly, if I wanted someone to correct my thinking, I'd go see a doctor. Not a forum moderator. What if I said I was going to get that STH port on gba(I'm not, just saying. I already have it on genesis) would you bash that as well? Most likely, because you wouldn't agree it's a good game( not saying it is or isn't a good game, I haven't played it)
Back on the point of STH360. So what if it got a 50% rating. I just may happen to like it. Besides, going to a place like game rankings, I might as well go to x play and not play EVERY game that got below a 4/5( which is nearly all of them) when in all actuality a lot of the games they review are really solid games. Not looking to start a flame war with you mozgus, just here to say that I like the newer sonics, as I like the older ones too. This topic was made to discuss newer sonic games, and that's what I intend to do.

You need to calm down. I was being nice by trying to keep you from making a big mistake. You were supposed to say "thanks, but no thanks" but instead you act like I attacked you.

Comparing GameRankings to X-Play is retarded, however. GR is simply an averaging tool for every professional review out there, and X-Play's are not professional, so they are not even considered, last time I checked.

The vast majority of Sonic fans have seen the series go downhill, and are sadded by the fact. This thread wouldn't exist if it weren't a fact. You're free to throw away money, and you're free to give Sega the message that we will consume turds. Whatever. I honestly thought that, for a second, you were not aware of what the world said about the new title, and I thought that by showing you what they said, you might have been relieved and $50 richer. (Or is it a $60 title? lol)

Image
Last edited by Mozgus on Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
arion
Next-Gen
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Iceland

by arion Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:28 pm

jemsic wrote:My roomate has a 360 and I just got to play Sonic the Hedgehog for like, the first 5 levels or so.

My impression is that IT'S THE SAME GAME AS SONIC ADVENTURE!

Even down to that huge whale destroying the bridge as you run down the beach.

Seriously, Sega must've thought that no one ever played the DC version - cause they just released what is basically the same game with nicer graphics.


sounds kinda cheap...but not illogial since the number of people that did own a dreamacast and played sonic adventure is a lot smaller than the people that have never heard of the dreamcast or at least never played any games on it.
Return to Sega

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests