I would say that, considering the quality of the last half dozen or so Sonic titles, the bias is entirely justified and that Sega has a lot to prove with that franchise.

....Sonic 4 looks like it'll do nicely, however. And I won't even listen to people who don't acknowledge that Sonic, Sonic 2, Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles are great games.

amp316 said: The problem is that they are met with unfair bias. Look. You're so biased against Sonic that you didn't even mention Sonic and the Black Knight. Seriously though, there is some truth to what Majin says. It seems as though Sega feels that they have to have a gimmick in order to sell their game. Sonic Unleashed was great except for the horrible Werehog levels which were in over half of the game and in Sonic and the Black Knight they felt the need to give him a sword. Now I am as big a Sonic fan as any and did enjoy those two games, but they would have been much better if the gimmicks didn't exist.

Mario does stuff like this, and it isn't as much of an issue at all.  Ok, it isn't done to the same extent as you have with Sonic, but still Mario goes all over and does sports and also adds new play mechics and so on.  It is entirely possible with Sonic that Sonic's character isn't one you can add a bunch of stuff to.  Sonic is a fairly simple character with speed as the main attraction.  Have him do more and it turns people off.

I played every console sonic game ever made. Everyone seems to be ripping in to sonic after he went 3D.

Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 were great games when they came out. I actually preffer them both to Mario Sunshine...

Sonic Heroes, Sonic and the Secret Rings and Sonic Unleashed were flawed games that were fun to play.

Shadow the hedgehog, Sonic and the Black knight and Sonic 06 were crap

People seem really quick to say anything Sonic 3d is crap when it simply isn't true.

I loved secret rings

richardhutnik said: amp316 said: The problem is that they are met with unfair bias. Look. You're so biased against Sonic that you didn't even mention Sonic and the Black Knight. Seriously though, there is some truth to what Majin says. It seems as though Sega feels that they have to have a gimmick in order to sell their game. Sonic Unleashed was great except for the horrible Werehog levels which were in over half of the game and in Sonic and the Black Knight they felt the need to give him a sword. Now I am as big a Sonic fan as any and did enjoy those two games, but they would have been much better if the gimmicks didn't exist. Mario does stuff like this, and it isn't as much of an issue at all.  Ok, it isn't done to the same extent as you have with Sonic, but still Mario goes all over and does sports and also adds new play mechics and so on.  It is entirely possible with Sonic that Sonic's character isn't one you can add a bunch of stuff to.  Sonic is a fairly simple character with speed as the main attraction.  Have him do more and it turns people off.

You could put Mario in a porn and he would do just fine... Not sure about Sonic.

I think Sonic went wrong when they introduced boring and horrible playeable characters. i dont want to play as Big cat thingy or a frog or rose or some other odd character.

Sonic should be kept to Sonic or at Sonic, Tails and Knuckles. How can you have other characters as fast as Sonic? It just doesnt make any sense. If Sega concentrated more on Sonic and less on new and shite characters, they would have been much better off.

I think what infuriates critics and other gamers is the samething- Sega have the concept to make a great Sonic game e.g. Sonic Unleashed, but then spoil it by putting in crappy werehog stages. Sega needs to understand, people like Sonic for Sonic gameplay. To make a successful Sonic game, this is all they need to do. Stick with Sonic, put in lots of great Sonic levels designed around speed (make sure you include a pinball stage), bonus levels and the ability to become Super Sonic and kick some serious ass at Light Speeds!

Fei-Hung said: I think Sonic went wrong when they introduced boring and horrible playeable characters. i dont want to play as Big cat thingy or a frog or rose or some other odd character. Sonic should be kept to Sonic or at Sonic, Tails and Knuckles. How can you have other characters as fast as Sonic? It just doesnt make any sense. If Sega concentrated more on Sonic and less on new and shite characters, they would have been much better off. I think what infuriates critics and other gamers is the samething- Sega have the concept to make a great Sonic game e.g. Sonic Unleashed, but then spoil it by putting in crappy werehog stages. Sega needs to understand, people like Sonic for Sonic gameplay. To make a successful Sonic game, this is all they need to do. Stick with Sonic, put in lots of great Sonic levels designed around speed (make sure you include a pinball stage), bonus levels and the ability to become Super Sonic and kick some serious ass at Light Speeds!

I think the cahracters are fine. I mean in Sonic Adventure you have a 5-6 hour sonic campaign, 4 hours for Tails, 4 hours for Knuckles. That right there is usually enought to justify the price of the game.

By the time you get to the big cat, which is meant as a fishing bonus game...you've got your moneys worth.

What I'm saying is, more gameplay is good, but it needs to be good gameplay.

Man, Sonic Adventure was great. Both 1 and 2. I wish they'd make more games like that.

HOLiDAY_AETERNUS said:  1998/1999: Sonic Adventure 1 is released as a launch title on the SEGA DREAMCAST and is met with great financial and critical success, soon becoming the console's best selling game.  2001: Sonic Adventure 2 is released. Is a critical success as was its predecessor.

And here's your problem. Now, Sonic Adventure games weren't exactly a critical success, actually, but they did get favorable reviews... despite the fact that they were crap. They sold because they were Sonic games, and then people realized how they are nothing like they expected and, in fact, no fun at all. Good reviews only made us not trust reviewers anymore, and when reviewers realized this, they stopped giving the following games overblown scores.
Bias? Maybe. Unfair? Not really. If Sega wants clean slate, they should start a new franchise.

RoaR said: HOLiDAY_AETERNUS said:  1998/1999: Sonic Adventure 1 is released as a launch title on the SEGA DREAMCAST and is met with great financial and critical success, soon becoming the console's best selling game.  2001: Sonic Adventure 2 is released. Is a critical success as was its predecessor. And here's your problem. Now, Sonic Adventure games weren't exactly a critical success, actually, but they did get favorable reviews... despite the fact that they were crap. They sold because they were Sonic games, and then people realized how they are nothing like they expected and, in fact, no fun at all. Good reviews only made us not trust reviewers anymore, and when reviewers realized this, they stopped giving the following games overblown scores. Bias? Maybe. Unfair? Not really. If Sega wants clean slate, they should start a new franchise.

With only 6 posts have no credibility here yet. Posts like this won't help your credibility cause frankly, you don't know what you're talking about.