By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - No, no, no, no, no, no, no! STOP IT SEGA! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! Sonic RPG...

facher83 said:
a.l.e.x59 said:
BenKenobi88 said:
This whole thread is full of your strange opinions, and frankly, it's annoying that you assume everyone thinks the same way you do.

What is strange, and what is annoying? You really think it's going to be good? You're probably not even going to play as Sonic 80% of the time.

 


Just out of curiosity, devil's advocate here, these statements youare making could totally be applied to Mario franchises in general - would you say Mario RPG was a bad idea, for the SNES? These seem like opinions and assumptions more than anything else.


 



Numbers: Checker Players > Halo Players

Checkers Age and replayability > Halo Age and replayability

Therefore, Checkers > Halo

So, Checkers is a better game than Halo.

Around the Network

@a.l.e.x59:

I like Sega and all, but their output has been pretty dismal of late. I think that if anyone could revive Sonic, it would HAVE to be someone other than Sega. What was their most recent great game? I can't think of anything...



Hates Nomura.

Tagged: GooseGaws - <--- Has better taste in games than you.

a.l.e.x59 said:
BenKenobi88 said:
So? I don't have to play as Sonic to make it a good game.

And I still don't know what you mean about far more Star Wars games suck than are good. I'd argue the opposite, as LucasArts pushed existing videogame technology for all its new games, which were pretty much always Star Wars games. And newer technology combined with classic Star Wars story typically made great games.

They're using the Euphoria and DMM engines for Star Wars: Force Unleashed, which will really make games more realistic...it and GTA4 will be the first games to use Euphoria.

That's fine, but what does Star Wars have to do with any of this?

By the way...


28 Star Wars games recieved scores over 80%. 67 Star Wars games recieved scores less than 80%. Let me rephrase my previous statement: "More Star Wars games are of less quality, than higher quality." Not far more are of lesser quality, for 28 Star Wars games, over 80%, is actually pretty good.

I don't care if BioWare is making the game. I just think that's not going to be very good.

By the way, you're rude sometimes.

 


 I'm only rude because you only seem to make an opinion of your own, and then don't pay attention to others' ideas.  You don't know anything about the game yet, I don't get why you're judging it.  You should more excited if anything that Bioware is onboard to perhaps revitalize the Sonic franchise.  If it turns out to be crap, then nothing has changed...they can really only improve. 

And yet again, you rely too much on gamerankings.com.  Try playing all those games instead of using compiled review scores to form your opinions.



LEFT4DEAD411.COM
Bet with disolitude: Left4Dead will have a higher Metacritic rating than Project Origin, 3 months after the second game's release.  (hasn't been 3 months but it looks like I won :-p )

I only wish he'd answer my question



Numbers: Checker Players > Halo Players

Checkers Age and replayability > Halo Age and replayability

Therefore, Checkers > Halo

So, Checkers is a better game than Halo.

BenKenobi88 said:
a.l.e.x59 said:
BenKenobi88 said:
So? I don't have to play as Sonic to make it a good game.

And I still don't know what you mean about far more Star Wars games suck than are good. I'd argue the opposite, as LucasArts pushed existing videogame technology for all its new games, which were pretty much always Star Wars games. And newer technology combined with classic Star Wars story typically made great games.

They're using the Euphoria and DMM engines for Star Wars: Force Unleashed, which will really make games more realistic...it and GTA4 will be the first games to use Euphoria.

That's fine, but what does Star Wars have to do with any of this?

By the way...


28 Star Wars games recieved scores over 80%. 67 Star Wars games recieved scores less than 80%. Let me rephrase my previous statement: "More Star Wars games are of less quality, than higher quality." Not far more are of lesser quality, for 28 Star Wars games, over 80%, is actually pretty good.

I don't care if BioWare is making the game. I just think that's not going to be very good.

By the way, you're rude sometimes.

 


 I'm only rude because you only seem to make an opinion of your own, and then don't pay attention to others' ideas.  You don't know anything about the game yet, I don't get why you're judging it.  You should more excited if anything that Bioware is onboard to perhaps revitalize the Sonic franchise.  If it turns out to be crap, then nothing has changed...they can really only improve. 

And yet again, you rely too much on gamerankings.com.  Try playing all those games instead of using compiled review scores to form your opinions.


 Well, we'll see how good the game is, once it comes out.



Around the Network
facher83 said:
I only wish he'd answer my question

 I don't think Sonic RPG will be good like Mario RPG.



a.l.e.x59 said:
facher83 said:
I only wish he'd answer my question

I don't think Sonic RPG will be good like Mario RPG.


 Mario RPG:

-Aided by Squaresoft, in its highest prime.

-Uses 'silly' fictional characters from a cartoonish, and often times over-used, mediocre series of games.

 

SEGA RPG:

-Aided by Bioware, revolutionary and brilliant RPG studio.

-Uses 'silly' fictional characters from a cartoonish, and often times over-used, mediocre series of games.

 

(Mediocre meaning not every series game is a hit, and some series games are a complete flop, but also include blockbusters that even the balance out.)

 

 

There's my reasoning.....   have you had yours? 



Numbers: Checker Players > Halo Players

Checkers Age and replayability > Halo Age and replayability

Therefore, Checkers > Halo

So, Checkers is a better game than Halo.

True, but...

Mario = good. Sonic = bad.


And the Mario characters are far, far, far better than the Sonic characters.


a.l.e.x59 said:
True, but...

Mario = good. Sonic = bad.

And the Mario characters are far, far, far better than the Sonic characters.

 I'm trying to think of the game where Mario characters were actually evolved, given more personality definition, back story, emotions, and just plain character progression - I can't think of any NES games that had any of that at all, whatsoever.... Mario 3 had "Princess Letters" coing to you, but they weren't -that much- in terms of development, more of explanation of the next area, as I recall.

Mario Kart possibly, but really only the voice acting and one-line scripts for victories.

Mario RPG - now that's where we actually have plot, some progression, home towns, emotional reactions to events and phrases, interactions.....

Dare I say, I don't think the Mario franchise had much more than voice acting, grunts and sounds before Mario RPG came along.   Perhaps Mario RPG was the real definitive franchise game where characters actually were given a persona beyond on-screen looks and yelling.



Numbers: Checker Players > Halo Players

Checkers Age and replayability > Halo Age and replayability

Therefore, Checkers > Halo

So, Checkers is a better game than Halo.

Does anyone that has read this thread still respect A.l.e.x59? I mean this has to be one of the worst examples of posting I have ever seen. Alex your opinion is just that an opinion. You can't pass it off as fact.