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

Forums - Gaming - It appears Sonic Generations doesn't suck...is the Sonic cycle doomed?

oniyide said:
lestatdark said:
RolStoppable said:
lurkerwithnosoul said:

Mandatory melee in Sonic stages is better than full speed Sonic/Shadow levels now?

Also, i think otherwise. Sonic heroes was atrocious! It has spammable special attacks. Levels that were too long. Level design was stupid (unnecessary large and repetitive levels). Lame plot compared to the ones we had in SA/SA2. Worst soundtrack. I can't stress this enough!

One thing i could actually like when i switched from the 16 bit era from the 128 bit era is that i actually felt the change was pretty cool. Sonic and Shadow levels were fast and the platforming was ok. The optional stages, well, they were a pain sometimes, but it was a fresh change of pace that i didn't mind. Those games had heart. That is something Sonic Heroes didn't had.

Yes, mandatory melee is better because it comes with high speed levels instead of having 2/3 of the game being mediocre or trash like the Sonic Adventure games were.

Sonic Heroes was pretty good. You can't complain about stupid level design when Sonic Adventure had a temple level that you locked you into a water room with a snake for almost two minutes, not to mention that the rest of that level was really bad too. Also, full speed in SA/SA2 was slower than what SH offered. Plus the Sonic Heroes soundtrack was awesome. You must have not liked it because it sounded like a video game.

But your comment about the plot trumps everything. Nothing has ever been so out of place as Sonic living among humans and Tails having to save the president. It's just ridiculous.

Can't we all agree that both plots are stupid? >___>

And yes, both the adventure games and heroes had stupid level design, problem with heroes was that the level design was also smeared with countless amount of glitches like the absurd amount of clipping most edge of platforms had and the awful collision detection system. While you may consider it a good game, those glitches made it nearly unplayable to me. 

Anyway, back to your initial comment, why do you always assume that people who do not follow your line of thought must have started gaming in a different era (i.e sooner generations), than you? You did the same in the Mario thread. 
I find Heroes and Adventures bad games, but heroes the worst of the three and I started playing Sonic back in the Megadrive era. Heck it was my first game for the Megadrive, along with Space Harrier II and Golden Axe >__>

yes we can agree that both plots are stupid.

just out of curiosity which version did you play?? it sounds like you played the PS2 version. I had an argument with my friend on this very thing and his problem was that he played the PS2 version which sucked. The GC and Xbox version doesnt have anywhere near the glitches of PS2.

Exactly the PS2 version. I might give the GC version a try then, because I won't touch the PS2 version ever again >_<



Current PC Build

CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"

Around the Network
oniyide said:
lurkerwithnosoul said:
RolStoppable said:

???? Heroes had no mandatory melee, you could just home in with Sonic/Amy/Shadow like you did in the other games

Did you actually play SA2, because i dont think you did. Those levels were NOT optional. Change of pace??? WHy the hell im I playing the fishing or horrible 3rd person shooter mech to advance the game?? Thats not what I play Sonic for. I play it to run fast like a maniac and thats what you did 90% of the time in Heroes and you did that about 35% of the time in the Adventure games.

I'm pretty damn sure there were numerous big enemies you couldn't defeat in Heroes without switching to your power character. Or it would take about 10 minutes with Sonic's dash attack to kill them (if he even could hurt them).

 

That, my friend, is mandatory melee. Don't go accusing someone of not playing a game right after you spout out blatant untruths about the other game. :P



4 acts in and its very cool so far.

As a cherry on top, its fully 3D compatible on both consoles and the 3D effect isn't as bad as other 3D games Ive played on the 360 and PS3.

Can't wait to get ahold of the PC version though. Frame rate and visuals on consoles take a hit at times.



wfz said:
oniyide said:
lurkerwithnosoul said:
RolStoppable said:
 

???? Heroes had no mandatory melee, you could just home in with Sonic/Amy/Shadow like you did in the other games

Did you actually play SA2, because i dont think you did. Those levels were NOT optional. Change of pace??? WHy the hell im I playing the fishing or horrible 3rd person shooter mech to advance the game?? Thats not what I play Sonic for. I play it to run fast like a maniac and thats what you did 90% of the time in Heroes and you did that about 35% of the time in the Adventure games.

I'm pretty damn sure there were numerous big enemies you couldn't defeat in Heroes without switching to your power character. Or it would take about 10 minutes with Sonic's dash attack to kill them (if he even could hurt them).

 

That, my friend, is mandatory melee. Don't go accusing someone of not playing a game right after you spout out blatant untruths about the other game. :P


Name them. It has been awhile since ive played the game i admit, but if I am wrong, prove it. 



lestatdark said:
oniyide said:
lestatdark said:
RolStoppable said:
lurkerwithnosoul said:

Mandatory melee in Sonic stages is better than full speed Sonic/Shadow levels now?

Also, i think otherwise. Sonic heroes was atrocious! It has spammable special attacks. Levels that were too long. Level design was stupid (unnecessary large and repetitive levels). Lame plot compared to the ones we had in SA/SA2. Worst soundtrack. I can't stress this enough!

One thing i could actually like when i switched from the 16 bit era from the 128 bit era is that i actually felt the change was pretty cool. Sonic and Shadow levels were fast and the platforming was ok. The optional stages, well, they were a pain sometimes, but it was a fresh change of pace that i didn't mind. Those games had heart. That is something Sonic Heroes didn't had.

Yes, mandatory melee is better because it comes with high speed levels instead of having 2/3 of the game being mediocre or trash like the Sonic Adventure games were.

Sonic Heroes was pretty good. You can't complain about stupid level design when Sonic Adventure had a temple level that you locked you into a water room with a snake for almost two minutes, not to mention that the rest of that level was really bad too. Also, full speed in SA/SA2 was slower than what SH offered. Plus the Sonic Heroes soundtrack was awesome. You must have not liked it because it sounded like a video game.

But your comment about the plot trumps everything. Nothing has ever been so out of place as Sonic living among humans and Tails having to save the president. It's just ridiculous.

Can't we all agree that both plots are stupid? >___>

And yes, both the adventure games and heroes had stupid level design, problem with heroes was that the level design was also smeared with countless amount of glitches like the absurd amount of clipping most edge of platforms had and the awful collision detection system. While you may consider it a good game, those glitches made it nearly unplayable to me. 

Anyway, back to your initial comment, why do you always assume that people who do not follow your line of thought must have started gaming in a different era (i.e sooner generations), than you? You did the same in the Mario thread. 
I find Heroes and Adventures bad games, but heroes the worst of the three and I started playing Sonic back in the Megadrive era. Heck it was my first game for the Megadrive, along with Space Harrier II and Golden Axe >__>

yes we can agree that both plots are stupid.

just out of curiosity which version did you play?? it sounds like you played the PS2 version. I had an argument with my friend on this very thing and his problem was that he played the PS2 version which sucked. The GC and Xbox version doesnt have anywhere near the glitches of PS2.

Exactly the PS2 version. I might give the GC version a try then, because I won't touch the PS2 version ever again >_<


Well mystery solved. You cant really judge a game based on a gimped version. Thats like judging multiplat games based on the Wii version



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
oniyide said:

Name them. It has been awhile since ive played the game i admit, but if I am wrong, prove it. 

He is right, you just need to look up some gameplay videos of full stages to see that there are mandatory battles. Act 2-1 and 2-2 should be safe bets. Sorry that I don't remember the name of these city stages right now.

There are plenty of instances where you have to defeat a group of enemies to remove barriers, let switches appear etc. and the turtle-like enemies require you to switch to your melee character.


holy crap, its all coming back to me. I really need to play this again. My bad



blkfish92 said:
The sonic generation demo was fun as crap that's for sure!

I'm not a big fan of Sonic games but I have to agree that the demo was pretty fun indeed!  I might pick this game up for some platforming bliss.  Lol



Shadowfest3 said:
blkfish92 said:
The sonic generation demo was fun as crap that's for sure!

I'm not a big fan of Sonic games but I have to agree that the demo was pretty fun indeed!  I might pick this game up for some platforming bliss.  Lol


Platforming is done right by the new sonic for sure lol.



           

RolStoppable said:
lestatdark said:

Can't we all agree that both plots are stupid? >___>

And yes, both the adventure games and heroes had stupid level design, problem with heroes was that the level design was also smeared with countless amount of glitches like the absurd amount of clipping most edge of platforms had and the awful collision detection system. While you may consider it a good game, those glitches made it nearly unplayable to me. 

Anyway, back to your initial comment, why do you always assume that people who do not follow your line of thought must have started gaming in a different era (i.e sooner generations), than you? You did the same in the Mario thread. 
I find Heroes and Adventures bad games, but heroes the worst of the three and I started playing Sonic back in the Megadrive era. Heck it was my first game for the Megadrive, along with Space Harrier II and Golden Axe >__>

Sure, the plots are all stupid. Nobody even asks Sega to put in more elaborate stories.

I assume it, because most of the time it's true. I know that there can be exceptions to the rule, but they are rare. It happened several times to me that I got into an argument with Nintendo fans who supposedly started gaming during the NES/SNES era and later on listed the Gamecube days among their favorite childhood memories. That just doesn't add up. What's true in those cases is that they touched NES and SNES controllers, but N64 and GC games actually defined their childhood and that's what they played for the majority of time.

I wouldn't be surprised if something similar holds up for lurkerwithnosoul who may have played the 16-bit Sonics, but Sonic Adventure defined his childhood. That's really the only reasonable explanation why someone would say that the SA games had heart, because they were messes for the most part (well, the first one definitely was; the second one was actually bearable even during its worst parts).

That's the same for those who were raised with an Atari 2600 or Spectrum ZX controller and played a few games with them but it's the NES/Master System era that defined their childhood, which was basically the case for me. I had my first NES when I was almost 3 years old, I started playing on an Atari but it's the SNES/Megadrive era that defined my childhood and still to this day I consider the SNES as being the best console ever released. 

I believe it's more about preferences rather than actual experience. Nothing tops the JRPG experience I had with the SNES, while the NES had an all around great assortment of games and experiences (Mario Bros, Crystallis, Fanaxadu, Tecmo Super Bowl, Ninja Gaiden, Megaman, Castlevania and the list goes on). I understand Lurkerwithnosoul POV, mostly because his best experiences could have been with the SA games. For most of us who grew up with the 16-bit Sonics the SA games were horrendous (although I loathe the 2nd much more than the first....the digging stages with Knuckles and that she-bat....makes me want to throw up a bit), but that isn't the case for everyone I guess. 



Current PC Build

CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"

This is such an awesome game.

Still have the final boss left on xbox360... Got ahold on the PC version so I'ma play that now. I'd recommend playing it ont he PC instead of consoles if you have a decent gaming PC. It just looks much better.