Conn wrote:God no. I don't WANT a speedy Sonic game. The Advance titles were too fast and due to that, the stage design was incredibly lacking and you could beat a lot of stages by holding right.
The Adventure games were a nice speed, but anything faster would just be stupid. I like to be able to dodge things, damnit!
Thats so true. I showed my friends how the first stages in Sonic Advance could be played with eyes closed and literally spin dashing then holding right. Sonic for NGP is an example of a good sonic game after the genesis even if the level design wasn't totally original. It had these puzzle pieces you had to collect in game that you had to try to put together. The addition of those made that the longest lasting 2D Sonic game for me. (I never found all the pieces either)
Conn wrote:God no. I don't WANT a speedy Sonic game. The Advance titles were too fast and due to that, the stage design was incredibly lacking and you could beat a lot of stages by holding right.
The Adventure games were a nice speed, but anything faster would just be stupid. I like to be able to dodge things, damnit!
Thats so true. I showed my friends how the first stages in Sonic Advance could be played with eyes closed and literally spin dashing then holding right. Sonic for NGP is an example of a good sonic game after the genesis even if the level design wasn't totally original. It had these puzzle pieces you had to collect in game that you had to try to put together. The addition of those made that the longest lasting 2D Sonic game for me. (I never found all the pieces either)
Yeah, it almost seems like Sonic is just a big tech demo now.
Also, why is it that people seem so interested in fast Sonic games? Nobody really likes the Advance sub-series, and most fans consider Sonic 1, 2 oe 3 to be the best in the series (not me- I like Adventure the most), which were actually pretty slow. It was probably due to slowdown, but it was a great speed- faster than Mario and other platformers, yet slow enough to accurately control.
yeah, Sonic 1-3 and CD he actually moves pretty slow and just has the capibility of accelerating up to a great speed. It was pretty unique at the time. The newer games seem to be a more instant speed.
Conn wrote:God no. I don't WANT a speedy Sonic game. The Advance titles were too fast and due to that, the stage design was incredibly lacking and you could beat a lot of stages by holding right.
The Adventure games were a nice speed, but anything faster would just be stupid. I like to be able to dodge things, damnit!
Thats so true. I showed my friends how the first stages in Sonic Advance could be played with eyes closed and literally spin dashing then holding right. Sonic for NGP is an example of a good sonic game after the genesis even if the level design wasn't totally original. It had these puzzle pieces you had to collect in game that you had to try to put together. The addition of those made that the longest lasting 2D Sonic game for me. (I never found all the pieces either)
Yeah, it almost seems like Sonic is just a big tech demo now.
Also, why is it that people seem so interested in fast Sonic games? Nobody really likes the Advance sub-series, and most fans consider Sonic 1, 2 oe 3 to be the best in the series (not me- I like Adventure the most), which were actually pretty slow. It was probably due to slowdown, but it was a great speed- faster than Mario and other platformers, yet slow enough to accurately control.
I don't know if I'd even call the new Sonic games a tech demo either -- nothing that incredible.
The original sonic Adventure was breathtaking before the Dreamcast was launched, but that's about it
racketboy wrote:I don't know if I'd even call the new Sonic games a tech demo either -- nothing that incredible. The original sonic Adventure was breathtaking before the Dreamcast was launched, but that's about it
The only reasons to play any of the Adventures is the music and exploring the pretty worlds. Everything has great textures and if you like or hate the soundtracks, you have to admit that Sega put forth the money and effort on them.
Heroes looks DAMN sharp on PC, let me tell you. Runs perfectly too on these settings:
They're certainly not worth playing for the gameplay.
racketboy wrote:I don't know if I'd even call the new Sonic games a tech demo either -- nothing that incredible. The original sonic Adventure was breathtaking before the Dreamcast was launched, but that's about it
The only reasons to play any of the Adventures is the music and exploring the pretty worlds. Everything has great textures and if you like or hate the soundtracks, you have to admit that Sega put forth the money and effort on them.
Heroes looks DAMN sharp on PC, let me tell you. Runs perfectly too on these settings:
They're certainly not worth playing for the gameplay.
If you look at kids games, Sonic is probably one of the top three characters kids love. Mario games are to hard for children, Spyro and Sonic are really popular for little girls, other than the barbie/cartoon network/disney shovelware drivel. I see sonic toys in the store, and kids wearing sonic shirts, they like em. Hardcore gamers dont care as much, but kids buy sonic, and parents feel safe buying those games for kids, thus they sell. I bought sonic 3 for my niece, and she loves it. Its got cute characters and you run around only need one button, perfect kid game. All the mario games for the Gameboy Advance need an advanced degree in gameology to beat, their impossible for kids, she played Super Mario Advance 2 for five minutes, died like three times and wanted to play more sonic.
