Bleck Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Going back to play Sonic 1 and 2 - and you know what? They aren't very good. Music is still great, but... When you're going fast, you have almost no time to react to anything. When you aren't going fast, you're trying to run up a stupid hill and can't. Sonic 2 is less of a problem there since you've got the spin dash, but still. Both games feel really clunky and not nearly as fun as I remember them being. Only reason I even enjoyed Sonic 3 & Knuckles was because you can play as Knuckles, since you can climb over annoying shit and bash through walls. That's pretty ironic, given the SONIC FREIDNO GRR being tossed around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Well, the idea wasn't that you can go at crazy fast speeds at first, you were challenged to learn the level designs so you could zoom through them later. Speed was the trump card, gave the games more replay value when you completed them just to see how fast you could go through them. Making a game "with an emphasis on speed" isn't the idea, because learning where all the hazards were so you could dash through LATER was where the appeal of the games lay for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobaltstarfire Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 When you're going fast, you have almost no time to react to anything. I never found myself having problems with this myself, I have with games like rush, but the older ones? Not really. I think I more often died on obstacles that require me to stop and wait, cause stopping more than a moment always throws me off in platformers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumUltimA Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Going back to play Sonic 1 and 2 - and you know what? They aren't very good. Music is still great, but...When you're going fast, you have almost no time to react to anything. When you aren't going fast, you're trying to run up a stupid hill and can't. Sonic 2 is less of a problem there since you've got the spin dash, but still. Both games feel really clunky and not nearly as fun as I remember them being. Only reason I even enjoyed Sonic 3 & Knuckles was because you can play as Knuckles, since you can climb over annoying shit and bash through walls. That's pretty ironic, given the SONIC FREIDNO GRR being tossed around. That's because you are bad at video games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 That's because you are bad at video games. You shouldn't have to be good at a game to enjoy it. This is a major principle of game design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 about sonic 1 and 2 not being very good... i'm sorry but this is just too funny. both games are significant players in the history of games; sonic is in the pantheon of game icons. your notion is the same as pointing out that the 2010 ford mustang has superior auto design than a 1910 Ford Model T both DUH and irrelevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Less Ashamed Of Self Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm curious to see how they deal with the physics engine in general... it's notoriously sloppy. Sorry; for the die-hard sonic fans I meant to say it has a 'notorious learning curve'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocre Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I recently started a Sonic3&K playthrough and it felt like I had gone back in time. I was going through the levels just like I used to. I hope this new game has the same pace as the Genesis games. As for the zones themselves, I'd love to see Act transitions make a return (eg. Angel Island zone, the zone gets set on fire by that one blue robot and the fires continue to burn for Act 2) and even narrative Zone transitions (eg. Mushroom Hill to Flying Battery zone, it was simply Sonic jumping onto the ship). If they can pull little things like that off, I'll be impressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 your notion is the same as pointing out that the 2010 ford mustang has superior auto design than a 1910 Ford Model T bluh buh bllb blhub hlubuh anyways yeah Tomb Raider is also a significant player in the history of games but uh that doesn't really mean it isn't a shitty fucking game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 anyways yeah Tomb Raider is also a significant player in the history of games but uh that doesn't really mean it isn't a shitty fucking game you've missed the point completely. carry on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 did you even have a point or did you forget it in your earnest to one up someone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'd rather pay good money to have a good looking game that people enjoy playing than pay less money to have a terrible series that flounders around on the bottom of the video game barrel for almost fifteen years! Sprite work is so expensive that I'd say doing an HD version of Sonic would probably make it more like $100 a copy, if they priced it based on what they paid to create it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazygecko Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 They wouldn't exactly be animating a Disney feature film frame by frame. The few devs that are making sprite-based games on today's hardware seem to get along just fine not charging anywhere near $100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwaltzvald Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'd rather pay good money to have a good looking game that people enjoy playing than pay less money to have a terrible series that flounders around on the bottom of the video game barrel for almost fifteen years! Going back to this, what would one say if Sega suddenly decided to rehash the original quartet (sonic 1 - 3&K) by redoing everything; from creating true HD backgrounds, sprite work, keeping the original layouts of the stages BUT as an added bonus, made remixed stages of the originals (even remixing the special/emerald stages) once you've completed the game the first time as unlockables; changing the bosses on said remixed stages so they're not the originals you've fought before. Would you or any one, especially those that bought the originals over and over again as they were ported to newer systems, pay $60(360/PS3)/(Wiiware pricing?) for each game..? Unrelated to the issue but... It always bothered me that in Sonic & Knuckles where at the Doomsday Stage, Dr. Robotnik (He'll always have that name in my mind) had the large emerald as he's escaping but never uses its power to fight back Super Sonic considering Sonic has a timer in the form of the ring countdown. Sure he had missiles being launched at Sonic but that made shit worse for him. Why not use the emerald to complicate things and stall for time (better speed/stunning strength for the mech?) Would have made for a more challenging end for that game imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 did you even have a point or did you forget it in your earnest to one up someone don't troll me. my point was fairly clear: sonic 1's gameplay doesn't have to be very good for the game to have been a significant success to a great deal of gamers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Would you or any one, especially those that bought the originals over and over again as they were ported to newer systems, pay $60(360/PS3)/(Wiiware pricing?) for each game..? Well, I wouldn't since not only did I just finish saying how I think the first two weren't very good anyways but I'm also strictly against remakes/rehashes/resells. It always bothered me that in Sonic & Knuckles where at the Doomsday Stage, Dr. Robotnik (He'll always have that name in my mind) had the large emerald as he's escaping but never uses its power to fight back Super Sonic considering Sonic has a timer in the form of the ring countdown. Sure he had missiles being launched at Sonic but that made shit worse for him. Why not use the emerald to complicate things and stall for time (better speed/stunning strength for the mech?) Would have made for a more challenging end for that game imo. I was going to respond to this with 'robots can't go super' BUT THEN I REMEMBERED so yeah I have no idea. my point was fairly clear: sonic 1's gameplay doesn't have to be very good for the game to have been a significant success to a great deal of gamers. yeah that's great and all but uh seeing as how I wasn't commenting on how successful it was I think that's largely irrelevant don't troll me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 yeah that's great and all but uh seeing as how I wasn't commenting on how successful it was I think that's largely irrelevant like i said, nevermind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_NutS Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Going back to play Sonic 1 and 2 - and you know what? They aren't very good. Music is still great, but...When you're going fast, you have almost no time to react to anything. When you aren't going fast, you're trying to run up a stupid hill and can't. Sonic 2 is less of a problem there since you've got the spin dash, but still. Both games feel really clunky and not nearly as fun as I remember them being. Only reason I even enjoyed Sonic 3 & Knuckles was because you can play as Knuckles, since you can climb over annoying shit and bash through walls. That's pretty ironic, given the SONIC FREIDNO GRR being tossed around. You are completely missing the point about old sonic games. They weren't fun because you could sit down and roflpwn every level on the first try. Sonic games were about memorizing patterns, finding the best route, and beat the level as fast as you can through constant practice AND exploration. If you want a game that isn't like this, there are plenty around, but then if you want a game that isn't like this, then you don't want a true sonic game. Also, this doesn't mean in any way that the games are flawed or not fun, it means that they're not fun to you. edit: it's like calling bionic commando a flawed game because you can't jump, which is common among other platformers, or the classic ninja gaidens because they were hard as fuck, or battletoads because it was all about pattern memorizing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_NutS Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Sprite work is so expensive that I'd say doing an HD version of Sonic would probably make it more like $100 a copy, if they priced it based on what they paid to create it. uh.. WELL if that was the case then Vanillaware would be selling their games for a shitload of money, which they aren't. Not that I want sonic done in 2d HD, Im just fine with 2.5D, I love what has been done with bionic commando rearmed and new super mario bros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollgagh Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 there aren't enough HD 2D games though we need more of those I've been looking forward to HD 2D games since the PS2 launched but everyone hates 2D these days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 uh.. WELL if that was the case then Vanillaware would be selling their games for a shitload of money, which they aren't.Not that I want sonic done in 2d HD, Im just fine with 2.5D, I love what has been done with bionic commando rearmed and new super mario bros. Those titles aren't pure 2D, nor are they HD. The developers for BlazBlue and SSF2T HD Remix have both said how unbelievably time-consuming and expensive it is to produce HD sprites. Now factor in that Sonic would require exponentially more sprites than a fighting game given the size and scope of the levels. My point is that it's not "oh I'd pay $5 more for HD sprites", it's on a completely different scale entirely in terms of difficulty and cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobaltstarfire Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Just to put it in perspective, look at a sprite sheet from a 2d sonic game on the GBA. Look at all the sprites on it just for the characters to walk-run. Now imagine how many more drawings it will take to do that in HD, it would take many many many many more drawings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Just to put it in perspective, look at a sprite sheet from a 2d sonic game on the GBA. Look at all the sprites on it just for the characters to walk-run. Now imagine how many more drawings it will take to do that in HD, it would take many many many many more drawings. Right, and with a 3D model, that is basically your sprite sheet right there. You don't need to precisely copy every pose with slight differences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollgagh Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 fuck difficulty and cost I just want HD 2D why would HD 2D have to be sprites anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
José the Bronx Rican Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 We get a 2D sonic game and people still want to bitch to cry foul about Sonic needing to die. Sonic picked a heck of a time to start failing, just when the Internets blew up, read as "equal weight given to even the most ignorant, uneducated crackpot opinions." The backlash was slow and steady, and I saw it all building up ever since SA2 was released and Greg Sewart of EGM thought he could get away with a tiny blurb at the bottom of one page calling the original Sonic series "overrated." People became instant experts on game design and kept crying to "bring back 2D" or "give us roots" or something, and eventually people got tired of bashing the new stuff and inevitably started shitting on the classics. Sonic never deserved that. Games that everyone thought were terrible THEN are getting more respect NOW. So if this new title is "giving the fans exactly what they wanted," who's to blame if it fails? Not the fans, if they can help it; that's a guarantee. "Sonic 4" might suck to us when it's released, but if it was called a "fangame" the self-important Sonic pundits will almost certainly love it to death and start yelling, "see, Sega, THIS is how you do it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.