• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sonic P-06. What Sonic 2006 couldve and shouldve been

snapdragon

Member
"Sonic P-06 Is The Best Sonic Game Ever Made"


The adventure formula in my opinion is just straight-up superior to the boost formula, it has a higher skill ceiling, more freedom of control, and mechanics that allow for much more extensive and platform-heavy levels and it isn't as automated or linear. sonic 06 was basically Sonic Adventure 3 and had superior level design and use of characters (no longer having entire stages dedicated to characters who are either just not fun to play or less fun to play than the speed characters) than the 2 great but heavily flawed adventure games that it was based on, the game was fundamentally solid but technically and mechanically broken due to its rushed development cycle and mismanagement, sonic 06 is one of the greatest tragedies in the history of gaming as it ruined the reputation of a beloved mascot and forced sonic team to completely abandon a working formula in favor of more strict and linear ones like the storybook games and boost games.

I personally think the boost formula should be relegated to 2D/2.5 sonic rush or SXS act 2 style levels



 

Saber

Gold Member
Adventure formula sucks. It was a remainder of the time when Sonic went "cool and edgy" to try to differentiate himself from Mario. The game sucks, as the player didn't have much control of the character and the camera didn't help. Adventure 2 end up doing a worse work in this departament, with straight up linear running paths that constant spam dash pads.

Sonic 06 should never have existed. It was a wet dream from a Shadow fan fetish, going for the autistic serious tone of a cartoon protagonist game.

The boost formula, depite being linear was a hit on the right direction. What it needs was a mix of rails and transitions to 2D sections to make the stages less about boost, while providing chances for level design. Colors was the peak of boost formula, depite being a relativelly easier game. It present mix of boost parts and 2D sections with lots of plataforming, which is the primary thing about Sonic(not retarded dark stories and neither cool looking action). And this doesn't even compared to Rush. Rush is a very bad game, rellying way more on boost sections, bad plataforming and bad physics(and stupid notions of Sonic jumping and ending its spin attack for no reason). Rush is mediocre compared to recent boost games, not to mention it's soundtrack is annoying.
 
Last edited:

Geometric-Crusher

"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
Sonic 2006 was really bad man, for god's sake. The open world stages were disgusting and the speed gave me a headache, the fights with Silver were very broken and the game was very punishing. It's true there are stages from Sonic 2006 in Sonic X Shadows Generations but it's not the same thing.
The best formula is Shadow Generations without the 2D stages followed by the Sonic Dream Team formula.
 

Celcius

°Temp. member
I've never played Sonic 06 but I kinda just want to experience it at this point lol

The music at least is amazing
 

Taur007

Member
Adventure formula sucks. It was a remainder of the time when Sonic went "cool and edgy" to try to differentiate himself from Mario. The game sucks, as the player didn't have much control of the character and the camera didn't help. Adventure 2 end up doing a worse work in this departament, with straight up linear running paths that constant spam dash pads.

Sonic 06 should never have existed. It was a wet dream from a Shadow fan fetish, going for the autistic serious tone of a cartoon protagonist game.

The boost formula, depite being linear was a hit on the right direction. What it needs was a mix of rails and transitions to 2D sections to make the stages less about boost, while providing chances for level design. Colors was the peak of boost formula, depite being a relativelly easier game. It present mix of boost parts and 2D sections with lots of plataforming, which is the primary thing about Sonic(not retarded dark stories and neither cool looking action). And this doesn't even compared to Rush. Rush is a very bad game, rellying way more on boost sections, bad plataforming and bad physics(and stupid notions of Sonic jumping and ending its spin attack for no reason). Rush is mediocre compared to recent boost games, not to mention it's soundtrack is annoying.
SA2 is literally the best sonic game ever not even counting the chao garden
 
It's been a while since I've seen someone here acknowledge how good Sonic Rush was. Same goes for the other portable Sonic games which are completely overlooked not only by the fanbase but also by Sega themselves (where is the portables compilation game Sega?).

Also the Hideki Naganuma music added a ton to it, making it feel like a secret soundtrack to an unreleased Jet Set Radio 3.


 

Unknown?

Member
Why do sega people insist that all their failed shit was actually magical and amazing and better than the stuff people liked? Like, time to move on.
This puts it on a different engine and fixes most of the problems with the game though. Can't fix the story though.
 

Saber

Gold Member
Why do sega people insist that all their failed shit was actually magical and amazing and better than the stuff people liked? Like, time to move on.

Because cool little Johnny thinks Sonic Adventure 2 is the best game evah. And since Adventure 2 is where Iizuka little baby started, he loves to give more spotlight to him.
The problem of Sega is Sonic Team.
 
it tells me some shmuck spent a lot of time polishing a turd
thumbs-up-okay.gif
 

snapdragon

Member
History and everyone disagrees with you.
I really do not get these people


This dude stated that Colors with its dogshit 2d sections that are utterly outclassed by its DS counterpart and colors (wii) extremely linear and automatd 3d sections are better than stages like green forest and speed highway lmao

The sonic fan base doesn't agree on alot but criticisms for the adventure games isn't based around most of its speed stages level design but instead around poor button mapping, a bad camera, and unfun characters/playstyles that were put in the game solely to extend the playtime (basically every sonic team game from 1998 to 2010)

I do want to adress his comment directly but pointing out classic sonic fans unwilling to change is easy
 

snapdragon

Member
Already had dose of "history" with Sonic 06, which sold incredibly well. Too bad it didn't say anything about the quality of the game, but whatever makes people happy.
You're comparing the market performance of sonic 2006 to the fanbases and gaming community's generally positive view of sonic adventure 2

SA2 is a great but flawed game, it doesn't matter whether or not you like it, there were clearly redeeming qualities in the game which led to its critical and financial success (despite being initially released on 2 failed consoles)

The adventure formula has proven to work arguably better than the boost formula which is why it has taken so long (and thats with the heavy expansion of that gaming industry along with multiplatform releases) for any 3d sonic game to top the sales of A2 and A1
 
Last edited:

Saber

Gold Member
This dude stated that Colors with its dogshit 2d sections that are utterly outclassed by its DS counterpart and colors (wii) extremely linear and automatd 3d sections are better than stages like green forest and speed highway lmao

Colors execution, level design and direction is way better than Rush, not need to get touchy about it kid. I honestly can't tell if you're serious or have brain damage thinking about 06 having superior level design, I would suggest you tone down the laughing part.

SA2 is a great but flawed game, it doesn't matter whether or not you like it

SA2 has atrocious level design in alot os aspects, specially on the later stages of the game and most of treasure hunt stages. Me liking or not has not influence on this. If you like eating dirt, thats on you. Doesn't make the dirt any tasty.
 
Last edited:

snapdragon

Member
Colors execution, level design and direction is way better than Rush, not need to get touchy about it kid. I honestly can't tell if you're serious or have brain damage thinking about 06 having superior level design, I would suggest you tone down the laughing part.



SA2 has atrocious level design in alot os aspects, specially on the later stages of the game and most of treasure hunt stages. Me liking or not has not influence on this. If you like eating dirt, thats on you. Doesn't make the dirt any tasty.
1. How? Rush has some sections that completely break the momentum and turn it into a generic platformer with a tons of dimps classic bottomless pits. Rush Adventure and especially Colors DS fix a lot of these issues but in Colors on the Wii these issues are amplified x20, there is no speed or momentum-based platforming in Colors Wii's 2d levels, it literally turns the game into a Mario clone outside of the wisp abilities

even colors 3D levels/sections except for astroid coaster are a joke compared to almost every speed stage from Unleashed, SXS, and Generations.

2. I agree, the treasure-hunting stages are horrible and a few later speed stages especially Shadows are rough as well but SA2 has City Escape, Green Forest, Metal Harbor, Final Rush, Radical Highway, White Jungle, and Sky Rail as its good stages while only having a few bad speed stages like Crazy Gadget, Pyramid Cave and Final Chase.

"Me liking or not has not influence on this. If you like eating dirt, thats on you. Doesn't make the dirt any tasty."

Dirt as a food is universally disliked, Sonic Adventure 2 as a game is generally well-liked, and just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean it's a bad game or has no redeeming qualities that Sonic team shouldnt try to further improve/replicate. I personally couldn't stand Elden Ring with its garbage optimization, difficulty spike, and clunky combat but that doesn't make it an objectively bad game, its critical, financial success and following clearly indicate that fromsoftware got something right despite some people's criticisms of it.

like I stated before if the adventure games were able to financially and critically perform better than most 3d Sonic games despite being released on the fucking Dreamcast and Gamecube then they clearly did something right
 
Last edited:

Osaka_Boss

Member
Boost Formula still being a thing after all this years os a terrible indicator for the series.

A terrible gameplay pushed by Dimps and their s***** advance 3/rush that favor speed over anything else shouldve been relegated to select games, not Made into broad mainline game.

It even Works Fine in open world like Frontiers, but as main course? Let it die already.
 

snapdragon

Member
Boost Formula still being a thing after all this years os a terrible indicator for the series.

A terrible gameplay pushed by Dimps and their s***** advance 3/rush that favor speed over anything else shouldve been relegated to select games, not Made into broad mainline game.

It even Works Fine in open world like Frontiers, but as main course? Let it die already.
I just believe the 3D boost formula limits sonics gameplay and is just overall inferior to the adventure formula, I do not think it is bad at all. sonic team found a working formula and they managed to pump out some of the best games in the series with it. the boost gameplay as I stated should just be relegated to 2d games and spin-off 3d games due to its limitations.
 

SnapShot

Member
2D in 3D Sonic is one of the worst things that happened to the series, it was fine with Unleashed because at least they were short and few there but then you get to Sonic Colors where only 25% of the game is 3D and the whole rest of the game is shitty gimmicky 2D sections. Shadow Gens seems to have mostly gotten over this issue with the first Acts of each Zone being full 3D so maybe that's a sign that they are at least improving this.
 

SkylineRKR

Member
The Adventure formula kind of sucks. I never found it fun to explore the hub. I only like SA2 because it actually removed the hub and went for a more linear approach but with different characters to change the gameplay. I liked SA2 a ton, to my surprise I was hooked to the PS3 port about 10 years after I played it on Dreamcast. But a lot of this comes down the fact you have to get through some shit gameplay to get the goods. Still, I like it.

SA1 was good at launch, but showed its age real quick. Which perhaps wasn't strange as its in fact a 1998 Dreamcast game. 06 was just trash though the demo was fine. SA2 is the best of these 3, imo.
 

Geometric-Crusher

"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
I just believe the 3D boost formula limits sonics gameplay and is just overall inferior to the adventure formula, I do not think it is bad at all. sonic team found a working formula and they managed to pump out some of the best games in the series with it. the boost gameplay as I stated should just be relegated to 2d games and spin-off 3d games due to its limitations.
Explain better what adventure formula means. Do you suggest that Sonic stop running and be a game like Mario Odyssey?
 
Last edited:

Saber

Gold Member
1. How? Rush has some sections that completely break the momentum and turn it into a generic platformer with a tons of dimps classic bottomless pits. Rush Adventure and especially Colors DS fix a lot of these issues but in Colors on the Wii these issues are amplified x20, there is no speed or momentum-based platforming in Colors Wii's 2d levels, it literally turns the game into a Mario clone outside of the wisp abilities

even colors 3D levels/sections except for astroid coaster are a joke compared to almost every speed stage from Unleashed, SXS, and Generations.

2. I agree, the treasure-hunting stages are horrible and a few later speed stages especially Shadows are rough as well but SA2 has City Escape, Green Forest, Metal Harbor, Final Rush, Radical Highway, White Jungle, and Sky Rail as its good stages while only having a few bad speed stages like Crazy Gadget, Pyramid Cave and Final Chase.

"Me liking or not has not influence on this. If you like eating dirt, thats on you. Doesn't make the dirt any tasty."

Dirt as a food is universally disliked, Sonic Adventure 2 as a game is generally well-liked, and just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean it's a bad game or has no redeeming qualities that Sonic team shouldnt try to further improve/replicate. I personally couldn't stand Elden Ring with its garbage optimization, difficulty spike, and clunky combat but that doesn't make it an objectively bad game, its critical, financial success and following clearly indicate that fromsoftware got something right despite some people's criticisms of it.

like I stated before if the adventure games were able to financially and critically perform better than most 3d Sonic games despite being released on the fucking Dreamcast and Gamecube then they clearly did something right

Rush is straight up worse in the "boost to win department", with way more forced stop sections that requires you to beat enemies to progress and reliance on a plataform that doesn't work thanks to its terrible physics. Mania woops the shit out with better physics and plataforming thanks to a more healthy level design.
They did not something right. The reason for the port is because those games were strict to Dreamcast, a dying very expensive plataform that almost nobody had acess(unless you live in a bubble that only a few countries exist in the planet).
I'm one of them who pick up those games because I didn't have Dreamcast, not because they were great.

I honestly can not relate with someone who thinks 06 has potential while can't stand Elden Ring. Elden Ring is master piece globally liked, while Adventure 2 is a wetfart reminder of dumb adventure era.


Explain better what adventure formula means. Do you suggest that Sonic stop running and be a game like Mario Odyssey?

I don't think he can even explain.
In short Adventure style is more like a take where Sonic gameplay remain intact (running sections with plataforming) while he gots the support of other characters gameplay, which are not the same. Thats basically what Adventure formula means, Sonic main beef gameplay and other characters with different gameplays.
The funny thing is they did try a take on less running Sonic when they went with Lost World, which is more like a straight up copy of Mario but abit worse.
 
Last edited:

Unknown?

Member
Rush is straight up worse in the "boost to win department", with way more forced stop sections that requires you to beat enemies to progress and reliance on a plataform that doesn't work thanks to its terrible physics. Mania woops the shit out with better physics and plataforming thanks to a more healthy level design.
They did not something right. The reason for the port is because those games were strict to Dreamcast, a dying very expensive plataform that almost nobody had acess(unless you live in a bubble that only a few countries exist in the planet).
I'm one of them who pick up those games because I didn't have Dreamcast, not because they were great.

I honestly can not relate with someone who thinks 06 has potential while can't stand Elden Ring. Elden Ring is master piece globally liked, while Adventure 2 is a wetfart reminder of dumb adventure era.




I don't think he can even explain.
In short Adventure style is more like a take where Sonic gameplay remain intact (running sections with plataforming) while he gots the support of other characters gameplay, which are not the same. Thats basically what Adventure formula means, Sonic main beef gameplay and other characters with different gameplays.
The funny thing is they did try a take on less running Sonic when they went with Lost World, which more like a straight up copy of Mario but abit worse.
Sorry bro, SA2 is globally liked.
 

Osaka_Boss

Member
Whenever someone criticizes Adventure era, they never bring up how good it is to control Sonic, by either talking about the camera or diverting to mentioning the other characters. You know most people think about Sonic stages, level design and physics beyond the whole experience when they talk foundly about this era, not only Adventure 1 and 2, but also Heroes and Shadow the hedgehog. Like, that Sonic that sometimes will have fixed camera, and others following you, with good platformaing and no-brain-dead routine (or sonic becoming a tank if you get something wrong and stop it, making you need to smash boost button?). In regards to the other characters are there basically as bonus to beef up the content of the game, which these days could be solved with more bonus and varied stages for Sonic where speed/platform wasnt the issue. In regards to the camera, get good I guess?

In all fairness, criticizing Adventure era is essentially criticizing 3d platforming games as a whole, and it is something that is ridiculous. Some people can't accept that Sonic had a good transition to 3D to this day. These Unleashed-like games from the Dimps-core have their value, but they are a downgrade in many aspects to 3d space controling, exploration (which, surprise, were part of Sonic 2D games, and not much in Advance 3/Rush... coincidence?).

It still baffles me a rushed project like 06 was enough for some people to damn a whole generation of games, when it was obvious 06 was under a huge development hell. Honestly, I don't like it, even if it were mechanically correct. Most stages are boring, a lot of automatized section placements that had no place before and the story/theme sucks. But these are demerits to the game itself.
 

DanielG165

Member
It’s still Sonic 06 at its core, and the bones of that game are just inherently problematic. It’s WAY better than vanilla 06, significantly so, but unless ChaosX changes the internal structure of how the game plays, P-06 will always feel a little janky, despite the immense amount of refinements and improvements.
 
Top Bottom