Support NeoGAF

[BattleScar]

This is nothing more than complete and utter Fanboy nonsense. I was actually waiting for this comment to pop up because it's almost inevitablee. "YoU jUsT dOn'T uNdErsTand tHe dEsIgn oF cLasSsic SOniC gAmEs". Mate, take a hike. It's a 2D platformer from the early 90's, there's nothing to grasp or difficult to understand here. "Rolling downhill" is not the solution to the issues mentioned, not even by a long shot. Rolling downhill is only beneficial in certain areas and while it protects you against SOME enemies, it doesn't protect against all of them and doesn't protect you against spikes, falls, or springs all which become near impossible to react to unless you already know they're there.

Falls?
I could probably count on the fingers of 2 hands the total number of levels with bottomless pits in Sonic 1, 2, 3 & Knuckles and CD combined.

You can argue springs, enemies and spikes all you like. But you're rarely punished by going fast with bottomless pits. That's just not how the games are designed.

Reacting to obstacles is part and parcel of platformers. Need I mention airship levels in SMB3 again.

 

[SomeGit]

This is nothing more than complete and utter Fanboy nonsense. I was actually waiting for this comment to pop up because it's almost inevitablee. "YoU jUsT dOn'T uNdErsTand tHe dEsIgn oF cLasSsic SOniC gAmEs". Mate, take a hike. It's a 2D platformer from the early 90's, there's nothing to grasp or difficult to understand here. "Rolling downhill" is not the solution to the issues mentioned, not even by a long shot. Rolling downhill is only beneficial in certain areas and while it protects you against SOME enemies, it doesn't protect against all of them and doesn't protect you against spikes, falls, or springs all which become near impossible to react to unless you already know they're there.

Here are the level maps for Sonic 2. https://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_the_Hedgehog_2_(16-bit)/Maps

Point out to me the instance where you have a downhill slope with any enemy that cannot be damaged by rolling, spikes or bottomless pits. Here's a hint you won't find them.
At most you'll find a spring, which is at most annoying, but it doesn't actually punish you or something like this:

Notice how the game stops you, by either placing a rock or sometimes a vertical set of spikes, never horizontal. Almost as if the game had some kind of thought put into it, nah it must have just been a collective fever dream where the game was never good.

You can call it utter fanboy nonsense all you want, you can mix upper case and lower case all you want, but yes you don't understand the design of classic sonic games. Apparently a early 90s 2D platformer is too difficult for you to grasp.

I don't understand how a game that has a moveset built around fast and easy way to deposing of enemies, you can either roll or jump and you damage enemies in every direction instead of just down like most platformers, extremely forgiving health system where you only need 1 collectible to keep going, level design that goes out of its way to hint you and even stopping you when you have upcoming hazards or when you can thread free and minimal bottomless pits, is in any way at odds with being played fast or does, in any way shape or form, punishes you for it.

 

[Honey Bunny]

Is this a cope for Sonic fans getting unsure of themselves? Nobody who thinks that already will watch a fucking video essay about it lmao

 

[WolfusFh]

No, Sorry. Sonic was never good.

The games are flawed on a fundamental level. Sonic was a mascot character that had a game build around it rather than the other way around. The result is a character with a moveset that is at odds with the actual level design of the game. Sonics moveset is designed specifically to go fast. The character is downright unresponsive and not fun to play when he doesn't go fast. This aspect is so fundamental to the character that it is baked into his very design. Sonic downright looks strange when he's walking slow in both his old design and his new design. He is simply meant to go fast, like he was advertised.

This is objectively false. Anyone that has ever properly analysed a classic Sonic game knows that you are never punished for going fast in the level design, and Sonic's control is responsible when moving in high and slow speeds. The levels are designed to reward players that have skill and can keep Sonic's momentum. These players can access faster routes with more rings and itens. At the same time, the slow paths are there so that the players aren't overly punished for making mistakes or being unable to keep Sonic's momentum. This is proven by the structure of the levels and through gameplay.

The "1 hour 30 minutes "I grew up with Sonic when I was 6 and I loved it" video" is one of the many examples that prove that. But there are much shorter videos from fans and non-fans of the franchise analysing the level design.

Your comment, however, is proof that you lack basic understanding of the games you're talking about.

And before you start talking nonsense about "nostalgia" or whatever, the only Sonic game I played as a kid was sonic riders. I got into the series in 2020, when I was 23 yrs old.

 

[Rykan]

This is objectively false. Anyone that has ever properly analysed a classic Sonic game knows that you are never punished for going fast in the level design,

This is so hilariously false and incorrect that I'm not even willing to consider the rest of your post, sorry.

 

[WolfusFh]

This is so hilariously false and incorrect that I'm not even willing to consider the rest of your post, sorry.

Well, that's expected from people with garbage argumentation and lack of knowledge about the subject.

You do the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and going "lalala". That's why you ignore people's points, including the points in the video that debunk your shitty arguments the level design.

 

[cireza]

No, Sorry. Sonic was never good.

The games are flawed on a fundamental level. Sonic was a mascot character that had a game build around it rather than the other way around. The result is a character with a moveset that is at odds with the actual level design of the game. Sonics moveset is designed specifically to go fast. The character is downright unresponsive and not fun to play when he doesn't go fast. This aspect is so fundamental to the character that it is baked into his very design. Sonic downright looks strange when he's walking slow in both his old design and his new design. He is simply meant to go fast, like he was advertised.

Yet it's almost as if the design for the character and the level design were two different teams with no idea what the other team was doing. Sonic levels are designed to be played slowly and the game actively punishes you for going fast. But Sonic's moveset isn't designed to do that and it has led to the same issue that has manifested itself in different forms through out the series. The whole "Momentum" argument is a bunch of BS by Sonic fans trying to defend bad level design. You can't build momentum if you don't know whats coming up ahead, and the only way to know that is by beating the game and playing it again and again to memorize every level. Having to beat a game before you can start playing it "The way it was meant to be played" is terrible game design.

In the old Sonic Games, 1,2 & 3, there is the clear clash between character movement and leveldesign that is at odds with each other. In some other series, Like Sonic Rush, the game goes all in on the speed aspect of the character and adjusts the level accordingly. Yet now the leveldesign has been so oversimplified that the games become a hold right to win game. There has never been a clear concept of what a 3D Sonic game should look like and they are all a mess because of it. It has appears to try to replicate the 2D sonic experience into 3D but it has never worked and even the best 3D Sonic game struggles to reach mediocrity. Mario understoon that 3D games are fundamentally different than 2D ones. This is why they never tried to replicate 2D Mario into 3D, rather they chose to reinvent Mario for 3D. this is why 3D mario plays nothing like 2D Mario.

That's not to say that the franchise is completely without merit. The character design is fantastic, both in its old design and its new design. The old games especially looked fantastic with vibrant worlds and the original 2 sidecharacters are great. Fantastic villain too.

The games legacy are its characters which is why the Sonic TV show was much better than the games and why people are far more excited for the new Sonic Movie than whatever the fuck Sonic Frontiers is supposed to be.

The Games were never that good and no 1 hour 30 minutes "I grew up with Sonic when I was 6 and I loved it" video is going to change that.

I wonder if it is even possible to be more wrong than you.

Also read the nonsense in your following posts. You have no clue about why Sonic games are good, and your complaints demonstrate it. If you don't enjoy Sonic games for whatever reason, that's fine. It certainly doesn't make the games bad or unplayable or whatever. I think 3D Mario games are shit overall, with the exception of 3D Land/World which were okay, not great. I am not making up stuff to try to feel better.

Sonic games on MegaDrive where cleverly designed, and Sonic 3 & Knuckles is particularly great in terms of level design. These games where never about going fast all the time, they involve a ton of platforming and exploration. Your complaints are the usual complaints "this is Sonic I gotta go fast I hold right but I don't win Sonic games suck". Maybe there is more into it.

Controls were perfectly fine and super responsive. There is a physics engine in Sonic games, it is meant to be used to achieve what you want to do. It is not like the simplistic Mario physics from SMW or SMB3.

Sonic Rush was a new take on the gameplay, it was meant to go fast this time, and build up score using tricks. It was a lot of fun. Sonic games often try new things and this what keeps the series fresh to this day. 3D games are the same, and you can be sure that Frontiers will bring novelty to the table as well.

As for the fact that Sonic never found its 3D formula, this is again some nice bullshit. The 3D formula that was by far the most used is the one introduced with the Hedgehog Engine in Sonic Unleashed (which clearly finds its roots in Sonic Adventure 2), and it was present in almost every Sonic game afterwards. Sonic Team simply doesn't feel constrained to this and do different things each time, not making direct sequels, but the overall feel and level-design is present every time. This is like saying Mario never found its 3D formula because M64 is different from Sunshine which is different from Galaxy which is different from 3D World which is different from Odyssey. No shit. All different games.

 

[nkarafo]

You need to look up what the term Nostalgia means because it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Ofc, i knew you don't really have an argument

 

[WolfusFh]

Ofc, i knew you don't really have an argument

This dumbass couldn't present an argument even if you wrote it for him. These videos basically debunk his "points" completely. And his "points" are just just overused repeated garbage made by people that have barely played the games.





Hell, there's even a video showing that an A.I can learn how to play the game due to the mechanics and level design.



See this, Rykan ? It's called evidence. Maybe you should learn about it instead of wasting people's time.

 

[Rykan]

Here are the level maps for Sonic 2. https://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_the_Hedgehog_2_(16-bit)/Maps

Point out to me the instance where you have a downhill slope with any enemy that cannot be damaged by rolling, spikes or bottomless pits. Here's a hint you won't find them.
At most you'll find a spring, which is at most annoying, but it doesn't actually punish you or something like this:

So I actually booted up Sonic 2 again for this specific reason and played the first 4 levels (emerald zone 1 + 2 and Chemical hillzone) and while playing these four levels, two things become apparant. The first is that your previous claim that the player in the video "Wasn't playing properly and was going slow because he didn't ball going down slopes" is complete nonsense. In the vast majority of cases, the game actually "forces" sonic to slow down almost instantly after going down a slope. In fact, the game forces you to go slow down for a lot of sections like jumping on blocks, waiting for platforms or for breaking parts so you can enter pipes.

Second is that the game does actually punishes you. Emerald Hillzone act 2 has 2 clear instances. The first is near the large waterfull with the 1up. Its right after the double looping. The map shows that there are two vertical spikes on the floor. They are vertical, but they actually go up and down. When you go at full speed, you can get hit by them with no way to avoid them (Unless you know its already there). Whether you get hit by them or not is random. I've tried that section twice (I own the PC version of Sonic 2 and it has a rewind feature) and got hit the first time, passed the 2nd time without being hit. Botht times were at full speed. Something similar happens with the downhill slope with the red monkey a little bit further up. This spike, like the previous examples, also go up and down and has spikes above it too to discourage you from jumping over it. If you go at full speed, whether you get hit by it seems to be random...Unless you know its already there.

Chemical Plant Zone has less of these issues, aside from the falling blue blobs which damage Sonic and the spring at the start of the first slope which literally servers no reason to be there. The reason why Chemical Plant Zone has less of these issues is because CPZ has two modes: Very slow or autopilot.

Notice how the game stops you, by either placing a rock or sometimes a vertical set of spikes, never horizontal. Almost as if the game had some kind of thought put into it, nah it must have just been a collective fever dream where the game was never good.

You can call it utter fanboy nonsense all you want, you can mix upper case and lower case all you want, but yes you don't understand the design of classic sonic games. Apparently a early 90s 2D platformer is too difficult for you to grasp.

Mate, I do understand the design of "classic" sonic games. Everyone understands the design of "Classic" sonic games. These are platform games made for kids.

I don't understand how a game that has a moveset built around fast and easy way to deposing of enemies, you can either roll or jump and you damage enemies in every direction instead of just down like most platformers, extremely forgiving health system where you only need 1 collectible to keep going, level design that goes out of its way to hint you and even stopping you when you have upcoming hazards or when you can thread free and minimal bottomless pits, is in any way at odds with being played fast or does, in any way shape or form, punishes you for it.

Because you nitpick, and that's why you don't understand it. I showed you a video of a typical playthrough of Sonic 2 and your only take from it was "Well he wasn't going into a ball during some downslopes so obviously he has no idea how to play the game". The fact is, most slopes either punish you or "force" you to slowdown almost right after the slope (I put it in quotation marks because you can avoid being slowed down IF you already know whats coming) but the slopes are only a small part of the game. The game allows you to go fast without slopes as well, but if you do that, you will most likely walk into enemies, spikes or other hazzards. Again, a typical playthrough of a Sonic game goes fairly slow unless you play the game several times and memorize the layout. I think that's bad design.

I wonder if it is even possible to be more wrong than you.

Well it appears that you can, as you're about to demonstrate.

Also read the nonsense in your following posts. You have no clue about why Sonic games are good, and your complaints demonstrate it. If you don't enjoy Sonic games for whatever reason, that's fine. It certainly doesn't make the games bad or unplayable or whatever. I think 3D Mario games are shit overall, with the exception of 3D Land/World which were okay, not great. I am not making up stuff to try to feel better.

I didn't say the games were bad. Well most of them, anyway. I said they were average to mediocre in quality.

Sonic games on MegaDrive where cleverly designed, and Sonic 3 & Knuckles is particularly great in terms of level design. These games where never about going fast all the time, they involve a ton of platforming and exploration. Your complaints are the usual complaints "this is Sonic I gotta go fast I hold right but I don't win Sonic games suck". Maybe there is more into it.

Controls were perfectly fine and super responsive. There is a physics engine in Sonic games, it is meant to be used to achieve what you want to do. It is not like the simplistic Mario physics from SMW or SMB3.

And that's where you're right. And also very wrong. You're right in the sense that Sonic isn't actually about going fast due to the level design. Thats why most Sonic playthroughs are actually fairly slow besides a few autopilot sections here and there. The character, however, is absolutely designed to go fast and his controls are certainly not "Perfectly fine" or "Super responsive" when hes not going fast. His jumping ability is both imprecise and Sonic is slow to respond when hes building momentum. But lets entertain your way of throught for a moment. Lets say, for the sake of argument, that the controls aren't bad. As you yourself have admitted, Sonic isn't about going fast. So then what does Sonic actually have going for it? He doesn't have an interesting moveset. There are no power ups in most of the games. He can jump on top of enemies or roll into a ball in some instances..speaking of which, the enemies have nothing special going on and aren't interesting. The boss fights are terrible and the games aren't very long either. So then what remains? Outside of some interesting branching paths level design, all that you're left with is a mediocre platformer who's entire early success is based on its marketing campaign.

Sonic Rush was a new take on the gameplay, it was meant to go fast this time, and build up score using tricks. It was a lot of fun. Sonic games often try new things and this what keeps the series fresh to this day. 3D games are the same, and you can be sure that Frontiers will bring novelty to the table as well.

Okay I will certainly give you that, The franchise is not afraid to try new things.

As for the fact that Sonic never found its 3D formula, this is again some nice bullshit. The 3D formula that was by far the most used is the one introduced with the Hedgehog Engine in Sonic Unleashed (which clearly finds its roots in Sonic Adventure 2), and it was present in almost every Sonic game afterwards. Sonic Team simply doesn't feel constrained to this and do different things each time, not making direct sequels, but the overall feel and level-design is present every time. This is like saying Mario never found its 3D formula because M64 is different from Sunshine which is different from Galaxy which is different from 3D World which is different from Odyssey. No shit. All different games.

When I say that it never found its 3D formula, I meant that it never found a 3D formula that works. Sonic 3D games range from terrible (Most Sonic 3D games fall into this category) to ehh...alright. There are countless 3D Platform franchises that are much, much better than Sonic. I am very curious what they plan to do with Frontiers.

With all of that said, having a debate with 2 - 3 people at the same time is proving to be too much work, so I'm going to leave it at this. I'm sure no minds were changed, mine certainly has not, but I've said my piece as far as Sonic is concerned: Fantastic Character Design, Great visuals and music that accompany farily mediocre to average games. That will be all, dear gentlemen.

 

[WolfusFh]

So I actually booted up Sonic 2 again for this specific reason and played the first 4 levels (emerald zone 1 + 2 and Chemical hillzone) and while playing these four levels, two things become apparant. The first is that your previous claim that the player in the video "Wasn't playing properly and was going slow because he didn't ball going down slopes" is complete nonsense. In the vast majority of cases, the game actually "forces" sonic to slow down almost instantly after going down a slope. In fact, the game forces you to go slow down for a lot of sections like jumping on blocks, waiting for platforms or for breaking parts so you can enter pipes.

False. Not only does the videos I provided show evidence against that, but speedruns also show that with skill, one can easily overcome most challenges in the level while maintaining speed, save for a few sections.
Being slowed down in most situations is an issue that appears due to the lack of skill of the player, and reaction time is part of that skill.

Second is that the game does actually punishes you. Emerald Hillzone act 2 has 2 clear instances. The first is near the large waterfull with the 1up. Its right after the double looping. The map shows that there are two vertical spikes on the floor. They are vertical, but they actually go up and down. When you go at full speed, you can get hit by them with no way to avoid them (Unless you know its already there).

Skill and reaction time. .

.Again, a typical playthrough of a Sonic game goes fairly slow unless you play the game several times and memorize the layout. I think that's bad design.

That's false, unless you're talking about people with very slow learning curve that are playing the franchise for the first time.
Also, trial and error to incentive multiple playthroughs is not a bad thing. You don't die in most of the sections you refer to, you only slow down for a brief period of time. People can replay the levels for faster times and can train their skills and reaction time. That's intentional, and it's not bad design at all. You might not enjoy it, a lot of people don't. But it's not bad, it's just not meant for them.

Games that are praised to high heavens have these elements. Silent hill and Dark souls come to mind as examples.

That's why most Sonic playthroughs are actually fairly slow besides a few autopilot sections here and there. The character, however, is absolutely designed to go fast and his controls are certainly not "Perfectly fine" or "Super responsive" when hes not going fast.

All false, proven by video evidence shown in previous comments.

With all of that said, having a debate with 2 - 3 people at the same time is proving to be too much work, so I'm going to leave it at this. I'm sure no minds were changed, mine certainly has not, but I've said my piece as far as Sonic is concerned: Fantastic Character Design, Great visuals and music that accompany farily mediocre to average games. That will be all, dear gentlemen.

Translation: You can only repeat the same tired garbage arguments, and now you're running away because people are providing objective evidence against your claims.

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

The whole premise of Sonic never made sense imo. Go blazing fast through the levels, actually don't, go look for secrets, but do it fast like, yea . . . .

 

[WolfusFh]

The whole premise of Sonic never made sense imo. Go blazing fast through the levels, actually don't, go look for secrets, but do it fast like, yea . . . .

That's false. The game rewards skilled players that can maintain their momentum with access to shorter and better routes in the level. These routes lead to items as well as paths to the end of the level.

A better understanding of the design of the game before claiming it "doesn't make sense" is a good idea.

 

[manfestival]

Guys, let's let this thread die so we can go back to posting the "sonic was never good" memes.

 

[SomeGit]

So I actually booted up Sonic 2 again for this specific reason and played the first 4 levels (emerald zone 1 + 2 and Chemical hillzone) and while playing these four levels, two things become apparant. The first is that your previous claim that the player in the video "Wasn't playing properly and was going slow because he didn't ball going down slopes" is complete nonsense. In the vast majority of cases, the game actually "forces" sonic to slow down almost instantly after going down a slope. In fact, the game forces you to go slow down for a lot of sections like jumping on blocks, waiting for platforms or for breaking parts so you can enter pipes.

It forces you to slow down when you are going into a slower section, it's a red flag to thread caution in this part. When it's time for a faster section, it frees you up.
So you do understand that the level design clues you in. I though you were saying that the game punishes you for going fast without any indication, but now there are indications... And no "forcing" you to stop or slow down isn't punishment, it's helping the player.

Second is that the game does actually punishes you. Emerald Hillzone act 2 has 2 clear instances. The first is near the large waterfull with the 1up. Its right after the double looping. The map shows that there are two vertical spikes on the floor. They are vertical, but they actually go up and down. When you go at full speed, you can get hit by them with no way to avoid them (Unless you know its already there).

Whether you get hit by them or not is random. I've tried that section twice (I own the PC version of Sonic 2 and it has a rewind feature) and got hit the first time, passed the 2nd time without being hit. Botht times were at full speed.

You mean this one?



Oh man that sure is unavoidable at full speed. And yes, they always trigger after you passed them at full speed.

Something similar happens with the downhill slope with the red monkey a little bit further up. This spike, like the previous examples, also go up and down and has spikes above it too to discourage you from jumping over it. If you go at full speed, whether you get hit by it seems to be random...Unless you know its already there.

This one I'm hesitant to agree, since I can see how you it may happen. But for the life of me I can't replicate it and I attempted it twice (well three times I didn't remember what part of the level you were talking about so I had to backtrack). In all instances I was stopped and the spike triggered after, even by approaching it differently.



Regardless the level tries to stop you, it may fail, but that's hardly recurrent or even common.

Chemical Plant Zone has less of these issues, aside from the falling blue blobs which damage Sonic

And are always hinted before hand, the sound play ahead so you know that they are there. When you first encounter them the ramp shoots you upwards so you have time to process it.

and the spring at the start of the first slope which literally servers no reason to be there.

It send you to the slower path, the game gives you plenty of time to abort by jumping or you can just continue on your way.

The reason why Chemical Plant Zone has less of these issues is because CPZ has two modes: Very slow or autopilot.

That's what most classic Sonic games are designed around, some more obvious some less, but they always have fast and slow zone. I think you are starting to get it, even though you don't want to admit.
The point is that the level design, clues you in on what to do. You don't have to inch along every time like the video you posted or what you are implying.

Mate, I do understand the design of "classic" sonic games. Everyone understands the design of "Classic" sonic games. These are platform games made for kids.

You can minimize all you want, but no you don't or you're being intellectually dishonest. The target audience is irrelevant, the designers were still adults.

Because you nitpick, and that's why you don't understand it. I showed you a video of a typical playthrough of Sonic 2 and your only take from it was "Well he wasn't going into a ball during some downslopes so obviously he has no idea how to play the game". The fact is, most slopes either punish you or "force" you to slowdown almost right after the slope (I put it in quotation marks because you can avoid being slowed down IF you already know whats coming) but the slopes are only a small part of the game. The game allows you to go fast without slopes as well, but if you do that, you will most likely walk into enemies, spikes or other hazzards. Again, a typical playthrough of a Sonic game goes fairly slow unless you play the game several times and memorize the layout. I think that's bad design.

Yes, if he is not rolling down slopes he don't know how to play the game. It's sign that he can't read the level design, which gives you plenty of indication on when to thread carefully and when you speed mindlessly.
It's not nitpicking it's a sign that the guy is going slowly because he doesn't know when to do so, or when not. But the level design keeps telling you that, you don't need to memorize every levels, my first Mania playthrough I didn't have to do what the guy in that video had to, and I had 0 clue about the levels outside some small set pieces that Mania recycles.

 

[SumJester]

Anyone who unironically post these memes are on the same level of your usual "video game journos", these came from IGN for a reason. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Those who even dare to post their gameplay of the 2d classics play as one too.

So stale that it has the same energy as a middle age woman posting minion macros in facebook at this point.

 

[Rykan]

Just wanted to leave this excellent video here, since I know how much you all like videos (Can't blame you, watching videos about Sonic is way more fun than actually playing these games)


It's an excellent overview on how these games do punish you for going fast and how the very design of these games are fundamentally flawed.

This guy also has a rather nice video about the subject, lacks production values though but ehh. Still gets his point across.


Bottom line is that the whole "Sonic is meant to go fast and the game doesn't punish you for it" is complete nonsense.

 

[WolfusFh]

Just wanted to leave this excellent video here, since I know how much you all like videos (Can't blame you, watching videos about Sonic is way more fun than actually playing these games)


It's an excellent overview on how these games do punish you for going fast and how the very design of these games are fundamentally flawed.

This guy also has a rather nice video about the subject, lacks production values though but ehh. Still gets his point across.


Bottom line is that the whole "Sonic is meant to go fast and the game doesn't punish you for it" is complete nonsense.

Last video has been debunked for quite a while now.
You should either address people's point or stop posting.

 

[cireza]

And that's where you're right. And also very wrong. You're right in the sense that Sonic isn't actually about going fast due to the level design. Thats why most Sonic playthroughs are actually fairly slow besides a few autopilot sections here and there. The character, however, is absolutely designed to go fast and his controls are certainly not "Perfectly fine" or "Super responsive" when hes not going fast. His jumping ability is both imprecise and Sonic is slow to respond when hes building momentum. But lets entertain your way of throught for a moment. Lets say, for the sake of argument, that the controls aren't bad. As you yourself have admitted, Sonic isn't about going fast. So then what does Sonic actually have going for it? He doesn't have an interesting moveset. There are no power ups in most of the games. He can jump on top of enemies or roll into a ball in some instances..speaking of which, the enemies have nothing special going on and aren't interesting. The boss fights are terrible and the games aren't very long either. So then what remains? Outside of some interesting branching paths level design, all that you're left with is a mediocre platformer who's entire early success is based on its marketing campaign.

This entire quote is pretty much disinformation and/or blatant lies.

Jumping in 2D Sonic games is super precise, that's a simple fact.

I don't know what problems you have with his "moveset" but this looks like childish nonsense. Sonic has very subtle movement features actually, as everything is buillt around gaining momentum when required, and jumping while taking into account the curves of the floor. Then you have the three shields that add variety in Sonic 3 & Knuckles. And finally, you have Tails and Knuckles with their own set of skills (flying, gliding, climbing, destroying walls).

Many boss fights are quite great and epic.

Never seen someone so salty about a series.

Sonic 3D games range from terrible (Most Sonic 3D games fall into this category) to ehh...alright.

This is what we call a personal opinion. I have played several 3D Sonic games that are fantastic and a lot of fun. And obviously, seeing how successful the series still is today, I am not the only who thinks this.

With all of that said, having a debate with 2 - 3 people at the same time is proving to be too much work, so I'm going to leave it at this. I'm sure no minds were changed, mine certainly has not

That's definitely the right thing to do. When everybody comes at you explaining how wrong you are, never ever give it a second thought and believe you could actually be wrong.

 

[aygomyownroad]

Sonic was the first game I got with my first console (Megadrive (or Genesis).

Sonic, Sonic 2, Sonic 3 & Knuckles, Sonic Mania are all quality games.
Sonic Spinball was quite enjoyable.
Sonic R had the best soundtrack.

The rest (outside of the go kart games which I haven't played) have been poor at best.

 

[Whitecrow]

Sonic Adventure had an amazing story and incredible levels, and the only problem it had was the filler characters.

Adventure 2 had some great level design and OST too. I cant remember ther story at all.

Sonic Heroes had incredible charm, with characters chatting during gameplay, amazing ost, and godly level design, with controls, story and filler characters being the weak points.

You could always find something to love in 3D sonic games, unless you are a hater that gives the game a 0 because one thing disappointed you.

 

[Rykan]

Last video has been debunked for quite a while now.
You should either address people's point or stop posting.

It hasn't been "debunked", Sorry. The irony of you completely ignoring the first video, after accussing me of "ignoring evidence", is not lost on me.

There is literally no point in adressings people points because it just become a cycle of the same arguments over and over again. You, for some inexplicable reason, think videos about Sonic Aventure 2 and Sonic Mania, which are released long after "classic sonic games" came out is "evidence" to prove your point. One can only wonder why you thought an AI playing Sonic was in any way relevant. I'll start adressing your points when you can actually provide something that is relevant to the discussion and when you can actually control yourself and refrain from personal insults.

SomeGit doesn't know what points he wants to make. He wants to dismiss an entire typical playthrough of Sonic 2 because the player "Doesn't always roll into a ball going slopes" and that's why the player goes slow, and then further down acknowledges that the game actually slows down the player almost instantly after most slopes anyway. The rest is just the same typical trope of Sonic fans: "You just don't understand the complex design of an early 90's platformer made for kids! You just don't get it!"

Cireza doesn't actually have any points to make and just uses vague phrases like "This is great! This is Amazing! This is fantastic!" and is so far gone that he actually thinks Sonic 3D games are fantastic.

 

[TheGodfather07]

I never actually gave sonic a chance. Was a Nintendo kid and sonic just looked lame in comparison to super mario. Going from super mario world to sonic was a downgrade. That and the fact that I never owned any Sega consoles. I used to play it over at my cousins house.

 

[WolfusFh]

It hasn't been "debunked", Sorry.

It has. You just refuse to look at any rebuttals, as you have consistently done throughout this entire discussion.

There is literally no point in adressings people points because it just become a cycle of the same arguments over and over again.

The one who has done that is you. You repeated your arguments, linked to videos that repeat your superficial nonsensical arguments, and refused to look into any evidence other people have provided.

You, for some inexplicable reason, think videos about Sonic Aventure 2 and Sonic Mania, which are released long after "classic sonic games" came out is "evidence" to prove your point.

Because the videos talk about the level design, including the classics. The videos show how the levels are structured in the way people here have been talking about. Thus being objective evidence, regardless of your inability to understand it.

One can only wonder why you thought an AI playing Sonic was in any way relevant.

Perhaps if you had any resemblance of intelligence, or if you'd seen the video, you'd see that the A.I is able to improve it's performance in the game due to the structure of the levels. If they did truly "punish the player for going fast", the A.I would most likely not converge to faster movement, but it does. And it's able to replicate what it has learned in other levels.

This is a strong evidence, since it gets rid of the subjective human parameter. But of course someone as irrational as you wouldn't be able to grasp this concept.

l start adressing your points when you can actually provide something that is relevant to the discussion and when you can actually control yourself and refrain from personal insults.

I'll start "refraing from personal insults" when you stop strawmaning and ignoring counter arguments or evidence against your claims. For now, you deserve every insult for your lack of intelligence.

 

[Rykan]

The one who has done that is you.

Because that's what a discussion about something as simplistic as a 2D platformer like Sonic eventually disolves into. There just isn't that much room for discussion because these games are so simple.

Because the videos talk about the level design, including the classics. The videos show how the levels are structured in the way people here have been talking about. Thus being objective evidence, regardless of your inability to understand it.

As long as these videos don't specifically talk about issues such as enemy placement, trap placement and reaction time required on a first playthrough, then the video does not prove your point in any way or form.

Perhaps if you had any resemblance of intelligence, or if you'd seen the video, you'd see that the A.I is able to improve it's performance in the game due to the structure of the levels. If they did truly "punish the player for going fast", the A.I would most likely not converge to faster movement, but it does. And it's able to replicate what it has learned in other levels.

This is a strong evidence, since it gets rid of the subjective human parameter. But of course someone as irrational as you wouldn't be able to grasp this concept.

I'll start "refraing from personal insults" when you stop strawmaning and ignoring counter arguments or evidence against your claims. For now, you deserve every insult for your lack of intelligence.

Okay since you want to drag this down to a mud slinging contest: You are a moron. The reason why Sonic games are to be played slowly in a first play through (And most likely first couple of playthrough) is because of typical human reaction time to oncoming obstacles that appear in the screen. As shown in the first video that I've posted that you dismissed for no reason, the reaction time for sonic moving at full speed (without boosts or momentum from loops/ledges) into an oncoming enemy as it comes into screen is 8 frames, or about a quarter of a second.

While training an AI to complete a video game level comes with all sorts of challenges, it obviously isn't limited by human reaction time. DeepMind AI can literally defeat Starcraft 2 professional players. How the fuck is any of this relevant to how a human being experiences the game? Out of all the possible "Counterarguments" you could come up with, this is by far the dumbest one and you should absolutely be ashamed of yourself for even bringing this up.

 

[WolfusFh]

Because that's what a discussion about something as simplistic as a 2D platformer like Sonic eventually disolves into. There just isn't that much room for discussion because these games are so simple.

Regardless of the simplicity of the discussion, repeating overused debunked arguments isn't necessary.

As long as these videos don't specifically talk about issues such as enemy placement, trap placement and reaction time required on a first playthrough, then the video does not prove your point in any way or form.

The level design includes enemy and trap placing, so that is analysed. The reaction time necessary is included in regards to developing skill, something you ignored completely as per usual. To make it easier, I'll repeat it here:

"Being slowed down in most situations is an issue that appears due to the lack of skill of the player, and reaction time is part of that skill."

"The playthrough isn't slow, unless you're talking about people with very slow learning curve that are playing the franchise for the first time.
Also, trial and error to incentive multiple playthroughs is not a bad thing. You don't die in most of the sections you refer to, you only slow down for a brief period of time. People can replay the levels for faster times and can train their skills and reaction time. That's intentional, and it's not bad design at all. You might not enjoy it, a lot of people don't. But it's not bad, it's just not meant for them.

Games that are praised to high heavens have these elements. Silent hill and Dark souls come to mind as examples."

Okay since you want to drag this down to a mud slinging contest: You are a moron. The reason why Sonic games are to be played slowly in a first play through (And most likely first couple of playthrough) is because of typical human reaction time to oncoming obstacles that appear in the screen.

Again, reaction time is part of the player skill that can be developed and through the intention of the design, as mentioned above.

As shown in the first video that I've posted that you dismissed for no reason, the reaction time for sonic moving at full speed (without boosts or momentum from loops/ledges) into an oncoming enemy as it comes into screen is 8 frames, or about a quarter of a second.

I didn't dismiss it, I already talked about the influence of reaction time and memorization.

While training an AI to complete a video game level comes with all sorts of challenges, it obviously isn't limited by human reaction time.

It is limited by several factors, as it is only capable to develop beyond human reaction time after a long time of calibration. Something you'd know if you watched the video.

Out of all the possible "Counterarguments" you could come up with, this is by far the dumbest one. This point is almost as dumb as your attempt to use speedrunners as an actual argument.

Perhaps if you weren't such a dumbass who refuses to look into any evidence people provide you, you'd know the difference. Your stupid point is that the game punishes the players for going fast due to poor level design. So an I.A that does not have instant reaction time as seen in the video would not converge to a solution (faster movement) that would harm it's goal. That was the point that I was discussing with this evidence.

Your dismissal shows that you can't even keep up with what's being discussed. You're garbage. Stop wasting everyone's time and go back to elementary school, you have much to learn.

 

[Rykan]

Regardless of the simplicity of the discussion, repeating overused debunked arguments isn't necessary.

Except that they aren't debunked.

The level design includes enemy and trap placing, so that is analysed. The reaction time necessary is included in regards to developing skill, something you ignored completely as per usual. To make it easier, I'll repeat it here:

"Being slowed down in most situations is an issue that appears due to the lack of skill of the player, and reaction time is part of that skill."

"The playthrough isn't slow, unless you're talking about people with very slow learning curve that are playing the franchise for the first time.
Also, trial and error to incentive multiple playthroughs is not a bad thing. You don't die in most of the sections you refer to, you only slow down for a brief period of time. People can replay the levels for faster times and can train their skills and reaction time. That's intentional, and it's not bad design at all. You might not enjoy it, a lot of people don't. But it's not bad, it's just not meant for them.

Games that are praised to high heavens have these elements. Silent hill and Dark souls come to mind as examples."


Again, reaction time is part of the player skill that can be developed and through the intention of the design, as mentioned above.

This has literally been adressed previously, but allow me to break it down for you so that even you can understand.

People who play slowly through Sonic games when they play them for the first (few) times will play through them slowly. As mentioned before, the reaction time is 8 frames or about a quarter of a second when going at full speed. The overwhelming majority of players will not be able to respond to something that has less than a quarter of a second reaction time consistently, no matter what their "Learning curve" is. When you talk about "Lack of skill", what you're actually refering to is "Lack of memorization of the level" because that's what it really is. The result is that your first few play throughs will be going rather slow. The whole issue with this is when Sonic doesn't go fast, there is nothing special about it. it's a completely mediocre platformer. Only if you play through the games again and again can you actually play the game at a fast pace. You don't think thats bad design at all. I disagree, I do think its bad design if you have to go through them several times and memorize the layout of every level before you get to play the game in a way that makes it unique or how its meant to be played.

None of these issues are present in DS or SH. Yes you will most likely have to fight the same bosses again and again in DS games before you can beat them, But you don't have to finish the game several time or become an expert at it before you can play the way it was "meant to be played". Or advertised, for that matter.

I didn't dismiss it, I already talked about the influence of reaction time and memorization.

It is limited by several factors, as it is only capable to develop beyond human reaction time after a long time of calibration. Something you'd know if you watched the video.

Perhaps if you weren't such a dumbass who refuses to look into any evidence people provide you, you'd know the difference. Your stupid point is that the game punishes the players for going fast due to poor level design. So an I.A that does not have instant reaction time as seen in the video would not converge to a solution (faster movement) that would harm it's goal. That was the point that I was discussing with this evidence.

I'm surprised to see you double down on this silly argument. The whole point why players are punished for going fast due to poor level design is because they are unable to react fast enough to whatever obstacle appears in the way when they go at full speed. This is obviously not an issue for an AI which, as the video explains, has been learning from previous levels. This means that it can recognize certain obstacles such as enemies or spikes and unlike humans, can react instantly because it doesn't have to deal with human reaction time. Using an AI as an example of how a human being learns and experience the game is straigth up ignorance.

Your dismissal shows that you can't even keep up with what's being discussed. You're garbage. Stop wasting everyone's time and go back to elementary school, you have much to learn.

Okay, I'm done with you and your petty insults. You are going straigth to the ignore list. It's obvious that you are unable to hold a discussion like an actual adult and frankly, I've ran out of patience with your nerdrage over a childrens game. Grow up.

 

[SumJester]

I never actually gave sonic a chance. Was a Nintendo kid and sonic just looked lame in comparison to super mario. Going from super mario world to sonic was a downgrade. That and the fact that I never owned any Sega consoles. I used to play it over at my cousins house.

Well I was a Sega kiddie and I gave Mario lots of chances, and the whole series (specially 2d outings) are basically the boring strawberry bubblegum of the platform genere, and i never replayed a single title more than 2-3 times start to end.

Hell the titles that actually grabbed any interest were Land 1 and 2, that were aparently too "inventive" for the series. (At least the better Wario Land series spawned from that)

The (classic) levels are stupidly linear compared to Sonic's and everything structured on blocks like in a grid. Handful of secrets can hardly compare to real alterative paths. Hell i'd say you only have real choices on map hubs.

The real gems of Nintendo for me were games like Zelda, F-Zero and such. And of course the godlike Metroid.

 

[SomeGit]

It’s the first time where I’ve seen any Prevously Recorded video mentioned as an “excellent overview”. Good job scrapping the bottom of the barrel, after a let’s play from a literally who an overview from one of most incompetent duo at playing video games.

What’s next a DarksydePhil video on the bad design of MGS games?

 

[rofif]

I wouldnt say never.
3d blast was fun and looked nice.
adventure was so bad it was good. I always liked it.

But I never liked the side scrolling first games. The character moves so close to the right part of the screen, you have no time to react.

 

[WolfusFh]

Except that they aren't debunked.

This has literally been adressed previously, but allow me to break it down for you so that even you can understand.

People who play slowly through Sonic games when they play them for the first (few) times will play through them slowly. As mentioned before, the reaction time is 8 frames or about a quarter of a second when going at full speed. The overwhelming majority of players will not be able to respond to something that has less than a quarter of a second reaction time consistently, no matter what their "Learning curve" is. When you talk about "Lack of skill", what you're actually refering to is "Lack of memorization of the level"

Yes, most players won't be able to react to it consistently. Which is exactly why the game doesn't overly punish the player with obstacles. Instead, obstacles will just redirect the players to other routes in the game, and cause just a momentary stop or a hit at worse. The other routes still allow the player to reach his previous momentum very quickly, and will often be lengthier, but easier. This has been present since green hill, and is explained in details in the video that originated this thread and in other videos.

You act as if every obstacle in the game kills the player or puts them in a part of the level in which the player has to play slowly for a significant amount of time, which is objectively false.

because that's what it really is. The result is that your first few play throughs will be going rather slow. The whole issue with this is when Sonic doesn't go fast, there is nothing special about it. it's a completely mediocre platformer. Only if you play through the games again and again can you actually play the game at a fast pace. You don't think thats bad design at all. I disagree, I do think its bad design if you have to go through them several times and memorize the layout of every level before you get to play the game in a way that makes it unique or how its meant to be played.

Again, that's false. The games provide plenty of routes and moments for the player to keep it's momentum with sufficient consistency, as mentioned. Even when the player has slower speed, the game offers variety through exploration that allows the player to learn and improve in it's mechanics in order to return to the higher speed sections.

None of these issues are present in DS or SH. Yes you will most likely have to fight the same bosses again and again in DS games before you can beat them, But you don't have to finish the game several time or become an expert at it before you can play the way it was "meant to be played". Or advertised, for that matter.

You don't need to do that with sonic either. Again, you act as if every obstacle required the reaction time at full speed, and you act as if the obstacles stopped the player's progress and stopped them from quickly regaining their speed (the way it's "meant to be played" as you put it).

All of this has been talked about in all the videos you chose to ignore.

So you don't need to replay the game several times to enjoy it as "advertised", since small trial and error in the first level will already give the players the understanding of the mechanics and the average obstacles. Besides, even the first playthrough of a level.is probably the time it takes on the first battle with a DS boss. The games' lenght aren't comparable. The same goes for SH or Resident evil when one dies and has to replay big sections and boss battles. So you can replay levels to get the most out of them, as you replay sections of many other games. But that isn't necessary to enjoy the games' design, as mentioned previously.

I'm surprised to see you double down on this silly argument. The whole point why players are punished for going fast due to poor level design is because they are unable to react fast enough to whatever obstacle appears in the way when they go at full speed. This is obviously not an issue for an AI which, as the video explains, has been learning from previous levels. This means that it can recognize certain obstacles such as enemies or spikes and unlike humans, can react instantl
because it doesn't have to deal with human reaction time. Using an AI as an example of how a human being learns and experience the game is straigth up ignorance.

I'm surprised you're so ignorant to the point that you ignore video evidence. The A.I doesn't react instantly, you moron. Pay attention to the screen.
And bold: The A.I was created to simulate human learning through repetition, it's said so in the beginning of the video.
The only one ignorant here is you, ignoring every detail in order to make your argument easier.

But sure, let's ignore an automated process that is meant to reproduce human learning since it can't be compared to human learning. But let's also ignore actual human learning since the only playthroughs you accept are the ones that benefit your point.
Your argumentation is garbage.

Okay, I'm done with you and your petty insults. You are going straigth to the ignore list. It's obvious that you are unable to hold a discussion like an actual adult and frankly, I've ran out of patience with your nerdrage over a childrens game. Grow up.

Why don't you grow up and learn to debate, you moronic piece of garbage.
The one unable to hold a discussion here is you. You constantly strawman people's argument, consistently ignore evidence and arguments against your points and often makes baseless assumptions (such as the nostalgia argument).

Regardless of the subject, this form of discussion is mostly done by stupid ignorant people. Thus you deserve every insult and much more. If you don't want people to insult you, try learning proper argumentation first.

 

[WolfusFh]

Okay, I'm done with you and your petty insults. You are going straigth to the ignore list. It's obvious that you are unable to hold a discussion like an actual adult and frankly, I've ran out of patience with your nerdrage over a childrens game. Grow up.

Also an amazing job at admitting you're nothing more than a moron, a coward who consistently does shitty things, but runs away the moment someone calls you out on it.
Do the world a favor and leave the internet. Garbage like you shouldn't even access to such resources.

 

[RetroAV]

All I've seen from the "Sonic was never good" crowd is that they themselves were never any good at the games really.

 

[tygertrip]

Boomers? People born in the 1940s don't care about Sonic LOL.

IKR? So many kids on the internet think Gen-Xers are baby boomers.

 

[Phunkydiabetic]

This thread is wild

 

[IbizaPocholo]

Amazon.com: HORI Nintendo Switch Wireless HORIPAD (Sonic) Pro Controller - Officially Licensed By Nintendo & Sega : Everything Else

Amazon.com: HORI Nintendo Switch Wireless HORIPAD (Sonic) Pro Controller - Officially Licensed By Nintendo & Sega : Everything Else

www.amazon.com

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Sonic memes are glorious. It just needs to be said:

 

[bigdad2007]

Just finished Sonic 1 for the first time in years on the Origin Collection.

Everything after green hills is hot garbage.

Playing the later stages of this game is like trying to play a jigsaw puzzle with someone constantly hitting the pieces out of your hands and hiding them.

Like when I die in Mario Wonder I’m like “man I didn’t make that jump I should have jumped to that other platform”.

When I die in Sonic 1 90% of the time I’m like “well there was nothing I could do because that enemy/trap was intentionally placed there not to test my reflexes but to literally kill me to lose a life”.

 

[Icymanipulator]

The games were OK as a kid. But the platforming never felt right, and still doesn’t to this day.

 

[Sooner]

I know this is a necro, but...

Sonic was never good.

 

[HogIsland]

The only great Sonic is Sonic Spinball

 

[bigdad2007]

I didn’t mean to necro the post but this was in the top google search for Sonic 1 sucking.

I’ve bounded off Origins several times trying to play the classics in order (having beat them on emulation and original hardware over the years).

I’m now on team “Sonic was never good”.

Sonic 2 and 3 are ok games that benefit greatly from being the Genesis mascot games.

But I firmly in the camp of “they can’t make good 2D Sonic games now because they were never good to begin with”.

And I’m not saying you can’t like them. I love things like the OG Tomb Raider and Resident Evil games and most people hate those games because of the controls. It’s ok to like something that is bad but pretending like Sonic 1 is on the same level as any of the Mario games on NES or SNES is wild to me.

 

[Saber]

I didn’t mean to necro the post but this was in the top google search for Sonic 1 sucking.

I’ve bounded off Origins several times trying to play the classics in order (having beat them on emulation and original hardware over the years).

I’m now on team “Sonic was never good”.

Sonic 2 and 3 are ok games that benefit greatly from being the Genesis mascot games.

But I firmly in the camp of “they can’t make good 2D Sonic games now because they were never good to begin with”.

And I’m not saying you can’t like them. I love things like the OG Tomb Raider and Resident Evil games and most people hate those games because of the controls. It’s ok to like something that is bad but pretending like Sonic 1 is on the same level as any of the Mario games on NES or SNES is wild to me.

Not saying you're wrong, but did you try playing the actual Taxman convertions of Sonic 1 and 2? The ones who launched for smartphones? Taxman is the same guy who brough back a fantastic port of Sonic CD as well and pretty much the guy behind Mania. Not that it will actually fix the fundamental problems of the game though, but Origins fails to actually replicate what Taxman did even though they actually stolen his engime. Sonic Team is a bunch of incompetents that never could replicate their own physics.

Also if you didn't like Sonic 1 wait you until you play Sonic Advance 2. The enemy placement and type in that game is hideus, it was a time when some people start to come in terms that most of Sonic games weren't great at all. Sonic Rush is also of those most fake word of mouth games that is incredibly terrible.

 

[RoboFu]

The good sonic games were sonic 2 and sonic cd and those were only okay.

 

[ienjoyrawfish]

All I've seen from the "Sonic was never good" crowd is that they themselves were never any good at the games really.

And here comes bigdad2007 to prove you right 3 years later.

 

[Syphon Filter]

sonic 1 and 2 on genesis is awesome, same for sonic adventure 1,2 and sonic heroes.

 

[Hookshot]

Sonic 1 is a bit slow with some duff levels, Sonic 2, 3 and K are all decent.

I thought Mania was a bit shit tbh, levels are too long and the bosses sucked.

 

[fart town usa]

The 3D games are a complete mess AFAIC.

I never appreciated Sonic 3 until I watched someone good at it, made me realize that the games are better than I give them credit for. My favorite has always been 1 on Genesis but I enjoy the Master System titles the most, they are more of a pure platformer, much slower pace.

 

[snapdragon]

1. Great Sonic games
>Sonic Colors DS
>Shadow Gens
>Sonic Gens
>Sonic Advance 3
>Sonic Mania
>Sonic 3&K
>Sonic 2
>Sonic and all-stars racing transformed (I know this is a spinoff but this game is one of the best racers period. when this game came out people were saying it blew Mario Kart 7 out of the water, if the game still decent support and didn't have a ridiculous character selection it would have been a massive hit)

2. Good Sonic Games (have some serious flaws, especially in regards to filler content or other characters/playstyles)
>Sonic Unleashed (daytime stages which are arguably the best 3D stages in the series)
>Sonic Rush
>Sonic Rush Adventure (drop the filler content and it easily has the 2nd best 2d stages in the series behind colors)
>Sonic Adventure (sonic stages)
>Sonic Adventure 2 (most sonic/shadow stages)
>Sonic Colors Wii (when the game was released it was universally praised and I'm sure most enjoyed it but even as a kid I thought the game was a massive downgrade compared to the DS version, Astroid Coaster Act 1 is an excellent level but >everything else is extremely weak compared to the other boost games, also the 2D parts are atrocious)
>Sonic Advance 2
>Sonic Advance
>Sonic Frontiers
>Sonic Unleashed Wii

3. Questionable Games
>Sonic Heroes (I personally think this game is the Antichrist and is a complete disgrace compared to the Dreamcast Games in level design, control, and art style but a lot of Sonic fans swear by this game, It is clearly not bad but I particularly do not like this one)
>Sonic 1 (a good platformer, not a good Sonic game)
>Sonic Lost World
>Sonic 4 Episode 2
>Sonic boom 3DS games (never played them, never will play them, generic platformer slop, Dimps deciding to make 2.5D games drastically reduced their quality)
>Sonic Generations 3DS

4. Bad Sonic games
>Sonic 06 (the fan remake Sonic P06 is excellent though, it shows that Sonic 06 wasnt a fundamentally flawed game, and if the stability, mechanics, and controls were properly tuned which easily could have happened if the game had more development time than it would have been widely regarded as the best 3D game in the series)
>Sonic Forces
>Shadow the Hedgehog
>Sonic and the Secret rings
>Sonic and the Black Night
>Sonic 4 Episode 1
>Sonic Lost World 3DS
>Sonic Boom Rise of Lyric

 

[March Climber]

*Zooms camera out*

There:

I have fixed older Sonic.