Do you respect retrospectively changing an opinion and giving a game a more sober, truer second glance when the hype (and in this case pressure from Sega) has calmed down? SimCity is another example of this
 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
|
Do you respect retrospectively changing an opinion and giving a game a more sober, truer second glance when the hype (and in this case pressure from S...
Is this the new Sega Sucks General?
No
>sega thread on /vr/
Nope, pretty sure I'm right.
Translation: yes
The key of a successful loaded question is in a believable disguise, op. If you want to post an arbitrary opinion based on arbitrary assumptions, just post it; don't just phrase it as a question in the hope that people will validate it as a fact by virtue of replying to you frick I guess it worked and I'm doing just that right now
How is it a loaded question? You could easily argue that revisits like that aren't fair because games are a product of their time and it's a betrayal of your past self, yadda yadda
It's a loaded question because they implied the second glance is always more true without questioning the inherent assumption
this is a huge thing with technology...
is announced in detail
assume its something its not
releases and doesnt live up to the insane hype
gets 010 by soys everywhere
....
pass
person tries thing
it to what was available at the time, and it is always leaps and bounds ahead
I guess, but not in this case because SA actually lived up to the hype
>Arthur Gies
This. He's probably mad there aren't enough black people in the story.
>3.5/10 who would play this garbage when BotW exists also gender roles or something
Modern scores are not retro.
Except BotW is even worse for LGBT since it portrays a white girl as a damsel in distress, a white Aryan Chad as a hero, and a Black person as a villain.
ngl I owned sonic adventure on the Dreamcast back when it came out and I got bored and stopped playing halfway through the game
You aren't the only one, the game was trash just like the rest of the franchise.
Yeah… I got the true ending with Super Saiyan Sonic back in the day, but a lot of the Amy and Bigs levels were pretty bad in hindsight.
Well, if a reviewer does that then he basically proves that he's a corporate bootlicker and only rated the game well the first time because of external pressure. But people can see that it's true regardless of whether he proves it himself or not, so doing that is at least a little bit of honesty.
Reminder that IGN apologized last year for this shitting-on-Sonic era and admitted they were just riling people up for attention/clicks. This wasn't even reviewed by the same person both times so it was pretty transparent what it was.
I seriously doubt that whoever reviewed Sonic Adventure for IGN in 1999 is still working there 24 years later to be fair.
the 3.5 is for the 2010 re-release. the DC version is an 8.6
And OP was never heard from again (in this thread at least)
https://www.ign.com/articles/2010/09/23/sonic-adventure-review
Everything they complain about is also in the original game
>The gameplay shifts between 3rd person, behind the hedgehog running, which doesn't control very well, and 2D side-scrolling sections here and there which control marginally better (since you're pretty much just holding forward and hitting the jump button).
>Sonic Adventure is so fundamentally flawed that it borders on unplayable - the sections that move the fastest, that work most, that are even slightly interesting, require the least input from the player. In fact, in many of these sections, input from the player will result in death or catastrophe, and there's really no way to know which until you either fly through not completely sure what happened or die, also not completely sure what happened.
>This is, of course, when the camera is working -- which is about half of the time.
>The controls themselves are another failure. Sonic and co. maneuver poorly, even at slow speeds, and there are bizarre collision detection rules in place that will cause you to become caught in bizarre invisible traps that require some frantic thumbstick jerking to break free of. This extends elsewhere throughout the game, as the world itself seems fragile and pitted with holes in its reality. I fell through floors, was catapulted outside of the game world, and generally murdered without warning or explanation by failures in Sonic Adventure's ability to hold itself together repeatedly. And this isn't counting the times the camera literally broke free of the game world itself to exist outside of the engine's geometry.
>Tails hovers, E102 shoots, Amy...wields a giant hammer, Big the cat fishes, and Knuckles glides and punches. Unfortunately, all of these new mechanics are even less functional than the broken platforming of the main adventure.
/vr/ and Reddit are the only places that still pretend Sonic is good
Looks like skill issues + the 2006-2016 "Sonic was never good" meme. Every review at launch was at least at 80% and half of them were 90%+
Because spergs like you would blow up buildings if they rated any Sonic game at 0, which it deserves.
this.
SA was the most annoying 3d game I've ever played. SA2 attempted to make the game less annoying, but even that one had plenty of places where either the collission, controls, or camera freaked out.
The exact same shit like that still happened in Sonic Generations, just less often there since half the game was a 2d sidescroller. But I still got the occasional fricked up camera or falling through walls in the 3d parts.
I dunno if they managed to fix things ever since, I stopped playing Sonic games after that.
The issue in that video doesn't happen in the US Dreamcast version.
i really really fricking hate the wall collisions in these games, it just fricks the pace so bad when you lose all your speed for bumping into a wall, i almost hate 3d sonic just for that alone
What do you want to happen when you crash into a wall?
well in most cases with sonic you're not directly running straight into it, just grazing against a wall and a lot of games trigger an animation when you graze against a wall where you might lose some speed but you dont completely stop dead in your tracks, i cant name any off the top of my head but i assume you can guess what i mean, pretty sure tony hawk does what im saying
in sonic grazing doesn't cause that but bumping at the fastest speed, an aspect which is solved by the spin dash which makes that state impossible.
>Sonic fandom so thin skinned you have to apologize to them for giving them the deserved rating
Reminds me of another group
I don't even like it when they do this today with games that got their bugs fixed. If a game was released as a buggy mess, it deserves the low score it got. Most people already played the game the way it was
The problem is that so many "retro" reviews are done by zoomie morons who are just looking to give a contrarian opinion to a game that was love/hated by trying to say some game that got any amount of praise at all over the years isn't worth the hype because it didn't absolute melt their moronic brain as the most amazing shit ever or isn't as bad as it was hyped to be because it didn't literally give them cancer.
>"Alright, we need to sell new Sonic game, but people cling to the old one too hard, so here is your second bag of money, go and shit on the older game, so we can sell new one."
No. Sonic has always been fricking shit and I'm tired of pretending it's not. Sonic adventure is a bad game. Sonic adventure 2 was a bad game. Sonic heroes fricking sucks. Shadow the Hedgehog stops being ironically funny 5 minutes in. 2D sonic games are fricking boring.
Sonic sucks fricking shit and the only reason it has relevance is because Sega has sunk cost fallacy regarding this stupid mascot.
It's not even a Sega problem. Other sega games are amazing. Sonic is the only 100% bad game series with no redeeming quality they continue to produce. It feels like its some false flag shit where they have to prove how good other sega games are compared to what people "want", and yet people still beg for bullshit shovelware sonic games.
Filtered.
Yeah. The filter is there to stop all the shit and piss from going into the water supply.
the thing is that the piss is you by not understanding a game which has good qualities by external pressure and lack of nuance in arcade gameplay, something that is seen in you not having depth discussion on the series by that lack of experience, press down on slopes and be happy, become hEDGEhog
The good qualities don't make up for how shitty the games play in general.
>how shit
the momentum feels nice, has mechanics to generate speed with skill like rolling and has cool level design encouraging those things mixed with platforming which is dynamic and fun.
The 3D games are plagued with camera problems and breaking any momentum or not following the pre defined track makes the game borderline non functional.
In 2d sonic you are punished for going too fast. It turns into a schizophrenic bullshit Mario where occasionally you can actually go fast and just have to hold right or left to win. It's not fun.
In comparison SMW is much faster paced and has more interesting levels with challenges that go beyond navigating a labyrinth.
In Mario 64, it's slower than 3D sonic, sure, but there's a certain flow and freedom the game provides that 3D sonic simply doesn't. You aren't locked into a linear track and you actually have a level to explore instead of just running past it.
It sucks in comparison to even the most generic platformers.
>In comparison SMW is
Sonic is not mario!! They're different games.
It's like if I said "Metroid is a slower Mario with less interesting level challenges that go slow.' It's a schizo analogy (like yours). The point of Metroid is slow exploring. It's not to be SMW. You lost when you compared the two.
Id normally compare it to shit but I at least gave it some grace and compared it to a good game that has always had good 2D and a flawless jump 3D design and was a direct competitor to Sonic.
You can probably say I can't compare 2D sonic to 2D Mario, sure, but I can compare 3D sonic to 3D Mario, since the ONLY reason it exists is because of 3D Mario.
they (were) direct competitors in the same genre and were constantly compared in sega's own marketing, nice try though
where they said that it was different.
aside from that, it's publicity from people unrelated to his development, that's like saying that mario traveled through time just because a non canonical game with other devs did it, it's something idiotic and doesn't make the need of add things which didn't had anything to do, obviously there's a base but that's just a genre denomination which mario didn't even make and in general varied it just like any platformer and that shouldn't be an excuse to say that a game is bad by interesting mechanics which are the opposite of that by his great design and objective quality (it's even better that it's original).
can you translate from schizo to english please?
>Sonic is not mario!! They're different games.
you're right about that, mario is fun and sonic is not. anon you are replying to nailed it: if you stop to try and explore the side passages in a sonic game the controls are simply not functional, sonic moves like a moron unless sprinting which the game often punishes you for doing, it's moronic
they don't have camera issues, the controllable l and r camera mixed with the mixed settings works really well and is less shit than other classics like spyro, ocarina or others.
you aren't, there's something which makes you go faster and gives you invencibility called pressing down on the dpad and running, making you invincible until you jump
mario isn't faster paced, on the opposite, it's more meticulous, still has on the regard of speed worse sections with enemies like the big hammer bros or the big boos which appear out of nowhere and by the more consequential power ups encourage a more slow approach, something that isn't wrong but isn't similar to sonic on any way.
mario 64 doesn't have a lot of freedom either, the objectives normally can only be done on a certain way and it was a way to give content to the game on a different way of mastery based gameplay replay ability which sonic does (a thing which looks that you don't like by your personal taste rather than issues with sa).
it doesn't suck stop sucking raw eggs and cook them.
different way than mastery based gameplay which sonic gives*
use the dpad down function on any slope and you will see that you are always safe by rolling.
remember, hedgehogs curl and sonic rolls with it, be hedgehog, be powerful.
i think that you are personally (if you aren't baiting) giving biases to mario by playing it more often and memorizing the levels rather than give recognition to the quirks of certain games by a lack of personal detailed experience with sonic games or by you playing a shit tier port of a 3d sonic game like sonic adventure dx, play it on Dreamcast or on pc modded if you want to enjoy amazing gameplay with beautiful graphics: https://dreamcastify.unreliable.network/
Sonic Adventure’s fatal flaw was making you play as the shitty other characters in order to get the true ending. They should’ve taken a page from Mario 64 and made it all about Sonic.
The characters weren't shitty, only the Big stages were pretty underwhelming I know where you live wienersucker
Still would’ve been a better game if it was just Sonic.
nah, everyone has momentum and aid in the specialized 3d space by giving each character tools to make focused level design instead of making op shits which remove it by the capacity of forgoing them.
the camera/colission and the controls never freaks out unless you do glitches which aren't there on dc or are so hard to do you need 2 hours and a memory address mapper to get to the specific location to do them.
if you are playing the dc original on emu don't use a square dead zone, it gives broken diagonals by the game being developed with a circle one, and if you are playing dx mod it on pc or stop doing it.
Why did you sperg out at the end?
they aren't shitty, they are excellent styles which are fun and complement sonic philosophy of momentum based platforming (amy being the most different but still equally good), the only bad character is big and that is because it was a literal tech demo which is finished on 20 minutes and is the low point of a game like zelda water temple for example.
you literally are by forgoing mechanics, the level design is designed so you pick speed, press down on slopes so you roll and mantain invincibility thanks to that, being based around capacity and skill, you aren't playing smart by thinking that is mario and forgetting that you are a rolling assasin which needs to roll on hills rather than learning the mechanics.
sonic is the same for speed as mario, is to win the stages quicker and personal mastery by the game not killing you until a very long time limit is passed (a time limit which mario has as well), in general you show a lack of understanding of game mastery which arcades and older console games are based upon by ironically disregarding a variety of experiences by slop, the reflection of a person embroiled by a lack of personal depth and development.
aside from that, the moves in mario aren't that depth, the side hops are very context sensitive and just differ from crouching state and stopping, sonic is more fundamental but the depth of hyper precision on the 3d games and jump depth by the physics system (with context sensitive actions like the light speed dash, the spin dash and more on the sequels) with the rolling make for very complex games based around jumping and momentum which thrives an awesome gameplay, mario has physics too but these are more static and based around correction which is equally good to sonic but it's inherently different.
contra isn't a memorization game tho, you are just moronic and you walk definitively even when you see enemies which are strong, if the enemy can't be killed on 1 second you shot it until it dies.
following this, the game doesn't punish going fast because sonic becomes faster by rolling and becomes invincible, the game wants you to become fast so you become invincible rather than the opposite.
the skills of sonic are transferable as well by being based around jumping and hitting things too, it's just that you don't want to play and use the skills of specific games, just like wanting to finish klonoa by not using the ball mechanic for example, it's ludicrous to think that learning is a bad thing and that games need to be conforming to be of any quality, that homogenization breaks interesting level design and literally removes what makes games fun, aka learning, sonic having different depths with the same base than mario is cool by it giving more gameplay experience and fun and it's sad that you see games as a consuming endeavor instead of enjoying the experience that it gives on his play time, a pretty sad approach which is seen by liking repeated routines and lack of interest in learning.
>you're playing it wrong
the only sonicgay argument
Sonic punishes going fast while simultaneously encouraging it. The only benefit to going fast in Mario is personal mastery. The game stops being about playing smart and instead just turns into memorizing levels. Sonic is an annoying because it requires such insane mastery to enjoy, that by the time you learn to play it, you could've played 10 other much more fun games instead.
And even then, if you're good at sonic, no one cares because You're supposed to go fast and memorize the levels. Being nice at Mario or any other slick platformer is much more impressive due to the variety of movements you can do, and the skills are transferable between games.
Sonic is like contra. After a certain point it just turns into a memorization game and after that it loses all appeal to me.
>Sonic heroes fricking sucks.
I don't disagree with that.
That's all you get.
>Sonic has always been fricking shit
Frick you okay?
Sure, as long as I can see the date that the review was written. I take all 8-10 reviews written at the time of release with a grain of salt anyway. But it's also fair if a reviewer specifies that they're rating a game based on how good it was at the time of release or compared to its peers.
The perception of the Adventure games had already started to shift by the time Heroes came out.
How about being actual fricking human being and judging a review but what they wrote and not being a lazy, illiterate, oaf who just looks at fricking number. You are comparing their old review (which nobody in this thread has or will read) to their new review (which nobody in this thread has or will read). Do you have any idea how stupid it is to compare two things you know nothing about? Why even bother discussing it if you are so uninterested you won't even see what it is?
It's clever framing for (You)s from OP, it's not a re-review with a 'more sober' score at all, it's a review of a busted port of a port that everybody rightly shit on when it came out. IGN's Dreamcast review is still right there and still an 8.6.
OP is misleading for the sake of a shitpost, but
is still true. The Adventure games always had their critics, and the more negative asssessments floated to the top as time went on. You can see it in IGN's own reviews of the Gamecube ports (much of them isn't specific to the ports at all), or where Adventure is mentioned in Heroes reviews.
That review was made in the "Sonic was always bad" meme era
Pic related is an actual review of the game and not clickbait
kek this review copy still had the dreadful beta theme
I'm glad I got a DC emulator to run Sonic Adventure perfectly now. Before something was off about the controls on redream, now everything is great. I'm sorry but Sonic Adventure is a fun game. I especially love running around the Mystic Ruins and the comfy NiGHTS slot machine.
Looks like it's still an 8.6 on IGN. The poor review linked in the OP is of the terrible XBLA release that was even more buggy than the Gamecube version. I've found most people going on about how bad and broken Sonic Adventure are are either playing the original broken JP Dreamcast release, or the later even more broken ports.
The US Dreamcast release is the version you should be playing as it's the most bug fixed version with the best controls.
Is there a problem with the SADX controls? Do I need to mod my SADX if I want to replay it?
fanboys are always going to overrate flagship games for their console
ign N64 gave conker a 9.8 back in the day
>Arthur Gies
I do not respect journo opinions, I especially don't respect that journo's opinion
Stop desperately trying to change history, you dreadful furgay clown. You do this every day, the game is as shitty as the day when it was released and it will never change.
Sonic was (and indeed is) never good. Especially Sonic Adventure. The only reason the original releases were "acclaimed" was because Sega fans had no games and no standard. No surprise it's completely eviscerated when it's exposed to a wider audience, audience that didn't have Stockholm Syndrome with Sega's shitty games.
bait anon, even snes fans liked sonic and most people didn't had that war by their friends having other systems and playing there, you don't really have standards if you don't play and analyze by yourself rather than by third parties which do it for zealous monetization thanks to outrage.
like sonic still thinking about it.
Sega in general was never good. Wish we could just admit this and make this board PC and Nintendo only.
Nintentrannies are too feeble minded to comprehend Sega's fast-paced, arcade action. Nintendo consoles should all be recycled into HRT pills.
SA1 is a solid 7.
2 has much better controls
Arthur Gies is a fricking homosexual
?si=Ctk0gv-XDfKVdoIi
is there anything good on the genesis if you're not into licensed games or fighting games? dont say arcade ports because i can play better versions elsewhere. i mean actual just genesis games.
i wish the genesis had a nice platformer but everything seems to revolve around teenagers and rip n tear energy
Only thing the Genesis has outside of that are obvious copies of SNES games and they just do that better. I mean JRPGs on the genesis is just kind of...why bother? I'm sure I rustled someone over their childhood summer game but frick me man. SNES just did slower paced games better. And frick Disney and comic book games.
A bunch of shoot 'em ups like Gley Lancer, Battle Mania 1&2, Steel Empire and Thunder Force 3&4.
A bunch of beat 'em ups like Comix Zone and Streets of Rage 1-3.
Beyond Oasis is a pretty good Zelda-like.
Castlevania Bloodlines.
Contra Hard Corps.
Gunstar Heroes was fricking amazing.
Monster World 3&4.
Phantasy Star series are surprisingly pretty good RPGs, maybe not up to par with SNES ones but unique and interesting enough to still warrant checking out (mostly just 4).
Ristar and Rocket Knight Adventures are mascot platformers, sure, but they're good. The latter especially.
There's also Shining Force 1&2 and Langrisser 1&2 for all the SRPG fanatics.
shoot em ups. nice platformers, rpg's like shiny force and more, go here to look: https://vsrecommendedgames.fandom.com/wiki/Mega_Drive
Popful Mail
Snatcher
Lunar 1 and 2
Keio Flying Squadron
Lords of Thunder
Very good taste in this post. I played Gley Lancer for the first time earlier this year and it's surprisingly good
>Ristar and Rocket Knight Adventures are mascot platformers, sure, but they're good. The latter especially.
I played these two before touching Dynamite Headdy and I still prefer them both over that game (not that it's bad though).
>or fighting games?
The snes had better original fightans.
eternal champions is very equal to power instinct
most 2d fighters were multiplatform.
equal, not very, just equal.
Those games suck compared to What the snes had.
like what?
eternal champions and power instinct are the only real exclusive fighting games i can remember and they are ok on both platforms, ther isn't something on snes which takes the mega drive out of the water.
>Power rangers: Fighting edition
>Gundam wing: endless duel
>TMNT tournament
>DBZ hyper dimension
>Sailor moon
>Ranma
>Super V.G.
>Battle tycoon: flash hiders
>YYH final
Even if you argue that all those games suck, they are still miles ahead of what the genesis had to offer in original fighters.
they are ok games but not amazing, they are multiplatform as well with genesis games of the same franchise which have the same quality on the same or different genres (except tmnt fighters which is shit on megadrive)
the game is different and the ads showed it, a thing being different isn't bad and sonic has good objective qualities which make the game work and be good, see:
(You)
see:
>they are multiplatform
They are not, the genesis doesn't have half of the games i listed, games from the same liscense don't count as multiplatform unless they play basically the same.
from what i remember only 2 games (ranma and super v.g) don't have mega drive counter part, the others have games with the same licenses but different gameplay (something that is cool because you can play something different and fun on his own right), in general the ports of fatal fury and others are really good as well.
from what i'm seeing there are 24 fighting games (if we exclude beat em ups) on sega while there are 21 fighting games (if we include beat em ups) on snes. sega has more fighting games with licenses and everything so i don't see the crux of calling md a non fighting game console when it has a lot of good arcade ports of fighting games and original fighting games.
Seems like we got a bit off track.
?si=-wgCO25yN-WJCKXc
?si=lZsWGBpzZPZ2lAKq
The snes does in fact have more fighting games than the genesis, and beat em ups are a completely different category.
Anyway, the original post was talking about fightans that aren't arcade ports, the only exclusive fighter from the genesis that people actually like is YYH, while FGC autists and even casualgays can name a few SNES fighters that are worth playing.
>genesis games of the same franchise which have the same quality
?si=K3lFueJYGFe9AYU_
?si=gtyluotPKuFCYSi3
They don't.
Appropriate rating. Tried it, tried to have fun, concluded it's trash outside of some comfiness here and there
Meanwhile with Nintendo's Sonic....
5 is better than 3.5
Nintendo can't stop winning
Star Fox 2 isn't even retro
Is this the weekly "Sonic was never good" containment thread? I wish you homosexuals would actually stay contained though, only thing worse than a Sonic autist are the Anti-Sonic autists that make the same posts every other day.
>when the hype has calmed down
That's not what happened. The game was literally review bombed after Sonic 06.
opinions are like buttholes; everyone's got one.
Only if it's an example of correcting yourself when your original opinion was moronic.
In this case Sonic Adventure is a masterpiece that was both good for the time and has aged well, so no, he's a fricking idiot.
Not really. If the bar genuinely became higher for a certain type of game then sure you couldn't really give a formula 1 game from 1995 a 10 anymore comparing it to current titles. A game like Sonic Adventure could not fall so far like that. It might go 2 points at most, so say a 9 to a 7 for someone, or a 8 to a 6. Not to a 3.5, which is absolutely ridiculous. It's a wonderful game, though I did think it was slightly boring at the time and I still do today, so it's always been something around a 7-8 for me.
I wonder, what kind of person would benefit from convincing others that things in the past were not better?
Sonic Adventure is a beloved classic, and making the same thread every single week won't change that, no matter how obsessed you are about it.
I don't respect gaming ""journos"" period
I think some things can change but what you feel in the moment is the most important. It's not fair to judge a 20 year old game based on the perspective today
If you need people to agree with your taste before you can enjoy it, you're merely enjoying fake social accreditation. Obsessive needs for exclusively playing critically appraised games means your tastes will always be moving to whatever is currently advertised as popular. May as well forgo playing retro altogether for being antiquated, buncha entertainment weekly reading posers.
3.5 is too high.
3.5 out of 5 is fine.
3.5 out of 10 is moronic.
No, it isn't too high.
>Filtered.
It's only okay when Nintendo does it.