FPBP, CD is the worst classic Sonic game unless we're counting Chaotix, which we shouldn't
It's the weakest of the classic 2D sonic games. I find half of Sonic 1 a chore to get though but I'd still rather play it over CD's autistic level design.
Accurate
3d sonic was never good
2d sonic was a masterpiece, at least until chaotix
Adventure's Adventure maps and their npc storylines and Station Square lore is comfy as frick. In terms of gameplay you're right
I'd say the go hand in hand similar to how Sonic 2 and Sonic 3&K do, where about 50% of the fan base will prefer one, while the other 50% prefers the other, with Sonic 1 and Sonic CD being a more platforming focused duologu, while Sonic 2 and Sonic 3&K were a more speed focused duology.
It's the weakest of the classic 2D sonic games. I find half of Sonic 1 a chore to get though but I'd still rather play it over CD's autistic level design.
The soundtrack to this game is unfairly good. "How can the music be this good?" I used to wonder. And then they have past and future versions of each song and THEY ARE GREAT TOO.. tidal tempest is my favorite.
was never go-
One thing that has been bothering me is how suddently I'm seeing the "Sonic was never good" or "2D Sonic was always fundamentally flawed" arguments being said so much more frequently than ever before. It seems that for all beloved classics that might be rough around the edges for many, there's still a lot of respect and appreciation, even when criticizing them, one example is the original Zelda on NES, however for Sonic the treatment is completely different, before Sonic was generally considered good up until Adventure/Heroes, then it became more common to said he never worked in 3D at all, and now we went even further and suddently 2D Sonic wasn't good either, it's a rewriting of history.
How did this happen? Why did this happen? Am I supposed to believe that a video game icon loved by millions was just a fluke? A collective delusion? I don't buy it.
What baffles me is that I recall Sonic always being seen as a somewhat easy platformer compared to others in the '90s, as long as you roll into a ball in slopes or loops you'll be fine 90% of the time, and the ring mechanic makes it so getting hit isn't that big of a deal, incentivizing the player to experiment and to attempt to go fast, even the platforming sections weren't much of a problem and allowed for speed most of the time. I suppose current sensibilities could have something to do with it, but it's still odd, it seems that players understand that in a video game you can either win or lose, which is a core aspect of making it interesting, and that you won't be any good at the start, that you have to play and learn, it's only for Sonic that I see so many dismissing it because they try to go fast all of the time from the get go and end up getting hit sometimes, as if being able to lose and having to learn how to get better somehow is a bad thing and makes Sonic fundamentally problematic, I don't get it.
Speaking as someone who felt this way at one point, I think there's a fairly common pipeline:
1. Get told to start with 2
2. Get to Chemical Plant Zone
3. Drown
If that's you're first exposure to Sonic, it makes the games look completely unfair and unfun.
I literally can't put myself in someone's shoes who's playing Sonic for the first time. I was playing Sonic 2 before I can remember (I'm talking 3 years old) and Chemical Plant Zone was never hard wtf. If you said Metropolis Zone then I'd get it.
>normie dies once in mario >"lol oops my mistake. oh well try again." >normie dies once in sonic >"this entire fricking concept should've never existed. i will never even attempt to try again."
i guess they really aren't much different from /vr/
Well, it's a fair point, but I still belive Sonic 2 might be the best one to recommend in this regard, because in Sonic 1 and Sonic CD, there's no way to avoid going under water in the water levels, with Sonic 2, all levels that have water were designed in a way that, depending on the route you take and how well you can play the game, you might avoid the water altogether. I know it can be difficult when starting out and not necessarily the be the best way to get exposed to the series, but at the same time Chemical Plant is a fun and fast level before you go in the water, downright exhilirating at times, and before that there's Emerald Hill which is also a fun and fast level, if by the point you drown in Chemical Plant the 1st time you still haven't developed a liking to Sonic's gameplay, at least enough to want to learn and keep going so you can keep playing it, overcoming the challenges like the water, then perhaps it wasn't meant to be and Sonic just doesn't appeal to you in particular, and that's fine, they're unique games and I can see why they'd be divisive, my main issue is people developing the conclusion that because a certain gameplay and level design isn't appealing to them, that must mean that it's fundamentally flawed and those that like it are delusional somehow. which I see often online.
I couldn't agree more, the water can be intimidating at first, but if you know what to do you don't even have to touch the water at all, and it's easily one of the fastest level in the whole franchise, can't get enough of it.
Sonic CD is literally the worst example you could use for this.
FPBP, CD is the worst classic Sonic game unless we're counting Chaotix, which we shouldn't
Accurate
Adventure's Adventure maps and their npc storylines and Station Square lore is comfy as frick. In terms of gameplay you're right
Cd is better than Sonic 1. Maybe.
I'd say the go hand in hand similar to how Sonic 2 and Sonic 3&K do, where about 50% of the fan base will prefer one, while the other 50% prefers the other, with Sonic 1 and Sonic CD being a more platforming focused duologu, while Sonic 2 and Sonic 3&K were a more speed focused duology.
worst 2d sonic
worst sonic robot
Mecha Sonic and its not even close
Silver Sonic is the 8-bit bot you tard.
That is obviously gold, anon.
Still, for some reason he's called Silver Sonic in the US.
I always remembered people just calling him robo sonic, silver sonic was from 2.
>literally implying two of the "other" aren't literally fricking Metal Sonic
Just the Chaotix one. The Fighters one is literally a Mecha Sonic model that resembles Metal.
It's the weakest of the classic 2D sonic games. I find half of Sonic 1 a chore to get though but I'd still rather play it over CD's autistic level design.
Ah, here come the filtered black creatures
>you don't like shitty games? filtered xdddddd
Cope, seethe and dilate
3d sonic was never good
2d sonic was a masterpiece, at least until chaotix
-od
There OP, anon finished your sentence.
I like CD, only Megadrive one I don't like is 1, but why would you use CD over 2/3+K to make this point?
>Hating on SONIC CD
This can't be.
od as CD exists and is the lowest point of 2D sonic games.
The soundtrack to this game is unfairly good. "How can the music be this good?" I used to wonder. And then they have past and future versions of each song and THEY ARE GREAT TOO.. tidal tempest is my favorite.
>Soundtrack that kicks ass in both regions
>Shitty game
was never go-
One thing that has been bothering me is how suddently I'm seeing the "Sonic was never good" or "2D Sonic was always fundamentally flawed" arguments being said so much more frequently than ever before. It seems that for all beloved classics that might be rough around the edges for many, there's still a lot of respect and appreciation, even when criticizing them, one example is the original Zelda on NES, however for Sonic the treatment is completely different, before Sonic was generally considered good up until Adventure/Heroes, then it became more common to said he never worked in 3D at all, and now we went even further and suddently 2D Sonic wasn't good either, it's a rewriting of history.
How did this happen? Why did this happen? Am I supposed to believe that a video game icon loved by millions was just a fluke? A collective delusion? I don't buy it.
An entire generation grew up with video games you can't lose. Sonic is too hard for them.
What baffles me is that I recall Sonic always being seen as a somewhat easy platformer compared to others in the '90s, as long as you roll into a ball in slopes or loops you'll be fine 90% of the time, and the ring mechanic makes it so getting hit isn't that big of a deal, incentivizing the player to experiment and to attempt to go fast, even the platforming sections weren't much of a problem and allowed for speed most of the time. I suppose current sensibilities could have something to do with it, but it's still odd, it seems that players understand that in a video game you can either win or lose, which is a core aspect of making it interesting, and that you won't be any good at the start, that you have to play and learn, it's only for Sonic that I see so many dismissing it because they try to go fast all of the time from the get go and end up getting hit sometimes, as if being able to lose and having to learn how to get better somehow is a bad thing and makes Sonic fundamentally problematic, I don't get it.
Speaking as someone who felt this way at one point, I think there's a fairly common pipeline:
1. Get told to start with 2
2. Get to Chemical Plant Zone
3. Drown
If that's you're first exposure to Sonic, it makes the games look completely unfair and unfun.
I literally can't put myself in someone's shoes who's playing Sonic for the first time. I was playing Sonic 2 before I can remember (I'm talking 3 years old) and Chemical Plant Zone was never hard wtf. If you said Metropolis Zone then I'd get it.
>normie dies once in mario
>"lol oops my mistake. oh well try again."
>normie dies once in sonic
>"this entire fricking concept should've never existed. i will never even attempt to try again."
i guess they really aren't much different from /vr/
Well, it's a fair point, but I still belive Sonic 2 might be the best one to recommend in this regard, because in Sonic 1 and Sonic CD, there's no way to avoid going under water in the water levels, with Sonic 2, all levels that have water were designed in a way that, depending on the route you take and how well you can play the game, you might avoid the water altogether. I know it can be difficult when starting out and not necessarily the be the best way to get exposed to the series, but at the same time Chemical Plant is a fun and fast level before you go in the water, downright exhilirating at times, and before that there's Emerald Hill which is also a fun and fast level, if by the point you drown in Chemical Plant the 1st time you still haven't developed a liking to Sonic's gameplay, at least enough to want to learn and keep going so you can keep playing it, overcoming the challenges like the water, then perhaps it wasn't meant to be and Sonic just doesn't appeal to you in particular, and that's fine, they're unique games and I can see why they'd be divisive, my main issue is people developing the conclusion that because a certain gameplay and level design isn't appealing to them, that must mean that it's fundamentally flawed and those that like it are delusional somehow. which I see often online.
Chemical plant is the best second zone out of the three games
I couldn't agree more, the water can be intimidating at first, but if you know what to do you don't even have to touch the water at all, and it's easily one of the fastest level in the whole franchise, can't get enough of it.
cd is why people think sonic was never good
Sonic is for gays
Mario could kick Sonic's ass in a fight any day
At least 2d Sonic has class
3d aged worse than milk
games dont age. 3d sonic was shit when it came out
*goo-
Its not like you're being cut off between the two O's. Frickin' moron
>implying cd is bad