• Sonic: How over rated is it?
    76 replies, posted
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYDsz1NFBJw[/media]
Sonic is a great drive-thru. Stop the blasphemy.
There's far better games on the Sega Genesis than Sonic.
"most over rated game ever" you mean like many games today?
"8 frame reaction time = 1/4th of a second" That's actually less time to react than sonic Unleashed and Sonic Generations and that's what people complain about... Yeah you move faster, but you can see what's going on.
-snip-
These guys seem like cunts. That said, most of this video is just either nit picking, or not even talking about the game play. My personal opinion: Sonic 1 was pretty meh. Sonic 2 and 3 were pretty good. And then its all downhill from there. Til Colors anyway.
It really feels like they're pulling things out of their ass because they were mario fans growing up and aren't good at it now that they're adults.
Funnily enough people always rag on 3D sonic games because they didn't translate well but I feel like a lot of the issues Sonic has are remedied with 3 dimensions. Also I find it interesting to note that although Sega is not a player in the console market and thus don't need Sonic to sell consoles he's still around.Wierd , huh?
Actually I have to agree with them. As much as I love Sonic & Knuckles, Sonic Adventures 1/2, Generations and All Star Racing.... Sonic's design has a lot of flaws and marketing it based on going fast was wrong when you can hardly see what's going on ahead of you. [editline]29th July 2014[/editline] Also they have a really good point about it being a "gaming icon". I really don't think Sonic would be as big as it were if it were on Super Nintendo instead. I'd guess it'd be a smaller franchise like Rayman but I don't see it being "icon worthy". They're good games but they also have a lot of flaws and there are more deserving platformers worthy of "icon status".
[QUOTE=Oizen;45531378]These guys seem like cunts. That said, most of this video is just either nit picking, or not even talking about the game play. My personal opinion: Sonic 1 was pretty meh. Sonic 2 and 3 were pretty good. And then its all downhill from there. Til Colors anyway.[/QUOTE] The sonic adventures were good too.
Sonic 1, 2, Sonic and Knuckles, and both Adventures were great. The rest were okay to awful. Forgot Sonic Heroes; that was pretty good.
[QUOTE=usaokay;45531542]A Sonic nearby my location has a 2 1/2 stars on Yelp, but damn, don't their chili dogs taste fantastic[/QUOTE] 50-cent corn dog day is amazing.
I would say that after Sonic Adventure 2 is when they stopped getting decent and more into bleh.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;45531568]I would say that after Sonic Adventure 2 is when they stopped getting decent and more into bleh.[/QUOTE] Sonic Heroes is pretty good though.
I think these guys have missed the fact that Mario and Sonic are not the same kind of game. The mechanics of the Sonic games are built around speed-running, everything from the novel (at the time) physics engine to the health mechanics and level design. I think Sonic 1 suffers a lot from this because they failed to provide a good learning curve; you basically had to memorize the levels carefully before you could try to clear them quickly, which isn't exactly accessible. Sonic 1 can still provide fun as a basic platformer, but I think they hit a sweet spot with Sonic 2, 3 and Knuckles, by providing a multitude of paths through the level. Failing at any point puts you on a slower path, but there are also plenty of opportunities to go from a slower path to a faster one. This kind of level design is completely unlike the Mario games and should serve as the first clue that these games are fundamentally different. If you read interviews with members of the original Sonic Team, it's clear they had their own vision for the game, they weren't trying to reproduce Mario for their own platform. Sega may have requested it be a 2D platformer, but I don't think the developers had much to do with the marketing aspect beyond that. I agree that the original Sonic games are often overrated. It's easy to rate them too high when subsequent Sonic games, which have generally been bad, beg the comparison, but that does not mean that the originals were bad. I think the original Sonic series is great, but for completely different reasons than why I think early Mario games are great. Mario created a template for a new genre of games, so it's easy to make the mistake of comparing Sonic to that genre, but as they are only superficially similar, it just isn't a fair comparison.
I'm surprised at how bad some redlettermedia videos are edited and produced sometimes. Audio Levels all over the place, they didn't keep them the same between shots. I turn down my speakers for their game-footage audio, and then the next scene with them at the table, I can't hear. The Game footage wasn't deinterlaced, or when it was, it was done badly. Didn't bother cropping the game footage to scale to the video frame. Way too high of a shutter speed. White balance is different between the cameras. Also you were recording 480i likely, which is 60fields per second. They would have been seeing double that, but going through the frames in the recorded video would have been only half the frames seen while playing the game since they'd be combined.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;45531705]I'm surprised at how bad some redlettermedia videos are edited and produced sometimes. Audio Levels all over the place, they didn't keep them the same between shots. I turn down my speakers for their game-footage audio, and then the next scene with them at the table, I can't hear. The Game footage wasn't deinterlaced, or when it was, it was done badly. Didn't bother cropping the game footage to scale to the video frame. Way too high of a shutter speed. White balance is different between the cameras. Also you were recording 480i likely, which is 60fields per second. They would have been seeing double that, but going through the frames in the recorded video would have been only half the frames seen while playing the game since they'd be combined.[/QUOTE] 16 frames at 60 fps would still be around a quarter of a second. also man who cares they've got a point
there is not much to discuss regarding the vid. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but "Sonic is overrated" is an argument that can't be backed up. Most of it is unfunny filler skits about two dudes playing sonic games horribly. as brt said, the editing is half-assed. What's the point in this vid? It's unfunny, uninformative, and poorly done. Please don't watch this video, it's click bait.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;45531861]16 frames at 60 fps would still be around a quarter of a second. also man who cares they've got a point[/QUOTE] I know the time is the same, my point is it's not 8frames to the player. Their method of counting was flawed. Also I'm not putting down there point. I think Sonic actually sucks. I never enjoyed playing a real sonic game outside of Sonic Adventures. my point is for a group which makes this stuff on a regular basis and makes these films here and there and also does a movie review show, I'd at least like them to catch these obvious editing messups.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;45531705]I'm surprised at how bad some redlettermedia videos are edited and produced sometimes. Audio Levels all over the place, they didn't keep them the same between shots. I turn down my speakers for their game-footage audio, and then the next scene with them at the table, I can't hear. The Game footage wasn't deinterlaced, or when it was, it was done badly. Didn't bother cropping the game footage to scale to the video frame. Way too high of a shutter speed. White balance is different between the cameras. Also you were recording 480i likely, which is 60fields per second. They would have been seeing double that, but going through the frames in the recorded video would have been only half the frames seen while playing the game since they'd be combined.[/QUOTE] PreviouslyRecorded tends not to care about quality compared to Half in the Bag or Best of the Worst
I love RLM, but I strongly disagree with this video. Not only does the complaints sound nitpicky (I'm reminded of the Ocarina of Time Sequelitis a lot), but I have a really hard time getting the "Sonic was only popular because of THAT commercial." argument when the marketing used in the US, wasn't used in Europe, yet Sonic was more successful in Europe, and while I may be incorrect, not ad I saw ever mentioned Blast Processing. And no, Sonic wasn't fast because of the need to market the faster CPU, Yuji Naka was already working on something long before the marketing material, in fact Sonic was faster during development and was slowed down for the final release in order to be more fair/balanced. Not only that but did they completly failed to see the point of the game and what set it apart from other platformers of the same time, mainly the momentum based, fast-paced gameplay and the use of more natural terrain, as opposed to the flat terrain and fixed speeds/jump height of other caracters at the time. And all the talk about how Mario was much better... I find it sad that after 20 years we still have to compare games with different focus and scopes, only because they marketed competition at the time.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;45533397]PreviouslyRecorded tends not to care about quality compared to Half in the Bag or Best of the Worst[/QUOTE] I guess I can see that. Just a shame with all the pontential they have to make rookie messups in some places. Edit: Ironically mistyped.
Overrated doesn't mean bad. Most good games are overrated
[QUOTE=Brt5470;45531705]I'm surprised at how bad some redlettermedia videos are edited and produced sometimes. Audio Levels all over the place, they didn't keep them the same between shots. I turn down my speakers for their game-footage audio, and then the next scene with them at the table, I can't hear. The Game footage wasn't deinterlaced, or when it was, it was done badly. Didn't bother cropping the game footage to scale to the video frame. Way too high of a shutter speed. White balance is different between the cameras. Also you were recording 480i likely, which is 60fields per second. They would have been seeing double that, but going through the frames in the recorded video would have been only half the frames seen while playing the game since they'd be combined.[/QUOTE] IIRC this is a side thing done by rich and what's his face, it isn't something the whole team works on.
Honestly I hate to be that guy but most of their points they brought up literally just are grabbing for straws as a result of "not playing it right" or not "getting it". It comes off as clickbait honestly I mean the dude in the very beginning said when he was a kid he was a mario fanboy and when he played sonic as a kid he instantly didn't like it. Hows that for bias lmao Not to mention the atrocious editing in the video really doesn't help their (shitty) points all too well.
Sonic 3 and Knuckles is better than any of the Mario platformers on the Snes.
What's up with the sound editing, every time it cuts to them playing the game I have to turn the volume way down
Never really liked Sonic games, even the older ones feel like they're falling apart as you play, with the level design progressively getting worse as you go through the game. Sonic is so hard-designed to be a straight-line speed game that the moment you start adding more complex level structures it loses a lot of its appeal. At least it does to me.
i don't think this is nitpicky at all. it's pretty obvious sonic was meant to be a mascot from the start, and the whole level design thing seems pretty spot on [editline]29th July 2014[/editline] and there ARE tons of segments in the sonic games where you literally don't have to control your character
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.