Rumor: Sega Finishing Sonic Wii "Trilogy"

[Harlemura]

I hope if they do make a third storybook one, it's for the regular Wii. I liked Sonic and the Black Knight, but I ain't intending to get a Wii-U.
Which is a console that's going to sound funnier for even longer than "Wii" did.

 

[Magnatek]

Hmm...color me interested. If it is the final storybook title, that raises one question; what else is there with stories? Arabian Nights and King Arthur are covered, and I find it hard to imagine Sherlock the HedgeHolmes.

 

[Andrew Northcutt]

As badly recieved as it may have been, I've gotta say, I honestly enjoyed playing Secret Rings. It was kinda buggy and unpolished and could have used a couple more months in development, sure, but I don't think that it deserved the thrashing it took when it first came out.

 

[orangeapples]

Hmm...color me interested. If it is the final storybook title, that raises one question; what else is there with stories? Arabian Nights and King Arthur are covered, and I find it hard to imagine Sherlock the HedgeHolmes.

I'm thinking something Asiany. I mean, relative to the Americas (because I'm from the US and we're the center of the world /sarcasm) we got something set in the East, something set in the Middle East, so why not something set in the Far East?

 

[Saltyk]

They do and it does, but some people don't follow Sonic enough to know that the last couple of games are good

Translation: Some people don't follow my personal opinions enough to know that I think the last couple of Sonic games are good.

Colors and Sonic 4 were both well-received. and the daytime stages in Unleashed were praised too

Really. Because I've heard more hate for Sonic 4 and Unleashed's daytime levels than praise. I'm not trying to use that to "prove" that they were bad like you're trying to use praise to "prove" that they're good. I'm just saying.

Are you always this rude when you disagree with someone? >_>

My previous post was not a review, so I didn't feel the need to elaborate on why I liked Colors and 4, but maybe I should have elaborated on what Sonic Colors proves: competency. Stuff like "the camera allows you to see where you're going" and "it's not buggy". These things are so basic that it's usually not necessary to mention them, but this is an improvement over games like Shadow the Hedgehog. Whether or not you like something is, of course, always subjective, but basic competency is not, and Sonic Colors proves that they are capable of being competent.

As for "but some people don't follow Sonic enough to know that the last couple of games are good", it stands to reason that people who haven't liked Sonic since the Genesis or Dreamcast probably have not played many post-Dreamcast Sonic games. After all, if you don't like Sonic, why play Sonic? And, yes, the responses to Sonic the Hedgehog 4 that I have seen was mostly positive, and almost every criticism and rant I see for Unleashed says something good about the daytime stages. What I was going for here was that there was some positive feedback from Unleashed. I don't know about you, but I'be yet to see anyone who has anything good to say about Shadow or '06.

By the way, this should save you some time later on, there is an understanding that since all opinions are subjective, it isn't really necessary to point that out when you write one. Not having to put a disclaimer on every opinion you ever write really is a nice time saver.

I'll say this. The last Sonic game I played was Sonic Heroes. And it was a buggy piece of shit. I liked the idea, but the actual game was almost unplayable. I have heard good things about Sonic Colors, but don't own a Wii, so can't really say anything. But, if they actually managed to be competent and play test the game for a change, I might have some [sub]small[/sub] hope for Sonic Team.

As for Unleashed, I did want to play it when I saw the daytime levels, but I had a really terrible feeling about the Were-hog levels. From what I heard, I was right. Which sucks, because I really wanted to play a good Sonic game. Still interested in Sonic 4, but honestly just haven't gotten around to it. I love Sonic, but his games are pretty low on my radar these days.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Just remake Sonic Adventure but make it so that collisions with the walls don't bring you to a dead stop, and instead slow you down a bit. Poof instant hit game.

 

[GeorgW]

When will they just give up and remake the original 3 Sonic games?
Or make more rush games, those were great!

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

Ah Sonic, the once-beloved mascot now long deceased, but nonetheless returned to a lurching parody of life as a gruesomely reanimated corpse, what atrocity will they inflict upon your ravaged shell next?

Sonic is dead.​

He's dead. Just like every other platforming game mascot that nobody talks about anymore because they've been allowed to fade away into obscurity gracefully. But the Sonic Team won't give their once beloved mascot a proper burial and allow him to moulder in peace, they have to drag his rotting carcass out into the daylight and heap even more humiliation upon him - it's just sad at this point.

What did Sonic ever do to deserve his legacy being pissed on by the string of hideous parodies of "Sonic" games that they keep on releasing? And more importantly, why the hell do people still buy those games? Pattern recognition people! Look into it!

Sonic fans are evidently as masochistic as the Sonic developers are delusional - they release games that you hate and you buy them so you can hate them and complain about them. Team Sonic are the video game equivalent of George Lucas: they won't rest until they've completely ruined their franchise, to the point where even our nostalgia for the times when Sonic games were good are poisoned by our seething bitterness and resentment; giving them your money only leads to even further humiliations. The only way to win is not to play at all. You only have yourselves to blame when Sonic Team releases another abomination, because you gave them your damn money - please stop doing that.

Sincerely,

My fond childhood memories of decent games.

 

[Scrustle]

Why does everything have to be a trilogy nowadays? There's the Halo trilogy, the Mass Effect trilogy, the Gears of War trilogy, along with many others too. The same is happening in films. It seems to have started with LoTR, but has only gained momentum in the games industry more recently. But why? Not EVERYTHING has to be a trilogy. Loads of these franchises were never supposed to be a trilogy from the start, but they always act like they were around the release of the second game. I guess a trilogy is a good length for a decent story arch, but it annoys me how everything seems to want to be a trilogy, but only after the game gets popular.

As for another Sonic game, it's not worth it. I had Sonic and the Secret Rings, it was alright but got dull very quick. The controls were pretty terrible, I never felt like I was actually in control though. Sega should just focus on on the Sonic games they have already announced. They seem to be going in a better direction that those games went. I would love a Sonic Adventure 3, but not on DS. And to be honest, even if they did make a Sonic Adventure 3 it wouldn't play anything like the first two.

I don't really like the direction Sonic is going in right now with Sonic 4 and Generations. The games are okay to play, but I feel really disappointed that to do that they went back to 2D side scrolling style gameplay. To me it just feels like Sega caved in to all the angry fans who wished Sonic was like it was when they were a kid. The reason the games aren't as good as they were isn't because they're in 3D, it's because the games have shoddy design and terrible controls. To say that having an extra dimension is to blame is silly. Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 were great games, even if the controls in SA1 were a bit iffy. They still prove it's not 3D that's the problem, it's the overall quality of the product. 3D isn't to blame for the catastrophic loading times and the stupid plot of Sonic 2006. 3D isn't to blame for the stupid "were-hog" in Sonic Unleashed. They just have poor design and poor quality. I feel like going back to 2D style gameplay is a step back. It's like Sega is giving in to that they can't make a good 3D game and just giving up and returning to 20 year old style game design. They shouldn't give up! They should hand Sonic over to a more component studio and give them 3 years or so to really make sure they make a great game.

 

[Arehexes]

The next game is going to be sonic giving you the goatse the entire game. And I'm not trying to be a dick I love sonic games, from sonic 1 all the way to heroes (yes I like heroes, but just barely).

 

[Arehexes]

Why does everything have to be a trilogy nowadays? There's the Halo trilogy, the Mass Effect trilogy, the Gears of War trilogy, along with many others too. The same is happening in films. It seems to have started with LoTR, but has only gained momentum in the games industry more recently. But why? Not EVERYTHING has to be a trilogy. Loads of these franchises were never supposed to be a trilogy from the start, but they always act like they were around the release of the second game. I guess a trilogy is a good length for a decent story arch, but it annoys me how everything seems to want to be a trilogy, but only after the game gets popular.

As for another Sonic game, it's not worth it. I had Sonic and the Secret Rings, it was alright but got dull very quick. The controls were pretty terrible, I never felt like I was actually in control though. Sega should just focus on on the Sonic games they have already announced. They seem to be going in a better direction that those games went. I would love a Sonic Adventure 3, but not on DS. And to be honest, even if they did make a Sonic Adventure 3 it wouldn't play anything like the first two.

I don't really like the direction Sonic is going in right now with Sonic 4 and Generations. The games are okay to play, but I feel really disappointed that to do that they went back to 2D side scrolling style gameplay. To me it just feels like Sega caved in to all the angry fans who wished Sonic was like it was when they were a kid. The reason the games aren't as good as they were isn't because they're in 3D, it's because the games have shoddy design and terrible controls. To say that having an extra dimension is to blame is silly. Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 were great games, even if the controls in SA1 were a bit iffy. They still prove it's not 3D that's the problem, it's the overall quality of the product. 3D isn't to blame for the catastrophic loading times and the stupid plot of Sonic 2006. 3D isn't to blame for the stupid "were-hog" in Sonic Unleashed. They just have poor design and poor quality. I feel like going back to 2D style gameplay is a step back. It's like Sega is giving in to that they can't make a good 3D game and just giving up and returning to 20 year old style game design. They shouldn't give up! They should hand Sonic over to a more component studio and give them 3 years or so to really make sure they make a great game.

Yay someone who gets that it's not the 3D that ruined it, it's the fact the controls/gameplay/tech got worse and worse. But Generations from my understanding is that 3D sonic will play like a 3D sonic game (I hope so)

 

[Verdilian]

Hmm... Interesting. I know that the team behind Colors made the first two games. And of course, I loved Colors and found Black Knight to be decent. I'll be looking forward to this game. But remember, cautious optimism.

 

[Adam28]

Sonic Adventure 3DS?

Interesting. I think Sonic needs to stay a way a few years from consoles or take a similar approach to what other classic titles are doing e.g. Castlevania (excluding the 3D version) which has pretty well received DS games, Megaman, Kirby etc.