Sonic '06 - Objectively Better Than Portal

[bafrali]

Oh my God! How couldn't we see it. How could we let this masterpiece of a game to be torn apart by critics for being ahead of its time? It wasn't a failure. We as humans failed in our existance for denying this game its place on the golden pedestal of game design an history books.

I used to want Glados in every game.

Now I only want an underage girl kissing a dead hedgehog corpse IN EVERY OTHER STINKING WORK OF ART. (want you gone referance..kinda) because there are no other way for us to reach the enlightment as species. To the Necrophilia and Beyond!!!

 

[Andy Shandy]

Y'know, I want to play along with everyone here.

But I'm sorry, I can't.

I mean...I just can't joke about a game that managed to drive a popular internet animator to the point of mental breakdown.

Playing along...? I don't understand.

You mean, you don't truly believe that Sonic '06 is one of the finest games in all existence? I believe it is you who is the joke here, good sir!

Perhaps you have not been enlightened by the genius of '06 yet.

 

[Vegosiux]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

 

[Vegosiux]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

Someone missed the joke. >.>

I tend to miss the unfunny ones, yes.

Silly me.

 

[hazabaza1]

changed gaming forever

Uuuuuuuh... I seriously think you're overstating the impact that Sonic 06 had.
It was a shitty game, sure, but it produced Pokecapn+Crew's LP and the GameGrumps series.
To be honest I enjoy watching those series a lot more than playing Portal. Not that Portal is bad.

 

[bafrali]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

Someone missed the joke. >.>

I tend to miss the unfunny ones, yes.

Silly me.

Come on. Don't be so jaded. Even if you don't find it funny, you must have seen the clever jabs at the "hardcore" and "retro" games...all of which tried to copy the genius of the Sonic 06 unsuccessfully. When will they learn?

 

[shrekfan246]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

Someone missed the joke. >.>

Edit: I thought trolling was a big forum no-no. Apparently OP didn't get the memo.

I fail to see where this is trolling.

These are things that many people like to complain are prevalent in "modern" games. Taking those complaints, I've matched them up to two separate games to see how they hold up. Examining each title closely, one clearly comes out as being superior to the other. They're both ostensibly "modern" games, one of which succumbs to all of these "tropes" that people like to say are huge problems with the current gaming industry, and one of which eschews the tropes in favor of the opposing stance.

 

[aguspal]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

Someone missed the joke. >.>

I tend to miss the unfunny ones, yes.

Silly me.

I thougt it was a pretty interesting read and I rather like this thread.



Now seriously. In my opinion: Portal is a good game but a tad overrated, Sonic 06 is kinda broken BUT its also pretty fucking hilarious to play a game with so many bugs. It was actually FUN. More than what I can say about other games...

 

[njrk97]

I... ahh cant even teh brain i think broke it you hasss

 

[Beautiful End]

I agree.

Sonic also deals with relationships a lot better than Portal as well.

A romantic relationship between a human woman and a blue hedgehog teaches us that our physical forms are just barriers to something deeper.

Truly, Sonic '06 is the Citizen Kane of this generation.

Daystar, you are right. And for that, I thank you.

Now, where is that cute little raccoon I saw yesterday...?

OT: Arguably, it could be better. But it's not. I know this is probably a satire but still. Sonic 06 is soooooooooo badly designed...

-The genre is a beloved one. It's kinda like a platformer but not all the way. It could have been great if well developed. Portal actually took the "kinda FPS" genre and made it their own.
-The color palette is bigger but just because you have colors doesn't mean you gotta use them all.
-The levels are more colorful but broken. You can glitch through them or simply die for no reason.
-Sonic 06's challenge is finishing the game without going nuts. So I guess it IS more challenging.
-The game wants you to figure everything on your own. That's ok...but there are ways to do it. Portal puts the solution in front of you and expects you to figure it out. Sonic throws you into the Lion's Den and doesn't even give you a toothpick to defend yourself.
-Sonic 06 is longer, perhaps too long. After playing a broken game for so long, you start to miss something like Portal.
-Investment is irrelevant and varies per customer.

But seriously, if you don't believe me, just watch Game Grumps playing Sonic 06.

Do it. Go now. I'll wait.

Actually, this would summarize it:


...

And I rest my case.

 

[Shadowstar38]

I'm still here, waiting for the "objectively" bit to be pointed out and elaborated on. So far, all I've seen was subjective stuff, or rather, you keep talking about why you liked Sonic more than Portal.

Sorry, but at the use of "irrefutably prove" and "objectively" in the OP, I think I will have to let my ol' pal Inigo Montoya do the talking.

You haven't really been around too many modern game disscussions have you?

Each point is a laundry list of what gamers say is "wrong" with games today. Those people think of wrong in terms of objectivity as well. I can see why. If I finish something in an afternoon, and have no story to really think about, nor interesting and varied gameplay, well does make a game shit.

Now statistically, many of the people that claim gaming today sucks will also look at Valve as the crowning acheivement of what developers should be doing. That there presents it's own issues. But I digress.

Take a well loved game and put it up against the standards being laid out, and you can see it fail horribly at it. While a game everyone hails to be shit hits all the high marks.

The ending result will have one of two options.

The first is that it gives you a wealth of insight into why something isn't as bad as people make it out to be. With this new viewpoint you can gain a newfound respect for it.

Or, alternatively, people who use all the hallmarks that allegedly make a game better have to abandon their system because looking at something like this will make them foam at the mouth.

In short, this thread is an epic exercise in critical thought. It's less of a "joke" as the others would think, and more of an analysis of the state of gaming as a whole today.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

In light of my recent thread, I've come to the realization that many people feel that shorter games are not worth their money. They feel that the number of dollars spent should be roughly equal to the number of hours spent playing the game, or else they haven't gotten their money's worth. I've noticed a few other complaints about "modern" games as well, namely that many of them are first-person shooters with an extremely limited color palette, or are linear and just a succession of corridors that don't let you explore, or that they're too easy and don't challenge the player in any significant way.

I was one of the people in that thread who argued that games are getting objectively shorter, and commented that I like to get the most content for my dollar.

I didn't feel it was completely necessary to specify that volume alone isn't the only thing that makes a game worth buying to me.

Apparently, it was necessary. So without further adieu...

I seek to get the most content for my dollar as a goal, but ultimately, a shorter/fun game is more worthwhile than a longer/terrible game. The ideal game however is long/fun. Therefore, to me, Sonic '06 is still an overall bad game and Portal is still awesome, even though it's short.

Please don't make me specify what 'fun' equates to.

EDIT:
Notably, Portal was also never a full-price game. It was originally part of the Orange Box (which was already pretty low-price for what you got in the bundle), and then got its own stand-alone release. I don't remember the prices for it everywhere, but the stores around here were selling Portal for $10 as a stand-alone when it was new. For only $10, I have no complaints about the amount of content.

Regardless, the post was hilarious and I got quite a few good laughs out of it. Brightened up an otherwise boring and uneventful workday.

 

[TheCommanders]

I get that this is at least partially a joke, but it brings up a good point. Games need to be judged as their own entities. As Top Gear continually points out about cars, just building/judging by numbers or formulas doesn't cut it. It's all about execution, and how the complete package feels to the individual. For example, there's been a recent trend (for some reason) of thinking it makes you a great artistic critic to point out how blue and orange are very prominent hues in... well everything. What are the two primary colors in Portal again? Does that in any way affect your enjoyment of the product? No? Then shut the fuck up with your banal generalities that serve as a poor substitutes for actual critical thinking.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

There is no form without function and if the function is abundantly flawed then the form also suffers in which then both form the experience. My experience with Portal was better then Sonic '06.

Sure, one has more content over the other but does that mean the content is better? I personally say no.
Yes, the color schemes are different but if it fits the setting well then does it matter? Unless it goes against function then no.
If a number of game provides a very similar experience from one another then should I buy a particular game anyway? Chances are, 4 slight variations are my limit before I will do something else.

 

[00slash00]

this my be my favorite thread on this site, ever. anytime someone says that a game is inferior because its too short, i will link them to this thread

 

[Lugbzurg]

Wut!?

Ok, Portal is not a first-person shooter any more than Sonic '06 is a racing game or a beat-em-up title.

Color palate. Let's take a look back at Sonic the Hedgehog and Super Mario World. Now, the Super Nintendo was capable of producing more colors than the Genesis. But at the dawn of Sonic's debut, someone asked a guy at Sega about this and how they could compete there, and the Sega guy showed the other person Sonic the Hedgehog and Super Mario World side-by-side and asked him "Which one has more colors? It's not how many colors you have, it's what you do with them." That applies here. Sonic '06 has some pretty shoddy visuals. There's a lot of blur and obnoxious repetition. Overall, it's not pleasant to look at. Portal has a very interesting look to it. It's not just the colors, its the visual style as a whole.

Level design. You've gotten "Level design" confused with "art design". Sonic '06 has terrible level design, as Clement would tell you. We didn't ask for confusing direction with empty areas and the ball puzzle. Portal had excellent level design. It was actually fun to play.

Challenge. The reason Sonic '06 is so hard is because of the bad design choices. Shadow's Kingdom Valley was his hardest level. And need I remind you how early you play that level? The game's constant glitches and terrible design make it hard in a way that's frustrating, rather than rewarding.

Depth. Ha, ha, ha. Depth? In Sonic '06? That's just painful. As Clement explained in his now-rather-famous videos on Sonic '06, the multiple gameplay styles were one of the main things that killed this game. You've got nine playable characters, along with the super forms, Shadow's vehicles, and the mach-speed sections. There were way too many gameplay styles to keep a tight grip on, and as a result, they all fall so hard. Sonic '06 doesn't leave you to figure out anything for yourself. What are you talking about? They spell out everything for you in that game! Playable characters and the voice of Elise's dead dad are constantly telling you how to overcome every obstacle and interact with every object through the whole thing as everyone constantly points out the obvious about the environment. Portal is the one that leaves you to figure everything out on your own. After all "This next test is impossible." And as for story? The story of Sonic '06 was convoluted at best. Portal? It took the interesting storytelling mechanics of Half-Life and improved them with things like the Ratman chambers.

Length. Actually, you'd be shocked at how many people actually like short games. Yes, some people actually like to clear through the entire thing in one sitting and not have the story broken up as they play through it over several days. After all, haven't you seen Portal 2? That game is feature-length, yet many weren't happy with that, and felt that it was weighed down with too much filler, whereas the original gave you everything it needed and didn't bother with any pointless rubbish to make the game longer. Also, Silver is inexcusably-slow in Sonic '06. So, that's gonna make game time longer. Just sayin'. And as for that extra content for $15? It's just Hard Mode and Super Hard Mode. What do we get for Portal? Cool media. Nothing that lags the game down and makes it even more frustrating.

Investment. You know, that last bit actually looks like you started to acknowledge Sonic '06 as crap. This stuff isn't an accomplishment. That's actually the whole reason why it's so widely despised!

You know what, I'll just leave the first part of Clement's review, since I was bringing it up like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCwwxCL4iyw

Y'know, I want to play along with everyone here.

But I'm sorry, I can't.

I mean...I just can't joke about a game that managed to drive a popular internet animator to the point of mental breakdown.

Thank you.

Is this a joke? 'Cause, it really isn't funny. If it's supposed to be satire, as some people seem to be claiming it to be, it sure doesn't come off that way. It's like when people try to make the claim that this "Gungam Style" or whatever-it-is is supposed to be a parody on modern pop music videos when it's really nothing of the sort; contributing to the exact same things without a hint of irony.