Please. This game is nothing on the crap-o-meter compared to Sonic 06. It's better than other Sonic games, too. It's better than Secret Rings. Better than Shadow, or even Heroes (though that's a bit of a stretch). The game controls better than all of those. Hell, I'd say it's got better controls than any of the Boost games.
Ugh god, it is
not better than Heroes. And Secret Rings wasn't something I would want to replay through, but it at least wasn't buggy as hell and offered some legitimate challenge. I haven't played Shadow, but based on what I've seen and heard about it, I wouldn't consider "better than Shadow" high praise.
Maybe you think one thing or another is "uninteresting", but I'm not the only person in existence who thought the game could actually be fun at times. You're clearly not giving it a chance, and by the looks of it you haven't been since the beginning. You can turn the voices off, so if you don't like them anyway, you shouldn't be bothered by their frequency of speaking when there's an option to get rid of it entirely.
* I think the platforming segments would be fine if every character's gameplay was sped up and/or there were enemies involved. Everything I've seen so far looks pretty basic and non-perilous.
* When all we had were a couple 1-minute trailers, I thought this game showed some promise, at least conceptually. After looking at gameplay from E3 as well as listening to other people's sentiments I decided the game wasn't going to do well, on the grounds of the gameplay looking stale, the soundtrack being bland, and the one-liners getting on my nerves. I did not expect the game to be a buggy unfinished mess, which is what we got.
* You know what would be even better is if the dialogue was less frequent in gameplay so I can enjoy some of it without Sonic or Knuckles' quips getting shoved down my throat every five seconds.
* The SRB2 forum disallows "If you don't like it, don't download it" because it's a nonconstructive argument used to dissuade criticism. The same reasoning applies here: being able to turn the voices off does not shield the dialogue from criticism.
Lives are a BAD THING. They exist only as fake difficulty to keep us playing the game longer.
No, they exist to create stakes. That is exactly my point. Lives make you care about the danger of the situation and think about how to approach obstacles thoughtfully, rather than just trying to plow through it as fast or as easily as possible. Citing it as just being an artificial difficulty enhancer makes me think you don't really understand that much about game design, nor the point I'm trying to make in that there needs to be consequences for the player's actions.
And you mean to tell me you haven't even played it? How exactly do you expect me to think you're better to speak for this game than someone who's played the thing?
What if the person arguing with you is someone who has experience looking at games critically, or someone with a less biased perspective due to not really having a preconceived opinion on the franchise this game is from? What if you
want this game to be good, and so you're more inclined to look at things from a brighter perspective while not paying much attention to the game's weaknesses?
Of course I haven't played it, I'm not spending $60 on this shit. Just because you've played it doesn't mean you have greater authority on the subject over someone who hasn't; if you did, it would be super-easy to defend Superman 64 just by taking the time to download it and say "Well,
you haven't played it, so how do
you know it's bad?" No hands-on opinion is a valid argument unless it's backed by actual fact and reason.
Yeah, and? This game isn't so bad that I didn't want to finish it. It's functional, and I think the writing is good, and the graphics, while inconsistent, usually look alright. The gameplay is more of a mesh to tie in everything else, and it's still a hell of a lot more functional than any main series title released from 2005 to 2009.
The writing would be better if the game didn't try to teach you through character dialogue FOUR TIMES that you can push buttons to make things happen; there's hand-holding and then there's Sonic Boom's tutorials. And can you really call it "more functional" when the only game with more game-breaking bugs is maybe '06?
If people don't care about Sonic, they aren't going to be talking about Sonic. Anyone who complains about this game is a critic or a Sonic fan, because everyone else automatically writes off every new Sonic game, regardless of quality, as "ehh nyeehh another bad Sonic game whatever bleh" and never mentions it again.
You are hyper-generalizing in order to strengthen your point; subsequently, your generalizations are wrong. A majority of the critics and gamers I've heard from tend to agree, even if they didn't like Sonic, that Generations and Colors were good games, and I think some would even consider Lost World to be decent. As far as non-Sonic fans go, the complaints I've heard for Rise of Lyric range from "Why is Sonic slow" / "This doesn't feel like a Sonic game" to "Oh my god I just fell through the floor" and "lmao I can bypass the entire game by pause-jumping with Knux".
犬夜叉;763185 said:
You know why Sonic 06 is better? Because the things that happen in that game are so absurd that they're fucking hilarious.
I dunno about that; I do like how the character you're using in Sonic Boom can die instantly from wading into knee-deep water (complete with gurgling noises).
