plus as the story goes on Sonic keeps changing, while Mario is kind of a static character. Sonic is incredibly dynamic.
Static does not necessarily mean bad. Sometimes you have a _good_ design. No reason to fix something that isn't broken.
Even though most of the games have glitches and bugs, the game is still possible to beat and it justs keeps me entertained.
That is a wrongful statement. First off, glitches _can_ ruin a game. In SA2 the glitches weren't all that bad, and more than anything, were entertaining. Ever since then, glitches have only proven to make the game more frustrating. Sometimes you may be on a rail and attempt to transfer to the next rail, and instead go flying off into the abyss. Or run against a wall, jump, and fly into the abyss. Or hit a wall straight-on and turn 90-degrees for absolutely no reason and go running into the abyss. Or have a cutscene play after hitting a boss and after it ends, go flying into the abyss. Or go around a loop and then for no reason fall through the floor into the abyss. How is that fun?
Not to mention, your argument of "still possible to beat" is flawed. Since when did any of these bugs prevent a user from completing the game? Hell, E.T. for the Atari is possible to beat! In both E.T. and the modern Sonic games, however, there are some rather nasty bugs that can completely destroy the experience. Furthermore, your argument of "still possible to beat" infers that you are trying to dodge claims of these bugs being harmful to the fun factor of a game.
I also like how the games are challenging as well which also increases the replay value for me.
Challenging does not equal replay value. If I just went through some frustrating stage where I glitched out half the time or had to make split-second-perfect jumps, the last thing I would want to do is play that stage again.
Also I just like the character more, to me it has more action and speed which appeals to me then mario.
"Yeah! Woohoo! Alright! We're Sonic Heroes!" I simply can't respect the Sonic universe anymore. I'm sorry.
there is nothing wrong with the characters as well
The addition of new characters into Sonic games has become a cliché now. There is no real purpose to half of the characters they're adding in. All these hedgehog recolors we get around here and Sega makes it worse by adding in Silver. That really makes me want to puke, that they're supporting such stupidity. Don't get me wrong, I actually did like Shadow when he was in SA2. He was like a sort of rival to Sonic. When they took him out of SA2 he simply didn't have a purpose anymore. He died after the ARK was transported back up, he should have stayed that way.
I really hate when people only refer the good games to be only classic sonic when the current titles could be better if the people who handle the character makes a game without problems.
Another company could probably make good Sonic games, but the point is that all the modern games are currently being handled by a company that
isn't competent. That's what all the fuss is about.
All I can say for Sonic though, the games are getting better (like it or not) at a very slow pace.
Uhh, Sonic Advance 2 was better than Sonic Rush, Sonic Advance 1 was better than Sonic Advance 2. Sonic Heroes was better than Sonic2K6, Sonic Adventure 2 was better than Sonic Heroes. A special case can be made for Secret Rings, but will the next games follow suit?