Sonic Unleashed?

[Locit]

Holy shit this game gets brutal at the end!

Like, I mean, wow! It's sort of amazing!

[Owen Axel]

Hey, wow. Cutscenes aren't unskippable in the 360 version after all. You have to press Start 5-6 times in a row. Why? Pressing the button once should do the trick. This way it's more like an easter egg than a standard option.

[Locit]

Hey, wow. Cutscenes aren't unskippable in the 360 version after all. You have to press Start 5-6 times in a row. Why? Pressing the button once should do the trick. This way it's more like an easter egg than a standard option.

Be grateful you can skip them at all.

[Arcade]

The Wii bersion is getting better reviews... but I will save my money for Crash: Mind over Mutant, a friend has the ps2 version and the game is fun...

[(...)]

I've been playing some more.

I recently discovered the secondary platforming levels, like the Holaska "boost the whole way without dying" stage. They are significantly less well-designed than the main levels.

The spagonia day stage and the egg devil ray stage both rock!

The Chun-nan day stage feels like a 2006 level. It's all bottomless pits, dodgy homing attack lock-ons and drab colours.

I'm stuck on the Holaska night stage. Seriously, how do you jump off those climbable falling ice pillars without falling in the water? On the second set of pillars, I do the double jump off the third pillar and miss the snowy ground by a few pixels EVERY DAMN TIME!

Personally, I think the critics who propose Sonic can succeed by being stripped back are completely wrong. If they ever got the game they all said they want, they would hate it... they would complain that it is too shallow and too short. A $60, 12-hour Sonic game DOES need to be fleshed out with alternate ideas and play styles to succeed.

There are ways of fleshing out short games without having to cram in levels from other completely different games. e.g. online, multiplayer, multiple endings, time trials, episodic content, collectibles (anyone else remember when you had to do special stages to get the chaos emeralds?). Also, MAKING THE GAME GOOD promotes replay value! I've done the Mazuri and Spagonia day stages many, many times now, just because I enjoy them.

Incidentally, Sonic Rush was all run-and-jump gameplay and that didn't feel short.

[Locit]

The Chun-nan day stage feels like a 2006 level. It's all bottomless pits, dodgy homing attack lock-ons and drab colours.

Really? I think it might be one of my favourite stages, and my experience with the homing attack has been pretty positive. For me, Adabat comes closest to 06 in terms of pit/water death count, though mostly just on the first attempt. Subsequent playthroughs have proven extremely entertaining.

As for the extra day stages, I haven't really hated any of them. They're usually pretty short, and since there's typically no real penalty for running out of lives it's hard for me to get too worked up over the more brutal, twitch-oriented levels (see: Adabat 2 or 3, I forget which). The chao-gathering Spagonia level comes close, though.

Probably the most disappointing thing in the game thus far, though, has been the reuse of Chun-nan's faux-boss and Spagonia's robot-projectile segment in later stages. While they're decently fun semi-scripted events, the subsequent uses don't really add anything new and even make the originals seem less interesting.

[Radrappy]

There's something just insanely soul sucking about trying to make sense out of Ign's 4.5 scoring of one of your most anticipated games while a banner flashes "PRINCE OF PERSIA, 5/5-gamepro, 9.3-IGN, 'ONLY 2 MORE DAYS'" at the top of the screen.

[Yami CJMErl]

Ubisoft probably pays better than SEGA.

[Hybrid]

To be honest, that's the sort of review I'd probably have written if I'd sat down to write just after beating Eggmanland.

Here's my speculation about why the Wii version is getting better reviews than its HD brothers: The 360 version makes you angry. Every time I played it - prior to memorizing the level layouts - I'd be muttering "that's bullshit" every couple of minutes. And I assume the Wii version is a hell of a lot less infuriating, even if it is excessively mediocre.

[FlashTHD]

Incidentally, Sonic Rush was all run-and-jump gameplay and that didn't feel short.

Sonic Rush was not $60.

[gr4yJ4Y]

Incidentally, Sonic Rush was all run-and-jump gameplay and that didn't feel short.

It also had those talking-head story scenes. And you had to collect the chaos emeralds to reach the last story sequence and boss. All of which took up some extra time.

On the other hand I found Sonic Rush Adventure's set-up a little annoying (though not a game-breaker) when playing it the first time. I just wanted to play the traditional levels instead of sitting through dialog and touch-screen minigames. And then the levels would only last for a few minutes. I've had a lot of fun replaying it latter, but that first time I was disappointed.

I don't like that IGN gave Unleashed 360 such a low score, if only because my taste in gaming will continue to be questioned when I eventually go and buy it.

[Locit]

And I assume the Wii version is a hell of a lot less infuriating, even if it is excessively mediocre.

It's actually quite a lot worse!

There's something just insanely soul sucking about trying to make sense out of Ign's 4.5 scoring of one of your most anticipated games while a banner flashes "PRINCE OF PERSIA, 5/5-gamepro, 9.3-IGN, 'ONLY 2 MORE DAYS'" at the top of the screen.

Did anyone watch the IGN video review? It looked like a toddler was playing. My friend's younger sister (12) tried the game out for a bit a few nights back, and she far more adept at not jumping over dash pads into obvious bottomless pits than whoever was reviewing the game at IGN.

[Esrever]

Honestly, I think that Wii reviewers are scoring a bit higher because they are just generally the kind of gamers that have a greater affinity for Sonic. They are definitely being a lot more forgiving. Look at how much ign's 360 reviewer hates the night time stages... then imagine how he would have reacted to a version of the game that had three times as many.

If anything, it shows how bizarre it is for SEGA to make the nextgen version of any Sonic game the primary sku.

[FlashTHD]

Honestly, I think that Wii reviewers are scoring a bit higher because they are just generally the kind of gamers that have a greater affinity for Sonic. They are definitely being a lot more forgiving. Look at how much ign's 360 reviewer hates the night time stages... then imagine how he would have reacted to a version of the game that had three times as many.

Woahwoahwoah. Is IGN really supposed to have reviewers in place that're that intentionally, blindly dedicated/exclusive to a single platform/company? That's what this sounded like.

[DackAttac]

I think what he meant was that someone who signed up to review Wii games probably gets floored by vibrant Sonic-y worlds and is used to controls that can be spotty because of the mediocre input method. You get a reviewer used to handing out perfect scores to Halo and Call of Duty, a game containing a color other than brown probably goes in at a handicap. Add in the fact that the camera/controls/whatever it is that's off this time aren't 100% fine-tuned like the big-name titles usually are, and you have an awful score.

I haven't played any version of Unleashed, I'm kinda doubting I'll bother, but I do feel Sonic is a really easy target beat up on when he hasn't really been a critic's darling since before these people started game journalism—possibly gaming. I mean, really, I'm heavily considering getting a 360, but something still bugs me as I remember the kind of kid that owned a Genesis or an SNES when I was younger. Nintendo's now pandering to his mother whilst Microsoft and Sony are marketing to the kids who stuff him in his locker. If there was to be a Sonic game that deserved to be taken seriously, could it find its audience?

Incidentally, Sonic Rush was all run-and-jump gameplay and that didn't feel short.

Sonic Rush was not $60.

Also, don't forget that Rush also unnecessarily padded itself out by forcing you to play it twice. And it didn't feel short but it felt incredibly shallow. I seriously wonder if it's less about actual time and value, it's about feeling "done". That in order to not feel ripped off, you need to start to be feeling a little sick of the game.

[Esrever]

All I'm saying is, if you are a reviewer who specializes in covering a particular console or company, it is likely at least partially reflective of your personal taste. If you are a Wii reviewer you probably have a reasonably pronounced soft spot for all-ages platforming staring classic gaming icons. You'll probably go a little easier on Sonic, even when his game has severe problems, because you just like Sonic games a little more than the other guy, you know?

[FlashTHD]

You get a reviewer used to handing out perfect scores to Halo and Call of Duty, a game containing a color other than brown probably goes in at a handicap. Add in the fact that the camera/controls/whatever it is that's off this time aren't 100% fine-tuned like the big-name titles usually are, and you have an awful score.

Guess this isn't too farfetched :p But in seriousness:

All I'm saying is, if you are a reviewer who specializes in covering a particular console or company, it is likely at least partially reflective of your personal taste. If you are a Wii reviewer you probably have a reasonably pronounced soft spot for all-ages platforming staring classic gaming icons. You'll probably go a little easier on Sonic, even when his game has severe problems, because you just like Sonic games a little more than the other guy, you know?

I don't know, I think this is generalizing things too much. I've not seen a lot of Wii-specific Unleashed reviews but does it really seem like this is true this time, setting aside the obvious case of Nintendo Power? I thought it was mostly "well the day stages on Wii let you go really fast more so this is much better", and I haven't had any reason to suspect otherwise.

The finding-an-audience bit is a great point but i'm too wiped out at the moment to think about a good reply.

Also, don't forget that Rush also unnecessarily padded itself out by forcing you to play it twice.

I see where this is coming from but, a little bit unfair to say "forced", depending on how seriously you take getting to the usual derivative climax. Also, there was an overall crappy story in place, but in Rush's case it was something to motivate two playthroughs at least.

And it didn't feel short but it felt incredibly shallow. I seriously wonder if it's less about actual time and value, it's about feeling "done". That in order to not feel ripped off, you need to start to be feeling a little sick of the game.

You can become sick of any game. It's in how you get sick of it. Otherwise, that's right. or has yet another point gone soaring over my head here?

[DackAttac]

And it didn't feel short but it felt incredibly shallow. I seriously wonder if it's less about actual time and value, it's about feeling "done". That in order to not feel ripped off, you need to start to be feeling a little sick of the game.

You can become sick of any game. It's in how you get sick of it. Otherwise, that's right. or has yet another point gone soaring over my head here?

No, I think we're on the same page, but I'd love to hear you elaborate on the "how you get sick of it" part, mainly because I think you're on the verge of putting something into words that I couldn't.

[Dr. Watson]

So how about the new human characters design huh? Personaly, i dont like 'em. Many people will say that cartoony-looking humans is the way to go in the Sonic universe but i disagree. I guess that mostly has to do with the fact that im simply not used to it, but its also because it makes Eggman seem less special. I thought it was cool how his design used to contrast against the more realistic humans and made him seem like some kind of weird humanoid egg (with a touch of walrus). It almost sorta felt like he belonged more with the fantastical, cartoony, interesting anthropomorphic creatures he seems to spend most of his time battling with than the realistic, uninteresting humans whom he shares species with.

Wow, this post came out way more nonsensical and pointless than i intended.

[Shadow Hog]

Y'know, I think I'm gonna say something completely different from what anyone's saying... I really like the Werehog stages, but really hate the Sonic ones.

Werehog's combat is a bit repetitive, yes, but now that I'm memorzing a few different moves, gotten up to Lv. 5 Strength, and stopped bothering to do a Critical Attack on EVERY goddamn enemy (usually just the last one of a batch), it's gotten a whole lot less tedious. Plus the platforming is actually plenty inventive, and genuinely fun - I'm rarely missing my jumps or anything. I was worried that clock tower in Spagonia would be a royal pain to get through, but the thing actually went by rather quickly, and quite easily, too...

Sonic, on the other hand, is just pants. The concept is sound, but the control simply isn't there. I'm finding myself veering WAY off target when I don't mean to, which makes moving onto small, lengthy platforms a hardship. It's just too damn loose! 2D is better in this regard, since there's less chance I'll be off to the side of the platform in that third dimension... but 2D is the exception, I've noticed, not the norm. I suppose it doesn't help that the last two Sonic stages I've tried were Holoska Act 1 and Apotos Act 3, the former being slippery as all hell and having tons of "run across this large body of water at blinding speed but don't even think of veering off to the side or there's no way you'll make it back on target without overshooting it" segments, and the latter having "here, grind on this rail for a really long time without missing any of our jumps or hitting any of the spikes because if you do you're instantly hosed, and don't even think about checkpoints because we can't be bothered to put any in". Too much trial-and-error for a platformer.

Nowhere near the return to form people have claimed it is, at any rate. But hey, as long as I'm enjoying the werehog stages - the parts everyone said I WOULDN'T enjoy as much - then certainly things are bound to pick up.

[DackAttac]

Jesus, you people are all over the goddamn map. I don't think Secret Rings had reactions this scattered. Polarized, yes, but not scattered.

[big_smile]

It seems Sonic Team share a similar view to some of the posters in this thread:

I asked one of the developers at TGS, you know I was like, come on everybody just wants Sonic running, like whats up with the werehog? And he was like, well, heres the deal... he [Sonic] runs at this miles per hour, kilometers per hour, and he laid out all of the statistics on how fast this hedgehog goes, and he was like In order to make a game where Sonic is running and everybody enjoys the whole thing we'd have to design this many miles of level, and it was some ungodly number. And he's like and that would be like maybe a three hour game and I was like wow, well that kinda stinks and he's like yeah, so we gotta do this other stuff.

Source: IGN's Three Read Lights quoted in Games are fun

In the original Mega Drive games the player had full control over Sonic's speed. For example, while it is possible to to complete Green Hill Zone Act 3, in around a minute, the stage also offers enough scope to allow for a full five minutes of play (perhaps even longer).
In newer Sonic games, this control is missing. Devices such as dash pads hurtle Sonic at full speed through the stage, regardless of the player's wishes. While this is initially thrilling, it is an ultimately shallow experience, as when being automatically propelled at high speeds, there isn't much scope for player input.

Sonic Team seem have to lost sight of the fact that the original games were a combination of both speed and exploration. While a speed based game might only last for three hours, this should only happen if the player desires to play in this manner. A good game should offer enough scope for exploration to allow for a much longer play session.

[Xyton]

What is this obsession with game length, anyway? Who cares is the game is only three hours as long as it's fun (and preferably replayable)? There always seems to be this talk of "is it long enough," or being too short because it's "only 10 hours." Come on! I'd much rather play a fun, short game than a long, [what sounds to be intermittently] crappy game. And then a game like Portal comes out and suddenly how long it is doesn't matter. Don't get me wrong; I love Portal and I'm glad the length didn't give it automatically poor scores, but it totally bucked that trend.

In other words, how long were the original Sonic games? Why would making another game of that length be such a problem?

[DackAttac]

Here's the other issue: Sonic's 1 & 2 existed before saving your game did. You didn't want the game to last more than 10 hours. Because even if you could pause it for dinner, you'd be trying to finish it as your parents called you for bed. Unless you wanted to try to leave the thing paused all night (risky), there was a length cap back then. Now, the price has doubled and since there's been a liberation from this, so when a game is short, there's this "Why?!" reaction from the crowd. And quite frankly, replay value is a lot to stake the value of a game on. There are some games I have and really enjoyed but haven't bothered replaying. $60 is a lot to sink into an afternoon.

And then a game like Portal comes out and suddenly how long it is doesn't matter. Don't get me wrong; I love Portal and I'm glad the length didn't give it automatically poor scores, but it totally bucked that trend.

I was going to bring up Portal, but it was part of the Orange Box. You also got Half-Life 2 and Team Fortress 2 for your money.

[Baba O'Riley]

The PS3 version is out already?

Did I say PS3? My bad, I meant 360. Sorry for the confusion.