Shadow game justification.

CM August · Post by **CM August** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:00 am

When one claims that Shadow The Hedgehog has taken Sonic in a very, very wrong direction, the response from would-be defenders is usually "but this isn't a Sonic game." I've mixed feelings about that answer. How well you personally think that excuse holds up?

Kishi · Post by **Kishi** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:23 am

It's like Chaotix: it's close enough to a Sonic game that it stands to be compared to Sonic games and judged as one.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:41 am

Does it matter whether or not it's a Sonic game if it's fucking stupid either way?

CM August · Post by **CM August** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:06 am

Right, good point. It pays to step back and look at the bigger picture.

Owen Axel · Post by **Owen Axel** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:15 am

It's note like there haven't been Sonic games that were taken in very, very wrong directions before. I'm reminded of one where Sonic couldn't run and had to roll all over the place in slipshod faux 3D labyrinths.

CM August · Post by **CM August** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:06 am

Well, yes. However, Sonic Labyrinth was "Sonic" right down to the bone in everything but the actual gameplay.

On the other hand, many people argue that Shadow IS NOT a Sonic game and should not be judged as one - it's free to do whatever the hell it wants. Which to me sounds as absurd as the game itself.

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:35 am

I think part of the problem with Shadow in comparison with other spin-offs is that it seems to be trying to fit in with current continuity. Games like Chaotix and Tails Adventures were pretty much just treated as seperate stories and the games weren't so story based back then anyway. For some reason they've even gone as far as giving Shadow the same supporting cast as Sonic Hereos to the extent that Sonic himself is a supporting character. It's still not really a Sonic game but I think these elements make it harder to just dismiss it altogether like you could with say Chaotix. As for the long term effects who knows but I'm guessing it will have some kind of "everything is back to normal" type ending rather than have aliens and whatever other shit the game features being a permanent part of the series.

Post by **Crazy Penguin** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:19 am

Games like Chaotix and Tails Adventures were pretty much just treated as seperate stories and the games weren't so story based back then anyway.

Chaotix tied right into plot elements of Sonic 3 & Knuckles and Sonic CD.

Despite all its faults Chaotix had a really nice soundtrack and art direction. Even the premise of simultaneously controlling multiple characters is a good one, it's a damn shame that it went so wrong in all three of the Sonic series' attempts at putting the idea into execution.

And Tails Adventures was fun all around.

Ritz · Post by **Ritz** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:05 am

Continuity is a story thing, innit? The story appears to be just as shallow as Heroes', and what little plot there was in that trainwreck sucked anyway, so what's the point?

Neo Yi · Post by **Neo Yi** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:15 am

It really doesn't matter for me whether Shadow should be counted as a part of Sonic or treated differently, I still think the concept of Shadow with weapons and "X-TREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEME" attitude looks retarded. But like I always say, I'm willing to play the damn thing before I truly think it's good or bad, so in general, it goes back to my first sentence that it doesn't matter to me whether it's judged as a Sonic game or stand-alone, as much as whether it's a game worth my time.
~Neo

Frieza2000 · Post by **Frieza2000** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:23 am

I think the logic of the people making this argument is that as long as Sonic Team still makes good Sonic games, it's ok if they make bad Shadow games. Unfortunately Sonic Team doesn't still make good Sonic games, so that invalidates that. And so does all that continuity stuff, but that remains to be seen.

The game itself isn't the real problem, it's what it indicates about Sonic Team's direction and attitude toward the series. I think it was first apparent in Advance 2, though some saw it in Adventure 2. Shadow's game just confirms what we all realized at one point or another: that Sonic Team has no love of games, only money. That they will cut corners and rehash past successes to save the time being thorough and creative takes. That they will pander to whatever audience they think will give them the most sales with no regard for or sense of artistic integrity. That they're done making superior games and are content to shovel out mediocre ones.

That is what's wrong with this game in the big picture.

Professor Machenstein · Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:29 am

Chaotix is a "Sonic" game.
Tails Adventures is a "Sonic" game.
Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine is a "Sonic" game.
Fang the Sniper's Druken Boxing Championship DX is a "Sonic" game.

I'm pretty sure Shadow the Hedgehog is "Sonic" game as well, and if it turns out to suck ass, it is still a Sonic game. There is no pillow of reassurance fluffy enough to deny that. If there was, we wouldn't have lost faith in the series post-Sonic Heroes. If Shadow the Hedgehog does truely suck, the best we can do is either A) whine, or B) pretend it doesn't exist. Heh, from what I've seen from message boards this past year and a half, we should've done B for Heroes a long time ago. So I'm warnin' ya, if you're really feeling the suckage from Shadow the Hedgehog, choice B is the go-to guy.

EDIT: Oh, yeah, and what Frieza just said. Good point.

PSMad · Post by **PSMad** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:47 pm

I think it's a little harsh to say they don't love games. Yes they need to make money but I'm sure theyd rather make good games than crap ones they think we might like.

Cub · Post by **Cub** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:17 pm

PSMad wrote:I'm sure theyd rather make good games than crap ones

Then why the hell don't they?

Owen Axel · Post by **Owen Axel** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:36 pm

Cub wrote:
PSMad wrote:I'm sure theyd rather make good games than crap ones
Then why the hell don't they?

Because crap games sell better than good ones. They don't seel better than awesome ones, but those require inordinate amounts of effort and creativity to create, and we just can't have any of that.

Baba O'Reily · Post by **Baba O'Reily** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:51 pm

Exactly. If you have the hook, you don't need the gameplay.