2005 got a name...

[Professor Machenstein]

In the Sonic Museum page.

The Holocaust, is it? Suitable, but I felt it was more of a year with two sides for Sonic. More like Yin and Yang, mind you. Think about it...

Yin: Shadow the Hedgehog

Yang: Sonic Rush

You have the worst Sonic game in years and the best one in years. Of course, if we are to magnify the Yin, then Shadow the Hedgehog is only a portion of it, what with Deem Bristow's death, the voice actor change and the embarrassing Sonic CD port.

[Segaholic2]

Sonic Rush wasn't that good.

[Professor Machenstein]

Yes it was. =p

[Wooduck51]

Technicaly Shadow the hedgehog was rather, bland. But since I played it mainly for sewing up Shadow's story arc and for the CG cutsecenes, It was quite enjoyable. Still have not played Sonic Rush, is there an emulator for it?

[James McGeachie]

As far as I'm aware, no there is not. Buy the game/DS/whatever you need.

[Esrever]

By my recollection, Segaholic is the only one here who actively dislikes Sonic Rush. Almost everyone else's opinion fell somewhere between the "not bad" to "excellent" category, and many of us posted thoroughly detailed explanations of why we felt that way.

Of course, we're all "DS fanboys masturbating furiously over the Hideki Naganuma soundtrack". After all, that's what Gibbon said, and he would know, since he hasn't actually played Sonic Rush.

[The T]

Actually, I hate it too.

And I'm a DS fanboy.

Yeah, figure that one out.

[Green Gibbon!]

Of course, we're all "DS fanboys masturbating furiously over the Hideki Naganuma soundtrack". After all, that's what Gibbon said, and he would know, since he hasn't actually played Sonic Rush.

Didn't you also like Sonic Advance 3?

It isn't that I think the game is bad so much as I don't really care enough to play it and find out.

[DackAttac]

Rush was a decent title. It's easy to chalk it up as a disappointment because it had to compensate for Shadow, which nothing short of some kind of miracle could accomplish.

But of course, you have to play it before you talk to anyone on the internet, who will claim it's the cure for cancer, AIDS, pubic lice and most Coldplay obsessions. And you'll get confused because it's just pretty good, even though we haven't seen a pretty good Sonic game since the moment before the plotline in SA2 moved to space.

[Segaholic2]

I never said I actively disliked Rush. As far as I recall, I only stated that it was a mediocre game far undeserving of the apparent high praise it's received. I think I also made a fairly lengthy post detailing my reasons.

[Esrever]

Yes, you listed many, many things you didn't like about the game, and that's why I thought you didn't really care for it. I know you don't think it was the gaming anti-christ or anything, that's why I used the word "disliked" instead of "despised" or "set ablaze". Am I wrong? Do you like mediocre games?

Gibs, I don't care if you like Sonic Rush or not, or even if you ever play it at all. I just thought it was bizarre when you suggested there wa only this tiny sliver of idiots who enjoyed the game. Maybe you have to be an idiot to like it, but if that's the case, you've got to admit that it's a large number of idiots!

I mean, I don't like GTA, but that doesn't mean I spend a lot of time pretending that no one else does either. Wish maybe, but don't pretend.

(And yo, I did think Sonic Advance 3 was the best Sonic handheld title prior to Rush, although it's hardly a classic!)

[Crazy Penguin]

Isn't that kind of the problem? Sonic 3 & Knuckles was released over a decade ago, and none of the 2D Sonic platformers since have even come close to it (or Sonic 2, or Sonic CD or even the original Sonic).

Is there really any excuse for these games to be inferior to their decade-plus old counterparts?

[Professor Machenstein]

Moot point. The Mega-Drive games have everything that makes a great game. Then you have nostalgia on their side. Most people, including myself, were introduced to video games with Sonic. Then, we have different people involved with the series from time to time. Ohshima and Yashahura left, we had Iizuka, Yuda and Akinori in charge with [different parts of] the series this passing generation, and now we have this new director called Shun Nakamura in charge of StH 2006. If the original people were still involved with Sonic, we would still see on par Sonic games. That does not mean they are the only key to making a good Sonic game. SEGA just needs to hire the right people.

[The Doc]

Video games have "evolved" over the years. In the 80's and early-to-mid 90's, every video game looked different, but the premise was always the same: get to the end of the stage, repeat many times until you get to the last boss, watch the ending.

Then that wasn't enough for people. We needed COMPELLING STORIES to go along with this. We needed it just a little more complex. Of course, without complexity, we wouldn't have marvels such as the Zelda series, but I'm digressing.

The problem is, you can only make so many games with the same story before it gets old and you can't compensate with anything else of note. The story's been the same since Sonic Adventure--originally, it seems Eggman is the mastermind, but instead it's <insert something else here>, and whether it's Chaos or the Prototype or Metal Sonic or Black Doom or Dick Cheney or whatever, no matter what extra branches there are in the story, it doesn't change the fact that the root of the problem is that it's the SAME DAMN STORY.

What they should do is hire ME. I'll make them trillions.

[Crazy Penguin]

Moot point.

How so? Don't you think that sequels should be superior to their predecessors and/or offer a significantly different enough experience to their predecessors?

What's the point of a sequel being almost exactly the same as its predecessor but not anywhere near as good? It's cheap, it's lazy and it's a cash grab. Great for the guys making money from them who don't care about the integrity of their products, but not so much for anyone else.

[Professor Machenstein]

Your point is debatable because long running series tend to dip in quality more often than not. The people orginally involved with said series leave and new people, most of the time with a completely different artistic sense, get hired. Takashi Iizuka will not be the director of the series forever. Eventually he will move on like the others.

As for the quality of the series, no matter how good a new Sonic game is, we will always lean toward the classic games. I mean, what if there was a new Sonic game better than S3&K? How easy do you think it's going to be even mouthing the words "It's better than S3&K"? The premise is simply insane. It is like saying some next generation game is better than Super Mario Brothers. I used that as an example because we have developed a love so great for Super Mario Brothers that it will always be reguarded as the greatest game of all time no matter how sophisticated any game following it is.

That does not go with saying that any Sonic game following Sonic 3 & Knuckles is anymore sophisticated. So you are right. That is the problem right there.

[Double-S-]

What's the point of a sequel being almost exactly the same as its predecessor but not anywhere near as good? It's cheap, it's lazy and it's a cash grab. Great for the guys making money from them who don't care about the integrity of their products, but not so much for anyone else.

I agree, and can't really think of any reason someone could not (note that this is a pretty different point as to what Machenstein is arguing). I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but I don't think even We <3 Katamari was a validated sequel. And don't get me started on EA and Ubisoft.

[Tsuyoshi-kun]

And don't get me started on EA and Ubisoft.

Shooting fish in a barrel?

[Professor Machenstein]

I do agree with Crazy Penguin actually. We are long due for a proper Sonic sequel. Sonic Rush really does not count, not because it is unrefined or anything, but because it does not particularly carry the values of its classic brethren. Knuckles Chaotix suffered from this too. Chaotix may have a cool artistic direction in terms of visual style, but the elastic ring band gimmick was not somthing that would contribute to the classic formula much like Spindash or the W Kaiten did. I see great potential in the Tension Gauge though, it just needs to stop neglecting the Spindash and make it so the Tension Gauge is not the focus of the game. It needs to be an addition, not a requirement.

[Omni Hunter]

I think the thing about how we compare games is a bit 'tarded. Sure, I like the classics as much as anyone else but back then the bar was set much lower and we didn't have many gimmiks like double-screens, touch-screen, wi-fi and whatever else.
True, the classic games were great for what platforms they were on but these days it's a bit less easier to get the most out of consoles these days.

[smiths32]

It shouldn't be though. As console quality increases- in theory- so should the quality of games.

[Omni Hunter]

That's true, but think about it. The magic of the classic games was that it was simple, no technological gimmiks attached.
As I said, the bar was set lower, you proved my point in saying that the bar and expectations should be set higher now.
And that's exactly what we do, we have much higher expectations of games than we ever did before, especially compared to when we were all kids with Megadrives and Snes and were more easilly pleased.

[Esrever]

One of the reasons I like Sonic Rush is because it is decidedly different from the old games. The boost mechanic and trick system completely changes the way the game plays -- from how you make your way through the environments to how you engage the enemies. If they just tossed these abilities into the old titles it would have destroyed them, but in Rush the levels are structured to complement them.

It doesn't bother me too much that the game is not as polished as the Genesis titles because it doesn't feel like it is trying to replicate them. Instead of being an inferior clone, it's like more of a flawed-but-interesting spin-off.

Obviously, I would have preferred it to not have those flaws, but they're less frustrating when you're dealing with a new game style rather than a broken replica of an old one. I think it's probably the same reason why I was able to really enjoy Sonic Adventure, even though it had all kinds of problems, too.

[Crazy Penguin]

Your point is debatable because long running series tend to dip in quality more often than not. The people orginally involved with said series leave and new people, most of the time with a completely different artistic sense, get hired. Takashi Iizuka will not be the director of the series forever. Eventually he will move on like the others.

I feel to see how this makes inferior products more acceptable.

As for the quality of the series, no matter how good a new Sonic game is, we will always lean toward the classic games.

Bullshit. A lot of the old games have strong nostalgiac appeal, but we're not all blinded by it. The Master System version of Sonic 2 holds quite a bit of nostalgia for me, but that doesn't stop me from acknowledging that it's an outright bad game.

It is like saying some next generation game is better than Super Mario Brothers.

But Super Mario Bros 3 and World ARE better than SMB. Much, much better.

I used that as an example because we have developed a love so great for Super Mario Brothers that it will always be reguarded as the greatest game of all time no matter how sophisticated any game following it is.

Super Mario Bros will always hold an important part in history because it's one of the most significant and innovative games of all time, its presence is still felt today. But historical and creative context aside, SMB3 and SMW have it beaten in almost every way, as do many of the other games SMB inspired.

[Frieza2000]

Your point is debatable because long running series tend to dip in quality more often than not.

The fact that it exists is not justification of its existence.

How easy do you think it's going to be even mouthing the words "It's better than S3&K"? The premise is simply insane. It is like saying some next generation game is better than Super Mario Brothers.

Nostalgia is like drinking a beer. It may impair your judgment a little bit, but it won't stone you off your ass. It might make the game seem better than it is in the way a beer might make the hooker you're sitting next to look more attractive, but it's not going to compensate for everything like the fact that it clearly has an erect penis. I can honestly say I'd rather play Mario 64 than Mario 1, and Mario 1 was my first game ever. I enjoyed Sonic Adventure more than 3&K. Maybe we won't acknowledge a future good Sonic game as better than the oldies, but that's wishful thinking at this point. Our problem is that they're obviously not (haven't played Rush).

It shouldn't be though. As console quality increases- in theory- so should the quality of games.

Just because the paper gets bigger or the pencil gets sharper doesn't mean you have to draw something bigger or more detailed. Properly done, a small simple drawing can be just as meritorious as a large complicated one. I think what you were looking for is that as time progresses, the art of making games should too.