Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 1

[Orta]

Sonic 4 is far from shit, it's a fun but has its flaws when stacked up against 1-3. You want shit Sonic games? G Sonic, Sonic Labyrinth, Shadow the Hedgehog, Sonic '06. Those are shit, Sonic 4 is not.

Perhaps if it was not called "Sonic 4" people wouldn't react to it like that. It's called Sonic 4 but plays too much like the Rush series. TSSZ's review almost made me give up on writing my own since it's pretty spot on about my feelings towards the game before and after playing it (he even mentions PR disasters). Like them or not I think it's worth a read.

http://www.tssznews.com/2010/10/16/revi ... -xbox-360/

I swear I never spoke to people about this game outside the forums (why would I want to advertise something I have such a bad opinion of anyway?). That said, one of the first things my friend pointed out was the fact he was able to pull a spin dash with Sonic on a nearly horizontal position. That cracked me up, and then I asked if he noticed the spin dash sounds are wrong. He said he didn't notice. He also referred to the homing attack as "noob attack", which also cracked me up for obvious reasons.

"Shit" might be an overstatement but, to be honest, "good" doesn't really apply to Sonic Rush Remake HD. What is worse is that it becomes clearer each and every time I play it.

You know what's funny? There was a sequel in the Megadrive. Remember Sonic 3D? Yeah Sonic was much shit back then. Sonic 4 is great.

Not only it wasn't a sequel, the music in that game is way better than Sonic 4's. What is your point?

[crackdude]

it was as much as a sequel as S&K. Why isn't S3D cannon? Oh yeah, cause it sucks bawllz. Have you played it? That's my point. Sonic 4 is great. Back then Sega was ruining Sonic already.

[CrazyT]

The game may be fun, but it is flawed imo. As a sonic 4, getting negative reception from literally almost everywhere is a failed attempt. I'm not talking about the reviews, i'm talking about general players like us all. Normally it's a game gets bad reviews and user scores are high, with sonic 4 it's the other way around. What blows my mind  though is that they didn't have to call it sonic 4 to test out a 2d game on the consoles, it just seems for a company to use one of their well known good games and bring it out as a low budget and an unpolished game.

Are there other game companies that do this?

[Orta]

it was as much as a sequel as S&K. Why isn't S3D cannon? Oh yeah, cause it sucks bawllz. Have you played it? That's my point. Sonic 4 is great. Back then Sega was ruining Sonic already.

If Sonic 3D is as much of a sequel as Sonic & Knuckles, then Sonic CD, Chaotix or even Shadow or Black Knight are too. I have played it and I take offence from remarks such as those. I don't talk about things I know nothing about unlike many people here. Sonic 4 is not great, it's average, and nobody said Sega wasn't fucking up back in the day.

[Aki-at]

it was as much as a sequel as S&K. Why isn't S3D cannon? Oh yeah, cause it sucks bawllz. Have you played it? That's my point. Sonic 4 is great. Back then Sega was ruining Sonic already.

You are making utterly no sense.  It's not because it "Sucks bawllz" it's because it's absolutely not intended to be a sequel at all. It did not even involve any of the usual Sonic Team members, do you want to know why SEGA greenlit it? It's exactly the same reason why they made Sonic Spinball, Sonic Team was busy already making NiGHTS and they would have no Sonic games available for the Christmas period, so they had Sonic 3D made.

I realize you want to justify Sonic the Hedgehog 4's existence and want to put it on a higher pedestal, but do not start to make up what accounts for misinformation. An entry into the series it was, but a main entry? Certainly, Sonic 3D, it was not.

And please, Sonic may have had a few bad games then, but at least there was no abomination like Silver the Hedgehog back then. The series was much better off then than it is now, even if that was about to change thanks to Sonic 4 and Colours. At least back then not every review openned with "Sonic games these days suck, but how does this game fare?"

[Barry the Nomad]

"Shit" might be an overstatement but, to be honest, "good" doesn't really apply to Sonic Rush Remake HD. What is worse is that it becomes clearer each and every time I play it.

Oh come on now, the game hardly plays like the Rush series. Classic 1-3&K gameplay rules apply to Sonic 4 (act structure, special stage access, boss structure, visuals, storyline). Sonic 4 doesn't have Nega, Blaze, tricks, boost, a free roaming ocean, 3D circular stage bosses. Rush Remake? No f-ing way. Sonic 2 Remix HD? Much more fitting a label.

"Shit" is an overstatement. As for "good":

GamesRadar: 9/10
SPOnG: 86%
PSM3 magazine: 8.2/10
IGN: 8/10
IGN UK: 8/10
RunDLC: 4/5
Game Informer: 8/10
Eurogamer: 9/10
XGN.nl: 8.5/10
1up: B
totalvideogames.com: 9/10
gamers daily news: 8/10
Game Reactor 8/10 (editor in chief review)
ONM: 88% (WiiWare)
NintendoLife: 8/10 (WiiWare)
Nintendo Power: Recommended (WiiWare)
SEGABits: B (iPhone)
AppSpy: 4/5 (iPhone)

Sounds pretty fucking good to me.

[Sega Stylista]

After consulting with a team of PhD's in Oxford and Cambridge it was concluded that the visual style fails to reflect the ideals of early 90's gaming subculture.

[Orta]

Oh come on now, the game hardly plays like the Rush series. Classic 1-3&K gameplay rules apply to Sonic 4 (act structure, special stage access, boss structure, visuals, storyline). Sonic 4 doesn't have Nega, Blaze, tricks, boost, a free roaming ocean, 3D circular stage bosses. Rush Remake? No f-ing way.

How is this related to gameplay directly influenced by a physics engine straight out of Sonic Rush? It is what it is.

Sonic 2 Remix HD? Much more fitting a label.

I really don't disagree. I cannot agree as well since some people here might kill me because I put Sonic 4 in the same league as Sonic 2...

"Shit" is an overstatement. As for "good":

GamesRadar: 9/10
SPOnG: 86%
PSM3 magazine: 8.2/10
IGN: 8/10
IGN UK: 8/10
RunDLC: 4/5
Game Informer: 8/10
Eurogamer: 9/10
XGN.nl: 8.5/10
1up: B
totalvideogames.com: 9/10
gamers daily news: 8/10
Game Reactor 8/10 (editor in chief review)
ONM: 88% (WiiWare)
NintendoLife: 8/10 (WiiWare)
Nintendo Power: Recommended (WiiWare)
SEGABits: B (iPhone)
AppSpy: 4/5 (iPhone)

Sounds pretty fucking good to me.

I read a few those reviews. Most of them knew little about what they were talking about. Using reviews from an industry such as this hardly proves a point, I would expect better from anyone posting here given the kind of score Sega's games usually get because they do not have hype machines pushing them.

Not long ago we had Sonic Unleashed which wasn't as bad as the list of scores I could post says. I could also post a number of bad reviews Sonic 4 got. It's good to know Sega's new "Metacritic above all else" mentality is catching up here. Posting review scores is a new low. Sigh.

[Barry the Nomad]

Posting review scores a new low? Whatever. Please don't say that shit to me. I've read a good majority of them, they all knew what they were talking about, they all deem the game as "good" and that was the point I was trying to prove. That the game was "good", not "shit".

I like you Orta, I respect that you personally didn't enjoy the game, but I don't appreciate being told that I've stooped to some kind of "low".

If the argument in question here is: Is the game good, or shit? I sure as hell can't call it shit as it is a step up from a number of the previous games, I can't call it mediocre because I and many others genuinely had a fun time playing it. Could I call it excellent? No, it has areas that need improvement. But is it good? Yes, it's good. Why is it good? Because it is fun.

[crackdude]

trollface.jpg

in this thread I post a lame joke and everybody gets irritated, Barry shows good scores and overall great reception to a supposedly "doomed" series and the fans say it's shit, and a number alone is enough for a good game to turn disappointing and bad.

[Sharky]

Barry, chances are when you are old you'll have arthritis in your fingers from all of this typing. Do you really want waste some of your precious finger time arguing with someone that had decided he was going to hate this game way before he played it?

The critics and the sales will speak for themselves, they already are.

There are of course problems with Sonic 4, but it is still a very fun game and most people that haven't heard of this whole debate have enjoyed the game. As have many who did follow the debate.

[Orta]

Sharky, who decided he was going to love this game way before he played it, has spoken. Keep it up, bro. Sonic Team 4 life.  

[youtube:14ddrsuv]j28QjSOajyQ[/youtube:14ddrsuv]

[George]

Jesus, so much negativity here. The game isn't bad. It isn't as good, with physics as the originals. But I think tons of people ignore the good things of the game just cuz of this.

[Orta]

Jesus, so much negativity here. The game isn't bad. It isn't as good, with physics as the originals. But I think tons of people ignore the good things of the game just cuz of this.

I made a post about the things I found good about the game but I was properly ignored.

[Aki-at]

The critics and the sales will speak for themselves, they already are.

I hope you are not using that as a methodology to judge quality? There have been many games that some of us do not like, be it Halo, Grand Theft Auto or Call of Duty, that fall under that, are you willing to say all of those games are great quality thanks to critical and commercial success?

And lest of all, Sonic Heroes got good reviews and sold over 6 million, however most would rather forget that game ever happened.