Replaying Sonic the Hedgehog reveals it was kind of bad

BAD? Have you played other Genesis games? Games back then were simple. This sounds like the guy who called Super Mario Bros bad. Not many people call Super Mario Bros their favorite Mario game, but it has some fun elements that hold up but more importantly were a big deal at the time.

it's not a bad game. It's a good game and has some neat stuff in it, although yeah, the later games are better, like any good series tends to be.
 
Falk said:
Can I call Assassin's Creed 1 bad though?
Click to expand...

I think one thing people fail to realize is that when a series gets multiple entries that improve on the last, it doesn't make the one before it bad. Video games is a medium where a sequel can improve by learning from its predecessor. I'm noticing people comparing Sonic 1 to 2. I'm not saying it's a bad comparison, but when something in the sequel is better than the original, that's the way it should be. The developers learned from the mistakes made in the original and improved upon them.
 
I still love Sonic 1. I know it's not as polished as the sequels but I still find some enjoyment in all the stages. I genuinely love Labyrinth Zone, it's got a different feel, an almost desperate slow pace to it.
 
The modern gamer's video game measurement meter.

iEBWWF5.jpg
 
Menitta said:
I think one thing people fail to realize is that when a series gets multiple entries that improve on the last, it doesn't make the one before it bad. Video games is a medium where a sequel can improve by learning from its predecessor. I'm noticing people comparing Sonic 1 to 2. I'm not saying it's a bad comparison, but when something in the sequel is better than the original, that's the way it should be. The developers learned from the mistakes made in the original and improved upon them.
Click to expand...

True, but it sets expectations going forward. If Sonic 1 is your first game, it's going to seem a lot better than if you've played Sonic 2 and 3 and then go back and play Sonic 1. In a certain context - one that most newcomers are going to have today - Sonic 1 is not really a good game.

I think Assassin's Creed 1 is a good example. It's not a bad game for release but it's been made obsolete by it's own sequels and nobody really expects you to play it because it'll seem janky in comparison. Bad/obsolete, whatever you call it you know what people mean in context.
 
It's far from bad. The 2nd and 3rd are much better but the original Sonic is a solid game. I replay the trilogy (and sometimes CD) every year or so. Wish I could play Chaotix again. Though I remember not liking anywhere near the other classic Sonic games.
 
Even if I don't agree, I think OP did enough to explain why they think the game is bad. I don't know why some are treating this thread like they just lazily crapped all over the game in two sentences.
 
Sonic 2 has the worst soundtrack of the Mega Drive/Genny Sonic games but even that's a pretty decent OST.

But Sonic CD is like... on another level.

This thread is hurting my head. Especially dude with a Toejam and Earl avatar complaining about repetitive hip-hop soundtracks...
 
Surta said:
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...

Still waiting for your list of "many other games" contemporary to Sonic 1 that are better in your opinion.
Click to expand...

gg4XNsD.gif


Okay, I'll humor you even though you obviously didn't read my first post.

Comparing Sonic the Hedgehog 1 to 8-bit platformers such as Super Mario Bros 3, Bionic Commando, Castlevania I, Castlevania III, Ducktales, Batman, and the Mega Man series show just how lacking Sonic The Hedgehog is. I don't even think it compares to games like Adventure Island series, Jackie Chan's Action Kung Fu. Comparing it to other Sega platformers it fails to measure up there too. Wonder Boy makes it comparatively feel like a joke and I also prefer Alex Kidd. Comparing it to 16-bit platformers like Yoshi's Island, Rocket Knight Adventures, and Donkey Kong Country 2 isn't fair in any way.
Click to expand...

Sonic the Hedgehog only has like two good levels imo: Green Hill and Star Light. To me, that constitutes being a bad game. I don't even like its concept. Mutli-tiered stages leads to sloppy levels. The more linear stages like Labyrinth and Marble Zone are nothing special and aren't particularly fun - especially Labyrinth. Spring Yard is just boring, and Scrap Brain is blah.

Since you asked for peers of Sonic 1, I'll be using the years 1990 - 1992. Fucking Super Mario World? ActRaiser? Super Castlevania IV came out the same year as Sonic the Hedgehog. I think it's a much better game. Granted, the 16 bit era in general is a lot easier than the 8 bit era. Super Castlevania IV is not nearly as hard as I or III (II does not exist) but it's not nearly as boring as Sonic. Castlevania IV also has a lot more interesting ideas to me, such as its use of the whip. Mega Man IV is kinda blah, but I'd still rather play it than Sonic 1. Other games that came out at the around same time as Sonic 1 or a year later were Kirby's Dream Land, Mega Man 5, Adventure Island 3, Aladdin for Genesis? Are all better.

Calcaneus said:
Even if I don't agree, I think OP did enough to explain why they think the game is bad. I don't know why some are treating this thread like they just lazily crapped all over the game in two sentences.
Click to expand...

Sonic fans.

DryEyeRelief said:
Still interested in Sonic Mania Cindi?
Click to expand...

Nah. I'm not buying it now.
 
Gotta love how people are talking about "gamers" (hate being called this word) only discussing in extremes when the reaction to this thread despite my arguments is hyperbolic itself. Love the lack of self awareness. Clearly, if someone thinks a game you like is bad then game players only ever think in extremes! Which is obviously an extreme viewpoint to have. *snicker*
 
After reading too many of these types of threads to count I can safely say that anyone who tries to posit that Sonic 1/2/3&K are bad is simply bad at those games. 99% of the complaints I read (hold right to win, too many slow platforming bits, enemies can't be avoided) come from either low skill or a fundamental misunderstanding about how the games work. That's not to say that everyone HAS to like Sonic games, but these constant attempts at suggesting they were pretty awful and everyone has just been tricking themselves into thinking they're some of the best platformers of the 16-bit era are just bizarre.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
Gotta love how people are talking about "gamers" (hate being called this word) only discussing in extremes when the reaction to this thread despite my arguments is hyperbolic itself. Love the lack of self awareness. Clearly, if someone thinks a game you like is bad then game players only ever think in extremes! Which is obviously an extreme viewpoint to have. *snicker*
Click to expand...

I don't understand this sentiment. You hate being called what you are? Gamer isn't (and shouldn't) be a derogatory term. I realize this is a bit off-topic though. Sorry.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
Gotta love how people are talking about "gamers" (hate being called this word) only discussing in extremes when the reaction to this thread despite my arguments is hyperbolic itself. Love the lack of self awareness. Clearly, if someone thinks a game you like is bad then game players only ever think in extremes! Which is obviously an extreme viewpoint to have. *snicker*
Click to expand...

You are playing and complaining about a 20 year old game, on a game forum. We are all gamers. It's not a bad thing. it's what we are.
 
Camjo-Z said:
After reading too many of these types of threads to count I can safely say that anyone who tries to posit that Sonic 1/2/3&K are bad is simply bad at those games.
Click to expand...

Anyone? So they're bad at the games even if they beat the games? I remember a time when measuring whether or not someone was bad at a game meant that person couldn't beat it. "I suck at Ninja Gaiden Black, I can't beat Alma!" But no, let's give special treatment to Sonic.

Jaeger said:
You are playing and complaining about a 20 year old game, on a game forum. We are all gamers. It's not a bad thing. it's what we are.
Click to expand...

If you want to call yourself a gamer that's fine. I don't like it though. It was just a side remark.
 
I think what your running (ha!) is how un-reactive the nature of Sonic levels, to steal the words of someone more elegant than me:

Instead of being an optional layer of influence on top of the core gameplay like coins, rings are integral to the players survival. Players need rings to survive, and when Sonic gets hit, all of the rings that have been collected scatter out from the player. This design creates a type of dependency on rings not to mention a degree of static space that is functionally equivalent to attack-attack-heal. As long as the player has rings and can pick up at least one after being hit, they're free to play recklessly. This static gameplay generally occurs during boss fights because of the enclose fighting area.
Click to expand...

The enemies in Sonic don't feature much interplay. They're either slowly moving about, throwing/shooting projectiles, and/or exposing their spikes. The enemies are are either alive or completely destroyed. The enemies aren't typically arranged to layer together or positioned in a way to influence the player to maneuver in unique ways. As players zoom through each level, the enemies are either destroyed in the process or left behind and forgotten...

For these reasons the enemies in Sonic aren't designed to carefully shape, influence, and develop the platforming/action gameplay experience. More so, the Sonic enemies simply add an occasional annoyance/threat
Click to expand...

What's worth noting about Sonic's level design isn't the mechanics, how the elements influence gameplay, the interplay (or lack thereof), or the layered counterpoint (which it doesn't have). What works with Sonic's level design is that it's functionally similar to a roller coaster or amusement park ride. The lack of significant variation due to the shallow level and enemy design puts the emphasis on the game "experience" rather than the game "play." Sonic is all about experiencing the "ride" that's composed of the strong forward momentum. The more cool looking obstacles, jumps, loops, secrets, and enemies the designers can put into a level regardless of how well these elements shape the gameplay, the better.The more elements the player can zoom past, the more they feel like they're outracing even if these elements are basic or shallow.
Click to expand...

From: http://critical-gaming.com/blog/2009/1/26/sonic-the-core-design-and-beyond-pt1.html

Also, yeah we do have more then a few members who have made it very clear they don't think highly of Super Mario World, I belie one even called ti nothing but running around with a key in empty levels, so no Sonic is not a special snow flake in this "some people think and point out reason they feel a game lots of others like is weak."
 
NathanS said:
I think what your running (ha!) is how un-reactive the nature of Sonic levels, to steal the words of someone more elegant than me:







From: http://critical-gaming.com/blog/2009/1/26/sonic-the-core-design-and-beyond-pt1.html

Also, yeah we do have more then a few members who have made it very clear they don't think highly of Super Mario World, I belie one even called ti nothing but running around with a key in empty levels, so no Sonic is not a special snow flake in this "some people think and point out reason they feel a game lots of others like is weak."
Click to expand...

Right? Great way of putting it.

Nothing matters in these games. The level design is pathetic. Get hit? Pick up some leftover rings. You have infinite chances almost. Combined with the simplistic enemy attack patterns (compare it to Mega Man games for instance or even Mario 3 - again, the sun) and it's just not up to par. I feel the same way about Sonic 2 so far. A total shallow wasteland of theme park attractions and loop de loops. Hey cool, let's watch Sonic go through the tubes in Chemical Plant. I was bored to death until I got to Metropolis. Metropolis actually fantastic as I remember it. The enemies actually have placement. You have to avoid the star fish, and the grasshoppers scythes. It actually has elements of avoidance and reflex and platforming of an actual platformer.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
Gotta love how people are talking about "gamers" (hate being called this word) only discussing in extremes when the reaction to this thread despite my arguments is hyperbolic itself. Love the lack of self awareness. Clearly, if someone thinks a game you like is bad then game players only ever think in extremes! Which is obviously an extreme viewpoint to have. *snicker*
Click to expand...

uh-huh

Cindi Mayweather said:
Right? Great way of putting it.

Nothing matters in these games. The level design is pathetic. Get hit? Pick up some leftover rings. You have infinite chances almost. Combined with the simplistic enemy attack patterns (compare it to Mega Man games for instance or even Mario 3 - again, the sun) and it's just not up to par. I feel the same way about Sonic 2 so far. A total shallow wasteland of theme park attractions and loop de loops. Hey cool, let's watch Sonic go through the tubes in Chemical Plant. I was bored to death until I got to Metropolis. Metropolis actually fantastic as I remember it. The enemies actually have placement. You have to avoid the star fish, and the grasshoppers scythes. It actually has elements of avoidance and reflex and platforming of an actual platformer.
Click to expand...

which other enemies in mario 3 were even complex outside of the sun who appeared in a stage that can be completed in 45 seconds...
 
Sonic 2 was my first Sonic game, however S3&K is my favorite overall. I didn't play Sonic 1 until after these and I just don't care for it. I blame this 100% on playing the others first, and stems to me not wanting to play sequels before playing the original so I don't feel like I'm missing out on something by playing a newer/superior game in the series first. That lack of spin dash makes it really hard to play the original alone.
 
Sonic Does Things Differently Than Mario, De-emphasizing Combat and Coins and Focusing More on Keeping Momentum Up and Time Attacking, and Therefore It's a Shit Platformer and I Hate It: A Thinkpiece

"you have infinite chances as long as you have a ring!" wowwww yes that's the idea congratulations
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
Right? Great way of putting it.

Nothing matters in these games. The level design is pathetic. Get hit? Pick up some leftover rings. You have infinite chances almost. Combined with the simplistic enemy attack patterns (compare it to Mega Man games for instance or even Mario 3 - again, the sun) and it's just not up to par. I feel the same way about Sonic 2 so far. A total shallow wasteland of theme park attractions and loop de loops. Hey cool, let's watch Sonic go through the tubes in Chemical Plant. I was bored to death until I got to Metropolis. Metropolis actually fantastic as I remember it. The enemies actually have placement. You have to avoid the star fish, and the grasshoppers scythes. It actually has elements of avoidance and reflex and platforming of an actual platformer.
Click to expand...
This reads like an elaborate complaint that the game is too easy.
 
andymcc said:
which other enemies in mario 3 were even complex outside of the sun who appeared in a stage that can be completed in 45 seconds...
Click to expand...


In most Mario enemies it's less about complex movements then it is interactions, Kicking shells to clear a row of enemies but then having to quickly jump over it when it flies back at you. Jumping on a Goomba and it's death state lasting just long enough to make the enemy behind it bump into it and turn around so you have to take that into account for your next jump or run; Doing the Shell Shuffle in World because you can. Smart placement like Fire Snake in the confined pipe are in SMB3's 2-1, even guided fun like having to clear a bunch of bricks with a koopa shell at the end of 2-3 is you having to use how the game elements play off of one another.
 
No. It's fully controllable at all times, rewards practised skill, punishes mistakes you can learn to avoid, allows additional refinement due to alternate routes, and it looks/sounds fantastic.

Personally, I'd even say it's still the best 2D Sonic game.

Cindi Mayweather said:
on iPhone
Click to expand...

You fucked up
 
Elfforkusu said:
This reads like an elaborate complaint that the game is too easy.
Click to expand...

It's not only its difficulty but also its lack of engagement. Super Castlevania IV is easy and it still engages with the player. A lot of Sonic 1 and 2 feel like auto platforming. Nearly 15 years after Sonic came out Assassin's Creed was critiqued for its platforming. I'm not seeing how Sonic is much different in how it fails to engage with the player and present remotely interesting in level design.
 
Sonic 1 is my least favorite out of the original Genesis titles, always been a Sonic 2 man, but it's hard for me to see it as a bad game at all.

Camjo-Z said:
After reading too many of these types of threads to count I can safely say that anyone who tries to posit that Sonic 1/2/3&K are bad is simply bad at those games.
Click to expand...

I've never been very good at the classic Sonic games at all, despite Sonic 2 literally being the first game I've very played. My sheer lack of skill has never really impacted my love of the games. So I honestly wouldn't say that skill is a factor in finding Sonic games appealing.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
It's not only its difficulty but also its lack of engagement. Super Castlevania IV is easy and it still engages with the player. A lot of Sonic 1 and 2 feel like auto platforming. Nearly 15 years after Sonic came out Assassin's Creed was critiqued for its platforming. I'm not seeing how Sonic is much different in how it fails to engage with the player and present remotely interesting in level design.
Click to expand...

Wait so before it was because the enemy placement is bullshit and you don't have enough time to react so it's bad.

Now the game is automated and the enemies pose no challenge so it's bad.

Looks to me like you're just looking for reasons to dislike the game now.
 
Manu said:
Wait so before it was because the enemy placement is bullshit and you don't have enough time to react so it's bad.

Now the game is automated and the enemies pose no challenge so it's bad.

Looks to me like you're just looking for reasons to dislike the game now.
Click to expand...

1 and 2 have different issues. When I talk of automation I'm talking about 2.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
It's not only its difficulty but also its lack of engagement. Super Castlevania IV is easy and it still engages with the player. A lot of Sonic 1 and 2 feel like auto platforming. Nearly 15 years after Sonic came out Assassin's Creed was critiqued for its platforming. I'm not seeing how Sonic is much different in how it fails to engage with the player and present remotely interesting in level design.
Click to expand...

There is a pretty minimal amount of auto pilot in Sonic 1. The two zones you like the most, Green Hill and Starlight, are the only levels you can release your finger and enjoy the ride. None of the other levels are remotely of the same structure except Springyard Zone, which more often then not tries to force you to the wrong route if you want to let the game play itself.

EDIT: Sonic 2? Fair enough I'll play that tomorrow and see how it stacks up but for the most part I disagree the game plays itself.
 
NathanS said:
I think what your running (ha!) is how un-reactive the nature of Sonic levels, to steal the words of someone more elegant than me:







From: http://critical-gaming.com/blog/2009/1/26/sonic-the-core-design-and-beyond-pt1.html

Also, yeah we do have more then a few members who have made it very clear they don't think highly of Super Mario World, I belie one even called ti nothing but running around with a key in empty levels, so no Sonic is not a special snow flake in this "some people think and point out reason they feel a game lots of others like is weak."
Click to expand...

It's amusing watch this guy state all the reasons that Sonic is great while bluntly reframing his words in a way that make them seem like negatives.
 
TheAggroCraig said:
Sonic 2 was my first Sonic game, however S3&K is my favorite overall. I didn't play Sonic 1 until after these and I just don't care for it. I blame this 100% on playing the others first, and stems to me not wanting to play sequels before playing the original so I don't feel like I'm missing out on something by playing a newer/superior game in the series first. That lack of spin dash makes it really hard to play the original alone.
Click to expand...

Sonic 1 was the last of the original games that I played as well. And as a kid, Sonic 1 did not compare favorably to Sonic 2, Sonic 3, or Sonic & Knuckles at all. In terms of gameplay, environments, music, and playable characters, the shit just felt inferior.
 
Never change GAF...never change.

Revisionist history for everything now.

Star Wars sucked
Sonic sucked
Super Mario World sucked.

Etc.
 
Cindi, maybe you've got a bit of fatigue from having played the crap out of Sonic 1? I know I no longer have a desire to play Super Mario 1, 3, or Super Mario World since I just pop them in and burn a path to the end, special world, or whatever. Similar story for Super Castlevania 4, for me...Without having the wow factor of having never seen such large sprites or scaling effects, it just comes off as Simon bullying these underpowered, low health enemies and swatting away attacks with whip flailing amidst some slowdown. The most interesting thing about it is the rendition of Bloody Tears.

I'm far from an expert at the series, but Sonic seems much more in line with a shmup, or run-and-gun in that you're taking these soft penalties like walking back up a hill or losing rings while you take mental notes of how to avoid that situation next time and piece together the perfect run. It reminds me a bit of how one could play Contra with the 30 lives code until it's no longer needed or credit feeding an arcade game prior to learning to clear it on one credit. That seems to be the point in Sonic since the emeralds / best ending is locked behind the performance metric of being able to get a good amount of rings and bring them to a number of checkpoints unscathed.

Are you as good at the other games you still like better than sonic? All of the ones you mentioned seem a bit more exploration focused and allow more methodical approaches to the initial run through. They might just be more your type of game, but it's also possible Sonic is ruined by the fact that you know all of the answers already.

Do you like Contra, Metal Slug, R-type, Ikaruga, or anything like that?
 
I genuinely love Sonic 1. It hold very well to this day (I played recently the 3DS version of the incredible 3D Classic series) but you can clearly see that is a game from 1991.

But the pace, level desing, visual and sound identity are remarkable to this day. Sonic 2 improves it in every aspect.

Sonic 3&K is in another league though
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
Right? Great way of putting it.

Nothing matters in these games. The level design is pathetic. Get hit? Pick up some leftover rings. You have infinite chances almost. Combined with the simplistic enemy attack patterns (compare it to Mega Man games for instance or even Mario 3 - again, the sun) and it's just not up to par. I feel the same way about Sonic 2 so far. A total shallow wasteland of theme park attractions and loop de loops. Hey cool, let's watch Sonic go through the tubes in Chemical Plant. I was bored to death until I got to Metropolis. Metropolis actually fantastic as I remember it. The enemies actually have placement. You have to avoid the star fish, and the grasshoppers scythes. It actually has elements of avoidance and reflex and platforming of an actual platformer.
Click to expand...
I played Sonic 2 for the first time over the last few weeks and I can see where you're coming from but:

a) I still thought it was enjoyable
b) I still had a lot more fun than Sonic 1

I think Metropolis is an interesting zone because it's the border between "nothing matters" and "fuck you". It's all downhill afterwards.
 
btrboyev said:
Revisionist history
Click to expand...

is one of the most grating and overused buzzwords in neogaf, good god

"Revisionist history" would be saying things like "Sonic wasn't influential", "Sonic didn't sell well", "Sonic didn't get good reviews", etc. Someone saying they don't like a popular game isn't "revisionist history", no matter how lacking you found their reasonning to be. It's... an opinion.
 
Cindi Mayweather said:
People have different opinions! Must be GAF and revisionist history!
Click to expand...

The picture you are trying to paint is that "Sonic was never good." This is not the same as "I have a different opinion than others....". You could state that you don't believe the games have aged well, but to state they were never good despite that never being the consensus for decades is pretty much what "revisionist history" is. Clearly it was good, even if only at that time (which is nowhere near the truth, since every declared "good modern Sonic title" tries it's damndest to be those original 16-bit titles). The game series earlier on was universally praised and at that time started a generation of game wanna-bes and imitators, influenced numerous game mechanics for years to come, and is still mostly remembered by the masses (fans or not) as a fantastic game series.

To sum this up, you played Sonic 1 on the iPhone and stated it was never good. That's not even the platform it come out on originally.
 
I never played 1 as a kid, but 2&3K I played over and over and over.

So imagine my astonishment when I played 1 for the first time and there wasn't a spin dash move xD

I wanted to hurl my remote at the TV by the time I got to the Labyrinth Zone.

Then when Scrap Brain Sone act 3 happened I wanted to give up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

32 years since Adventures of Sonic The Hedgehog cartoon premiered.
News Retro 
21
293
Fahdis replied
Tee Lopes reveals track from cancelled Sonic Mania 2
40
571
Fake replied
I’m replaying the Baldur’s Gate saga AGAIN
23
520
Ziglax replied
  • Poll
Replaying games or trying new games?
2
61
1K
LavitzSlambert replied
Sony was the one who pushed for Helldivers 2 Xbox port, reveals Arrowhead CEO
36
1K
Dr. Samuel Hayden replied
Top Bottom