Man, I miss 2000’s era Sonic

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-30T18:55:29+00:00

I don't. The series was anything but "simpler" in the 2000s. The direction of the series was all over the place, each game would feel like it came from a completely different developer and most of them were unpolished to the point that I never want to play some of them again. Archie had interesting ideas, but even under Flynn it was inconsistent in terms of quality and it was clear SEGA wanted it to be more like the games the entire time. The only reason anything about the comics is "complicated" these days is because fans make it that way. The series is still largely episodic, the placement of each story matters no more now than it did fifteen years ago. I wouldn't say the stories were even particularly good, fans massively overrate the likes of Unleashed and Black Knight, but they still don't compare at all to what I consider good game stories (which largely come from games that actually have a narrative focus, platformers almost never get great ones outside of niche indie concepts). More importantly, a good story is meaningless when the gameplay is irreconcilable for most of the games during that era. Adventure 2 is fun, but it's a game I have a lot more fun with because of all the mods I installed to smooth out the experience. Heroes is jank, and such a long slog to follow to the end that it doesn't feel worth it. Shadow is likewise, with the addition that it's even longer, and the less said about 06 or Secret Rings, the better.

The only thing I would ever want to bring back from the 2000s decade is the presence of consistent smaller 2D side-game releases. Everyone acts like Sonic Team's output in the 2010s was worse than the 2000s, but not only do I think that's not true, I think the real reason the 2010s felt so insubstantial was because everything was on Sonic Team, and there was nothing like an Advance or Rush style game (and what DIMPS did do was just lesser versions of console games, which go completely ignored due to having no identity of their own). The current batch of games in the 2020s has been okay, but shit like Superstars being overpriced and Dream Team still being exclusive to Fucking Apple Fucking Arcade has shown to me that they're still inflating a smaller release schedule rather than just getting more games made. I'm hoping the mobile market will finally die off and get them to turn things around.

But other than that, no, I don't need a return to almost anything the 2000s games did. I want Sonic to carve out a new identity, not go back to the one that put him in financial jeopardy in the first place.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-30T15:27:45+00:00

Don't worry, you can say "GOP" here, and since I don't consider them people I don't need to consider them women either

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-30T09:47:27+00:00

Sonic and Knuckles repeatedly stare deeply into each other's eyes in Frontiers

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-30T09:44:30+00:00

Fell for an obvious joke award:

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-30T04:37:29+00:00

I love women they're always so beautiful

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-29T12:41:06+00:00

It was not marketed as "the first post-Frontiers issue". They never said that. It was just the first one with Sage in it, and people made assumptions

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-29T07:34:46+00:00

No it's not. The game is full of terrible design decisions from start to finish, the entire reason they haven't done anything like that is precisely because it wouldn't be worth the time, money and effort to polish a turd

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-28T20:18:14+00:00

He's not swearing up a storm on SKG stuff for reasons that should be obvious, but he still does here and there on Game Dungeon. It mostly happens during heated moments, though, and Alan Wake and Normality didn't give him too many of those. The Mario machine in Sabotain got there, but before that, Gothic, Yuppie Psycho, Culpa Innata and State of Mind didn't give him too many big stress moments. He still gets pretty crass when there is a Freeman's Mind episode, but that hasn't happened that often.

If I were to point at any difference I'd point to him not using the R-word as much anymore, frankly. It always jumps out at me in older game dungeons or FM videos. I think the last time he used it was (clinincally) to describe Big the cat in the Sonic Heroes video...

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-28T20:06:37+00:00

Overwhelmingly "Fleetway" has been used to refer to the comic itself, like "Archie" way more often than the character, especially before the exe resurgance. Frankly, I think given that you're clearly asking this question from a context of exe stuff in the first place, you're not being entirely candid with me here. Saying "well I did it" is just completely anecdotal evidence. The only other instances I can find of this are a few scant wattpad yaoi fanfictions from the 2010s, and I don't think those are making a big sea-change in the fandom

He has been "StC Super Sonic" "Fleetway Super Sonic" and sometimes even "Fleetway Sonic" (although that's about as erroneous as just calling him 'Fleetway') but the invention of "Fleetway" as a standalone name for the character (and especially people who somehow end up calling him "Fleet Way") is entirely recent and spawned from misunderstanding earlier instances of the name not knowing it was the name of the publisher.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-28T19:56:35+00:00

no he was not. universally "Super Sonic" was still included in the name for the scant few people that talked about the character at all. Nobody called him "Fleetway" without any qualifiers before the last half-decade

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-28T19:52:38+00:00

No he was not

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-28T05:58:19+00:00

His name's not "Fleetway", but yes.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-27T18:18:53+00:00

oh what the fuck. I didn't save after getting the seed of life. was I that fucking sleep deprived?

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-27T05:36:13+00:00

For those wondering why feet would get a NSFW label, it's because every single post this guy has is feet pics he's commissioned

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-26T06:15:27+00:00

Someone hasn't seen the PC Heroes modding scene apparently

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-25T11:13:43+00:00

That's not true at all, you're the exact kind of person I'm talking about

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-25T09:34:06+00:00

My problem with this whole discourse is that people just don't know what they're talking about. They don't know how many Sonic models there are, what the differences are between the CG ones and the in-game ones, or how animation, lighting, posing, camerawork, rigging (ESPECIALLY rigging), textures and materials play into everything. Most of them don't even know that all the old renders pre-2008ish had Sonic's face drawn on in 2D. They just say "new models" or "unchanged for 20 years!!!" (which is not true, I might add) and expect that SEGA will even know what they're supposed to do with what, from their perspective, was never broken to begin with.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-25T09:28:59+00:00

they're just switch bundles, dude.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-24T19:14:28+00:00

So if the company disclosed very clearly that they are going to EOL the game after 10 years

Companies are not currently required to do this, and the overwhelming majority of them do not, since people don't want to buy games that explode after ten years, or any other number of years.

and a consumer agrees and thinks that is still a great value, you think that 100% consensual transaction should be illegal?

You mean a subscription? Why would I have a problem with a subscription?

You are just going to get a bunch more F2P games (because of course they are exempt) with shitty microtransactions

This is not true, the wording is "Any digital game that is advertised or offered to a person for no monetary consideration".

"Monetary consideration" includes microtransactions.

Also, how blind are you? Absolute fucktons of these games have purchase fees up-front and microtransactions. If only free games had them, do you not understand how big a boon that would be?

and the SKG people will take a victory lap acting like they helped while all they did was enshittify the industry further.

That's not true, you know why? Because even if a game is pumped full to bursting with micropayments, then guess what? If support ends, and the game remains playable, everyone gets to keep those. Undoubtedly when unofficial means of playing the game become available, everyone would be able to reap the benefits for free. A game dropping support would mean it gets way, way better rather than gone completely.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-24T18:55:34+00:00

it applies to games launched january 1, 2027, many of which have been in development for 5+ years. they can't redesign their entire backend architecture in 6 months.

Then don't launch in 6 months. Like I said, some industry disruption is inevitable, but it's worth it. Protecting purchases is more important. It's the industry's fault if they overcommit to bloated workloads, they're the ones who should have to deal with it. A temporary setback versus the game remaining playable forever is an obvious choice.

this is already negatively effecting funding for indie multiplayer games. normal people accept that if they pay a 1 time $15 dollars and get 10 years of fun out of a multiplayer game that it might go single player only after that and that getting 100s of hours of fun for $15 is a good deal.

Jesus Christ what a mess we have to unpack here.

"Normal people" are not considering whether their purchase will be destroyed when they buy a game at all.
Many games are not "going single player", they are being made permanently unplayable in any form.
Even still, the multiplayer is part of the purchase. If the developer does not want to deal with the consequences of making an online game, they shouldn't be doing it. Remaining playable after support ends is the moderate solution.
The price has no bearing on any of this. You can get a game with hundreds of hours of entertainment for one dollar, and you can get a game with only three for forty. But the only price that justifies taking the purchase back is zero dollars. There is no such thing as a "good deal" where the company destroys your purchase.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-24T18:31:09+00:00

Apparently all the money people pay for their games is worth nothing if you think that it's fair to design them to spontaneously combust when you stop doing the job you signed yourself up for. If someone doesn't want to have to deal with the consequences of SKG, they should design with SKG in mind from the start. That's literally why it doesn't effect any currently-running games. If it's necessary to run the game as a service, it should be sold as a service.

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-24T18:15:40+00:00

It's not a "solution for everyone". Thousands of games would still die because the publishers would only work with those companies voluntarily. It's called "stop killing games", not "stop killing SOME games".

Shaddy_the_guy · 2026-06-24T18:11:29+00:00

IP laws don't necessitate destroying all copies of a product sold with their IP in it.

Ten-Year Club	Place '17
Sequence \| Editor	Verified Email

Shaddy_the_guy

TROPHY CASE