Leaderboard

If you were around for SAGE and saw me streaming, there's a good chance you saw me plugging my series, Neo Reviews. Well, all summer I've been telling myself I should get back into the swing of making videos and now I finally have! Neo Reviews is my series where I review games (usually older, sometimes obscure titles) and maybe other things in the future. I just released my first episode in over a year, a review of Shovel Knight. This game reminded me why I liked to game in the first place and was kind of the push that got me back into it. My plan is try to get at least one review a month out, while also releasing other things as well. Here's a couple others I've done so far, probably my favorites I'd reckon. So I'm throwing this out here as both a publicity thing (because hey, knowing people are watching is nice!) but also as a means for feedback! I know my microphone setup isn't the greatest and is unfortnately inconsistent, but aside from that, I'm open to suggests and comments. Plus, if you've got any games you'd like to see or think I should review, let me know!

i dont work at sega but would like to know what everyone would like the sonic game to be like and which sonic to use. to be honest i would love to see another adventure/boosting sonic game for modern sonic but i want it to not reuse level ideas from past sonic games. i also want to make my oan sonic fan game but i only want to be the level designer for it.

Hello fellow. I got this retro sonic game. My original and well done but from what I see you can also use it to Scourge the hedgehog and seen in several videos and forum to talk about it. But do not know how to unlock it. ami just because I get Sonia and Silver the hedgehogs. Which finger should I do to play Scourge

So here's how this is gonna go: You'll make cool zone names by using the words above. You post them and you may get something special! Here's some zones I came up with: Oh and another thing: If you want to use anybody else's zone names for a fangame or something, PM them first to see if you can. Also no double posting in this thread - Thank you

@pulse This is Poe's incomplete counter-review of Pulse's incomplete review of an incomplete game. Giving a "professional" review for spark now is like giving a professional review for the early access release of a game. It just doesn't make sense, the game is no where near complete. The reason people release early demos is so they know what they can improve on. You however, have rushed into a review, expecting this to be a full experience. You have given no time for this game to grow. This point is also proven by the fact that you hindered the games score based on things that will be changed it the future, such as the leftover sonic sounds and graphics. I believe the foreground is flat for a reason: The background is quite 3D. If the foreground had a decent amount of depth more than it does already, it would be too visual, and it would be hard to focus on your character. Just look at Chaotix. I believe the bosses are supposed be similar. That's the whole point of the game, I think. They're similar, but different enough where each experience with a boss still feels fresh. This is the one thing I agree on: Enemies are quite simplistic, and offer no reward for defeating them. I do believe the enemies will get harder when the levels progress in the final game, and I would also guess it's not too late for lake to add some kind of reward for defeating enemies. When reviewing, I believe you should not critique a game based on the choice of control that the player uses. You critiqued the keyboard, and how it is "harder" for someone to pull off advanced type moves. This type of thing should not even be in the review, especially when the player has a choice. When I played spark, I chose not to play with my controller, because I play these kinds of combat heavy games better with a keyboard. Sonic, on the other hand, I do play with a controller, because of the type of precision needed to play a game like sonic skillfully. This brings me to another point. I firmly believe you should never compare a game to another game when reviewing, unless it is a direct sequel to a previously released game. I would go so far to say not even indirect sequels, or maybe even prequels. I let one of my friends play this game. He asked me when playing, "hey, aren't those sonic sound effects?". I said, "Yes they are, in fact, this game was built on top of a sonic engine." He was pretty surprised. He could see why though, after I told him. 80% is an awfully specific number. The level design of the second level, while long, is pretty good. It's more oriented towards platforming, which brings me to pitfalls. I have never, ever seen anyone complain about a game NOT having pitfalls. Most people complain about the game actually having them, and how absurdly they can be placed sometimes. I think that pitfalls are good, when placed appropriately, in a place where it makes sense. For example, a sky level, like sky chase, or even a cave level, like mystic cave. IMO, a mountainous landscape does not make for a good place for pitfalls, nor does a sewer. It doesn't make sense. At the end there, you started complaining about rewards, like achievements not present and stuff... Really? Reeeeaaaally? This is a DEMO! Ugh. Score of Pulse's review: 4/10. You sounded professional or whatever, but it's a bit early and a good portion of what you said didn't make any sense. Score of Spark the Electric Jester: I really like the game a lot. It still has quite a bit to go to, but I've come back to the demo a few times to play it for fun, and I'm really looking forward to the final release.

I concur with Zig and Taz. Using number ratings are most likely not a good idea, IMO unless used with very descriptive review. but still they're eh. Also reviewing a beta is a tad early. A demo yeah I can dig that a bit more than reviewing a beta but as your first effort I'll bite. Still haven't watched it yet but maybe soon.

Number-based rating systems are awful anyways. a "i love it", "its okay", "it sucks" etc. help carry your opinion much more.

Isn't it too early to make a review on the game?

You know i to want to make a game

Just thought I'd create a general topic for stuff I've worked on! To start off, here's some sprites I've worked on, as well as some concept art stuff.

I am just tired of them having decent ideas, then barely using them. Adventure games, less action stages than hunting and shooting Sonic Heroes, ruined the whole experience by forcing you to beat it with 4 teams that get increasingly worse. Unleashed, revolutionize sonic 3D gameplay, 50% of game is god of furry Colors, tease you with unleashed gameplay, sike bitch this is a wannabe mario game Generations, 2D sonic and 3D sonic? NOOOPPE sike again gaylord modern stages spam 2D more than 3D Lost World, new 3D gameplay style nope mario galaxy party 0.5 wit motobugs get reckt noobs ...the only sonic game with consistent gameplay design was Shadow the Hedgehog...

Lange, holy shit, this post. I'm sure glad you're around to make my posts look smaller. Making the project too ambitious is the argument I lean towards, but i never said original assets are a bad thing, no way. It's an argument I usually make about fangames in response to how frequently they go unfinished. But over the years though I find that there's really not one thing you can blame this on, and like DW pointed out, one act demos are still progressive learning tools. I agree it isn't a very strong argument, and it is on the choice of the creator. It's just an opinion of mine. I never was downplaying the genesis title's design strength. I was pointing out that your fangame taking literally every cue from them is not going to make it an inherently better game. This is why I criticized Sonic 4 on a deeper level than even its engine flaws -- by pointing out that the very concept of the game itself was flawed, which leaked into and influenced every mediocre decision. This is a much greater problem than crappy physics could ever cause. Fixing them wouldn't be a large improvement, the game is built around it, and thus would still be a shitty game. The music was aggravating because instead of trying to sound good, it tried to sound retro. Ignoring the framework of its predecessors is indeed a pretty terrible offense for a 2D sonic game. But Sonic Rush a was phenomenal 2D sonic game and it had nearly nothing in the scope of proper classic physics. But it was a good game, because it wasn't trying to be reminiscent of Sonic 3 & Knuckles. It was trying to be Sonic Rush, a new exciting sonic game for the DS with 2 screens, where you go fast as fuck by pressing a button. It's not a contradiction, you just misunderstood me. I'm not saying modern games suck and old games are only good because of nostalgia. I'm saying modern games suck because their only focus is to provide nostalgia. It's the same problem above, where the concept behind the game itself just dooms it to be mediocre. And I personally believe, this backlash has leaked into fangames. The newer official games suck, Sega is basically acknowledging that's a fact, but they are still for whatever reason unable or unwilling to fix the problem. They have no clue what Sonic is anymore, only what it's supposed to look like. But sonic fans are actively studying what sonic is supposed to PLAY like, but with no positive present inspiration to feed off of, we now only build towards the past. Thus, every new fangame is a genesis clone, trying to be like a genesis game, with genesis graphics and a genesis storyline. --- Alright, this is alot to reply to, so im going to try to broaden my response a bit. Alright. It seems like the real root of our disagreement is coming from the definition of what a sonic fangame even is. You believe it's something that's faithful and respectful to the medium, I believe it's whatever you think would be fun to play that you can convert into a game involving sonic the hedgehog. It ultimately comes down into semantics and opinions, really. You don't have to sacrifice quality to make a creative or wacky fangame, and a wacky fangame is not inherently more appealing to me than a series faithful one. You seem to assume i'm saying people should start making SonicxMegaman fangames again, not worry about quality or game design theory in regards to sonic, and revert to static engines. This is totally not the case; my argument is not based on what a fangame looks like, or pulls its features from, or which engine it uses. It's all about what influenced you to start making the fangame in the first place. Which, as you already mentioned, is entirely at the whim of the creator...It's just an observation of mine that current fangames are seemingly biased towards a specific generation of sonic fangames. Which I cannot say happened nearly as much when fangaming was younger. And that is something I attribute to Sonic Team being far more forward looking and progressive with advancing sonic, whereas now Sonic is more about regressing backwards into "what worked", while pulling key design decisions from games that aren't even Sonic games. So in a nutshell, i have no problem with people who extensively study the mechanics of the old games, I don't think its a bad thing, i don't think it's a flawed thing, I don't think it's worse than doing random things. But I do COMPLETELY disagree in the belief that a sonic fangame is a such only if certain criteria are met. And i dont care what that criteria is, be it gameplay, graphics, genre, or whether its shit or not. I mean, i guess it has to have sonic characters in it. That's about it. As for my sentiments on 360 engines, I've already explained, that's just a personal belief of mine. I do believe that the current 360 engines have provided an amazing, stable tool for creating fangames. But for all of their overwhelming benefits, I also believe the removed limits come at the cost of that experimentation you talked about, because for whatever reason it's just not happening anymore. It's not not not the shitty fangames I miss, it's the mentality that produced them. And I don't think i agree that it was a mentality produced only by our inability to reach the classics, but who knows.

This so very much. It's nauseating to see someone prioritize fame or attention over a genuine interest in what they're doing. It completely disintegrates the soul and believability of a project, because then the creation is basically a lie, a disposable token that exists for the purpose of getting people to glamorize you. Love for your project comes first, and the love others have for it are born from this. You can't put the cart before the horse, it doesn't work. You may believe you have put love into your project and your only concern after it's out is that it still hasn't gained attention. Well if you did, I have bad news, your priorities are backwards. That isn't what your concern should be. It probably means you made a sub par experience and your skills are not well enough. If this is the case, your interest should be in improving your skills based on the observation that your game isn't popular, and not in trying to make a thing better because your project wasn't popular. See the difference? The former is observing something that implies lack of skill, and thus wanting to improve yourself. The latter is about trying to do something in the pursuit of popularity. To add to this, people tend to have a very distorted idea of what constitutes criticism, because those who take offense to criticism have a hard time distinguishing insults from critiques. To them, saying "your sprites are poor in quality" is the same thing as saying "go fucking die you horrible fuck". This seems to happen when people merge their project with their ego, and thus feel like they're being personally attacked when someone criticizes their project or any aspect of it. This kind of thing is incredibly destructive to oneself and acting on it is a great way to alienate others and stir up drama. It can ruin your credibility, ensure people never want to help you, and put you on a spiral where you need to keep layering defenses to protect your other defenses protecting your ego, and all of it boils down to irrational fear. If someone tells you "your sprites fucking suck" it's every bit as valid a criticism as "your sprites are bad quality". Do not make it a personal matter, do not attack the words or the person saying it, do not lecture them about being nice, none of these things will help you or them or anything. These are fallacies like any other. Doing this creates problems out of thin air and generates drama that would otherwise not exist. This is no better than plugging your ears and refusing to hear something you don't want to hear while biting back at the same time. If you don't like the way somebody said something, just ignore it. Take the criticism from what they said and use it. Maybe instead, consider if someone used such strong wording, that you should to really reflect on the quality of your work. This would be a constructive way to respond to the situation. Chances are, the person genuinely wants to help you, or is simply indifferent, and by reacting with hostility about things that aren't relevant, you're sending out a signal that says you don't want help. It only takes a bit of horse sense to determine if someone really dislikes you and just wants to attack you. Another important thing to remember that people seem to frequently lose sight of is that human beings have the incredible power to change and improve. If someone tells you your work sucks, this is a prompt to NOT suck, something you have the power to achieve. Someone who is praised for not sucking earned that by using their power to go from suck to not suck. You have the same power. Always keep that in mind. To close this point before moving on to the fangame stuff below, develop self diagnosis. Be able to see the quality of your own work against the totality of potential quality it can have. If you can look at someone else's creation and tell how good it is, you can do the same with yours. Criticism is easier to interpret if you can use your work as a backdrop to place it against. An artist who obsesses with modesty and ignores their own flaws and merits is an artist traveling blind. Getting to your goal will then be a matter of luck. The Genesis games are worshiped like the holy bible for damn good reasons. Don't pin a debate on that by pretending there's nothing to it. Opinions shmopinions. The games throughout the series have measurable qualities that validate the notion that the Genesis games are superior in many ways. If this weren't the case, no one would have any room to criticize Sonic 4's physics. I do not remotely understand your argument about creating original assets. I do not understand why you brought this up at all or how it is in any way a problem. Is it an issue because it makes projects too ambitious? Because it takes too long? Because it can result in games looking worse than the official art? None of these would be valid arguments. An ambitious project is the choice and burden of the creator. The quality is part of the creator's journey to improve. All of it is one's pursuit of a learning experience. This is a good thing. Either way is a good thing because they're different approaches to learning, and focusing on specific things to learn. Your point was golden in that sentence, up until the very end, which makes it a contradiction. You say that modern Sonic games have sucked, yet you say people only draw from the past games out of nostalgia. Okay, it's obviously not just nostalgia if people are avoiding the modern games because they suck. Make up your mind. "Nostalgia" is not an argument because it's speculative, and in many cases, completely false. Absolutely. Those features are what defined Sonic games. Making a Sonic fangame should adhere to the features that define it officially, unless you're deliberately trying to make something different than a traditional Sonic game and you're just using the Sonic image. It's foolish to ignore the staples and pretend like Sonic fangames are just random games with Sonic's face on them. Making a good game has nothing to do with that stuff. Making a good Sonic game has a lot to do with that stuff. Duplex is right, those are features that define the Sonic games apart from any other game, and generally it should be where someone starts from in a Sonic fangame effort. It is entirely sensible to prioritize the adherence of those features when making a Sonic fangame, and seeking to idealize them, improve them, or going on a mission to recreate them as faithfully as possible. Wild, silly, or new ideas do not make a good fangame. There's just as much to appreciate in how precise an engine is, or what it manages to accomplish in extrapolating the features of existing Sonic games. This sort of mindset is exactly the right direction a fangaming scene should have; fan, as in, admiration of existing properties, games, as in, making games, fangames, as in, making games based on existing properties. I feel stupid having to explain this. What you're suggesting is that we should drop interest in the features that define Sonic games, and instead make random whatever games that just happen to have Sonic's image slapped on. That isn't a fangame. By your logic, Mario fangames should ignore things like super mushrooms and stomping on enemies and hitting item blocks and linear platforming, and Mega Man fangames should ignore run and shoot gameplay and boss powers and charge shots and precision platforming. If those features are ignored, they're not fangames anymore, they're just random games with meaningless titles and pictures. Proper physics in Sonic 4 isn't the answer... by itself. Proper physics would be a huge improvement however, because this does have a lot to do with what is needed of another entry in the original Sonic series. There's plenty of other problems that need to be addressed, such as the horrid music, and also what you said about it is true, it had no direction. But at the same time, it failed to adhere to anything in the format of its predecessors. Believe it or not, that's a huge part of what made them what they were, and these things should've been observed in the creation of a Sonic 4. By neglecting all of these things, it failed to be a legitimate Sonic 4. What bugs me so much about this argument is that you say it like people are forced to choose between one or the other. Like, if someone is focusing on technical precision and being faithful to past Sonic games, that this automatically means the game can't be creative or fun, nor can the creator have fun making it. What you're really doing it seems is making an assumption out of bitterness because you have a hard time enjoying the fangames of today. It is certainly possible for a developer to be so engrossed in a specific aspect that they lose sight of other important values. To assume that this is always the case just because the fangame scene found the roots it's been looking for is absurd. Is Overture not enough proof that developers can be passionate and enjoy their work, and make something fun and appealing while also being dedicated to accuracy and faithfulness to Sonic Team's original visions? We have not had to compromise one for the other. You're basically saying that fangames have turned bad because A was sacrificed for B. The solution is not sacrificing B to get A back. The solution is to find an equilibrium and then maximizing both until we have the best of everything. This is a primary challenge we take on together as a fangame community. You are confusing things together. The development of 360 engines was a logical step for Sonic fangames. This is when Sonic fangaming became stable. What you call pre-death was essentially a bunch of kids experimenting and goofing off and having fun. And yes, this was lively and entertaining. But it goes without saying that 99% of the fangames back then were unplayable wrecks. It was like a bunch of people planning to build cars and giggling as they smashed a bunch of junk together in trash compactors. Hilarious and fun, but at some point we have to start building a car. Somewhere along the way, the smartest of the bunch started drawing up the blueprints and eventually we finally got a sputtering yet working car. The joy of this achievement inspired everyone to start making the best cars they can. Fast forward a few years and folks are making some pretty good looking cars that drive really well. You look at this like things will never be fun again and the only way they will be is by destroying all the cars we built so we're all back to square one and have no choice but to bash car parts with hammers and all laugh and have a good time. Fact is, we got that out of our system, so that isn't going to happen again. A lot of us matured and we're taking interest in higher pursuits. But, it's foolish to think that things will never be fun again. History will repeat, but we'll be that much farther when it does. We'll eventually get close to a singularity where the engines are ideal and we have the best tools and things will become easy enough that we're free to start going crazy experimenting again. When that happens, it will be way more exciting than the days we were throwing tinker toys around. That is why it's best to devote oneself to the path we're on; it's a natural one. You perceive it as a high point that just dropped. If you zoomed out further and looked at the bigger picture, you'd see we're actually on a wave with crests and troughs. We will cycle back to where we were and bring with us everything we learned. This does not just apply to the Sonic fangame scene by the way, this applies to just about everything. Always look for the bigger picture.

I have a memory of being about 7 years old and playing Sonic 3 at my grandmothers house with debug mode on. I remember thinking how unique Sonic was compared to other platformers and thought about how I wanted to make a game like that. That thought never went away, so I guess I am trying to fulfill a childhood dream.