Sonic Boom Wii U Will Not have Online Multiplayer Experience

  • 84 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by xWoW_Rougex (2767 posts) -

I haven't checked what kind of game Sonic Boom is but Sonic games in general are kinda like fast paced platformers, almost a bit racing like, yeah? With that in mind, this sounds like that would work very well with online play so I am surprised by all the comments here that point out things like "derp online this isnt fps". Am I missing something or is this a typical defense squad?

#52 Posted by foxhound_fox (88776 posts) -

From article: "No online multiplayer; living room experience focused"

So they want to have same-TV multiplayer rather than online multiplayer. Good, more CONSOLE games need to realize this advantage of the platform.

#53 Edited by Shinobishyguy (22489 posts) -

@DocSanchez: he shat out a huge post consisting of nothing but strawmans about sheep and how much he despises them. How else am I supposed to respond? Should I really waste an iota of thought trying to deconstruct what is basically someone railing off on a fanbase because a nintendo executive killed their goldfish when they were 8?

#54 Posted by DocSanchez (1651 posts) -

@Shinobishyguy: He didn't.

You seem like the type who comes onto a board called system wars and feels awfully offended whenever someone attacks your system. Might I suggest you wander to a more neutral or fan based place?

#56 Edited by Shinobishyguy (22489 posts) -

@DocSanchez: if anything I'm ammused at all of this unconstructive roid rage being directed at a company. But hey of your feel like circle jerking with your alt account feel free to do so

#57 Posted by DocSanchez (1651 posts) -

@Shinobishyguy: You are losing it again. Calm down. Whatever your previous post was it can't have been pleasant. Relax.

#58 Posted by Shinobishyguy (22489 posts) -

@DocSanchez: it was the same as the next post but because of the awful touch interface I hit the delete button.

But like I said, continue the circle jerk uninhibited

#59 Posted by DocSanchez (1651 posts) -

@Shinobishyguy: I honestly don't think at this stage you know what you are saying. None of it makes sense. Every person who disagrees with you must be an alt account? Lazy.

#60 Posted by kingjazziephiz (2433 posts) -

@MBirdy88: sucks for the people with no real friends I guess.

#61 Edited by Speak_Low (1097 posts) -

@nintendoboy16 said:

Your posts go beyond frustration. I'm fine if you have criticisms (hey, so do I) and I understand if Nintendo isn't your thing, but you go the extra mile. You've never brought up "potential" before, so I don't believe you.

And most other fandoms are ANY FREAKING BETTER? Must we forget what happened over the Bayonetta 2 fiasco? Must we forget about what happened to BioWare over the ME3 ending (which happened WAY before the Wii U version even released)? Because, yeah, only the sheep "brutally assault developers/publishers". Don't act like any non-sheep are on any higher ground on treating devs/pubs, because they really aren't.

There's only three major players in this video game console business, and Nintendo is a large one and pretty hard to ignore. Notice I don't spend time laughing at Ouya sales or get worked up over Amazon's rumored entry into gaming. Nintendo should be doing better and has/had potential because they have the longest history and all of those IPs and have had past success.

I did start gaming with Nintendo way back. I don't put that in my posts because you don't need my biography. Nintendo is that sinking sports team that just won't learn - they aren't even holding steady or admirably but falling further and worse than their GCN years. Some choose to still be supportive of them and act as if nothing is going wrong, but I can't stand by it any longer, because I'd be supporting bad decisions (which is what they're completely wrapped up in right now). And my points of view do not align at all with the reasoning of Sheep or Nintendo. Talk about being on far, opposite sides of something. How am I not expected to comment when I see a Sheep statement expressed that I feel is way off base?

Some may overlook Nintendo's flaws or pretend they aren't there, but I'm not going to play a part in "softening the edges like a good boy" when I see other companies handle things so much better. So factually, much of the Sheep damage control and defenses have been dead wrong - even delusional Iwata correctly states some of Nintendo's flaws and struggles in his apologetic investor meetings - things which Sheep absolutely refused to admit were a problem for Nintendo.

And yet I still see the same excuses live on today, annoyingly perpetuated just like herd thinking (which is why I love the term 'Sheep' LOL) - and these excuses have been mentioned over ten years ago. When something is a flaw from over ten years ago and still not addressed or fixed - I dunno - sounds like the company is being stupid to me. It's like the kid who never learned his multiplication tables or basic math. After a while it's no longer funny or cute and a pretty huge problem.

As the years roll on and those detrimental problems still remain - and in some cases are actually worse than before - the charge of 'stupid' is absolutely valid at this point. New information is not settling in and past lessons are disregarded. At this point they deserve the least amount of "buck yourself up, kiddo" praises and should, instead, be getting the most criticism for their crappy position. Any other company doing what they're doing now with the Wii U wouldn't be immune from it either.

As for extreme fandom with other things - I'm well aware of it. Just log on to any game site or forum and you'll see it. I've commented plenty on various subjects and debates. You just see me here and think I only talk Nintendo. This is System Wars and I am mostly cow/part lem, so it stands to reason I will be most critical of Nintendo out of the three. And it's not just to pick on Nintendo for no reason. They are at their lowest point, and many critical failings - stretching across various parts of business - have led them there. So there is a LOT to discuss with this company, especially with updated news flowing in daily. You just want me to quiet down and keep a posting quota or sweeten up my criticism more.

I don't think Nintendo deserves it now to be honest. Lately this company produces bitter revulsion and twists up faces like no other.

#62 Edited by Speak_Low (1097 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@Shinobishyguy: He didn't.

You seem like the type who comes onto a board called system wars and feels awfully offended whenever someone attacks your system. Might I suggest you wander to a more neutral or fan based place?

Thank you DocSanchez. I don't understand why there is such a strong desire for conformity of opinions on System Wars, of all places. I would think that this is the place where opinions about consoles can be challenged. Personally I find many Nintendo defenses tiresome, lame and even nauseating - this is the place to look at some of those defenses straight in the face.

But now some don't like that and want more intervals of peace and acceptance with these companies. On System Wars, of all places.

Something interesting I've noticed - I think I've seen "strawman" typed here more than most places - even in forums devoted to much more controversial and inflammatory subjects and debates.

"Strawman" is an easy thing to rush to and utilize, to evade the core subject. Must be a nice thing to have in reserve.

#63 Posted by silversix_ (14803 posts) -

I mean isn't this is just laughable? Next CoD to appear on the system won't have the online feature but the "local experience". much wow when it comes to wiiu and everything related to the system

#64 Posted by m_machine024 (15020 posts) -

@xWoW_Rougex said:

I haven't checked what kind of game Sonic Boom is but Sonic games in general are kinda like fast paced platformers, almost a bit racing like, yeah? With that in mind, this sounds like that would work very well with online play so I am surprised by all the comments here that point out things like "derp online this isnt fps". Am I missing something or is this a typical defense squad?

I feel the same way. Like each character has its own strenghs and weaknesses. Level design built around that could have brought a cool online co-op experience I think.

But I never expected online in the first place so I'm not really bummed about it, I guess. :/

#65 Posted by Joedgabe (5127 posts) -

Oh noes.... the world is going to end.. oh god oh god ohhh god!!! O_O!

#66 Posted by nintendoboy16 (26919 posts) -

@speak_low said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

Your posts go beyond frustration. I'm fine if you have criticisms (hey, so do I) and I understand if Nintendo isn't your thing, but you go the extra mile. You've never brought up "potential" before, so I don't believe you.

And most other fandoms are ANY FREAKING BETTER? Must we forget what happened over the Bayonetta 2 fiasco? Must we forget about what happened to BioWare over the ME3 ending (which happened WAY before the Wii U version even released)? Because, yeah, only the sheep "brutally assault developers/publishers". Don't act like any non-sheep are on any higher ground on treating devs/pubs, because they really aren't.

There's only three major players in this video game console business, and Nintendo is a large one and pretty hard to ignore. Notice I don't spend time laughing at Ouya sales or get worked up over Amazon's rumored entry into gaming. Nintendo should be doing better and has/had potential because they have the longest history and all of those IPs and have had past success.

I did start gaming with Nintendo way back. I don't put that in my posts because you don't need my biography. Nintendo is that sinking sports team that just won't learn - they aren't even holding steady or admirably but falling further and worse than their GCN years. Some choose to still be supportive of them and act as if nothing is going wrong, but I can't stand by it any longer, because I'd be supporting bad decisions (which is what they're completely wrapped up in right now). And my points of view do not align at all with the reasoning of Sheep or Nintendo. Talk about being on far, opposite sides of something. How am I not expected to comment when I see a Sheep statement expressed that I feel is way off base?

Some may overlook Nintendo's flaws or pretend they aren't there, but I'm not going to play a part in "softening the edges like a good boy" when I see other companies handle things so much better. So factually, much of the Sheep damage control and defenses have been dead wrong - even delusional Iwata correctly states some of Nintendo's flaws and struggles in his apologetic investor meetings - things which Sheep absolutely refused to admit were a problem for Nintendo.

And yet I still see the same excuses live on today, annoyingly perpetuated just like herd thinking (which is why I love the term 'Sheep' LOL) - and these excuses have been mentioned over ten years ago. When something is a flaw from over ten years ago and still not addressed or fixed - I dunno - sounds like the company is being stupid to me. It's like the kid who never learned his multiplication tables or basic math. After a while it's no longer funny or cute and a pretty huge problem.

As the years roll on and those detrimental problems still remain - and in some cases are actually worse than before - the charge of 'stupid' is absolutely valid at this point. New information is not settling in and past lessons are disregarded. At this point they deserve the least amount of "buck yourself up, kiddo" praises and should, instead, be getting the most criticism for their crappy position. Any other company doing what they're doing now with the Wii U wouldn't be immune from it either.

As for extreme fandom with other things - I'm well aware of it. Just log on to any game site or forum and you'll see it. I've commented plenty on various subjects and debates. You just see me here and think I only talk Nintendo. This is System Wars and I am mostly cow/part lem, so it stands to reason I will be most critical of Nintendo out of the three. And it's not just to pick on Nintendo for no reason. They are at their lowest point, and many critical failings - stretching across various parts of business - have led them there. So there is a LOT to discuss with this company, especially with updated news flowing in daily. You just want me to quiet down and keep a posting quota or sweeten up my criticism more.

I don't think Nintendo deserves it now to be honest. Lately this company produces bitter revulsion and twists up faces like no other.

You seriously think those of us who are still fans of Nintendo and still support their systems are entirely accepting of their decisions? Why the hell do you think some Wii U/3DS owners beg the f*** out of them to drop region encoding? Why the hell do you see even Wii U owners begging them to advertise, make more games, etc? So by your logic, only by being a former fan, you are a "true" fan on anything?

Okay, find me proof that you've called out other fandoms, because mostly, I've seen you around Nintendo threads. Besides that, even if you did, you still act like the sheep are the worst offenders at what you called them out for.

And no, I'm not asking you to tone your opinion down, and again, I'm not getting on my knees asking you to like Nintendo's things again. I'm just calling out what I think is nonsense or at the very least questionable.

#67 Posted by DocSanchez (1651 posts) -

@foxhound_fox: why do Nintendo apologists act like this is a choice you have to make every time there are sacrifices? Guess what? You could have both local and online multi and give people a real choice. So no, this isn't good.

#68 Posted by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@kingjazziephiz said:

@MBirdy88: sucks for the people with no real friends I guess.

.... do you nintendo fans live in your own 14 year old worlds where everyone's friend groups have all the time in the world, are not scattered around the country and just sit on a sweaty sofa in their parent's spare room to the point where your statement is plain out drivel?

now for the rest of the world that would rather do other things when they get the chance to meet up. e.g those beyond university.... or distant freinds ect require this feature.

also those of us that don't like cheating morons with split screen making competitively playing together redundant.

#69 Edited by hiphops_savior (7945 posts) -

Co-op games with no online multiplayer

  • Rayman Legends
  • New Super Mario Bros U
  • Super Mario 3D World

Coincidentally, they are all platformers, and thus, requires a degree of precision. I wouldn't mind online mini games or ghosts though.

#70 Posted by foxhound_fox (88776 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@foxhound_fox: why do Nintendo apologists act like this is a choice you have to make every time there are sacrifices? Guess what? You could have both local and online multi and give people a real choice. So no, this isn't good.

Because every game ever made had an unlimited budget, infinity-sized development team and no time constraints whatsoever.

You clearly have no idea about the process of game development. They (Sega, not Nintendo, which a lot of people seem to be missing in this thread) are making the choice to DESIGN the game around a same room experience, RATHER than an online one. Since when is this a bad thing? We barely get any games these days that even give the option of same-room multiplayer. It's either online MP, online co-op or offline SP.

#71 Edited by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@hiphops_savior said:

Co-op games with no online multiplayer

  • Rayman Legends
  • New Super Mario Bros U
  • Super Mario 3D World

Coincidentally, they are all platformers, and thus, requires a degree of precision. I wouldn't mind online mini games or ghosts though.

....

Platformers are easily done online.... they require far less precision tha FPS, Fighters, RTS and even RACERS.

we arn't honestly trying to pretend here that any of the above games are that difficult.... only rayman legends has any sort of real difficulty on that list.... and is more about mesmerizing when to jump, as opposed to precision.... latency would not effect these games in the slightest.

#72 Edited by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

@DocSanchez said:

@foxhound_fox: why do Nintendo apologists act like this is a choice you have to make every time there are sacrifices? Guess what? You could have both local and online multi and give people a real choice. So no, this isn't good.

Because every game ever made had an unlimited budget, infinity-sized development team and no time constraints whatsoever.

You clearly have no idea about the process of game development. They (Sega, not Nintendo, which a lot of people seem to be missing in this thread) are making the choice to DESIGN the game around a same room experience, RATHER than an online one. Since when is this a bad thing? We barely get any games these days that even give the option of same-room multiplayer. It's either online MP, online co-op or offline SP.

You just put yourself in exactly the position he wanted you in... and hes right.

Its a design choice to ignore the majority of the multiplayer market? there is a reason online play is integrated far more than splitscreen.... hell even LAN on consoles is getting more attention. lets be fair, this is a cheap cash in game by sega for 5-10 year olds that even remotely think this game looks good. as a avid sonic player... no interest in this "lets milk the cartoon with a crap game" ... and sega's "Sonic is just for kids" excuse to churn out shovelware over and over again is embarrassing.

You could be right for the reasons above. this game is a joke as it is. but what is Nintendo's first party excuse? some of the biggest games franchises in the world still so far behind in the multiplayer department. Mario Kart Wii was the ONLY nintendo game that had "competent online" ... and I say that "nicely put" ... as it was far from perfect... Smash Bros Brawl's online was a friggin disgrace.

such a sorry state nintendo find themselves in. imagine the MILLIONS of people that would buy Smash Bros Brawl if it release on Xbox/Playstaion and or PC .... with proper online using their systems.

but no... instead, the next fantastic smash bros brawl will release on a failed console.... and a very limited 3DS.... fan-friggin-tastic.

EDIT

we now know that most of sega's gaming revanue is from the PC platform... which... with no coincidence, ARE MOSTLY ONLINE-CAPABLE games.

#73 Posted by Shielder7 (5152 posts) -

LMAO like it matters what they do, whens the last time they made a good sonic game MP or SP

#74 Edited by Shielder7 (5152 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

@kingjazziephiz said:

@MBirdy88: sucks for the people with no real friends I guess.

.... do you nintendo fans live in your own 14 year old worlds where everyone's friend groups have all the time in the world, are not scattered around the country and just sit on a sweaty sofa in their parent's spare room to the point where your statement is plain out drivel?

Opposed to what PC fans living like 14 year olds in their moms basements with no real friends or social groups outside of the internet and actually do have all the time in the world because they're too scared or fat to leave the house, and just sit on a sweaty computer chair in their to their underwear to the point where your statement is plain out drivel?

#75 Posted by Glitter (353 posts) -

I do not expect a video game like this to have any form of online multiplayer, it is simply a cash in type video game made in order to go along with the television series and whatever else from my understanding. Sega, along with any other company that handles Sonic the Hedgehog with the exception of Sumo Digital, lacks the creativity and understanding to make a great Sonic the Hedgehog video game, at least that is what they have proved to me. They should try to make an open world Sonic the Hedgehog video game with full control of the character, actual full control and make it similar to the Sonic Adventure series but better and let you play as a large range of characters from previous Sonic the Hedgehog video games instead of just the same basic four or five characters. Instead there has been Sonic the Hedgehog video game after Sonic the Hedgehog video game, where you really only get to play as Sonic and you have no proper control of him, other than to control him like a car because dumb Sega thinks this is a great idea; so they insist on doing it every time they make a new video game.

In this video game you will be able to play as someone other than Sonic, but no where near as many characters as I would have wanted and it is based a television series, so it is not the type of video game that much effort will be put into or is meant to be serious, it is the equivalent of a movie based video game; so no online should not be a surprise I feel and has nothing to do with other Wii U video games in general lacking online in my opinion. Plus they are not trying to make it look as graphically good as Super Mario 3D World and I doubt it will have decent game play. So with that, I am left with only my imagination, since Sega is too dumb and does not know what to do after all these years of complaints on what to do properly.

#76 Posted by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@Shielder7 said:

@MBirdy88 said:

@kingjazziephiz said:

@MBirdy88: sucks for the people with no real friends I guess.

.... do you nintendo fans live in your own 14 year old worlds where everyone's friend groups have all the time in the world, are not scattered around the country and just sit on a sweaty sofa in their parent's spare room to the point where your statement is plain out drivel?

Opposed to what PC fans living like 14 year olds in their moms basements with no real friends or social groups outside of the internet and actually do have all the time in the world because they're too scared or fat to leave the house, and just sit on a sweaty computer chair in their to their underwear to the point where your statement is plain out drivel?

Trying to counter a rhetorical question based on a stereotype that is obviously inaccurate to make a point with.... stereotypes and actually meaning it?

stop embarrassing yourself.

#77 Posted by foxhound_fox (88776 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

You just put yourself in exactly the position he wanted you in... and hes right.

Its a design choice to ignore the majority of the multiplayer market? there is a reason online play is integrated far more than splitscreen.... hell even LAN on consoles is getting more attention. lets be fair, this is a cheap cash in game by sega for 5-10 year olds that even remotely think this game looks good. as a avid sonic player... no interest in this "lets milk the cartoon with a crap game" ... and sega's "Sonic is just for kids" excuse to churn out shovelware over and over again is embarrassing.

You could be right for the reasons above. this game is a joke as it is. but what is Nintendo's first party excuse? some of the biggest games franchises in the world still so far behind in the multiplayer department. Mario Kart Wii was the ONLY nintendo game that had "competent online" ... and I say that "nicely put" ... as it was far from perfect... Smash Bros Brawl's online was a friggin disgrace.

such a sorry state nintendo find themselves in. imagine the MILLIONS of people that would buy Smash Bros Brawl if it release on Xbox/Playstaion and or PC .... with proper online using their systems.

but no... instead, the next fantastic smash bros brawl will release on a failed console.... and a very limited 3DS.... fan-friggin-tastic.

EDIT

we now know that most of sega's gaming revanue is from the PC platform... which... with no coincidence, ARE MOSTLY ONLINE-CAPABLE games.

Is this a Nintendo-published game or something? People seem awfully obsessed with criticizing Nintendo for something SEGA is doing.

*looks it up*

Nope, SEGA-published, developed by Big Red Button (Wii U) and Sanzaru Games (3DS).

This obsession with online multiplayer is what is killing traditional console gaming. Same-room multiplayer is one of the few advantages consoles had left over the PC. Now I guess since people are buying the PS4 and Xbone in droves, despite them literally having almost nothing to play, signals the end of traditional console gaming in favour of highly limited, closed-platform PC experiences.

#78 Edited by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

@MBirdy88 said:

You just put yourself in exactly the position he wanted you in... and hes right.

Its a design choice to ignore the majority of the multiplayer market? there is a reason online play is integrated far more than splitscreen.... hell even LAN on consoles is getting more attention. lets be fair, this is a cheap cash in game by sega for 5-10 year olds that even remotely think this game looks good. as a avid sonic player... no interest in this "lets milk the cartoon with a crap game" ... and sega's "Sonic is just for kids" excuse to churn out shovelware over and over again is embarrassing.

You could be right for the reasons above. this game is a joke as it is. but what is Nintendo's first party excuse? some of the biggest games franchises in the world still so far behind in the multiplayer department. Mario Kart Wii was the ONLY nintendo game that had "competent online" ... and I say that "nicely put" ... as it was far from perfect... Smash Bros Brawl's online was a friggin disgrace.

such a sorry state nintendo find themselves in. imagine the MILLIONS of people that would buy Smash Bros Brawl if it release on Xbox/Playstaion and or PC .... with proper online using their systems.

but no... instead, the next fantastic smash bros brawl will release on a failed console.... and a very limited 3DS.... fan-friggin-tastic.

EDIT

we now know that most of sega's gaming revanue is from the PC platform... which... with no coincidence, ARE MOSTLY ONLINE-CAPABLE games.

Is this a Nintendo-published game or something? People seem awfully obsessed with criticizing Nintendo for something SEGA is doing.

*looks it up*

Nope, SEGA-published, developed by Big Red Button (Wii U) and Sanzaru Games (3DS).

This obsession with online multiplayer is what is killing traditional console gaming. Same-room multiplayer is one of the few advantages consoles had left over the PC. Now I guess since people are buying the PS4 and Xbone in droves, despite them literally having almost nothing to play, signals the end of traditional console gaming in favour of highly limited, closed-platform PC experiences.

A game aimed at nintendo systems. I don't even know why they decided to do that even. trying to make out sonic appeals to the same people as mario... it doesn't... sonic is far lower class. but rant over... nintendo focused systems... the multiplayer aspect is a massive problem now... this is just 1 game in the many long lists of disappointments from nintendo in this area... an area which adds gameplay to MOST games.... pretty much anything multiplayer can justify an online component.

Isn't it obvious? its attached to nintendo through exclusivity. so its much easier to pick holes in. not to mention the many games even CoD that people have mentioned in this thread are criminally presented on nintendo systems.

"Traditional Consoles" .... no such thing. as they do now what they did then. Online was ALWAYS going to be much bigger than 4 player split screen, the only reason it was any other way was due to technology limitations of previous consoles.

I agree it should be more common to have local multiplayer. but genres like shooters and racers don't work well with splitscreen. splitscreen is a terrible solution to LAN play.... even with a 50 inch TV it looks awful.... and not anywhere close to as usable as multiple console LAN/TVs or Online... which is why its taking a massive back seat.

certain genres are fine.... things like Smash Bros for instance, and 3D mario world. but in 2014 criminal not to have online support, as you alienate a much larger audience than the local multiplayer.

Ideally both should be in ANY multiplayer game as a standard.

#79 Edited by foxhound_fox (88776 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

A game aimed at nintendo systems. I don't even know why they decided to do that even. trying to make out sonic appeals to the same people as mario... it doesn't... sonic is far lower class. but rant over... nintendo focused systems... the multiplayer aspect is a massive problem now... this is just 1 game in the many long lists of disappointments from nintendo in this area... an area which adds gameplay to MOST games.... pretty much anything multiplayer can justify an online component.

Isn't it obvious? its attached to nintendo through exclusivity. so its much easier to pick holes in. not to mention the many games even CoD that people have mentioned in this thread are criminally presented on nintendo systems.

"Traditional Consoles" .... no such thing. as they do now what they did then. Online was ALWAYS going to be much bigger than 4 player split screen, the only reason it was any other way was due to technology limitations of previous consoles.

I agree it should be more common to have local multiplayer. but genres like shooters and racers don't work well with splitscreen. splitscreen is a terrible solution to LAN play.... even with a 50 inch TV it looks awful.... and not anywhere close to as usable as multiple console LAN/TVs or Online... which is why its taking a massive back seat.

certain genres are fine.... things like Smash Bros for instance, and 3D mario world. but in 2014 criminal not to have online support, as you alienate a much larger audience than the local multiplayer.

Ideally both should be in ANY multiplayer game as a standard.

Now you are just moving the goalposts. First, this was criticism against Nintendo, now it's criticism against SEGA because they chose to put the game(s) on "Nintendo focused" platforms. You are being a super-try-hard here. You are trying to pull any simple amount of criticism you can muster against Nintendo, from what is essentially almost entirely not Nintendo-related at all.

This is SEGA's decision. Full stop. It has, as far as we know currently, given the information in front of us, nothing to do with Nintendo or the WiiU/3DS platforms at all. They want to make this game for a local multiplayer experience, rather than something online. The 3DS has a fairly good online system, why is the Wii U only being involved in this discussion? If SEGA was only targeting the Wii U with this game, your criticisms might hold some water, but they hold none when the 3DS is involved.

Online support isn't mandatory. Why aren't you complaining about The Order 1886 not having online multiplayer? What about Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2? It's criminal to shoehorn online multiplayer into a game not designed to take advantage of that particular style of interaction. The ignorance of gamers regarding game design and wanting "EVERYTHING POSSIBLE!" in their games is incredibly naive. Budgets, team size/ability and time constraints all hamper what a development team can do... and this isn't even considering the VISION of what they want their game to be.

Sure, a Call of Duty game not having online multiplayer would be dumb... that kind of game is centralized around that kind of experience... but a Sonic game? What benefit would a platformer gain from having online multiplayer? The only online components that make ANY lick of sense for a platformer is high score/time trial leaderboards.

You are really pulling at straws here to criticize a SEGA Sonic game that for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist to fulfill people's desire for online multiplayer.

#80 Edited by Renegade_Fury (17223 posts) -

Should it have online? Yeah, it should since it emphasizes co-op, but when even Nintendo doesn't implement online play in their games, I can see why Big Red Button wouldn't care. The game looks like a generic ps2 platformer anyway, so it's hard to have high expectations for it. Hell, I don't even know if we'll be able to classify it as a platformer since the game is focusing on combat, and the term "Action/Adventure" is being thrown out a lot around it. In multiple ways it reminds me of Sonic Mars and the other SatAM inspired game that was supposed to be about using stealth.

I will say this though: Even Sonic 4 had online co-op, which was much more of a traditional Sonic game, and it worked out fine. Platformers can and do benefit from having online play, so I don't buy into the argument that the mode isn't necessary in this genre, and especially when so many have local mp.

#81 Posted by millerlight89 (18569 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@foxhound_fox: why do Nintendo apologists act like this is a choice you have to make every time there are sacrifices? Guess what? You could have both local and online multi and give people a real choice. So no, this isn't good.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

#82 Edited by nintendoboy16 (26919 posts) -

@Shielder7 said:

LMAO like it matters what they do, whens the last time they made a good sonic game MP or SP

Even good Sonic games (not counting the racing titles) have multiplayer modes that generally aren't very good. I loved Colors' single player campaign, but the multiplayer sucked.

#83 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

Online multiplayer really should be a standard feature for all multiplayer games in 2014.

#84 Posted by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

@MBirdy88 said:

A game aimed at nintendo systems. I don't even know why they decided to do that even. trying to make out sonic appeals to the same people as mario... it doesn't... sonic is far lower class. but rant over... nintendo focused systems... the multiplayer aspect is a massive problem now... this is just 1 game in the many long lists of disappointments from nintendo in this area... an area which adds gameplay to MOST games.... pretty much anything multiplayer can justify an online component.

Isn't it obvious? its attached to nintendo through exclusivity. so its much easier to pick holes in. not to mention the many games even CoD that people have mentioned in this thread are criminally presented on nintendo systems.

"Traditional Consoles" .... no such thing. as they do now what they did then. Online was ALWAYS going to be much bigger than 4 player split screen, the only reason it was any other way was due to technology limitations of previous consoles.

I agree it should be more common to have local multiplayer. but genres like shooters and racers don't work well with splitscreen. splitscreen is a terrible solution to LAN play.... even with a 50 inch TV it looks awful.... and not anywhere close to as usable as multiple console LAN/TVs or Online... which is why its taking a massive back seat.

certain genres are fine.... things like Smash Bros for instance, and 3D mario world. but in 2014 criminal not to have online support, as you alienate a much larger audience than the local multiplayer.

Ideally both should be in ANY multiplayer game as a standard.

Now you are just moving the goalposts. First, this was criticism against Nintendo, now it's criticism against SEGA because they chose to put the game(s) on "Nintendo focused" platforms. You are being a super-try-hard here. You are trying to pull any simple amount of criticism you can muster against Nintendo, from what is essentially almost entirely not Nintendo-related at all.

This is SEGA's decision. Full stop. It has, as far as we know currently, given the information in front of us, nothing to do with Nintendo or the WiiU/3DS platforms at all. They want to make this game for a local multiplayer experience, rather than something online. The 3DS has a fairly good online system, why is the Wii U only being involved in this discussion? If SEGA was only targeting the Wii U with this game, your criticisms might hold some water, but they hold none when the 3DS is involved.

Online support isn't mandatory. Why aren't you complaining about The Order 1886 not having online multiplayer? What about Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2? It's criminal to shoehorn online multiplayer into a game not designed to take advantage of that particular style of interaction. The ignorance of gamers regarding game design and wanting "EVERYTHING POSSIBLE!" in their games is incredibly naive. Budgets, team size/ability and time constraints all hamper what a development team can do... and this isn't even considering the VISION of what they want their game to be.

Sure, a Call of Duty game not having online multiplayer would be dumb... that kind of game is centralized around that kind of experience... but a Sonic game? What benefit would a platformer gain from having online multiplayer? The only online components that make ANY lick of sense for a platformer is high score/time trial leaderboards.

You are really pulling at straws here to criticize a SEGA Sonic game that for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist to fulfill people's desire for online multiplayer.

stopped reading at the first sentence, as I clearly stated at the start that it was a rant about sega putting it on nintendo consoles.. so why pick up on it?

sigh.... ok I read on and facepalmed again. look at what I wrote "Any game with a multiplayer component can justify online multiplayer" and I later go onto say "Though the same could be said for local multiplayer" paraphrasing.

So how.... tell me how bringing up order 1886 or C:LOS2 is in anyway related to anything I said? they don't have multiplayer components. therefore are not part of the discussion at all.

Hint: I said games WITH MULTIPLAYER. as in local multiplayer only or vice versa. not SP games needing MP.

still I think order and LOS are bad examples anyway. people want everything multiplayer if they can justify it. look at the communities that have modded games like Just Cause 2 and Skyrim to have multiplayer.... order is a shooter, it could work, it could of had a unique angle and theme for an MP game too... so I can somewhat see why people are dissapointed.... a good change in theme for an MP shooter would be very welcome.

LoS could be fun with co-op play.

theoretically no game needs "anything" ... but then thats not trying is it? this lame arguement that "less time on MP means better SP" imo is a flawed arguement at best and very situational, especially when discussing AAA developers.

#85 Edited by PurpleMan5000 (7325 posts) -

This game came out a year too late, anyway. There are way too many great Wii U titles for many people to care about this game, multiplayer or not.

#86 Edited by foxhound_fox (88776 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

stopped reading at the first sentence

Yep.

Your entire argument is just falling apart here, and you cannot even maintain proper sentence structure.

You are completely ignoring the points I'm making and offering nothing new to the discussion (just repeating what you have a few times already). The fact you think you are entitled to tell a developer what "needs" to be in a game to make you satisfied kind of defeats the purpose of them being the developers. This company desires their game to offer a same-room focused experience. If you don't care for that, then speak with your wallet and don't buy it. Is this rustling your jimmies so much because you can't play the game on another, non-Nintendo platform?

#87 Edited by MBirdy88 (8330 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

@MBirdy88 said:

stopped reading at the first sentence

Yep.

Your entire argument is just falling apart here, and you cannot even maintain proper sentence structure.

You are completely ignoring the points I'm making and offering nothing new to the discussion (just repeating what you have a few times already). The fact you think you are entitled to tell a developer what "needs" to be in a game to make you satisfied kind of defeats the purpose of them being the developers. This company desires their game to offer a same-room focused experience. If you don't care for that, then speak with your wallet and don't buy it. Is this rustling your jimmies so much because you can't play the game on another, non-Nintendo platform?

white knighting poor choices... whats the point in that?

and it wasn't just about this one game.. as you already know.

what did i miss so important in your post when you made 2 very stupid comments which garnered immediate attention? and the hypocrisy of you not responding to my points... nice.

"If you find BS, dont call it out, just don't buy" ... yea because not buying something with no feedback or debate is EXACTLY what makes the next game worth it... AMIRITE? all those silent non-buyers.... such feedback, much information... wow