Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood gets 6.5 on IGN

http://ds.ign.com/articles/913/913197p1.html

Wow I am surprise. I thought this game was going to be great.

It's Bozon, I'll still be getting this...

GI - 8.5, NP - 8, ONM - 93, Eurogamer - 7, this deviates from the trend in an odd way.

Thats it.

If Bioware can't even make a decent game using the sonic name then it's over

Sonic is dead people.

*edit* Just saw those reviews the other poster posted. Okay maybe this will be good

What?! Bioware can't even make a good Sonic game. :( Sonic is sooo dead. It stinks. Sonic Unleashed is looking awful, too. I'm still picking this up since I love Bioware, but damn if this isn't depressing. :(

I won't comment on this

btw- keep in mind this is Biowares first handheld RPG and it's still good

Sonic should have died a long time ago..Dr_Snood

Well of course, who adds sonic with an RPG?randomguy15

Can't hurt to try, but this case it did:P.. but it worked for Mario so it was worth a try.. even if it didn't work, but still

Well of course, who adds sonic with an RPG?randomguy15

Well it worked with Mario so why not Sonic.

[QUOTE="randomguy15"]Well of course, who adds sonic with an RPG?JLF1

Well it worked with Mario so why not Sonic.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

[QUOTE="randomguy15"]Well of course, who adds sonic with an RPG?randomguy15

Well it worked with Mario so why not Sonic.

Sega is starting to remind me of Brett Favre, both don't know when to pack it in.Bigboi500

are you serious? last season was probably one of his best seasons hes ever played...

Bioware obviously didn't take this one seriously... They screwed Sega over thats for sure... If sega paid them to make it. I just don't understand why Sega can't make a good sonic game, all they need to do is play one of the genesis Sonics and hey presto you've you got every idea you need to make an epic sonic game.Dahaka-UK

That is however not an excuse for Biowares actions with this game.

That is however not an excuse for Biowares actions with this game.

JLF1

5.0 on Gamespot confirmed.

I was right to feel iffy about this game.

not surprised. The battles ar supposed to suck and take about 20 minutes each

Yet more fail from Bioware, first Mass Effect then this crap

http://ds.ign.com/articles/913/913197p1.html

Wow I am surprise. I thought this game was going to be great.

Wanderer5

I didn't.

First time I saw it i was like wtf

So then IGN matters, and GameInformer, Eurogamer, Nintendo Power, and Official Nintendo Magazine don't?famicommander

put that into perspective.

So then IGN matters, and GameInformer, Eurogamer, Nintendo Power, and Official Nintendo Magazine don't?famicommander

I'm not a big fan of official magazines and GI can be hit or miss. :P

[QUOTE="famicommander"]So then IGN matters, and GameInformer, Eurogamer, Nintendo Power, and Official Nintendo Magazine don't?Shinobishyguy

put that into perspective.

nintendo power gave shadow the hedgehog and sonic riders 8's

put that into perspective.

Shinobishyguy

and the last thing IGN are going to do is underrate a game. This game has looked dodgy from the start. Only furries are interested in Sonic the hedgehogs backstory and the battles and field gameplay look weak as ****

not surprised. The battles ar supposed to suck and take about 20 minutes each

Yet more fail from Bioware, first Mass Effect then this crap

blushield

The battles are about 20 minutes? Is that really true?

It is biowares first foray into the handheld market so ill give em props because alot of effort was clearly put into the game, but there was bound to be some problems gamers had with the game. Clearly Bozon had one too many. About Sonics future I dont see why SEGA cant create one kick ass 2D platformer for home consoles. They cant seem to get the 3D just right so stick to what your good at or were good at as the case may be.

I aren't gonna say if its good or bad because I haven't played it yet and I think it has got a few mixed reviews.

The battles are about 20 minutes? Is that really true?

Wanderer5

exaggerating but they're long as hell

they have different rounds, they're incrediby slow and the special moves require a long winded series of EBA style taps that result in nothing if you miss even one. Watch a battle video, it looks terrible

[QUOTE="blushield"]

not surprised. The battles ar supposed to suck and take about 20 minutes each

Yet more fail from Bioware, first Mass Effect then this crap

Wanderer5

I have to take offense to what u said about mass effect because the game was stunning, visually and in gameplay. Granted I played only the pc version but nonetheless... but you are entitled to your opinion...

You have got to realise at least one site or magazine gives a game a ridiculous score.

[QUOTE="blushield"]

not surprised. The battles ar supposed to suck and take about 20 minutes each

Yet more fail from Bioware, first Mass Effect then this crap

Wanderer5

The battles are about 20 minutes? Is that really true?

Battles can also go on forever, due to some random elements that come into play with the enemies you're fighting. Some characters will automatically heal after every round, others will come back to life if all enemies aren't dead after the round ends (sometimes with more HP than you can deliver with a team in the following round), and status buffers can cause a whole team to miss multiple times, round after round.

IGN

Going off this, not all the time but it's totally possible for them to reach twenty minutes. I haven't seen a video but I'm under the assumption this isn't an SRPG so twenty minutes would be way too much for a single battle.

I have to take offense to what u said about mass effect because the game was stunning, visually and in gameplay. Granted I played only the pc version but nonetheless... but you are entitled to your opinion...

dark_k

PC version was better but there's only so much you can polish a turd

compare to some of Bioware's earlier works and tell me it doesn't suck

You have got to realise at least one site or magazine gives a game a ridiculous score.

chocolate1325

This is not some bad magazine. IMO IGN has the best reviews. At least their reviews are normally closer to my own opinion of games.

My problem is do I still pick up my pre-order or move it to another game

[QUOTE="chocolate1325"]

You have got to realise at least one site or magazine gives a game a ridiculous score.

HarlockJC

This is not some bad magazine. IMO IGN has the best reviews. At least their reviews are normally closer to my own opinion of games.

My problem is do I still pick up my pre-order or move it to another game

Sonic is dead? Then what the hell were Sonic Rush, Sonic and the Secret Rings, and Sonic Rush Adventure? All of them scored either A or AA. And since when is IGN the universal indicator of quality? God, I hate people's reactions to Sonic games. It's either the second coming or the end of the world. It can't just be a "good game" or a "bad game". It's either the savior of the franchise or the one that puts it in the grave.famicommander

No, Sonic has been in the grave for a *long time* - the majority of Sonic games are mediocre. In the last seven years, if you take all of the Sonic games, the good ones are the *exception*. You're standing here going "omg, everyone is wrong but me and a tiny handful of remaining SEGA fans!".

People are UPSET because the hope is that someone other than SEGA might make Sonic what he once was: good. No, not brilliant - just on par with the standards of the generation would be enough. Sonic is reduced to 2D DS /PSP games that are only okay (level design off, annoying voices, stupid stories, blind jumps, control issues, etc - yet for Sonic that's "good). The only Sonic game on consoles in the past years that hasn't been a glitchy, terrible mess was Sonic and the Secret Rings - and that had to be on rails to do it (not that most Sonic games these days are really off rails).

-

So people have the right to be worried. Bioware is an amazing developer - something SEGA hasn't been in years - and if they're not able to make Sonic game that changes the direction of the series (lord knows SEGA isn't - Werewolves? Dark Knights? WTF?) then, well, it's time to retire.

-

Years ago we could debate "Sonic vs Mario" - now? Forget it. Mario Galaxy is GOTY material, Sonic 2006 was "worst game of the year" material.

Going off this, not all the time but it's totally possible for them to reach twenty minutes. I haven't seen a video but I'm under the assumption this isn't an SRPG so twenty minutes would be way too much for a single battle.

Technoweirdo

Yeah about 20 minutes would be too much, unless it a boss battle that has a lot of HP.

I never knew why people hyped this game so much, I thought it looked mediocre from the begining, I knew a Sonic RPG wouldn't work. Like how Yahtzee said in his review of Too Human: (Talking about the use of the right thumb stick in combat) "It's like somebody made a submarine out of metal, and the metal submarine worked perfectly fine and became the norm, but then someone said: 'Everyone makes submarines out of metal, let's make one out of bread.'"

Sonic Adventure on the Dreamcast was great, so Sega wanted to do something the same but different for Sonic Adventure 2 and that game turned out great too. But then there were some mediocre Sonic games like Shadow the Hedgehog with the addition of guns. But still, the formula for Sonic Adventure worked and Sega should try to make Sonic games that feels like Sonic Adventure again. I think they gave it a shot with Sonic 06, it wasn't bad, but it didn't feel so much like Sonic Adventure because it was rushed so it was missing some things. I felt like I had more freedom in Sonic Adventure for some reason.