So you're telling me that a huge development team with DECADES of experience can't properly make a next-gen console game for an established franchise, while tiny, brand new developers can hit the bulls-eye with no prior experience or franchise to build from?
I think it's time you accept Sega for what they are: a bunch of lazy washups who have nothing but the memories of their glory days.

And any attempt to deny any of this is completely not doing it right.

Well, whatever, I'm not standing up for Sega, because I know some really crappy games in the past, (Sonic Heroes for one), but...eh. Whatever.

You can't really say they're just a bunch of lazy wash ups, they have created some kick-ass Sonic games a bit in the past. I mean, unless they're starting to create crappier and crappier Sonic games, you shouldn't really just mock them.

Okay, Kyuubit, you don't have to repeat it like 10 times, we know they're getting better, but on the bad side, a little...cornier.

Okay, good for you.

Has anyone played Sonic 3D Blast? I've played through the emulator, I really didn't find it that fun.

Played it with a hack that disbables all Flickies there, so I ran through it without looking for them...

Now THAT was fun. =p

Go get the Saturn version.

Then... play it for his honor. -.-

Sonic Colors Scans.

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg65 ... 1275514661
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg65 ... 1275514711
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg65 ... 1275514763

Ooh! Thanks for that!

I read some of the text. First off, Sonic is the only playable character. No Tails.

BUT! It also says that you'll be switching between 2.5D and 'behind the hedgehog' 3D, like Sonic Unleashed which is great! It will use Wiimote and Nunchuck, motion controls are only used: 1 to activate a Wisp's (Those alien thingies.) power (You can only hold one at a time.) and 2 tilting the nunchuck to drift around corners.

None of the powerups mentioned thus far seem to slow down Sonic.

I think that this one might be worth watching out for even if it isn't a main series one!

Eh what?

It looks like I dare to question your judgement as it seems to somewhat contredict that of the reviews I've seen.

Metacritic:
60/100 (360)
66/100 (Wii)
54/100 (PS3)
66/100 (PS2)

Eurogamer:
4/10 (360)
6/10 (Wii)

Game Informer:
6.0/10 (360)
6.5/10 (Wii)

Gamespot:
3.5/10 (360/PS3)
7/10 (Wii)

IGN:
4.5/10 (360)
7.0/10 (PS2)
7.2/10 (Wii)

Infact, the only review that shares your belief would be
1-Up:
C (360)
D (Wii)

So, I must ask. Why do you think that the Wii and PS2's version is terrible while the Xbox and PS3's version is not?

1. All of them? Thats a slim probability.
2. How can I be certain that your not being Biased?

Well, what was the difference between the Wii/PS2 version and the Xbox/PS3 version that made the wii/PS2 one worse?

...


Oh yeah, I forgot that the 360 and PS3 versions were designed by a different team from the Wii/PS2 version, so those reasons make sense. Fair enough, fair enough.

I take it that the werehog stages are shorter in the Wii and PS2 ones?

Because that would probably be the reason why the Reviewers game it a higher score. You may like the werehog, but it didn't go down well with them so they probably wanted to take as little of it at a time as they could.