Topic: Sonic the Hedgehog 4 (Wii, PS3, 360, iPhone)

[Alice in Entropy]

I would imagine those are less heinous gimmicks.

[Mirby]

They're still Gimmicks!

[Bueno Excelente]

Sonic may not be the best character in vBrawl (in Brawl+ and Brawl-, that's another story! ), but the basic thing that any body who dares to main him could say? You don't try to spin all over the place. You use Sonic's speed, range and array of attacks to your advantage in a fashion that allows him to "hit and away", frustrating the opposition because a good Sonic should rarely be cornered, much less actually be hit. I at least believe Sonic controlled well, in that game.

Being a fighting game, is requires a bit of a learning curve to use him like that. As in said, the homing attack was a simple and direct option which felt comfortable from the start.

Incorrect statement in my eyes, and I'll tell you why.

The notion that Sonic that has been doing more than ever is NOT what's inherently wrong. It's actually based on the notion that Sega has been forcing Sonic to wear so many hats, with no real rhyme+reason to go along with it.

Pretty much every "gimmicky" thing that Sonic has had in his games from these last few years, from the extra play-styles/characters in the Adventures, the "Teams" in Heroes, to the Werehog and Sword-wielding in his most recent offerings, has NOT been given the kind of quality control that it could have been. And that is where the problem lies. Nothing is giving the time it needs to truly develop, and Sega is just as quick to force the team to focus on some new gimmick for a new game.

Case in point: they were quoted on saying that "we'd be seeing more of the Werehog". Well...here are, with yet another Sonic release, and the Werehog has yet to be seen (and likely won't be) in Sonic Colors, which focuses on yet ANOTHER set of gimmicks.

Of course the quality control in Sega sucks. And of course Sega prefers to quickly make the team work on a completely different game rather than actually explore the underlying problem. Mostly because Sonic Team is pretty much ran like a sweatshop of Sonic games, and there's no quality control to speak of, so they'd rather make constant new types of Sonic games so they don't manage to get a bad rep from their previous failed gameplay mechanics.

...it doesn't mean those mechanics WORKED TO BEGIN WITH. Let me give you an example. What was tried to do with Shadow. Collection of items, and a selection of which enemies to kill. Why didn't this work? Because they made it in linear Sonic levels, levels which don't work with those kinds of mechanics in the first place. Levels that are supposed to get you to speed by them, not pick berries along the way to grandma's. Black Knight? They tried to adapt melee mechanics in a game where you're always speeding forward. That doesn't help, because fighting isn't something you do while constantly running. They could try and adapt a feature such as fire a gun while running, like in many arcade shooters, they could try and make it so you can attack while speeding by, but focusing a game on sword attacks that you do while constantly running is just stupid, because as worked as that feature can be, it just doesn't work in a gameplay perspective. They'd have to retool the whole game. Examples like Sonic 06 are kinda different. Aside from the horrible sidecharacters you played as (although Blaze was good), the game COULD have been good, if it had better level design, and if they fixed the bugs, and added better graphics. The BASIS of the game is good, the main problem was everything else.

Again, I think the main thing is that it's a challenge unto itself to ascertain just how "difficult" it would be, until it was placed in the hands of a more competent development team with a decent amount of dev. time to its credit. Even Sonic Team was capable of some definite good ideas, such as the "Bounce" ability that Sonic had in SA2/Battle. In my opinion, it was a good answer to Mario's "Butt Stomp", as well as an ability that guaranteed how Sonic would move in a 3D space: straight up, straight down, unless there was other DI from the user. You can't get too much more precise than that, and control of Sonic remained firmly in your hands, and not trusted to the lock-on attributes predetermined by the game itself.

That's a basic ability that could have been honed over games, and served to develop Sonic's own moveset that much more. But...wouldn't you know? It was taken away, and later replaced with other things by the very next game...

The bounce ability was good, and yes, it could have been vastly improved. But in no way it could have replaced the homing attack. You gotta see, Sonic games were NEVER about fighting enemies. They're about when to know when to spin so you don't lose any rings when you collide with this or that guy. Since all enemies except bosses can traditionally go down with a single blow. And since enemies with spiky backs and such can't be taken out with the attack. In works in a gameplay perspective, so why get rid of it? It doesn't make the game harder or easier, just... playable.

[Mirby]

At least in Sonic 2 & 3, you could take the spiky enemies out with a spin dash... gave it a bit of balance. I'm just gonna side with Flash on this point; the point of Sonic has, and always will be, speed. Not fighting enemies. The enemies were merely there to provide an obstruction, a way to die (aside from spikes and pits, of course), a way to screw you over if you were saving up rings for a special stage (at least in 1 and 2).... never as a real challenge.

[Satoryu]

I'm just gonna side with Flash on this point; the point of Sonic has, and always will be, speed.

Uh, I'm pretty sure he didn't say that.

[Mirby]

Whatever. Then that's my point.

[Bueno Excelente]

Whatever. Then that's my point.

I said the opposite. =P The point of Sonic is supposed to be good platforming. But when it comes to enemies, you're supposed to blaze through them, not fight them directly. They're obstacles more than enemies.

[Mirby]

Ah, my bad. Well, as a platformer, that's naturally the point. But compared to most platformers, speed is more of a focus than anything else.

As for the enemies, yeah, that's basically what I was saying.

[Jericho]

*Waves the "Sonic is about momentum, not speed!" banner.*

...

*Gets taken outside and beaten for blasphemy.*

[Alice in Entropy]

I think you've got it about right.

I honestly feel that you should have to earn, as it were, your speed in a Sonic game; it should be something that you work for, carefully dodging enemies and traps, so you can keep up that sense of speed for as long as possible. The boost button was a nice gimmick, but if you can boost to top speed almost whenever you like, there's no real sense of minor pride compared to when you reach yoru top acceleration by running and running and dodging and running and looping and running some more.

Just my two cents, anyway.

[Bueno Excelente]

I think you've got it about right.

I honestly feel that you should have to earn, as it were, your speed in a Sonic game; it should be something that you work for, carefully dodging enemies and traps, so you can keep up that sense of speed for as long as possible. The boost button was a nice gimmick, but if you can boost to top speed almost whenever you like, there's no real sense of minor pride compared to when you reach yoru top acceleration by running and running and dodging and running and looping and running some more.

Just my two cents, anyway.

I don't think constant speed should be part of it. The original Sonic games didn't require speed in most parts, and the parts that HAD speed, came between others, and were a bit autopiloted. I think Sonic should have speed, but it should be a kind of speed ala Sonic Adventure. Speedy character, with no need to always be racing in a direction. He runs, he jumps, he goes from platform to platform, just like other platforming characters. Only he's faster.

[Hypershell]

I said the opposite. =P The point of Sonic is supposed to be good platforming. But when it comes to enemies, you're supposed to blaze through them, not fight them directly. They're obstacles more than enemies.

One does well to know this before playing Black Knight.  I took notice in the video review Matt stops to jump and attack every single enemy.  Sure, many may feel that impulse, but sooner or later you have to let it go.  Otherwise, you're just robbing yourself.

And believe me, I am a "jump in and destroy crap" gamer through and through.  But that's simply not what Sonic is.  In fact game mechanics which force this tend to be the lower points of their respective titles (Heroes and to a lesser extent Rush are guilty of this).

I honestly feel that you should have to earn, as it were, your speed in a Sonic game

See, this is why we can't have a nice Super Sonic.  Or spin-dash.

Not saying the constant high speed at the expense of everything else is a good thing.  I'm just saying, STH1 is not the high point of Sonic's career.

So, yeah. Nights sucked, but at least it wasn't marred with bugs. It just... sucked. The controls for the flying portions were okay, but the key-nabbing was stupid. Still, it was a bit fun to fly around in a few levels. Kids' gameplay WAS HORRIBLE. Specially for the fact that it was forced on us, unlike the original Nights.

Which controller are you using?  Because I guarantee you the Wii remote will scar you for life in that game.  It is horribly, horribly broken beyond what any Sonic game I've played has ever seen.

That and frankly I was fed up with the forced gimmicks even before I reached the kids.  I mean, NiGHTS transforming into a boat?  Nevermind the fact that it handles like a barrel of molasses.

[Bueno Excelente]

One does well to know this before playing Black Knight.  I took notice in the video review Matt stops to jump and attack every single enemy.  Sure, many may feel that impulse, but sooner or later you have to let it go.  Otherwise, you're just robbing yourself.

And believe me, I am a "jump in and destroy crap" gamer through and through.  But that's simply not what Sonic is.  In fact game mechanics which force this tend to be the lower points of their respective titles (Heroes and to a lesser extent Rush are guilty of this).
See, this is why we can't have a nice Super Sonic.  Or spin-dash.

Not saying the constant high speed at the expense of everything else is a good thing.  I'm just saying, STH1 is not the high point of Sonic's career.

Which controller are you using?  Because I guarantee you the Wii remote will scar you for life in that game.  It is horribly, horribly broken beyond what any Sonic game I've played has ever seen.

That and frankly I was fed up with the forced gimmicks even before I reached the kids.  I mean, NiGHTS transforming into a boat?  Nevermind the fact that it handles like a barrel of molasses.

First off, you may not be able to destroy every single enemy, but all GOOD Sonic games provide you with the possibility of tearing apart every single enemy and still maintaining your speed.
And speed made by the gamer instead of having to go entirely on momentum is a good thing. It's just not a good thing when you're REQUIRED to go at big speeds at all times.

And I don't think ANYONE would be crazy enough to use a Wiimote in the game without at least the Nunchuck. What did you do with it? I played it with a Gamecube controller. And yes, although the game was awful, it had a few fun moments, I think.

[Hypershell]

First off, you may not be able to destroy every single enemy, but all GOOD Sonic games provide you with the possibility of tearing apart every single enemy and still maintaining your speed.

BK is no different in that respect, you're simply wise to wait until the late-game before attempting, when your abilities better allow it.  It's certainly no more offensive than Secret Rings' level system.

And I don't think ANYONE would be crazy enough to use a Wiimote in the game without at least the Nunchuck.

There's always somebody crazy/stupid enough.  In this case, me.

Here's the thing, there are certain genres which I believe to be naturally geared towards classic controllers, ie most fighting games, so I'm not of the mentality that all Wii games need some bizarre motion control setup.  But I like to use the new setups when possible, if they feel as though they belong (Mario Kart).  NiGHTS, I have no prior experience with (which is sad to say; I'd REALLY love to play the original), but based on concept alone there's no reason the Wii remote shouldn't work.  Sega just implemented it in ways that are horrendously sucktacular beyond any words I can possibly offer.  They failed to do that which the FREAKING SYSTEM MENU does, for crying out loud.

There is no other game I have played, ever, where "controller functionally works" is in my list of things they could have done differently.  And believe me, I have embraced games that have some pretty bad bugs in them.  Journey of Dreams is simply inexcusable.

[Turian]

I didn't get very far into knights. Does the gameplay change or something? What I did play seemed to work fine, I just got bored with it. I used the wiimote only setup. is it bad? If it is, how so?

[Bueno Excelente]

BK is no different in that respect, you're simply wise to wait until the late-game before attempting, when your abilities better allow it.  It's certainly no more offensive than Secret Rings' level system.

Only games aren't meant to be enjoyed only when playing them for the second time flawlessly. They're meant to be enjoyed with intuitive controls and method of play. I'm not gonna try and search for a way to play this game "which the developers intended" just so it doesn't run like crap when I play it. It's supposed to be intuitive and the player needs to be able to do it in his first try, no matter how incredibly tough it might be. It just needs to be possible.

There's always somebody crazy/stupid enough.  In this case, me.

Here's the thing, there are certain genres which I believe to be naturally geared towards classic controllers, ie most fighting games, so I'm not of the mentality that all Wii games need some bizarre motion control setup.  But I like to use the new setups when possible, if they feel as though they belong (Mario Kart).  NiGHTS, I have no prior experience with (which is sad to say; I'd REALLY love to play the original), but based on concept alone there's no reason the Wii remote shouldn't work.  Sega just implemented it in ways that are horrendously sucktacular beyond any words I can possibly offer.  They failed to do that which the FREAKING SYSTEM MENU does, for crying out loud.

There is no other game I have played, ever, where "controller functionally works" is in my list of things they could have done differently.  And believe me, I have embraced games that have some pretty bad bugs in them.  Journey of Dreams is simply inexcusable.

99,9% of the time, the new setups never work as well as the original ones. Nights, for those who played the original, is a game about precision of flight. It's THE game that got Sega to make their very first analog stick controller. Needless to say, without an analog stick, it's like playing Mario Galaxy, only he moves where you tell him to go when you point at the screen. In trailers and gameplay demos, they never showed the wiimote-only setup. And they intended the game to be played with a Gamecube controller, originally, like SSBB. Trying to play Street Fighter in, say, the 360's d-pad and then saying it's bad gameplay just because it's an option, it's not exactly the way to go. It's an option, yes. But it's seriously not the way to play the game itself.

I'm a big classic Nights fan. Got both the original game and the PS2 japanese remake. And I really recomend it to you, so you know what true Nights gameplay is. The new game was bad, yes, but when played with a GC remote, it had its few tiny moments where you could say "Wheeeee, I'm playing Nights!". Just once, just for fans, I think it was worth it. If only Sonic Team had made a straight sequel instead of changing everything, we wouldn't even be complaining.

I didn't get very far into knights. Does the gameplay change or something? What I did play seemed to work fine, I just got bored with it. I used the wiimote only setup. is it bad? If it is, how so?

Yes, it's not really supposed to be played that way. Nights is the game for which the Saturn analog controller was invented, so there you have it. It's THE analog stick game.

[Hypershell]

Only games aren't meant to be enjoyed only when playing them for the second time flawlessly. They're meant to be enjoyed with intuitive controls and method of play. I'm not gonna try and search for a way to play this game "which the developers intended" just so it doesn't run like crap when I play it. It's supposed to be intuitive and the player needs to be able to do it in his first try, no matter how incredibly tough it might be. It just needs to be possible.

It's very well possible, just not as fast or easy as later.  People in BK make the mistake of constantly approaching enemies with jump attacks, which is great when you need the timing or the change of angle, but not for EVERY SINGLE SCHMUCK TO CRAWL OUT OF THE GROUND.  If the player can't get the lunge attack through their head, that's their own problem.

Furthermore, those playing at a relaxed pace will find themselves rebounding off of homing attacks and doing their actual swing on the next bounce.  It's a nice way to learn the ropes, but if you're actually quick, you can swing mid-homing attack, which cuts down on your time drastically and keeps up your momentum.

By your own words, tough but possible.

One usually does not attempt a stylized run in their first playthrough, though.  The established mechanics of Sonic games only allow killing enemies while keeping up speed providing said enemies are sparse.  Pick any instance in SA2 where two enemies appear side-by-side, especially if both are shielded, and you're not killing both without stopping.  If you don't want to stop, you kill one and keep going.  The same applies applies to 2D games with multiple airborne foes, you need to slow down to bounce on every one, or just pass them by and enjoy the fact that you danced around them.  Black Knight is the same deal.

99,9% of the time, the new setups never work as well as the original ones.

Metroid Prime, Mario Kart Wii, Godzilla Unleashed, Mario Power Tennis, Zelda...

Hey, I'm not above forsaking the new for the established.  Besides the obvious Brawl, the lack of a traditional control option is one of my most major complaints against Star Fox Command.  But if the Wii taught me anything it's that, most of the time, which input device is better suited is up to personal preference.

But you're confusing my complaint.  I'm not saying that the pointer is ill-suited for NiGHTS.  If that was my problem I'd happily switch controllers.  What I'm saying is that it damn well could have, and should have, worked, but Sega did a horrendously bad job of programming it.  It's not a matter of how well the setup fits the genre, the pointer in the game is functionally flawed, and severely so.  A failing such as poor fit (ie: remote-only in Brawl) merely encourages one to try something else.  A functional flaw, however, severely damages one's confidence in the game.  And when I'm looking at huge messes of jaggies and some damn boat gimmick being forced to interrupt my flight, that doesn't help any, not leaving me terribly tempted to find a work-around (maybe I will one day when I'm bored enough, but I don't see that day coming any time soon).  Even if I do see how much fun the core mechanics can be, and I do, there are simply too many failings that need to be dodged or drudged through for me to consider it worthwhile.

[Bueno Excelente]

It's very well possible, just not as fast or easy as later.  People in BK make the mistake of constantly approaching enemies with jump attacks, which is great when you need the timing or the change of angle, but not for EVERY SINGLE SCHMUCK TO CRAWL OUT OF THE GROUND.  If the player can't get the lunge attack through their head, that's their own problem.

Furthermore, those playing at a relaxed pace will find themselves rebounding off of homing attacks and doing their actual swing on the next bounce.  It's a nice way to learn the ropes, but if you're actually quick, you can swing mid-homing attack, which cuts down on your time drastically and keeps up your momentum.

By your own words, tough but possible.

One usually does not attempt a stylized run in their first playthrough, though.  The established mechanics of Sonic games only allow killing enemies while keeping up speed providing said enemies are sparse.  Pick any instance in SA2 where two enemies appear side-by-side, especially if both are shielded, and you're not killing both without stopping.  If you don't want to stop, you kill one and keep going.  The same applies applies to 2D games with multiple airborne foes, you need to slow down to bounce on every one, or just pass them by and enjoy the fact that you danced around them.  Black Knight is the same deal.

You're missing my point. Black Knight is a BAD game. With gameplay and levels unfitting to a subtile, always moving level design. Flailing the controller around works for 90% of the time, whe main story can be finished in aproximately
half an hour, and the boss battles are poop. The speed style of the game just isn't well-suited to melee attacks, much less ridiculous things such as trading rings with random passerbys. It's a gameplay setting which should have been scrapped from its very concept and simply moved on to the next ridiculous idea they had. That. or actually try to improve any of their game mechanics by a tiny bit. Playing it "well" is ahdering to the developer's little world of getting used to a game awkwardness in every single way instead of the opposite.

Metroid Prime, Mario Kart Wii, Godzilla Unleashed, Mario Power Tennis, Zelda...

Hey, I'm not above forsaking the new for the established.  Besides the obvious Brawl, the lack of a traditional control option is one of my most major complaints against Star Fox Command.  But if the Wii taught me anything it's that, most of the time, which input device is better suited is up to personal preference.

But you're confusing my complaint.  I'm not saying that the pointer is ill-suited for NiGHTS.  If that was my problem I'd happily switch controllers.  What I'm saying is that it damn well could have, and should have, worked, but Sega did a horrendously bad job of programming it.  It's not a matter of how well the setup fits the genre, the pointer in the game is functionally flawed, and severely so.  A failing such as poor fit (ie: remote-only in Brawl) merely encourages one to try something else.  A functional flaw, however, severely damages one's confidence in the game.  And when I'm looking at huge messes of jaggies and some damn boat gimmick being forced to interrupt my flight, that doesn't help any, not leaving me terribly tempted to find a work-around (maybe I will one day when I'm bored enough, but I don't see that day coming any time soon).  Even if I do see how much fun the core mechanics can be, and I do, there are simply too many failings that need to be dodged or drudged through for me to consider it worthwhile.

Not forsaking the new for the established? I am. And quite alot. Motion play games should be games that work BETTER in motion play, not worse. Not ONE of those games works as well as its counterpart. Only Metroid Prime, and it's only because its predecessors used a dumb lock-on feature to point at things instead of actually using a functional second analog stick for camera. Zelda is a specially dumb game to apply those mechanics to, seeing as the sword swinging lagged a bit in comparison to actual button imput, and to apply targeting, the entire game had to be mirrored. If we were talking about games like Resi 4, which improved with the Wii aiming, then sure. But I think new control schemes should be used when they work BETTER in the game. Sega's Wiimote-only control was bad, and it should have been simply scrapped to begin with, since pretty much everyone with a Wii should have a nunchuck. I am not arguing if it was or not completely abysmal. But heck, if people play the game like that and SEE it's abysmal, why not try the other controller setting? Seems dumb to carry on such a thing. I never spent more than 5 seconds with the setting.

[Mirby]

And we seem to be in another argument where people's opinions are being treated as irrefutable facts...

[Protoman Blues]

Not forsaking the new for the established? I am. And quite alot. Motion play games should be games that work BETTER in motion play, not worse. Not ONE of those games works as well as its counterpart. Only Metroid Prime, and it's only because its predecessors used a dumb lock-on feature to point at things instead of actually using a functional second analog stick for camera. Zelda is a specially dumb game to apply those mechanics to, seeing as the sword swinging lagged a bit in comparison to actual button imput, and to apply targeting, the entire game had to be mirrored. If we were talking about games like Resi 4, which improved with the Wii aiming, then sure. But I think new control schemes should be used when they work BETTER in the game.

I disagree actually, and I think this is a case of different strokes for different folks.  With Mario Kart Wii, I tried all the controller options and the best one IMO is the MoteChuk combo, because not only is the Analog stick not as precise as the Nunchuks, but it's easier to do the tricks with the simple flick of the Wiimote.  With Zelda, I had no problem swinging the Wiimote like a sword, but the true beauty of it came from shooting the bow and arrow, which is far superior with the Wiimote than the GC Controller IMO.  Never played the other ones, so I can't judge those.

[Bueno Excelente]

I disagree actually, and I think this is a case of different strokes for different folks.  With Mario Kart Wii, I tried all the controller options and the best one IMO is the MoteChuk combo, because not only is the Analog stick not as precise as the Nunchuks, but it's easier to do the tricks with the simple flick of the Wiimote.  With Zelda, I had no problem swinging the Wiimote like a sword, but the true beauty of it came from shooting the bow and arrow, which is far superior with the Wiimote than the GC Controller IMO.  Never played the other ones, so I can't judge those.

I actually forgot the archery in the Wii Zelda. But I was actually refering to the Wiimote-only option in Mario Kart, which is definetly not as precise as the regular one. And my complaint stems merely from games which replace button presses with waggle.

[Protoman Blues]

I actually forgot the archery in the Wii Zelda. But I was actually refering to the Wiimote-only option in Mario Kart, which is definetly not as precise as the regular one. And my complaint stems merely from games which replace button presses with waggle.

Oh, you meant WiiMote only.  In that case, I agree with you, it's not.  As for replacing button presses with Waggle, I generally have no issue with it.  Using Zelda as an example, I think that control scheme would've been fine either way, with a button used for the sword or the waggle.

[Hypershell]

I actually prefer the wheel in Mario Kart, but that may be attributed to my rejection of Bikes.  Wheelie boosts with the remote alone are clumsy, that is true.  But I frankly do not believe they should be in a Mario Kart game anyway.

or actually try to improve any of their game mechanics by a tiny bit. Playing it "well" is ahdering to the developer's little world of getting used to a game awkwardness in every single way instead of the opposite.

I've said it many times and I'll say it again, it's control-wise a VAST improvement over Secret Rings.  No matter how awkward you might think of a sword as being in a Sonic game, Brake buttons, charge jumps, and reverse-tilting are a lot worse.  And I actually do like Secret Rings, so, yeah.  Black Knight, to me, is an extremely solid title.  Not flawless, but definitely among Sonic Team's more enjoyable and consistent games.

That and they ACTUALLY did the unthinkable [spoiler]and included extra characters without requiring them.[/spoiler]

using a functional second analog stick for camera.

"First person adventure."  This is why I hate actual FPSes.  And to a lesser extent Hunters.

Hell, I even hate Wii-Metroid's Lock-On Free Aim (thankfully it can be disabled, unlike the game's auto-leveling).  Locking On should do just that; as a rabbid Legends fan I am perfectly capable of manually keeping the camera trained on my foe for free-aiming.

Zelda is a specially dumb game to apply those mechanics to, seeing as the sword swinging lagged a bit in comparison to actual button imput

Personal preference.  Lag-adjustment is simple, and it's more immersive.  I will concede, however, that thrusting should not involve an analogue stick.  That's launch-itis for you.

and to apply targeting, the entire game had to be mirrored.

I don't buy that as anything but a "quick and dirty" solution, since mirroring a character without mirroring the world should be plenty possible.  I also don't give a damn, because:
1. Link has always been ambidextrous (sprite mirroring, N64 Hook Shot).
2. I'm not convinced that reincarnations are required to share a dominant hand to begin with.
3. Fozzie The Bear introduced me to the sun rising in the West.

But heck, if people play the game like that and SEE it's abysmal, why not try the other controller setting? Seems dumb to carry on such a thing.

If that were my only problem with the game, fine.  But it's more of a "last nail in the coffin" thing.  There's plenty else wrong with it.  And I know from reading rants that there's plenty MORE wrong with it that I have yet to experience.  I'm not exactly willing to kick myself in the ass to endure that when I have other games sitting around unfinished.

[Mirby]

Personal preference.

I think this sums up every argument anyone has here nicely, since this is what it all comes down to. And I've seen a lot of I LIKE THIS! I HATE THAT! WELL I LIKE IT! TOO BAD IT SUCKS I HATE IT! and so on and so forth.

[Protoman Blues]

I think this sums up every argument anyone has here nicely, since this is what it all comes down to. And I've seen a lot of I LIKE THIS! I HATE THAT! WELL I LIKE IT! TOO BAD IT SUCKS I HATE IT! and so on and so forth.

And why do you feel the need to somehow always inject yourself into every single discussion/argument that takes place?