... @littleguyinsideyourphone - Tumblr Blog

Oh, I see. Mostly brought it up because I am now wondering how many people are gonna flaunt the "the public doesn't understand this kind of game" part as well as the news that the game won't be delayed as "definitive proof that Sega just doesn't understand their fanbase anymore".

Have you seen the "Crushing Thirties" song going around recently? With Johnny Gioeli of the Crush 40 fame. Let's say the community is quite... split over it, but I'm curious about your opinion.

Hey! amida-mothrae! Haven't seen you in a while! How's it been?

I'm of the opinion that it's a... Parody. And to be honest, I don't like parodies like Crushing Thirties -- the ones that deliberately force characters into real life themes and make them pathetic like they did Sonic. I haven't bothered to watch it nor listen to it, and I actually won't be bothered to do so.

(Wow, appreciate the care, thanks! All is fine, just work being hectic. Also I kinda brought up this song to go on a small tangent about my view on parodies like these, but first, I just wanted to share that I learned from @beevean that the full version of the song is more optimistic in tone and that the AMV does the lyrics no justice. Which unfortunately sucks for me, because the poor parody aspect outweighs any enjoyment I could have gotten from the song itself. Thanks, Youtube.)

I agree about the parody aspect, and honestly, at the risk of sounding like an old man shaking his cane at some kids for playing football on his lawn, that's something that always slightly irked me about parodies of child-friendly media like this in general.

Mainly, at some point it just becomes a case of "you've seen one, you've seen them all", because the ultimate punchline is always just some variant of "Golly! Did that child-friendly cartoon character just (insert crude or violent action that a child-friendly cartoon character would normally never do)?! How inappropriate and unorthodox!"

With Sonic, any "parodies" like these just remind me of the now infamous official Shadow art scat edit, or something way older like the Sonic Shorts, which had such prime comedy gems like Froggy verbally ripping into Big for being dumb and useless and dumb, which leads to Big hanging himself on a fishing pole, which then also breaks because get it he's fat.

And honestly, yes, comedy is subjective to everyone, but I just can't help but find this approach... weirdly childish? Like, I get the feel of "a middle schooler desperately trying to prove that they are cool and mature to their peers, so they just start making crude, violent and vaguely sex-related jokes every 5 minutes" from all this. Which is also ironic because that's also something a lot of adult-oriented comedies suffer from these days.

Also, before I get accused of being the purity police, yes, "edgy" humor like this can be funny. It's just that I personally have seen so much of the same jokes like these being made, that any shock factor that could have been there has long ago dissipated.

There's being tongue-in-cheek, and then there's being the modern Family Guy.

In your recent reblog of @beevean's answer to my reblog, I saw you say:

I swear, fans will blame anything and anyone before they breathe a word of criticism about Flynn's writing.

Yeeeah, about that...

And the replies along with the quote retweets are equally fucking abominable as well

But my personal favourites are those two interactions:

"He has a clear understanding on what works."

"HE HAS A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING ON WHAT WORKS."

I have no idea how the fuck do those people expect the series to progress and evolve when they aren't able to do the same thing to their own fucking fandom.

Then again, I really don't think that the majority of Sonic Twitter can be counted as fans of the series.

There's a lot to unpack here, but let's just throw away the whole suitcase.

They say we hate Flynn... and then turn right around and threaten to blame Pontaff for any bad writing that might arise, even though at this point Pontaff have exited the building and have absolutely nothing to do with the series anymore. Nice display of principles, guys. Mr. Compassionate would be proud of you for showing your enemies mercy.

"I am getting really sick of this habit of blaming one side of a problem when it takes two to screw up." - Yes, exactly. That is literally all we are saying. It's disingenuous as fuck to act like the writer isn't at least partially to blame for their bad writing, to act like it's everyone else's fault.

Not that Sega isn't responsible as well; their apathy is definitely a problem and exacerbates many of these issues... But to blame it all on them won't fix the problem.

To be brutally honest, I hold the opposite opinion of the person who tweeted that Flynn wrote IDW well in spite of mandates: I feel that if Frontiers' writing turns out to be good, it's going to be good in spite of Flynn's usual foibles, and in fact will be good because of Sega/ST's more direct interference.

We've already seen from Seasons of Chaos that self-contained stories mitigate his most glaring flaws regarding characterization and pacing, and a self-contained video game will likely have the same effect. The irony being that the so-called "mandates" bringing his writing down in IDW will have ultimately aided and refined his writing for Frontiers.

The thought I find depressingly hilarious in this case is that, I can only see this situation going two ways in terms of fandom reception...

If Frontiers' story ends up being bad (or actually, not even bad, just mediocre), it's clearly a sign from above that Sonic as a series is doomed forever, no one can save it, Sega is so draconian it literally saps people's talent, insert "THE MANDAAAAATES!!!" here.

And if the story will actually be good, it will instead be a sign that Flynn is truly the savior and the messiah, who valiantly crafted his story in spite of Sega's horrible no-good mandaaaaaaates, and that all future projects should only be under his pen lest we get "The Return of the Pontaff".

It's a lose-lose situation for clarity and awareness.

greenyvertekins

Maekawa didn't doom Sonic with Sonic 06, Pontaff didn't doom Sonic, Flynn won't doom Sonic either. That's because for better or for worse, Sonic fans show a constant loyalty to the franchise and kids of each generation enjoy aspects of those games or those writing

Pretty much.

Though it will always be funny how fans keep saying they won't accept mediocrity in this series anymore, yet proceeds to do so with whoever is next to take the writing reins.

Just a thought.

And even if it's the detractors or people outside the fandom going on about how anyone who likes Sonic these days "has permanent Stockholm syndrome" and is just constantly deluding themselves and refusing to accept reality...

Any of this won't erase the positive influence the series has had on many people, and there will never be any shame in liking Sonic, just like there is no shame in liking literally any other fictional series which had problems in it's run.

I've talked to Flynn a few times and he seems like a pretty chill dude, not once did it came of that he had an ego. The way he talks sounds rather humble he just says he feels so lucky and that he is thankful for the people that helped him get where he is today

Just because someone seems like a chill dude to the greater public, doesn't mean he's not arrogant behind the scenes anon.

the-fourth-knower

I also don't think Flynn is arrogant or anything. Not any more than the average person.

Of course, I don't really know him as a person. But there's more to suggest that he is just a dude than there isn't, if that makes sense.

Idk, man. I don't think he's a bad guy, but I do think he has a hell of a lot more clout and influence than the average fan and that fact should be taken into account more than it currently is. We got Penders in the first place because he was given reason to believe he had a major impact on Sonic. The only difference now, ofc, is that Flynn really does have the potential to mold the series to his personal interpretations, to make fanon canon, and I'm just incredibly wary about what might happen if one day he did grow too big for his britches. He's already pushing fanon BS in the encyclopedia and passing it off as "lore"

Although ngl, the rumor that he asked if a Japanese artist drew Team Hooligan just bc the characters were being shown together reminded me of some Ron Burgundy-level flexing

greenyvertekins

Not forgetting the Stans.

I posted a Twitter thread incorporating the obscure Sonic facts I’ve managed to compile over the years and included the fact that Birdie’s family are his siblings not his parents, regardless of what Flynn claims in the Encyclopedia.

Pretty much instantly, the Stans accused me of having a dig at Flynn;

Because HOW DARE ANYONE cast even a small dispersion on the knowledge level of their lord and saviour.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you took away white knights' ad hominem, they'd have no argument.

"Who cares how they're related to Birdie?" Are they being serious? We're talking about an encyclopedia. The bare minimum you can expect is that the information contained in an encyclopedia is accurate and relatively error-free.

If there were just a few careless goofs sprinkled around here and there, sure, I could understand being disgruntled by criticism (though tbh even then it would still be your right to point out inaccuracies). What I don't understand is defending the book when every blurb I have seen so far contains fanon or straight-up inaccuracies in some way.

@greenyvertekins The most bitterly hilarious part is that you're one of the most levelheaded of us. I've never seen you say anything that didn't turn out to be true later. If you're considered too "weirdly ragey," does that make the rest of us screaming lunatics? xP

greenyvertekins

I think I should address this.

- I was disputing the false assertion in the encyclopedia in order to enlighten people to a fact, one even stated in Sonic Adventure itself. Not just the official ST-guided strategy guide. There was nothing more to it than that. To claim I was being antagonistic is a Everest-level reach.

- Rational well-founded criticism is not being mean. Voicing the view that SEGA can do better than give Flynn the reins (And revealing my points about why I think that way) isn’t being that either. When you put your OFFICIAL work into a public sphere, you invite analysis and thus praise or criticism whether you want to or not. That is what comes with the territory. If you can’t accept that as someone who works on a facet of official media, hard shit. Grow a thicker skin. Maybe as writer you could learn from such viewpoints.

- I am not going to stand by when other people twist my views into something they’re not. That’s doing something in bad faith. I love this franchise. So much so that I expect it to be handled in the best way it possibly can be. That isn’t happening under Flynn.

Dug around the stans' replies for any more "takes" and hoo boy...

So, apparently, the team that made most of the Sonic games doesn't have even the slightest say in the matter (this was to your tweet about people treating Flynn as higher authority than Sonic Team),

Sega allowed this, so Flynn isn't wrong and you can't complain,

and since the fans themselves aren't sure about the question, you can't claim to be correct either.

Though perhaps the most hilarious bit is seeing these people portray you as this danger to be avoided at all costs.

I didn't know what I expected digging into this, but it definitely wasn't... whatever this all was.

… Is it odd that I want Cosmo back and in the games, but as a way to explore the idea of a character with a natural ability to control plants and is both light and heavy at the same time? Because I want to see Cosmo as her own character.

The most likely outcome to Cosmo coming back, un-very-fortunately, is that the premise gonna be hijacked by the extreme shipping crowd (you know what I mean) and turned into an angst-ridden validation fest to rival Archie's.

Which would be very sad to see.

Not to mention it seemingly takes a lot of cynicism on Flynn's part to turn Sonic's compassion into a flaw, now that I think about it. Even though there's plenty of pre-existing flaws to work with. But hey, that kinda further proves he doesn't get Sonic at all if he feels he has to make up flaws by twisting his virtues. Especially when it best suits the plot he's writing.

But how will people know he's the edgy furry alternative to Joss Wheden if he doesn't inject this childrens media franchise with as much smug internet cynicism as he possibly can?

I keep doing this, but it reminds me of how people keep going "WHY DOESN'T BATMAN JUST KILL THE JOKER?" as if heroes with no kill policies is old fashion and stupid. We've somehow regressed back to Youngbloods levels of consumer standards.

People can't seem to comprehend heroes just being good people. It's like all those anons going "WHUT IF SONIC WANTED TO DO SOMETHING THAT CAUSED PEOPLE TO DIED?" As if the idea that someone can simply CHOOSE to do and be good is beyond them, that someone living by a "do whatever the fuck I want" life philosophy and being a nice helpful and caring hero who seeks to stifle evil and help the helpless are mutually exclusive. Thus, Ian Flynn inventing this concept of Sonic having "principals" because that's the only reason he can conceive of Sonic being a hero - having an arbitrary moral code to restrict his behavior.

Some people don't need to be forced or compelled to do the right thing. The fact people don't seem to accept this speaks to a sort of systemic pessimism.

Although I gotta say Joss Whedon ain't exactly someone anyone ought to emulate nowadays...

But hey, anything to make Flynn look more stupid as he goes along if that's the case. :P

The funniest argument I heard in defense of this "heroes who do good just because it's the right thing to do are bad" mindset isn't even because these heroes are old and boring, it's because they "are too pure and unrealistic".

I guess, apparently, just because reality can be cruel, heroes just... can't exist.

Maybe we can also add the "but giving Sonic these "principles" makes him such a realistic and nuanced protagonist, though!!!" to the overall list.

beevean

Hmmm... your "Samus likes playing cutesy alien pet simulators" headcannon made me wonder... What if they have Metroid Tamagochi on sale in the galaxy? And what are the chances if Samus owning one?

I don't know how to feel about toys where you have to raise creatures that IRL were artificially hunted to extinction because they posed a threat to the galaxy 😂

To be fair, I can see some company make such an insensitive choice... and people buying Metroidgochi and sharing tips on how to get your own Omega being none the wiser.

(now I'm kinda imagining them like the Chao in Sonic, where you can get hundreds of different evolutions depending on the type of animals you give your Chao... what if they included the Phazon evolutions, for instance?)

I wonder if they'd remind Samus of The Baby, and if that would drive her to buy one or to avoid them like the plague. Now I'm sad :(

I can see people finding baby Metroids adorable enough to an extent where some big company could see it as a possible marketing venture.

Also, something more cursed entered my mind as I was writing this: Larva Ridley (Other M) plushies.

Looks like the Merlina fanboys are coming out in droves today. Tbh I didn't even know Merlina had fanboys until now.

She's a Rule 63 version of Merlin, AND an evil sorcerous who wants to enslave everyone, so dat dominatrix appeal

frankly I'm not surprised even though I also was unaware until now

I thought it was more of anon(s) unable to grasp the idea that Sonic is neither a morally righteous hero nor a ruthless bloodthirsty killer. That he is in a morality class all his own or something.

Moral complexity? in MY childrens media!?

It's more common than you think

But it's only eye-brow raising when Sonic does it! ;P

I've called it the Sonic Double Standard before and I'll call it that again. Things people would normally praise about another series, they criticize when it's Sonic.

Why Sonic of all things is the one they're trying to impose some black and white morality onto is beyond me. Sonic from day 1 was meant to be a radical departure from traditional video game protagonists. He was constructed from the get go to be an answer to Mario. Animal mascot video characters didn't really exist before Sonic, after him came a host of imitators.

Sonic doesn't rescue the princess by storming the castle and slaying the dragon, like Mario does. He saves woodland critters and opposes a mechanized industrialization by fighting Teddie Roosavelt. He's edgy and subversive while still being heroic. Sonic Adventure 2 was the most lauded of the series, and Sonic is an open fugitive in that one with the first level having him escaping arrest and running from the cops.

Sonic is not a squeaky clean traditionalist paragon. He does what HE thinks is the right thing to do. Classic Chaotic Good. He never has been and never should be a silver age super hero. It's weird that there's suddenly push back against what Sonic has ALWAYS been even from the story-devoid classic Genesis games and well up through the games everyone praises to the high heavens.

My guess is, what's at play here is this weird misconception usually pushed by people outside the fandom, which amounts to "since Sonic started the trend of animal mascots with attitude, he's now this symbol of everything wrong with The Radical 90s". And since the Radical 90s imagery these days is mostly regarded as too awkward and kiddy (need I even mention how many people say it's "too childish" to be a Sonic fan these days?), what most see as a way to "fix" him or strip away that "kiddiness" is to make him like, this very staple comic book hero. How that exactly helps him, I have no idea.

That's my best guess, at least.

Erm, two things:

1) Why the hell would SEGA/Sonic Team reference an obscure character from a long-dead part of the franchise, especially a character that isn’t well-liked in general?

2) Sonic is the one to mention the Biolizard – not Lancelot. Why would a character from the book Sonic was sucked into know about something like that?

This one just came onto my timeline on Twitter, and I felt a bit compelled to talk about it, considering that Dragons are my favourite mythical species, and I can’t stand this slander in my territory.

Honestly, I'm more so annoyed by the "Everything is Canon" label attached to that. Because the timeline getting even more convoluted is exactly what this franchise needs, apparently.

Ian Flynn proved he was better than Pontaff when he didn't write Sonic talking to dead robots or running his mouth constantly.

You can make the same "points" over and over, and I'll laugh at them over and over. :]

Why is talking to dead robots bad?

especially because... Tails immediately called him out for that. Like, it was SUPPOSED to be lame and silly.

I will seriously never understand the complaints people have about Colors. Humor is subjective, but the fact it was a fucking comedy isn't.

Personally I don’t think it’s that bad either, since while I could see the argument made for it being perhaps a wee bit flanderized, Sonic running his mouth off at no one in particular isn’t exactly unheard of in itself. He’s just as guilty of it as Eggman is.

But regardless, it’s one of the main things aside from Baldy McNosehair that people tend to point the finger at when providing examples of why Colours!Sonic is flanderized or just generally terrible. Hence why I used it as an example when comparing a Pontaff weakness to a Flynn weakness.

May be a bit late to the party, but think I'll add a tiny bit of outside view on this.

For me personally, the "Sonic talking to a silent ship" scene is kinda similar to the infamous "Laughing Tidus" scene from Final Fantasy 10. Even with context, even with another character lampshading almost right after that what the protagonist has done is stupid... I still see why people would look at it and say "yea, this is stupid".

I am more so on the side of "why would they think this scene would work/be funny in the first place?", and honestly, the argument of "it's supposed to be lame and silly" doesn't really cut it for me. At least, because then I can, in the same breath, say that Ian Flynn masquerading song lyrics as character dialogue is A-OK because it's supposed to be fanservice. He intentionally did it, therefore it's good.

Not sure I follow what makes the latter that much better.

Quoting song lyrics once, maybe twice, is fair enough depending on the context. Doing it constantly is just gratuitous, distracting, and a tell-tale sign of the writer trying too hard to show off their fan card.

I still don't get what's wrong with Sonic talking smack after finishing off the boss.

"Hey you big drip, where you going?" after beating Chaos is fine? "That wasn't so hard" after beating the Egg Hornet is fine? Sonic talks Smack. It's big Dante energy. If Sonic met Cerberus he'd probably do the exact same "come on poochie" thing Dante did.

He talks smack to the boss before fighting it. Does not get a response. Finds the lack of interaction disappointing. So after scrapping the robot, he continues talking smack because he didn't get any cathartic reaction from the mindless machine. Then Tails points out that talking smack to a pile of busted bolts and gears is stupid and Sonic is like "welp, you got me there"

I seriously don't get what's wrong with you if you look at that and go "UGH SO STUPID FUCKING CRINGE" like jesus christ, what is broken inside your soul?

Alright, I may have worded my original reblog a bit wrong, so let me explain:

I personally, don't find that scene bad. Yes, it makes me raise my eyebrow just a little, cause again, humor is subjective, but I don't find it bad, at least in context. I didn't come here to pick a fight, is what I mean.

I've just been observing fan reaction (on my side of the community, at least) towards certain "controversial" things for a good time now, and certain things I just find... interesting to share.

Colors is pinned as the start of the "Unfunny Clown Sonic" era as it's called in my place, partially influenced by that part of the community growing up on pretty much nothing but the mainline games that got PC ports and Sonic X.

Only part of the overall bile I saw gets thrown at Pontac and Graff for "turning a cool hero everyone can look up to into an unfunny quippy clown", though. The other is flung squarely at Roger Craig Smith, calling him the worst Sonic voice due to the majority opinion that his Sonic is "an overly happy and smug snarkster who can't make himself ever sound like he gives a fuck about what's happening".

As a result, you have the situation where people know that Sonic talks smack to bosses, where people know that Tails calls out Sonic for doing something stupid, and yet, every time that pre-boss cutscene rolls out, everyone's reaction is an immediate "no, shut up, Sonic, you are not as funny as you think you are", because in Adventure games Sonic "knew when it was time for jokes and when it was time to be serious" and in Colors and after he is a you know what at this point.

Yeah, their fault, you can say.

Sorry for all this rambling, again, I just find stuff like this... interesting to share sometimes.

Don't get me wrong I understand WHY people dump on it

the reason why they dump on it is because they're mindless sheep who didn't actually play the game and are just thoughtlessly regurgitating the opinion they were told to have by the funny heehaw youtube man

Your attempt to explain away the behavior which originates from a place of "I hate this because I was told to hate this" and NOWHERE ELSE only makes your point seem even stupider, btw. How in the ever loving tiddlefuck is the scenario where Sonic starts smack talking the robot boss in Color a situation which should be taken seriously and where joking around would be inappropriate? He's in a fucking SPACE AMUSEMENT PARK rescuing cute indigenous critters while blasting through a bunch of stupid robots. No world ending threat, no looming apocalypse, no dark malevolent god seeking to bring ruin to all he knows dear. Just Eggman and his dumb toys doing dumb Eggman things.

How, HOW, is reacting to Sonic enjoying his typical Tuesday afternoon with "NO SHUT UP CRINGE" at all reasonable or understandable? It isn't. The only reason you these people react that way is because you're they're predisposed to hating it for no reason simply because you they were told that's what your their opinion is supposed to be.

I don't care what your made up excuses are. The REASONABLE reaction from SANE PEOPLE to this scene, in a white room completely out of context, is either laughing along with it or a shrug of complete and total apathy depending on your sense of humor.

A reaction of, in your own words, "no, shut up, Sonic, you are not as funny as you think you are" is an INSANE reaction, from INSANE people. I'm not even sure you know what you're talking about since you describe it as a pre-boss fight cutscene, when the scene in question is a POST boss fight cutscene. The pre-boss fight cutscene to this one in particular is the "no copyright law in the universe will stop me" line. But I'm sure that line is also cringe and not funny and muh adventure sonic would never joke about something as serious as the legalities surrounding intellectual properties, amirite?

Ok, my apologies for unintentionally vague wording again, cause it seems I've made you assume a lot of things.

First, my goof for misunderstanding and not specifying the scene earlier, but the pre-boss cutscene I was talking about (and the cutscene I was talking about in the first reblog) is not the post-Refreshinator one, it's the cutscene before Admiral Jelly and Frigate Skullian. My mistake here.

To add, the reaction I was talking about happened because this was after Tails chastised Sonic for talking to things that can't answer back, but hey at least these two are sorta alive, at least.

Speaking of which, you seem to have assumed I am trying to present my opinion as one of some vague made up group (maybe you thought I was the OP as well, I dunno). I apologize for giving you the wrong impression, because I was just showing the abridged version of the shitstorm that usually happens in the Russian Sonic community whenever the writing of Colors gets brought up. I didn't want to make a long post even longer by dumping my translation of a good chunk of comments written in Russian in here, so, you only have what I put in quotes in the previous reblog. Yeah, that's what I meant by "an outside view". I am very straightforward, I know, should have specified, that one is also on me.

Finally, please point in my post where I openly said that the reaction I was describing is in any way, shape or form reasonable and/or acceptable. My reaction is exactly that shrug of apathy you described, I don't think those cutscenes are bad, I just didn't find them funny, that's all. I agree with your point about the exaggerated "oh no cringe" reactions being insane.

I just wanted to say that, yeah, you can explain the context of the moments that are considered "stupid" to those people all you want, but if that's general impression the cutscene has left on the community, even if it's just a part of it, those explanations aren't going to matter, because the reaction you'll most likely get in return is "what was the point of the scene, then?" This is not my opinion, but just something I've been noticing crawling not just in the English Sonic community, but also in other parts of the world.

Again, I apologize for making stuff confusing or demeaning to read at parts. I wanted to make it brief, but it all blew up in my face, haha.

Ian Flynn proved he was better than Pontaff when he didn't write Sonic talking to dead robots or running his mouth constantly.

You can make the same "points" over and over, and I'll laugh at them over and over. :]

Why is talking to dead robots bad?

especially because... Tails immediately called him out for that. Like, it was SUPPOSED to be lame and silly.

I will seriously never understand the complaints people have about Colors. Humor is subjective, but the fact it was a fucking comedy isn't.

Personally I don’t think it’s that bad either, since while I could see the argument made for it being perhaps a wee bit flanderized, Sonic running his mouth off at no one in particular isn’t exactly unheard of in itself. He’s just as guilty of it as Eggman is.

But regardless, it’s one of the main things aside from Baldy McNosehair that people tend to point the finger at when providing examples of why Colours!Sonic is flanderized or just generally terrible. Hence why I used it as an example when comparing a Pontaff weakness to a Flynn weakness.

May be a bit late to the party, but think I'll add a tiny bit of outside view on this.

For me personally, the "Sonic talking to a silent ship" scene is kinda similar to the infamous "Laughing Tidus" scene from Final Fantasy 10. Even with context, even with another character lampshading almost right after that what the protagonist has done is stupid... I still see why people would look at it and say "yea, this is stupid".

I am more so on the side of "why would they think this scene would work/be funny in the first place?", and honestly, the argument of "it's supposed to be lame and silly" doesn't really cut it for me. At least, because then I can, in the same breath, say that Ian Flynn masquerading song lyrics as character dialogue is A-OK because it's supposed to be fanservice. He intentionally did it, therefore it's good.

Not sure I follow what makes the latter that much better.

Quoting song lyrics once, maybe twice, is fair enough depending on the context. Doing it constantly is just gratuitous, distracting, and a tell-tale sign of the writer trying too hard to show off their fan card.

I still don't get what's wrong with Sonic talking smack after finishing off the boss.

"Hey you big drip, where you going?" after beating Chaos is fine? "That wasn't so hard" after beating the Egg Hornet is fine? Sonic talks Smack. It's big Dante energy. If Sonic met Cerberus he'd probably do the exact same "come on poochie" thing Dante did.

He talks smack to the boss before fighting it. Does not get a response. Finds the lack of interaction disappointing. So after scrapping the robot, he continues talking smack because he didn't get any cathartic reaction from the mindless machine. Then Tails points out that talking smack to a pile of busted bolts and gears is stupid and Sonic is like "welp, you got me there"

I seriously don't get what's wrong with you if you look at that and go "UGH SO STUPID FUCKING CRINGE" like jesus christ, what is broken inside your soul?

Alright, I may have worded my original reblog a bit wrong, so let me explain:

I personally, don't find that scene bad. Yes, it makes me raise my eyebrow just a little, cause again, humor is subjective, but I don't find it bad, at least in context. I didn't come here to pick a fight, is what I mean.

I've just been observing fan reaction (on my side of the community, at least) towards certain "controversial" things for a good time now, and certain things I just find... interesting to share.

Colors is pinned as the start of the "Unfunny Clown Sonic" era as it's called in my place, partially influenced by that part of the community growing up on pretty much nothing but the mainline games that got PC ports and Sonic X.

Only part of the overall bile I saw gets thrown at Pontac and Graff for "turning a cool hero everyone can look up to into an unfunny quippy clown", though. The other is flung squarely at Roger Craig Smith, calling him the worst Sonic voice due to the majority opinion that his Sonic is "an overly happy and smug snarkster who can't make himself ever sound like he gives a fuck about what's happening".

As a result, you have the situation where people know that Sonic talks smack to bosses, where people know that Tails calls out Sonic for doing something stupid, and yet, every time that pre-boss cutscene rolls out, everyone's reaction is an immediate "no, shut up, Sonic, you are not as funny as you think you are", because in Adventure games Sonic "knew when it was time for jokes and when it was time to be serious" and in Colors and after he is a you know what at this point.

Yeah, their fault, you can say.

Sorry for all this rambling, again, I just find stuff like this... interesting to share sometimes.

Ian Flynn proved he was better than Pontaff when he didn't write Sonic talking to dead robots or running his mouth constantly.

You can make the same "points" over and over, and I'll laugh at them over and over. :]

Why is talking to dead robots bad?

especially because... Tails immediately called him out for that. Like, it was SUPPOSED to be lame and silly.

I will seriously never understand the complaints people have about Colors. Humor is subjective, but the fact it was a fucking comedy isn't.

Personally I don’t think it’s that bad either, since while I could see the argument made for it being perhaps a wee bit flanderized, Sonic running his mouth off at no one in particular isn’t exactly unheard of in itself. He’s just as guilty of it as Eggman is.

But regardless, it’s one of the main things aside from Baldy McNosehair that people tend to point the finger at when providing examples of why Colours!Sonic is flanderized or just generally terrible. Hence why I used it as an example when comparing a Pontaff weakness to a Flynn weakness.

May be a bit late to the party, but think I'll add a tiny bit of outside view on this.

For me personally, the "Sonic talking to a silent ship" scene is kinda similar to the infamous "Laughing Tidus" scene from Final Fantasy 10. Even with context, even with another character lampshading almost right after that what the protagonist has done is stupid... I still see why people would look at it and say "yea, this is stupid".

I am more so on the side of "why would they think this scene would work/be funny in the first place?", and honestly, the argument of "it's supposed to be lame and silly" doesn't really cut it for me. At least, because then I can, in the same breath, say that Ian Flynn masquerading song lyrics as character dialogue is A-OK because it's supposed to be fanservice. He intentionally did it, therefore it's good.

Not sure I follow what makes the latter that much better.

Quoting song lyrics once, maybe twice, is fair enough depending on the context. Doing it constantly is just gratuitous, distracting, and a tell-tale sign of the writer trying too hard to show off their fan card.

Well yeah, of course, my example wasn't supposed to be better in comparison. That was more an add-on to my opinion that "some scenes in Colors are supposed to be stupid because Colors is a comedy" is... not a good argument in defense of it's writing.

Ian Flynn proved he was better than Pontaff when he didn't write Sonic talking to dead robots or running his mouth constantly.

You can make the same "points" over and over, and I'll laugh at them over and over. :]

Why is talking to dead robots bad?

especially because... Tails immediately called him out for that. Like, it was SUPPOSED to be lame and silly.

I will seriously never understand the complaints people have about Colors. Humor is subjective, but the fact it was a fucking comedy isn't.

Personally I don’t think it’s that bad either, since while I could see the argument made for it being perhaps a wee bit flanderized, Sonic running his mouth off at no one in particular isn’t exactly unheard of in itself. He’s just as guilty of it as Eggman is.

But regardless, it’s one of the main things aside from Baldy McNosehair that people tend to point the finger at when providing examples of why Colours!Sonic is flanderized or just generally terrible. Hence why I used it as an example when comparing a Pontaff weakness to a Flynn weakness.

May be a bit late to the party, but think I'll add a tiny bit of outside view on this.

For me personally, the "Sonic talking to a silent ship" scene is kinda similar to the infamous "Laughing Tidus" scene from Final Fantasy 10. Even with context, even with another character lampshading almost right after that what the protagonist has done is stupid... I still see why people would look at it and say "yea, this is stupid".

I am more so on the side of "why would they think this scene would work/be funny in the first place?", and honestly, the argument of "it's supposed to be lame and silly" doesn't really cut it for me. At least, because then I can, in the same breath, say that Ian Flynn masquerading song lyrics as character dialogue is A-OK because it's supposed to be fanservice. He intentionally did it, therefore it's good.

What about Rough and Tumble?

Generic thugs who only exist to take up space.

Nothing more.

I still find it sorta ironic how their debut back in #3 was perhaps their best outing. At least in that one, they showed to be smart enough to take advantage of the villagers during the not Forces war, only to turn the tables on them once it was over by taking away all their weapons. And the best part? They weren’t hired to do so by anyone. They were just being opportunistic mercenaries. Nobody told them to do any of this.

But as soon as they came back because Starline needed them for ‘extra muscle,’ they very quickly just became generic minions for the bigger bads.

Talk about a waste as well as a bad first impression if they haven’t been seen just doing their own thing like they were first shown to do. The closest thing I can think of is that one annual story with them and Rouge. That’s it besides their involvement in Bad Guys. To which obviously had them working for Starline. Again.

What's an even bigger waste is that, even in Bad Guys, the comic that put it's villains on the forefront, the two just felt like tagalongs with no personal stakes in what was happening.

I will give them this though, the reason I still hold the skunk bros in a bit of a higher regard compared to other original baddies is because I found their bro moments, as well as wanting their team in BG to be buddy-buddy relatively endearing. At the very least, you can tell the two's relationship is genuine.

Which is also why it still kinda stings that Kit and Surge's relationship turned out the way it is.

Kitsunami wouldn't even fly for a Badnik name. Starline can't even make up shitty puns for names as well as Eggman can. SMH.

You know what else? Barring monsters - because no duh Perfect Dark Gaia and Alf Layla wa-Layla and Biolizard have more syllables, lol - the longest that the names of Sonic villains tends to run is three syllables: Infinite. Merlina. Robotnik. The only exception I can think of is Erazor Djinn.

By contrast, Kitsunami has four. So in a way, it's almost like Starline's trying to say, through his weird naming conventions, that his villains will outlast other villains.

It's incredibly subtle to the point of splitting hairs, I will admit, and it might not even be intentional on IDW's part; it's just something that nonetheless kinda makes me go "hmm, might be trying a bit too hard with this one, guys"

To be honest, considering that the only sort of defense the comic and the white-knights have to fall back on now is "It was intentional!!!", we might as well just keep giving them ammo by splitting hairs like this.

Ammo that's really faulty and only serves to prove our point further, that is.

The fandom problem thing, I’m in an old and small fandom where a character recently started to be widely headcanoned as a Transman even tho the source material tells you very explicitly that he was a cis male raised as a girl and given a girl’s name by his faux progressive parents. Trans headcanons can be fun like any headcanon ofc! I greatly support the right to headcanon stuff I don’t headcanon myself, but there’s this tone policing in this fandom that you cannot even mention the character’s canonical feminine given name because it would offensive and triggering to people who kin the character or something along the lines.

That feels like too much, the name is mentioned in the show several times and in earlier years of the fandom, no one cared if you called him the name he hates, the series’ wiki has it listed on his bio. I feel like I’m a bad person but also feel like I’m being denied the right to express myself and my own interpretations or else I’m a bigot, even though my interpretation is directly based on the source material.

That sounds like a sticky situation, anon. Not sure what advice to give here.

Anyone have any suggestions?