Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep Final Mix | Retrospective Analysis

[@nathanmullan71]

Commenting because this video is fantastic and the whole series needs the algorithm to push it to new viewers!

[@Aurilaushe]

I don't know why, but every single time I play BBS, Mickey's random unwanted teleportation /kills/ me.

[@Nilnot]

Eraqus has been one of my favorite characters. He makes giant blunders, but his whole keyblade samurai motif is just really cool and we don’t get a lot of boss fights against opponents wielding light magic

[@GazKnightofNylrac]

I've always been a big fan of the series showing giving in too much to anything is bad, even when you lose yourself to light. Gotta love characters with major faults that they themselves can realize was a mistake.

[@johnclarke3261]

Another great video....in depth and formative as usual with tips on besting some of the harder bosses in the game that I'll definitely use on my next play through. Enjoyed this game particularly Aqua who, like Axel, became a quick favourite. Nice to see a few different worlds as well and the tweaks made to the overall gameplay were welcomed as not a drastic move away from the familiarity.

[@Renigade68]

Alright, finished the video, few final thoughts, I hate how they pronounce X-blade, like they even bring up that it can be pronounced as "kai" but continue to pronounce it as "key" why? To be confusing for confusing's sake? If you don't have subtitles on you won't even know that they're talking about the darn thing a lot of the time, and if subs are that essential to understand what's going on then turning them off shouldn't even be an option, but really they just needed to pronounce it as "kai"! This is one of my biggest pet-peeves with this game/series thus far. I really liked how Hailey handled Vanitus's voice here, I never really liked him in KH2 but I think that's largely cuz of bad writing and he was always gonna be weird in ReCOM cuz they probably should've got a woman to voice-match his KH1 voice but regardless this is the first time that I really liked his acting post balls-drop, hopefully I continue to like him in DDD and KH3 when he goes back to playing Sora, and I won't be too unhappy if Vanitus makes a surprise appearance in some form cuz I think Hailey nailed this role. I love how good this game is at scratching the lore itch without being too alienating to new-comers, like when Aqua puts a good luck charm on Kairi that may be how Kairi's heart was able to take refuge within Sora, not that an explanation for that was necessary, but a little science to explain some of the bizarre fantasy-magic in this universe is fun. So overall if I had to rate the games I'd put ReCOM on top (by a wide margin, heh), then the original KH as my clear number 2, then the actual KH2 as obvious bottom tier, but the other 3 are kinda hard to determine... Days/BBS/ReCoded are all kinda middling for me, I like and dislike them all for various reasons so it's hard for me to come up with clear rankings, in terms of pure story I'd go Days on top then BBS in the middle and ReCoded at the bottom, but for the gameplay I'd go in reverse, with ReCoded on top, BBS in the middle again, and Days on the bottom, funny that I consider ReCoded the worst in story, I actually think it executes on it's plot the best out of the 3, it's plot's just inherently not that interesting, but I'm getting ahead of myself, one game left to catch up on before I dive into KH2.8...

[@Renigade68]

Alright, about 44 mins so far, there's something I forgot about KH2, at least in the vanilla game I don't think you were ever able to meet back up with Yen Sid, which means the last you see of his world is Maleficent's return, I like to imagine a dark continuity where Mali gets Yen Sid's Heartless and a new suped up Nobody appears as well... You call the command deck a spiritual successor to the cards from COM? For one thing attacking is a free action, attacking not being free is one of my fav things about COM, and then there's the ability to use multiple keyblade cards in the same deck instead of having to stick to just one and the fact that cards have different numbers which break other cards and you can combine cards in multiple ways to perform sleights, of which you'll permanently lose the first card in a sleight, I guess you could say the command deck's "cards" are whole sleights, so there's that, overall I think the comparison is a pretty loose one, the command deck looses most of the nuance that I love about COM's card system, not that I hate the command deck, I think it's a neat concept, but it doesn't hold a candle to COM's cards, not in my book. it's real neat that the first 3 worlds you go to are the worlds of the princesses of hearts that you don't see in the original KH, I like that a lot. Oh man this plot... it's basically the Star Wars prequel trilogy on crack (and I love it), an interesting meta analyses is that players of ReCOM will know that it is indeed possible to wield the dark without being corrupted by it, ala Riku, maybe that's why Xehanort is so openly dark without anyone questioning him? They assume he's an exception to the rule like Riku who's not actually that bad? So Old Man Xehanort wears the same cloak as Heartless Ansem? Huh, that's neat, I honestly never caught that, I suppose I was mentally trying to connect Xehanort to Xemnas the whole time since he was the more recent villain, wasn't really thinking about Ansem. Personally I think this game's "plot" is real good but I remember it having some problems with execution, I'll have to finish this video to try and remember what those were, although I'm confident in my believe that letting you play the stories in any order is a mistake, I think Aqua's should unquestionably be played last, it might not be to the same extreme but I liken playing as Aqua first to playing as Riku first in COM, and Aqua being the first playable female in KH likely led many to choosing Aqua first, which means many players got a sub-par experience IMO, I think this is one case where giving the player more freedom was a bad thing, but oh well...

[@GazKnightofNylrac]

It's more the same team that worked on ReCoM used that battle system to inspire the Deck Command iteration, where it's more based on letting Abilities fire off with cool-downs. They were definitely going for a middle-ground between tactically selecting your loadout while also being more real-time and less based on the numbers-game CoM's Cards were based around. Its not flawless, as it renders a lot of basic Attacks completely worthless, but I enjoy how it incentivizes palying around with your Abilities/Magic since there's no MP to worry about, just a cool-down timer. It's definitely not as mechanically-nuanced as ReCoM for sure, I just like that they tricked a lot of people by simplifying the implementation without making it a numbers-game, haha. I definitely really like the BBS's story, and I agree that while I get why they let you pick between any of the three, the story definitely works more smoothly in the "proper" order of Terra, Ventus then Aqua. Not only do they build off each other more naturally, the reveals make a bit more sense in the grand scheme, since it's the order they "left" and roughly deal with elements that informs the following paths.

[@someguy1892]

Agreed!

[@Renigade68]

So if my prequel analogy holds then Terra would be Anakin, Xehanort would be Palpatine, Braig would be Dooku, Yen Sid would be Yoda, Eraqus would be Mace Windu, Aqua would be Obi-Wan, Ventus would be... R2D2 I suppose, with Vanitus as Darth Maul I guess? The comparison isn't perfect obviously :p alternatively Ventus is Jar Jar and Vanitus is Darth Jar Jar if you believe in that crack theory, then Ansem the Wise is... Darth Plagius? I admit it kinda falls apart there, oh and Mickey is Baby Yoda, or something. Alright, finished Terra's part, I remember my issue now, the pacing is awkward, it kinda jumps to the climax out of nowhere and we barely even see Eraqus before his death, in some ways it has the opposite problem of Days, there the Plot doesn't have enough nuance to justify the lengthy runtime, here it has too much nuance to be over and done so quickly, doesn't really give you time to breathe, my other issue stems from this not feeling like a fulfilling story in it's own right, and by now I think you've realized that's kinda important to me, heh, I'm actually a big fan of multiple story lines, I love the Sonic Adventure games for example, but you can easily play just Sonic's story in Sonic Adventure and feel you got a satisfying experience, playing the other stories helps you to appreciate some of the nuance in Sonic's story but it's in no way required, they're all achieving their own goals you could say, but in Terra's story in BBS we don't really get a chance to get to know Eraqus to give his fight and death the appropriate weight they deserve, the story cares more about the over-arching narrative to the detriment of each individual tale, is the problem, heck using COM as an example, Sora's story is completely self satisfying, Riku's story could not exist and the game would still be great, the same is not true in reverse, one example among many would be Repliku's death, it comes completely out of nowhere in Riku's path when taken as a standalone, kinda like Eraqus's here, but in COM it'll never be taken as a standalone cuz you have to beat Sora's story first, so you'll always have the context to make his death appropriately bitter-sweet, this enhances my belief that they should've forced a particular order on you in this game so that they could more appropriately prep you to feel the things you're supposed to feel at the various points in the game, I feel like it's required in a story that cares more about the over-arching narrative then the individual tale, COM actually does care more about the individual tale and yet still forces a particular order on you, but that's beside the point.

[@GazKnightofNylrac]

I actually find that an interesting comparison, since the series does the "multiple story lines" thing in four different ways across the series. KHII does the easiest and has Roxas as the opening tutorial hours, the plot and gameplay both accommodating this method, as everything Roxas does gameplay-wise is applied to Sora when control shifts back to him proper so you don't lose anything in the switch. Before this, CoM focused on Sora's Story as the meat of the game, with Riku's Reverse/Rebirth as a sort of tacked-on extra for some added nuance and further resolutions of story elements and proper set-up for KHII. This is a "forced order" of progression that makes sense; playing Riku's Story doesn't make as much sense to play first, because you obviously must play Sora's to even unlock it as it spoils every reveal in Sora's Side. The gameplay even matches this thematically, as Reverse/Rebirth is much quicker with pre-selected Card Decks and altering the mechanics to befit Riku's more unique darkness and power-based play style. Though I'd agree Sora's Side is the main draw of CoM, it would be a lesser game without Riku's inclusion, as it's the first step in Riku's journey of redemption which is one of the series' best storylines. Which brings us to the third style in BBS here, where they balance a trio across a single narrative. Bringing up the Sonic Adventure comparison is a good example of a mainline series doing the multiple storyline+gameplay thing, and I'm 50/50 with you on this one. I enjoy multiple perspectives as well, especially with videogames since you get the chance to shake up the gameplay to match the character you're playing as if there's enough variety in such, but I'd argue most play Sonic games to play as Sonic themselves, and most aren't going to list Big the Cat's fishing segments as their preferred bits of that game. It's true you don't spend a bunch of time doing that, but Sonic Team's difficulty in translating Sonic into 3D is another matter entirely. In contrast, BBS's gameplay all handles around the same basics you'd expect from a Kingdom Hearts game, and while you aren't playing as Sora throughout any of the paths, the Wayfider Trio all play similar enough to both Sora and Riku that it's not a shock to the system aside from the change to the Deck Command system this time around. It inherits the same issues that splitting KHII's Disney worlds in two by one more fragment this time around, but I think I prefer it across three different characters showing events from their own unique perspectives based around Darkness, Disney characters, and a combination of both often to resolve the other two. It makes the game seem very quick because it's cutting down the meat of the Disney Worlds by a third, but the overall length of the game adds up to roughly the same length of the other KH games, but focusing on three different characters at a time can mask that. The difference being here that BBS is openly showcasing it's a three-pronged storyline this time around, similar to Sonic Adventure, but with the main difference being that all three storylines are essential to the tale being told and hold the same level of importance and keeping the same core gameplay differentiated by power, speed and magic styles. Saying Repliku's death "comes out of nowhere" would be valid if they gave you the choice to play as Riku first, but they assume you have already seen his story arc through Sora's Side and it's forced upon you in a new game, as Reverse/Rebirth isn't standalone by default since it's explicitly a follow-up to the main 2/3's of CoM. While I think that the Terra-Ventus-Aqua order is the optimal way to play BBS, they are structured that you can play the game in any way you wish that doesn't completely spoil everything and negating the need to play the other two paths. A few things are either hinted at or straight-up told to you, but each of the Destiny Trio's perspectives are unique enough to not double-up on most of the developments save where they meet up and keeps most of the gameplay brisk with their own bosses and setpiece moments. While each character's save for Aqua's isn't truly "standalone" in that perspective to the overarching narrative, Terra and Ven's storylines are focused on "Vilains/Darkness" and "Disney/Sora-style" elements. Were you to bounce between all three in rough chronological order would likely be a bit too much for most players, as keeping track of even two sets of equipment tends to strike the right balance of keeping the gameplay straight, even if it would likely make for more logical episode-style segments the various bits of World plot develop as. KH does try the whole "alternate perspectives alongside each other" in two games, but that's across two characters and not three, and that game is designed to roughly have both characters develop in parallel, where BBS is designed to have you play through one perspective completely at a time. I still agree the game works best in the T-V-A order, but it's also designed around keeping many of the reveals locked to their own paths which makes each character worth playing, so it's an interesting discussion all the same. For what it's worth, you aren't wrong in how speedy the game seems in some of its story elements like how it deals with Eraqus, but that's where seeing the development and interactions "in order" might've helped alleviate that? I don't know, I can see that complaint while also enjoying how that unfolds in the preferred order with more context around knowing what happens to him. Always fun dissecting how people see things, this is fun!

[@Renigade68]

Heh, I think it's clear where are preferences lie, I didn't bring up Gameplay even once when I was talking about how to tackle multiple plot lines, but that was the main thing you focused on, not that there's anything wrong with that, I'm actually exactly the kinda person that would go back and forth between the multiple styles when playing Sonic Adventure, or bounce between multiple worlds in a Mario game instead of finishing off one before moving to the next, I love the variety, speaking from a knowingly biased perspective I likely would've preferred it if the game did let you play all 3 stories concurrently instead of segmenting them off, I do prefer how it's handled here to KH2, but that's not even a comparison I would think to make, there are so many inherent differences tackled between scenarios when a new character perspective comes into the mix, I don't wanna droll on about Sonic to much here but I never minded Big's fishing, I don't "enjoy" it, but I enjoy the story centered around it enough to still be somewhat invested when playing his stages, that's just the kinda person I am, gameplay almost always comes second to the story for me, occasionally a game like ReCOM will come along that will absolutely enthrall me with its gameplay, but I generally care far more about the plot(I got really lucky with ReCOM, having a gameplay style I love mixed with a story that I adore), I got introduced to Sonic through the Adventure games so I don't really play Sonic games for high speed gameplay as much as I do a high speed narrative, part of why I've been so uninterested in Sonic for the last decade, granted Big is hardly a high speed character, but exceptions to the rule help keep things fresh I feel.

[@GazKnightofNylrac]

It's why I'm not discounting your perspective in the slightest; I don't focus entirely on the writing itself or critique its effectiveness beyond a few snippets I find appropriate, so I find it fascinating. While it's perfectly fair to go in and dissect story elements from a video game and how effective they are and show where their pros and cons lie, video games are also inherently a different experience and offer unique methods to deliver their story when allowed to. You're decidedly more "involved" in the storytelling of a video game, even when you're just directing predetermined character actions like in KH; one may love the gameplay but hate the decisions their character performs. Allowing the player to control action scenes and play through the "travel time" as it were in various segments can give someone a more personal involvement alongside the journey of a character or two than just passively watching or reading their story, which can elevate an otherwise simple story. Heck, video games have a strength in that the story in a game can be complete and utter garbage but the gameplay can single-handedly save it, and vice verse. I'm less lenient on games where the gameplay is average to broken, but the story is above-average or great. You can definitely have a well-told story in a video game, but if the journey to get there frustrates me it's going to lessen the experience for me, since why did you make it an interactive experience if you're more interested in telling a story or make a movie without any gameplay tying into your themes or core of your plot? What games like Kingdom Hearts can be great at is tying in its gameplay systems more naturally into the story its installment is telling. BBS is strong in this regard, since half its systems have a justification from the story, where that story should inform the gameplay you're experiencing to a degree. Gameplay variety is fine on paper, but it's nice when you have a reason to do the things you're doing, and when KH is firing on all cylinders it can be damn effective. D-Links are an example of using the "hearts are all connected/friends are my power" theme KH loves to use and ties them directly into the gameplay. Not only are they this game's summoning system, they alter your gameplay to reflect who you're connecting with across distances even though it's a largely single-player experience while serving the series' penchant for connections to characters you've met in peaceful and violent ways. In addition, the ending of Ven's story subtly-yet-blatantly injects the D-Link concept into its final battle, allowing a gameplay mechanic to become a natural interactive storytelling device the player will already have experience with thanks to how Finishers and Styles work on building up a gauge using various Abilities. It's so natural that it happens without every player being aware of what's happening since it doesn't explicitly point out what it's doing in-the-moment and gives you a scene transition into the final phase to briefly catch what's going on from a narrative perspective. Which is why I'm never one of those absolutists saying "storytelling has no business in video games" since it all depends on the intention of the game in question. Storytelling can absolutely elevate a game, and many genres are known for their stories, good and bad. Kingdom Hearts for me is one of those series that tries on both the gameplay and storytelling front, and it's valid to enjoy either/and/or as to why someone is into the series. Luckily for me, the gameplay often hits that sweet spot between "mindless button-masher" mixed into games with some nuanced and rich gameplay mechanics in the combat especially depending on installment. The story is based around anime characters going around various Disney properties and characters linked into its own overarching narrative about existentialism with other convoluted and nuanced themes buoyed to tried-and-true and simple-to-understand "Light vs. Darkness" and "Power of Friendship" tropes. I'm obviously all for that, cuz there's enough that "works" for me in what I consider solid games under the wrapping of an insane crossover that many didn't think would or should even work, but here we are with 10 main games wrapping up its first major story arc in the Dark Seeker Saga, so many also find something appealing in the madness. And that's where I differ from many who play games for stories and not necessarily the gameplay; a video game with a terrible story but amazing gameplay can still be a great video game, whereas a game with a fantastic story and terrible gameplay is still a bad video game. I can't take someone's subjective viewpoint on a story away from them and if they don't enjoy the story a game is telling I understand if they drop the game, that's fine! I am not taking away anyone's feelings if they did or didn't enjoy a story for whatever reason. But it doesn't make it an objectively bad video game if the interactive elements are solid; it's simply a good video game with a bad story. This balancing act shifts depending on the genre of game of course; puzzle games often aren't expected to have an in-depth story with plot twists while RPGs are often juggling both gameplay and story. It just so happens that storytelling element is inherently more prominent where "role playing" can often mean telling a story and is often the focus of the genre. The Sonic Adventure example is a fun one, cuz while I roughly enjoy what they were attempting, I don't excuse the fishing segments even when there's only a handful of them and is a smaller part of the game because it added "variety". It felt like the beginning of Sonic Team not really understanding how to make a Sonic game work in 3D; they felt the need to tell this Tarantino-esque narrative of various perspectives that culminate into an epic finale, and I applaud them for it! It's bold for such a family-friendly series to go all-in on 90's 'tude and try to elevate their stakes in the storytelling. My favorite Sonic game growing up was SA2 Battle, where they cut down the chaff of the first game and focused on three gameplay styles split across two story paths. While many still didn't care for the shooting segments and treasure-hunting bits, I find them mostly inoffensive and vastly prefer them over the slower Amy segments and especially the fishing in the first game, which came across as trying to show off they had new characters even when the mechanics were half-baked. Nobody I know asked for fishing in a Sonic game, but in the same breath I absolutely loved the Chao Garden segments especially in SA2B. Not only do I love virtual pets like Tamagotchi, since it was optional it didn't force itself upon those who weren't there for the pet-raising sim unlike the Big sections in SA, and doubled as a bonus time sink activity tied into collectibles gathered in the main game. Variety is a tricky balance in a game, since a game that focuses on everything is often one that focuses on nothing, both in gameplay and story. The only difference is that games can rest entirely on their gameplay over their story while still making sense as a game. If your story is the focus to the detriment of gameplay, then why didn't you choose a different medium to tell that story where storytelling is more the focus? It's a fun discussion for sure, so I really enjoy these conversations!

[@Renigade68]

Eeeeee, depends, saying that something can't be counted as a bad video game if it has a bad story is true to an extent, but then I wonder why it even bothered having a story if it wasn't gonna bother with anything half decent, this has been my opinion on Sonic games of late, why waste money on these voice actors if you clearly don't care about the story? Just use the Sonic 3 approach of a mute story if you don't care to tell anything big and complex, and as you said yourself certain genres like RPGs have the expectation of a good story, if it's bad then I think it can be deemed a "bad" Role Playing Video Game, even if the "Video Game" part is pretty good, I'll admit that some games like say Mario Odyssey for example I'm mostly playing for the gameplay but if it's an RPG my first question is always "is the the story any good?" cuz I care more about stories then games, I enjoy Mario as a pass-time but I don't consider any of it's entries up there as one of my all time favourite games, except for possibly Paper Mario but that's not cuz of it's gameplay... Pikmin is one of my other favourite "games" alongside ReCOM, but even Pikmin I think does a great job of environmental story-telling, even if it is minimalistic, in the first 2 anyway, I think Pikmin 3's story is over-bloated and kinda pants as a result, and any fun I did have in Pikmin 3 was as a result of it being "Pikmin" and not really anything to do with it being "Pikmin 3", if Kingdom Hearts 2 had the COM cards mechanic I would've had similar feelings probably, although Kingdom Hearts 2 is much longer and would've given me more time to indulge in that style, but it would've been an icky taste when paired with it's story, I guess I would've considered it a guilty pleasure in that case, hmmm, that's part of what makes COM so fascinating to me, I haven't seen gameplay like it anywhere else, I'd love to see another spinoff down the line use it as a focus, preferably one detached from any greater ongoing story so the fans of the plot wouldn't complain about having to "tolerate" one of my favourite gameplay styles, It wouldn't be Kingdom Hearts if it didn't have some kinda narrative significance, but it could maybe be just a neat little "did you know the father of the main character starred in that wacky card spinoff? And he decided what he'd name his future kid in that game, there's a cute pun to how the name came about did you know? What a quirky fun-fact"

[@GazKnightofNylrac]

It's a question I had in reverse with certain games like The Last of Us. While the gameplay is perfectly fine and serviceable, definitely the kind of polish Naughty Dog became known for in various aspects, namely hodgepodging tried-and-true mechanics of the time into an Indiana Jones/National Treasure-esque interactive roller coaster, most only like to talk about the story in that game, and I agree that ND felt the need to do some sort of video game equivalent of Oscar Bait. The story told there isn't bad, but it seems more they wanted to make a story first and then throw gameplay in there second. It's not a bad game to play, but the story, while very well told, is very old-hat for anyone who knows the tropes of the zombie/post-apocalyptic genre. That being said, I'm happy it was a video game, because its quieter moments when not-shooting nailed the atmosphere they were aiming for, and the scenes with their brand of mushroom zombies were tense the first time around, as well as that one particular section under the hotel that still unnerves me on repeat playthroughs, and switching characters halfway through was a nice touch as well as a passing-of-the-torch moment. But TLoU is definitely talked about more for its well-told narrative than doing anything innovative, which isn't a necessity, TLoU is exactly the type of quality we should be striving for in that sort of narrative-focused game; if you're gonna focus on story, then go all-in. I'm more annoyed at how some video games are almost embarrassed to be video games, trying so hard to be "realistic" or "mature" and aren't using their interactive medium as much as they could be. You're also not wrong on what people are looking for in Role-Playing Games. If the story of an RPG isn't up to snuff for people, they're perfectly in their right to dislike the game, but that all depends on the type of RPG it is and what it's trying to achieve. In this case, Kingdom Hearts always tries on its gameplay and doesn't completely drop the ball in that department, even when experimenting on the handheld titles while trying to keep in line with the numbered entries. So even on games where the stories are less of a focus (Re:coded), the gameplay can make it not a waste of time cuz it's still a video game. I just find it a disservice for someone to say for example "KHIIFM is a terrible RPG cuz I hate X-character's actions" but completely ignoring the combat and sheer amount of related content. If I understand they really dislike that character or what they do enough that it sucks them out of the experience, I'm not going to convince them otherwise if they only value RPGs by their stories and not their gameplay. But video games are an interactive medium, and not factoring in the gameplay and only focusing on story can be a weird line of criticism for me. Not downplaying story at all, but some of these games would rather be movies or shows and feel obliged to be video games because reasons. As minimal as some stories are, like in Mario games, it doesn't mean I don't want them to not try, even if it's only as a means to set up "rescue the Princess from the dragonturtle" since I'm going into a Mario game for the platforming, and any story is mostly a bonus. The Mario RPGs on the other hand do have that expectation, and not without reason since Super Mario RPG, Paper Mario and Mario & Luigi all demonstrated that Mario games can be quirky, well-written and really funny playing in its worlds, returning and new, but that's largely why people are playing those games. The general loss of RPG elements in Paper Mario is largely seen as a net-loss compared to how the first game and especially The Thousand Year Door were beloved for their simple-if-layered battle systems, and in TTYD's case its excellent writing and story set in a whole new location with fun scenarios. So I do agree there that the loss of RPG elements coupled with the general watering-down of the stories has left me wanting a return desperately to the classic turn-based style of the first two games, as the gameplay has also suffered bouncing between platforming and RPG-lite elements in the Sticker system, which incentivizes *not fighting anything*, which is insane for an RPG where battling is half the equation. But there isn't one iron-clad absolute on the "Story and Gameplay" conversation. I obviously enjoy the combination of story and gameplay when it comes to KH, whereas the story is what matters more on your end, and you aren't wrong since KH's story is what it's become infamous for after you get past the "FF x Disney" crossover appeal. As a side note, regarding the Sonic thing, the franchise is in this weird phase because it's split its fanbase more than once; some are older fans who enjoyed the gameplay, which was then split in half again when it comes to the 2D/3D debate, and then you get the conversation on "is Boost Sonic even good?" and those who want the Adventure-style back, and then there's the conversation on story, on whether it should go all-in on being melodramatic and reaching for the stars, or if it should keep it simple like a Saturday-morning cartoon mascot he started as. It's a franchise that doesn't know what it wants to be, and I cannot wait to tackle that series, haha.