Template talk:Sonic games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Sonic Blast (Game Gear) 2 Shadow the Hedgehog (game) 3 Totally new inclusion criteria 3.1 Notes 3.2 Closing remarks 3.3 Comments 4 Revised inclusion criteria 4.1 General inclusion criteria 4.2 Notes 4.3 Using this criteria 4.4 A word of warning 4.5 Comments 2 5 Useless? 6 Inclusion criteria is now live! 7 Sonic Rush Adventure 8 main series 9 Sonic and the Secret Rings 10 Where's Sonic Battle? 11 Sonic RPG 12 Others 13 Inclusion criteria to be canned 14 Sonic 3D 15 merged template 16 A note about Super Smash Bros. Brawl 17 Main series

[edit] Sonic Blast (Game Gear)

Where is this Game Gear Videogame???? It must apear in Handheld games section --83.37.32.227 (talk) 10:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing. --189.129.144.146 (talk) 02:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

• I think I just put it in. But it doesn't show up in my browser; maybe just a refresh problem, though. Ben Standeven (talk) 09:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC) Edit: There now. So it's OK.

[edit] Shadow the Hedgehog (game)

This game shouldn't be include in the main series as it is a spin-off, this would be like adding Knuckles Chaotix to the main series list.

Why has this been readded and the page put on protection without mention? Either put Chaotix on the list as well or remove Shadow the Hedgehog.

Shadow passes the revised inclusion criteria as it ties in with the main games and includes running and jumping. It just adds another mechanic to the basic one. Hello2112 20:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Archives

*Archive 1

Why isn't Chaotix also included then? It follows the same basic gameplay and while it does feature a different gimmic(elastic rings), it's no different than Shadow's use of weapons. Also in the manuel it ties into the story as well. Though I'm still sure Shadow is a spinoff and should be included as a spinoff game as it does not continue the main series. Sonic not being the main character being the obvious factor. Also the criteria mentions "odd gameplay" as games not in the main series, which Shadow the Hedgehog has, meaning it does not pass.

"odd gameplay" == not running and jumping. Shadow == running and jumping. Chaotix has altered ring system. Read the new one carefully. It explains it. —davidh.oz.au 02:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It appears fixed now anyway, and if the new one explains that then it's clearly wrong. Shadow the Hedgehog is an obvious spin-off and only obsessed fans can't see past that. There are even interviews that state that Sonic Team has always wanted to make a game for Shadow and maybe even create a spin-off series for it. Chaotix does have the same basic gameplay as 2D Sonic games, the altered ring system isn't significant at all and is no different than being able to preform magical powers and driving motorcycles with shotguns.

1) don't call people who disagree with you "obsessed fans".

2) can you provide a link or source for these interviews with sonic team?

3) sign your posts please.

How is this still going on? We have discussed this issue to death; it predates the splitting up of the template into multiple templates. We protected them page for about a month to stop the constant reverting of the templates. The inclusion critter was created for the sole reason of sorting this issue out for good. And yet it still goes on. Does anyone really care that much? (Somewhat ironic coming from the one person who probably reverted this page the most.) El cid the hero 20:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Why did someone put Shadow the Hedgehog under a spin-off title? When it clearly isn't. And I'm not an obsessive fanboy. It is part of the main series as it LINKS Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic Heroes, and Sonic 06 together. It has the same basic gameplay as previous Sonic games. ( Running fast, going off speed ramps, get to goal ring, event scenes, and includes the ENTIRE Sonic cast as part of the main story. All it did was add in a few gameplay changes. Hell, It's like calling Sonic Heroes a spin-off because it used team based gameplay instead of solo gameplay. I don't approve of this change, and so I fixed the issue. Sonic Riders I can understand, as the story doesn't link to any of the previous games, and it has completely different gameplay. Takashi Iizuka may have said that he wanted to create a spin-off series for Shadow, but if you read his quote carefully, he said a spin-off series in the possible future. He didn't say that this game was a direct spin-off, when it was obvious a large portion of Team Darks story in Heroes was set up for Shadow's game. Also, in Sonic 06, Shadow joins GUN, after he settles his issues with them in his own game, he actually works for them now.......so yeah, the main series sonic games are linked to this one. --S200048 (talk) 02:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)s200048

[edit] Totally new inclusion criteria

From the above discussions, I have drawn up an inclusion criteria that is based on a games' merit which goes out of the way to avoid personal bias:

[edit] Comments

Barring no objections, I propose we transclude the above on all Sonic template pages via something like <noinclude>{{Sonic games/doc}}</noinclude> —davidh.oz.au 09:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• diff wording changes from the original. Still waiting for comments. —davidh.oz.au 07:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

i'm willing to support this, it seems fair. El cid the hero 11:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support and for your honest assessment of the proposal. It means a lot to me. ^_^ —davidh.oz.au 22:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

finally, a sensible criteria has been reached. I fully support this. Hello2112 22:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, looks like you guys did a good job here. I have no complaints. User:Denjo

This is a good, well thought out criterion.

There are a couple of points on which I'm unclear, however. Since the five numbered conditions contain no reference to console type, I assume that handheld games (in particular Sonic Rush and the Sonic Advance series) will be allowed on the template under this criterion? If that is so, then it needs to be made clearer (for example in the "closing remarks"). I suggest that the criterion include a couple of examples of borderline games (such as Rush and others already included), and then explain in which template they belong.

Also, since you've already spent so much effort on this matter, it might be worth going the extra mile to make criteria for the other two contentious templates as well. In fact, given the solid backbone you've already provided, it shouldn't be too hard. Say if a game fails to meet conditions 3 or 5 (and possibly 4), then it is automatically a spin-off. If it meets these two, but fails to meet any of the other conditions (1, 2 or possibly 4), then it is judged against a new condition 6: can it be played on a portable/handheld console? Obviously, if it can, then it is a handheld game; if not, it is also a spin-off. If you choose to incorporate this, the wording will probably need to be fixed.

Or you may decide that attempting to expand the criterion further will just complicate things, and thus decide to ignore the suggestion. That's fine. As an inclusion criterion for this template only, I think it makes a lot of sense. Good job. -- Supermorff 12:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

You are correct, there is no reference to console type in the first five conditions. You also correct in assuming that Sonic Rush and the Sonic Advance series will be allowed on this template, because as A Link to the Past pointed out, they really are main series games. Funnily enough, the first inclusion criteria, did have such a "fall back" procedure, but was removed to make this new one simpler. ([1]) As for your other idea, including a "How to" section... I didn't think of that! :) —davidh.oz.au 06:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

One problem I have with this and it's involving Sonic Rivals. Rivals by all means is a part of the main canon as it does a number of things, the primary one being the true introduction of Silver and a reappearance of Eggman Nega. Just because it's a handheld doesn't make it any less canon, like Sonic Rush.

Also, Secret Rings is a spin off as Yogiro Okewa(or something like that) has expressly stated that it is separate from all previous games. Also, Sonic Advances 2 and 3 as well as Battle would also be a part of the main canon as 2 has a first time character introduction (Cream) and 3 picks up off Battle.GrandMasterGalvatron 14:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Rivals doesn't fail the inclusion criteria to my knowledge.

The only reason why Secret Rings is here is because we honestly thought it would be a main series game. (The development, the marketing, the lead-up, the reviews, the graphics, it all felt like it would be TheNextBigThing for Sonic... even more than Rivals or Next Gen. In fact it still does to some extent.) The last Sonic game I bought was Sonic Riders, so I wouldn't know if it is a spin off or not. Place it whereever you feel comfortable with it.

The problem with Sonic Battle is that it is a canon handheld fighting game, thus making its classification difficult. It belongs in all three templates. Strictly speaking, it isn't a splash and dash. However, under the above inclusion criteria, it should probably go under spin off or handheld. However, I will change the Sonic Rivals in the closing remarks section to Sonic Battle, so hopefully this should clear this up.

—davidh.oz.au 06:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh and Riders...well, I wouldn't necessarily render that a spinoff so much as the plot is concerned. We have the whole introduction of the Rouges thing and they have since cameoed in other games. I'm willing to discuss that though.GrandMasterGalvatron 14:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but Riders is just as much a spin off as SatSR. Include one and you include them both. And Battle. And everything else. —davidh.oz.au 06:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I moved Secret Rings to the spinoff template so i guess that takes care of that. However, there's nothing expressly stating that Riders isn't canon. At least, not that I can find, but I don't really care. However, I kinda think all these templates ate tacky. Why not just one unifies, neatly organized template instead of four scattered ones? GrandMasterGalvatron 15:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I do agree with you. You see, there's this bloke called CVG WikiProject, (of whom I am a member,) who likes to do things differently than the rest of Wikipedia. No way in the world {{Naruto}} be allowed by CVG WikiProject if he had his way, simply because it makes navigation too easy. Why, I even had to split {{Sonic characters (other media)}} off from {{Sonic characters}} to save it from being split by that megalomaniac!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, TfD doesn't really like all these useless templates clogging up her template space when he was only linking between two or three of his articles, and more often than not ordered him to merge them back. (good for her!) On the other hand, a very big navigation box between lots of articles that are very loosely linked under one general header, say, {{Wikipedia articles}}, would be just as evil. So, in time, a balance in the wiki was discovered, and an honor code around the guiding core principle set up so that all template-ians may live on template-ooine in peace. The End! :)

Morale of the story: There are some really lame edit wars just waiting to be found out there. I don't think it's possible to get a merge like that done under the radar.

—davidh.oz.au 11:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Secret Rings fails to make any connections to previous games, I believe, besides characters, and its gameplay falls under odd gameplay. Riders fails because it has odd gameplay. The Advance games...I don'te believe that they make connections to previous games, so I say leave them and Battle in the handheld template. Hello2112 00:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

(previous discussion) A Link to the Past has presented a convincing argument that the Advance series and Rush really are main series games, and it has yet to be rebuffed. —davidh.oz.au 06:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

So is platform being disregarded completely here? If so, then I'm perfectly fine with them bring moved over to this template, despite that I don't truly see any connections to othergames besides Cream's introduction to the series. Hello2112 00:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I suppose you can't have Sonic Advance 2 without Sonic Advance 1 and 3? —davidh.oz.au 11:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Stop. Adding. Secret. Rings. To. The. Template. It has been determined as having odd gameplay, meaning that it is in the spin-offs template. Hello2112 01:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, it's not the control scheme that's the problem because it is still running and jumping. After all, we can't hold the control scheme against it, otherwise we'd be stuck with only 8-way-d-pad games! :P However, in this case it is the story that's the kicker. I do hope SatSR is retconned into canon like Sonic Rush was, simply because the last game that came close to having such a good reception was Sonic Adventure and Sonic Heroes. From the article:

"The game has received above average scores praising it for its graphics, varied challenges, as well as its many resolved issues (such as camera angles, poor controls, and other common issues) that were present in preceding 3D Sonic games, making it the most well-received 3D Sonic game since Sonic Heroes."

Aaannd.... look at the bottom of the article: there's 54 references, which is a good indicator of GA material at such an early date. And guess what? In Australia, Target (Australia) now sells it along with Wii-Sports as the two pack-in games for the Wii! Give it 12 months and it'll be back in this template, I'll bet. That said, for now it might be best to err on the side of caution. However, make sure to be kind about it. We don't want to upset anyone, even if we suspect that it'll be back here eventually. ^_^ —davidh.oz.au 11:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

• Shadow leads to the character article. - The 4th Snake 20:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious that Secret Rings IS part of the main series. There is absolutely NO evidence to disprove it. Oh, the gameplay's different. So? Sonic Adventure's gameplay was radically different from the 2D Sonic games. Does that make it a spinoff too? Oh, and the story's different? Every single 3D Sonic story has been different, in case you haven't noticed. It IS part of the main series.207.224.61.246 18:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• You could have said it nicer. >> There's no real evidence to prove it as a main game, either, now is there? Would we not have to wait for another Sonic game that makes connections to it and establishes it as part of the main canon? Hello2112 16:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• That's what I thought too. I believe Sonic and the Secret Rings is not a spin-off. But I won't bother you guys if you make it a spin-off. Willy105 12:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

For the 9,756th time, the game's freakin creator said it wasn't a part of the main series! What more proof do you need?!!GrandMasterGalvatron 00:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revised inclusion criteria

per Supermorff's suggestions:

[edit] Comments 2

Revised in an attempt to more fully encompass the other templates. —davidh.oz.au 08:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, this clears up the Advance/Rush main series issue - they'd stay in handheld anyway. This is better. Hello2112 19:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

No they wouldn't. Read it carefully. —davidh.oz.au 02:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Note: By "read it carefully" I mean that you shouldn't even consider the handheld template if the main template will suffice. The body of the criteria is meant to be parsed. —davidh.oz.au 02:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Note: the above comments were made before the following edits was made to the section under discussion:
   diff reword of lead paragraph and added another paragraph to "using this criteria" —davidh.oz.au 02:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
   diff fixed some small typing errors. —davidh.oz.au 12:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

---

[edit] Useless?

Well, a template is good in theory, but I'm of the idea that it just isn't necessary. Rather than enter never ending debates over what game should go where (like Secret Rings for example), and IMO, pointlessly separating off games by common features, why don't we just have a link to the list of Sonic games or something? Hell, I'd even make a disambiguation page of sorts and that lists links to each game article with the only distinction being the year released. I'd actually do something similar with the characters. In fact, a link to the Sonic Characters category is more than sufficient for that as it's already separated by the first letter of the name. (Not to mention the game character template is embarrassingly small anyways.)

Comments?GrandMasterGalvatron 03:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That does indeed sound like a good idea, there are many people who will consider Shadow the Hedgehog as being part of the main series, and many who won't, as well as many who won't include Sonic and the Secret Rings as a main game whilst others won't. Creating a list of Sonic games and released in which year and what not sounds more organized and accessable to me as well.

A list lacks the usability and simplicity of a template. Templates are designed to allow quick navigation to strongly related subjects. Having a list would defeat that purpose. El cid the hero 15:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm against a list. It's one big line going down listing over 50 games. Templates make navigation far simpler. You can pinpoint a template and find a game with ease. With a list, that ease is taken away. Hello2112 00:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason why we have nav templates is because the rest of wikipedia has them. For example, see {{navbox generic}}. However, the reason why this is an issue here is because the CVG wikiproject has to split it up over three or four templates because otherwise the navigational templates would be HUGE. Other wikiprojects don't have this problem. At least navigational templates are more useful than categories, which nobody knows about. My advice is it to just grit your teeth and bear with it. —davidh.oz.au 04:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion criteria is now live!

After one and half months of discussion, the inclusion criteria has now gone live! I hope you all enjoyed the process and I hope everyone present has gained an insight into the way wikipedia makes guidelines. As always, if anyone has any questions feel free to ask, or just go ahead and edit the new template documentation. —davidh.oz.au 05:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic Rush Adventure

I think this game should be in this template. It's the sequel to Sonic Rush, after all, which considered to be a main series game now. But then again, the game hasn't come out yet... 206.66.217.144 19:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

If it fits the criteria, then it'll probably land here.GrandMasterGalvatron 21:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] main series

Sonics rush is not considered a main series installment, because Blaze the cat is different in that game than in Sonicthe Hedgehog (2006), and speaking of which, Sonic the Hedgehog shouldn't be listed as a main series installment, on account the events of that game never happened, I personally think that Sonic Battle and Sonic Rivals should be listed as main series instead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.244.187.115 (talk) 23:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Super Mario Bros. 2 is a dream and it is considered in the main series of Super Mario, why Sonic the Hedgehog 2006 shouldn't be considered in the main series of Sonic (Don't go delete Super Mario Bros. 2 in the Mario template). And because the events of this game was erased from history, the lives of Blaze and Silver in the future might be heavily modified, then Blaze can now be a princess who defends the Sol Emeralds. Sonic Rush is in that way a main series installment. Also, I think Sonic and the Secret Rings can be in the main series, magical objects are common in the series, why the arabian nights book can't be one of these magical objects. The story of that Sonic game is considered canon in that way and the game is a platformer, different from the others, but it is a platformer. Shadow the Hedgehog isn't a main series installment, I had a lot of trouble to explain that before, but all the previous discussions were deleted. Again with a comparison with Mario, putting Shadow the Hedgehog in the main series is completely like putting Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island in the Mario main series, it can't be there because the main character isn't Sonic/Mario, but Shadow/Yoshi. And I think these games are also main series installments : Sonic the Hedgehog (8-bits), Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (8-bits), Sonic the Hedgehog Chaos, Sonic the Hedgehog Triple Trouble, Sonic Blast, Sonic the Hedgehog: Pocket Adventure, Sonic Advance, Sonic Advance 2, Sonic Advance 3 and Sonic Rivals (not Sonic Battle).DjinnFighter 21:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Sheesh, this has been discussed before. Read the previous sections where the reasons why we made the changes, both here and in the archive. We were getting tired of the edits wars and decided to do something about it. Just follow the agreed-upon documentation. —davidh.oz.au 05:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You are right about sonic 2006 being a main series and sonic Battle not being main series, but neither Sonic Rush or Sonic Rivals can be classed as main series. See the Eggman Nega article and read "story confusion" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.42.165 (talk) 23:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic and the Secret Rings

Does this game make any direct reference to other main series games? Because if it doesn't, I don't think it should be in the main series template. The game does fit the criteria in the sense that it is a successful game with Sonic in it and the gameplay is the typical running and jumping, but I don't think game makes any direct reference to other main series games. I haven't played this game, so I can't say for sure that it doesn't make a reference. Can someone provide an example of a direct reference in the game? 206.66.217.142 17:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I haven't played it either. In fact, at the moment I haven't played the last five games on the template. I just go by what other people say is in the games. Which makes taking a judgement call on this issue difficult. If I owned a Wii and this game, this issue would be over already. —davidh.oz.au 07:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm all most finished with it and it fail criteria 2 & 5. --Bobby D. DS. 04:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The game is, in essence, a mainstream Sonic game (it is a single player platformer with Sonic as the main playable character). While it does not explicitly reference past Sonic games (like most of the other games, however), and the storyline is slightly different (ie: this time, Eggman is not the main villain...), some references are made in the game, as for example when Sonic meets Sinbad, he mistakes him for Knuckles, which shows he already met him, thus referencing previous Sonic games. Therefore, the game should be listed as a main Sonic game, where it belongs. If Sonic & the Secret Rings is not listed as a mainstream Sonic game, then Shadow the Hedgehog should not either, as the storyline is also different and moreover it does not feature Sonic as the main playable character (some might even say it has an "odd gameplay" and that the title of the game does not even include the word "Sonic", but I do not want to argue about this). While the storyline of Sonic & the Secret Rings is a spin-off from the main series storyline (yet the same could be said about Shadow the Hedgehog), the game itself is a traditional Sonic game, light years away from say Sonic R or Sonic Fighters, which are not even platformers. That being said, I recommend you play and enjoy this wonderful game and consider my suggestion. -87.231.185.217- around 15:00 UTC, 22 June 2007

There was an intensive discustion about the criteria above. You should read it and then make your comments in the comments secton if you disagre. I'm just going by the current criteria. And Shadow the Hedgehog does tie in because it revels shadow true origins.--Bobby D. DS. 19:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the criteria doesn't work. And Sonic does not have "odd gameplay" because it is a platformer. Willy105 17:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest the game should be kept in the main series template, as there is no consensus it is a spin-off game. Moreover, I would like GrandMasterGalvatron to explain which criteria the game fails. -87.231.185.217- 13:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think this entire debate can be summed up like this... "it's a Wii game, too different and it confuses and angers me GRAAAAH!!!" 208.101.138.65 21:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm willing to put it either place. As far as I'm concerned, just because it's a spin-off, it does not make it not canon. Does it mean it's a main series game? No. But is it canon. Only the future will tell. If a cnon game in 2011 references this game, then it's on. There's really no proof either way. Sabre Knight 13:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where's Sonic Battle?

You can't have Sonic Advance 3 without Sonic Battle, that's impossible because of the Gizoid. 208.101.130.232 13:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Another example is Sonic Battle which satisfies all criteria in the first group except for criteria 3 (it is a fighting game), and so it is a handheld game because it satisfies criterion 6 in the second group.

quoted from 2.3.3 Using this criteria --Bobby D. DS. 04:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that the one determining factor for placing any game in the Main Series template is if Sonic is the undisputed main character of the game. I.E., Sonic Battle, as enjoyable and Sonic-focused as it is, should not be placed in this category as Emerl takes the place of the lead role. The same should go for Shadow the Hedgehog; Sonic is not the main character, therefore the game is not in the main canon. However, does anyone think the status of Main Game should also be determined by the storyline events?

SaviorOfImagination 20:23, 28 June (UTC)

I argue with that. Mainly, because "Shadow the Hedgehog" is on there. I think I've made my point. DarknessLord 12:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Note: See my point above. Sabre Knight 13:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic RPG

Hi The Sonic RPG article has been created, but I'm not sure which Sonic templates it fits into. There seems to be pretty strict rules regarding what fits where. Opinions?

The article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_rpg

Philtrauferson 21:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

No you got it right. If it turns out to be a main series game, we'll move it to main series template. —davidh.oz.au 14:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Others

Sonic chaos Sonic triple trouble Sonic blast and 3D blast should be here and Secret rings is not canon because Tails Knuckles and Eggman do not remember him and Sonic riders is canon. Sonic 3 & Knuckles should be in the template somewhere too.

There is no proof that Chaos, Triple Trouble, Blast, 3D Blast are canon. Secret Rings is currently being debated, and the canonicity of Riders has yet to be proven. And sign your goddamn comments. Hello2112 01:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion criteria to be canned

Heh, I really should pay more attention to what's happening on the wiki. Since the timeline was been deleted the main article months ago, I think the inclusion criteria should go to since it was just to get us past a rough patch. —davidh.oz.au 14:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Canned. —davidh.oz.au 12:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic 3D

Shouldn't this be included here? And while I think about it, this should be merged with the handheld section. Aside from the system there's no difference. - 82.42.162.112 11:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

No it shouldn't for both of your suggestions. There is nothing to suggest that Sonic 3D ever was canon, which is what this template is for. And handheld =/= canon, for most of the games in that template at least. So no. Hello2112 19:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow! That's EXACTLY why Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine is here, even after being completely ignored on multiple official websites! BRILLIANT!!!

... Honestly. 208.101.140.232 16:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

What? Hello2112 18:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] merged template

When'd this template get merged with the other three back into the metatemplate? Hello2112 18:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A note about Super Smash Bros. Brawl

I've notice that Super Smash Bros. Brawl keeps on being added to to the spinoff part and removed it, then put a note. Just to want to note Super Smash Bros. Brawl does belong there, because it is not a Sonic-spinoff game. It's the same reason why we don't add the game to every other series templates whose characters are in Brawl. It would like add SSBB to Metal Gear series template. Magiciandude (talk) 02:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know who keeps adding it and I agree that it's not part of the sonic series but it's still worth mentioning. Would it be acceptable to make a section for "related games" because there are several games where sonic is the star but they are not strictly part of the sonic series. e.g. Sega superstars and sega superstars tennis. 81.98.227.168 (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

To settle the topic, how about a row for just cameo appearances? --Hasek is the best (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Main series

Just a few points I'd like to make:

1. Sonic 06's events were erased at the end... so why is it consider a "main adventure".
2. Shadow the Hedgehog may of not stared Sonic, but why would it be a spin-off?
3. What maks SatSR a spin-off?
4. We don't know the status of Sonic Unleashed yet. Claycrow (talk) 16:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)