# Talk:Sonic the Fighters

It was called Sonic the Fighters in America, too. Where was it called Sonic Championship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.220.19 (talk • contribs) 

American arcade release. Gems doesn't count. --Shadow Hog 02:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Waitasec, this warrants a title move, then! WhisperToMe 01:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I actually think that the eighth emerald is the master emerald, which is why its shown huge on the "You got all 8 emeralds!" screen.--Ac1983fan 18:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

how do you, nvm yeah i agree

Most likely not, since the screen still shows eight other emeralds, as well as a gigantic green one. That makes nine emeralds, therefore your logic is severly faulty. Also, if it were the "Master Emerald", why would it be in Bean's posession? Masterotenko 18:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, through my research, people are putting thier own interpertations of my notes on here, for example:
1. Listing the Shadow Characters in Non-playable even though they are playable and says so in a note next to it.
2. "These characters, like Honey, are only accessible by hacking, but don't seem to be prototypes. They may be Easter Eggs thrown in by the designers for anyone who hacks or could simply be leftover characters that were scrapped from the final version but whose data was left over." This quote is completely false. Rocket Metal, Robotnik in his mech, Robotnik's minion from the intro, and the Robotnik in the UFO are ALL seen in normal gameplay, and saying they are Easter Eggs for hackers is extremely farfetched. This game was never planned on being dumped and emulatable at the time. Also, calling them leftover characters that were scrapped is completely absurd, considering they are in fact used in the game. 
3. "Strangely enough, this version of Honey makes a brief appearance in the opening of Fighters Megamix." This version of Honey does not appear in the opening of Fighters Megamix. An alternate version of this cat, the Shadow Character of Honey, appears to have the same colors at the cat seen in the intro to Megamix, however, it may, or may not have been planned to be Honey as we see it in this build of Sonic the Fighters. It could have been an altogether original character, as that cat character stands beside the Lunar Fox seen in gameplay. You may compare the image seen in Fighters Megamix here to the Shadow Character of the Sonic the Fighters Honey here.
4. "but Metal Sonic and Dr. Eggman (both of which can freeze the intro now and the latter will always crash when the final fight is about to happen) are still available." This statement could be somewhat related to BlueBlur's initial findings in the Sonic Gems Collection version of Sonic the Fighters. However, it was only upon loading any of the Eggmans (regular, large, minion, mech, or ufo), Rocket Metal, and Honey. Metal Sonic actually works in the gems collection and there are Action Replay codes to play as him.
5. "…and the one of the Emeralds could have been lost by another character and regained by him. It could have been that one of the Emeralds was a deliberate fake, much like Tails later possessed for Sonic Adventure 2." This line makes no sense and tries to fit continuity into the game. This game does not belong in any of the normal Sonic storylines. It is independent. There were no fake emeralds, and please stop trying to fit Sonic the Fighters into a "central" Sonic storyline, because Sonic is a genre which has no "central" storyline. Whoever posted this posted using their own opinion and not fact, so the neutrality of that statement can be debated.
I have decided not to edit the Sonic the Fighters page deliberately, because I would make such vast changes, it would almost appear to be vandalism, however, I leave the public to edit this as they please. I am just representing the facts I have. Also, I have no idea how to use Wiki very well. Thank you, and good day. Biggestsonicfan 22:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The Wikipedia is for fact. I don't know much about this "Honey" character, but I'm going to edit the part about hacking Eggman and Metal Sonic.
"…and the one of the Emeralds could have been lost by another character and regained by him. It could have been that one of the Emeralds was a deliberate fake, much like Tails later possessed for Sonic Adventure 2." 
That's all fan theories. Whoever is doing this, please discuss it on the Talk Page first. --Alice2 00:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Me again. I changed it, but I'm not sure how well I did. ^.^U I almost never edit articles. --Alice2 00:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd think the worst they could do was say that the greyscale characters were prototypes for Shadow or something... Cheeze Master 20:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Cheeze Master

Am I the only one who knows about them? 244pupil6 18:42, 06 October 2007

What are they?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.51.195 (talk) 21:24, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Recently, the article was moved from Sonic the Fighters to Sonic Championship per WP:USEENGLISH. I oppose on 2 grounds:

Sonic the Fighters was used most recently in the game's 2012 re-release on Sonic Gems Collection. This name was used in all regions, English included.
I also believe it to be the WP:COMMONNAME. While not definitive, a Google test shows:
Sonic the Fighters - 1.9 million hits to Sonic Championship - barely 1 million hits.
I'm open to discussion if I'm missing something though... Sergecross73 msg me 16:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Sergecross73:, makes sense to me. Thanks for reverting and stuff! --Soetermans. T / C 07:46, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Soetermans, no problem. I don't blame you for the move, my initial reaction was actually "Why didn't I think of that?", but then thought about it, researched it, and came to the conclusions above. I can see where you had been coming from. Sergecross73 msg me 12:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: I've heard that this game only got a limited release in North America because Sega of America considered its depiction of Sonic too violent. Have sources mentioned this? It might be good to put in the article. JOEBRO64 13:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Through my research, I remember glancing over that fact maybe once or twice, but each time I didn't feel the source was reputable enough or backed enough to consider it fact. In general, there is a lot of contradictory stuff about the arcade release, you sent me down a little rabbit hole...
GameSpy said it got a limited US arcade release in their Gems review. IGN said it "never saw a home release and never swept through US arcades", GameSpot said Gems "marks the first proper US release for Sonic the Fighters", but here they say it saw a limited release in US arcades. Eurogamer said it "only ever appeared in Japanese arcades". The History of Sonic the Hedgehog is the only source that even mentions a European release, and we know they were wrong about SegaSonic. They do also say "the game's distribution went almost unnoticed in Japan because of its violence, which could have been detrimental to Sonic's image."
We know it was definitely released in the US because Sonic Championship cabinets exist. I also know the cabs are rare, and given GameSpy and GameSpot say it got a limited release, I will add that in, but I don't feel we have it established it was because of violence. I'm also going to remove the Euro arcade release date. TarkusABtalk 14:15, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sonic the Fighters/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: TheJoebro64 (talk · contribs) 22:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Time to review Sonic the Fighting Vi— uh, I mean Sonic the Fighters! JOEBRO64 22:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Lead
convinced Sonic Team to approve—I'd link Sonic Team
Done
A planned home console port for the Sega Saturn was canceled, and so the game never reached home consoles until 2005 on the Sonic Gems Collection compilation for GameCube and PlayStation 2. → A planned home console port for the Sega Saturn was canceled, and so the game never reached home consoles until 2005 on the Sonic Gems Collection compilation for GameCube and PlayStation 2.
Done
As much as I loathe this game, "panned" pops out to me as potentially POV.
Changed to "criticized"
Gameplay
Wasn't Eggman still Robotnik in this game? I might be thinking of something else.
Yea, changed to Doctor Robotnik. In the game it's strangely spelled with a C: Dr. Robotnic.
Each character can punch, kick, and use a defensive barrier.[6] Combining these buttons also allows for a variety of special moves unique to each character.[7] Characters can raise a barrier to block themselves from attacks, but it can be damaged and eventually be destroyed by an opponent. The barrier also does not protect from being grabbed or thrown or attacks from behind.—I'd cut and use a defensive barrier from the first sentence. The sentence that's more in-depth reads like you've never mentioned it before.
I changed it a little differently but I think I fixed the problem. Some special moves use the barrier button.
Development
AM2's fighting game, Fighting Vipers—I think you can cut off "fighting game".
Done
using the Fighting Vipers engine—link to game engine
Done
In a retrospective interview in 2006, Sonic the Fighters was the game Kataoka was most proud of.—Huh? How can Sonic the Fighters be inside a 2006 interview? I'd change to: "Kataoka stated in 2006 that Sonic the Fighters was the game he was most proud of."
Done
Release
No biggies here, my only comment is that I think it's barebones enough to be merged into the development section. It's up to you if you think that's a good idea or not.
I merged it.
Reception
Some websites, like GameSpot and Gaming Age, aren't italicized.
Done
I'd also link to GameSpot.
Done
This is somewhat minor, but Metacritic says the 2012 version received "generally unfavorable reviews" (47/100), not "mixed" as the article says.
Changed to unfavorable
References
Reference 31: What makes Gaming Age a high-quality, reliable source?
Nothing much lol so I removed it.
Images
All seem fine; the two non-free images have their rationales filled out, one is free.
@TarkusAB: Nice work! I actually considered working on this a few months ago, but never got to it. JOEBRO64 14:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: Responded. Thanks TarkusABtalk 22:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@TarkusAB: Looks good. JOEBRO64 22:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@78.144.98.76: The omission of the reception box was a concious decision in the building of this article. The box is intended to provide a summary of the reception in Wikipedia articles, but that's not possible here because there is only one score available for the original 1996 release (most important), and none for the Sonic Gems re-release, which together make a bulk of the reception. The infobox you added with this diff only summarizes Xbox re-release scores, placing undue weight on the Xbox re-release in 2013. TarkusABtalk/contrib 17:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Why's that? Just because Sonic fans don't want you to know the game was panned?
If you think it's undue weight, just balance it out - find some original magazines that reviewed the arcade version.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.98.76 (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
I will post at WT:VG to get more opinions. TarkusABtalk/contrib 22:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
In my opinion, if the game was re-released by itself - as with Xbox Live Arcade - then listing scores for it would not be undue. What should NOT be listed are reviews for a compilation of which the game was a part, like Sonic Gems Collection. This is because those reviews are also contingent on other games.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:00, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
My bigger issue (which is why I removed it now) is that the addition of sources was from MobyGames which fails WP:RS/VG. And a MetaCritic score on its own doesn't really have weight as just being the infobox itself. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Also or the intent was to hide Sonic games being panned the review box for Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric would have been removed years ago--67.70.103.36 (talk) 17:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)