Jump to content


TSS Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Scar

  1. That's a fairly flippant, and reductive statement you've just made there. I'm not overly familiar with FE, but as far as I know, each instalment focuses on different characters. Sonic is more than just The Guy on the Box, he's the central character in the whole franchise. The titular character. Sonic is a mascot, and not just any mascot, one of the most instantly recognisable mascots in existence. You show a random person the boxart from any given FE game, and chances are, they won't know who it is. You show a random person a picture of a blue hedgehog with red shoes and chances are they'll know its Sonic. I'm not saying having an OC creator will kill the franchise, I just don't think its appropriate in a mainline game. If SEGA wanted to make a turn-based strategy game or an RPG, a character creator would be a-ok with me. But in the main series of Sonic platformers - a series which doesn't even have an identifiable gameplay style other than Gotta Go Fast, then in my opinion its just muddying the water with regards to what a Sonic game actually is.
  2. I don't really think that's a meaningful comparison.
  3. Personally think that a character creator in a game that is centred around a videogaming icon. A mascot upon which a company built its fame. That is a mistake. I'd have no problem with the character creator being put in an RPG spinoff or something, but in a main-series platformer? When you add in the fact that the Sonic franchise has lacked any real identity since 2011, and its just muddying the water. What is a Sonic game, if any random character creator can waltz in with a half-baked gameplay style and take centre stage? I ask this. Would you ever see a character creator in a mainline Super Mario platformer? Say a hypothetical Mario Galaxy 3, or Odyssey 2? They might introduce a new character or mechanic or powerup as a side function, but nah, no character creator.
  4. Y'know, its kind of amazing that we've heard nothing about a new main series Sonic game in 2 years. It feels weird, but honestly, I'm kinda glad. Franchise needs a hiatus to get itself in order.

    1. Menace2Society


      I wouldn’t be too sure about that. Remember that the gap between Lost World and Forces was 4 years, and well, we know how that went.

    2. TheOcelot


      My monies on a new 3D Sonic game for 2021 (30th anniversary) and maybe a second smaller title (like how we got Mania & Forces in the same year).

    3. Scar


      For a blissful moment, I had forgotten about Forces. 

  5. I don't recall any recent Sonic games trying to make Sonic cutesy? So I don't really understand where this is even coming from. Yeah they've been taking the angle of more self-aware and cartoonish approach, but that isn't really the same as being cutesy. YMMV if you don't like Sonic being a somewhat unfunny Ryan Reynolds wannabe. But its not like any of the other interpretations of Sonic have had stunning characterisation. SA1 Sonic was basic as fuck and had honestly laughable dialogue. SA2 is better, but that isn't really saying much. Heroes through to 06 is such utter garbage that its not even worth thinking about to be brutally honest. Unleashed and SatBK are probably the best iteration of the semi-serious Sonic, but still brought a lot more self-awareness and levity to the party than the ridiculously edgy nonsense that came immediately before it. What ultimately matters is the quality though. If a genuinely talented writer came in and produced a Pixar quality story where Sonic and co were cutesy, it would still be better than literally every other Sonic story that has ever existed. I personally don't care which direction they take, though I certainly have preferences. All I want is genuine effort and passion put into producing something of quality, instead of half-assedly attempting to target some niche segment of the massively fractured fanbase. If its just really fucking good, it has a better chance of satisfying not just existing fans, but attracting more people to the games as well.
  6. They probably realised it wasn't gonna be received like Generations. That game was basically Generations, but worse in every conceivable metric. 4 years to make a game that is visually stagnant and mechanically worse than its direct predecessor. Just terrible.
  7. 100% done with Marvel. Endgame was a great film and a great place to end my interest in anything related to Marvel.
    I hate Disney.

    1. Tails spin

      Tails spin

      Can you please explain....

      I mean I respect your decision just wanted to know your reasons for it

    2. Rusty Spy

      Rusty Spy

      No, that's perfectly reasonable. I share the exact same sentiment.

    3. mayday2592


      If anything i'm hyped. No one seriously expected the MCU to end with Endgame. Theres so much more to explore with there  a being an increased cosmic and multiversal focus.

    4. Scar


      Cause most of their films are just so cookie-cutter. They're rolled off a production line with all the passion of a Cadbury's Dairy Milk chocolate bar. Yes, they're pretty good, but not that good. Its not worth me going to pay to see each of the 2-3 formulaic derivative movies they release every year. Plus, I can't be bothered to follow a massive cast of mediocre characters - and lets be honest the best character in the franchise was Tony Stark, and CapAm had the best produced action films in the series. They're gone now. Their arcs reached their logical conclusion and I loved how they ended. There is nothing and nobody left who I can say I care about. 

    5. mayday2592


      I'd say there's loads of passion for the source material from both the Directors, Actors and Kevin Feige. do  Most  It's why such dedication was put into Endgame and Infinity War. And Mediocre characters? I cant really agree. Most of these guys are way complex and  likable compared to your usual action movie hero.

  8. If they're making a game, they've been awfully quiet. Frankly that's a good thing as Forces was hyped to shit and turned out to be a horrible embarrassment. Put your heads down and make a good fucking game. Also cancel the live action movie pls ty.
  9. I don't mind, as long as it has the minimum effort of Generations Classic Stages put into it. Those stages were absolutely popping with life and detail and it was wonderful. Personally wouldn't mind letting Taxman continue with his pseudo 32-bit 2D Sonic, but would actually really love for them to evolve it into like a hand-drawn sprite based 2D sidescroller. Something like Rayman Origins/Legends. Still broadly flat and 2D, but with beautiful high-res, handdrawn assets rather than the current 16/32-bit-style assets. Ultimately anything that isn't the pre-rendered garbage that Sonic 4 E1 was, is absolutely fine. But a 2D high-res sprite based evolution of Mania is ideal for 2D games imo.
  10. What have we seen of the next game to declare a change in Era? Nothing. Maybe Lost World might have marked that change, but Forces regressed back to a worse version of Generations/Unleashed's gameplay. So we're back to that again.
  11. TSR's soundtrack is gonna be sick.

  12. Remix is fucking sexy. Bingo Highway was an underrated track, but this adds so much more to it.
  13. In a word. No. The games are bad, because they're poorly conceived and poorly designed. There is no creativity. The maintain a baseline level of technical competence, and that's it. Mario games haven't ever been bad, despite being almost exclusively "Solo Mario". In fact, its equally bullshit to suggest that the mere existence of Sonic''s shitty friends is what led to the decline (aside from Shadow's game). Solo Sonic isn't to be blamed, and neither are his friends.
  14. That's a pretty bold assumption to make, considering I directly addressed my policy regarding characters later in my post. I want characters that regularly feature in the game, to bring interesting gameplay to the table. Theoretically, you could manufacture a "unique" gameplay for every single existing character. Ideally though you'd want it to mesh with an underlying gameplay philosophy that is central to the franchise, with alternate play styles supplementing (or contrasting if its well designed) that central design philosophy. I'm not opposed to other characters existing. They need to add something though. Are they interesting characters? Can they be interesting characters? How many characters do you need for a single story? How many characters are too many characters? If they can be done well, fine. Main point though, is gameplay. I don't know. If you can't come up with anything interesting to do with them in the first place, do they really need to exist? Aside from appealing to a certain subsection of fans? The more characters you shunt into a game in a meaningless bid to appeal to their particular fans and to keep them relevant, the more bloated the story gets. If you try to focus on just a few characters in the interest of keeping a tightly focused narrative, then the sidelined characters are just window dressing. They add nothing to the story and may as well not be there. Then there is the issue of fans of those sidelined characters being upset that they were present, but not involved. What then? If keeping these characters is essential then make tiers. Core cast, primary supporting cast, secondary supporting cast, fringe characters, or something. But they don't all need to be involved in every game, or indeed in any game at all. Let them stay in comic books or as merch. More to the point though, the fanbase of this franchise is so goddamn divided that no matter what Sonic Team,SEGA or whoever does, some subsection of fans will be displeased with the direction they choose to go, because it happens at the expense of what they like. Adventure fans have been crying for literally years about how classic fans got Sonic 4 and Mania and blah blah blah, and how Boost fans got Generations and Forces and blah blah blah. Before them, it was the classic fans who had seen their once beloved franchise fall down the shitter in the interests of an edgy black hedgehog with fucking guns. And they complained on the internet about how classic design philosophies had been abandoned. I'm fucking certain that if Sonic Team moves away from the boost, some boost fans will come out of the woodwork and start complaining about how they are disappointed they aren't getting another one of those games. Where does it stop? If anything is to be sacrificed at this point, its the interests of some subsections of fans. The question of this thread was "What are you willing to sacrifice to make Sonic popular again?" So. If it were up to me, I'd go for a clean slate. Culling the cast is just one aspect of this. An initial small group of characters say, Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy and Eggman are much easier to develop and characterise properly, than a sprawling mess of 30 characters who have 30 fucking years of baggage associated with them. Fuck, even this "core cast" needs to probably be sat down and rewritten so they're not as shallow as they currently are. Sonic shouldn't just be the cocky, impatient asshole. Tails shouldn't just be the boy genius. Knuckles shouldn't just be a strong dumb fuck. Amy shouldn't just be the obligatory love interest/female character. Boom, for all the shit it gets, at least tried to do something interesting with them, even if I don't like the trend of Knuckles continually being a simpleton. They can also bring with them some unique gameplay that is both in keeping with a design philosophy, and yet sufficiently diversified to add some nice variety. If this is starting to get a little thin, then you can reintroduce old favourites, but with similarly retooled characters (and backstories if need be), and maybe introduce a few new characters that have been given proper consideration. I don't want more Silver' or Infinites. I know Shadow is basically far too popular to ever be retired as a character and admittedly, I even have a soft spot for him. To "reintroduce" him, I wouldn't even mind a complete and total atomic reconstruction of SA2 (but better in every way) to preserve, or improve his backstory. But this should all take time. Sonic games should be once every 4-5 years. The big budget 3D ones at least. If Whitehead wants to collab and make Mania-type games on the side for $15 a piece in between major releases, sure. If there are karting games, sports games or other spinoffs in between, fine. In fact, I'd be more than happy to relegate most of the side cast to appear in these all-stars type games. I've already talked at length in many other threads, about how I'd like Sonic Team to go away and approach the gameplay. In a nutshell - go look at the classics, what made them great, what was the essence of that design philosophy. Go look at Adventures, what was good, what was bad. Go look at boost, what was good, what was bad. Take all that in and try coming up with a brand new 3D gameplay paradigm that brings all that knowledge together. Take as much time as is needed.
  15. Sacrifice to make popular? The Sonic franchise, despite the eldritch abomination it has recently become, is still popular. Even utter garbage like Forces manages to sell well enough to make SEGA a pretty dime. So, there isn't anything I would say I'd sacrifice to make the franchise popular. There is however, plenty I would sacrifice to make the franchise good again. For starters, the cast. The cast needs to be culled in a serious way. If merchandise is so goddamn important relegate them to the side lines. But let's be honest. Characters like Silver, Sticks, Big, Cream, Charmy, Bark, Bean, Fang (even Shadow, Rouge and the like to be brutally honest) etc. don't add anything to a franchise. Personally, I would slowly phase them out of existence. Stop mentioning their names, stop making their merchandise, and wait for them to fade out from our memories. There needs to be rules for characters to remain relevant. First and foremost - do they as a character have anything that could be made into unique gameplay that fits with the franchise. Secondly, could they be a relevant/interesting supporting character? This one is tenuous at best for me even. Ideally, I'd like most frequently appearing characters to be playable in some form. If not immediately, at some point. Think: Sonic Mania Plus. Then there's the gameplay. I've talked at length about what I want them to do with that, so I can't be bothered to repeat myself.
  16. Honestly, that doesn't really matter too much, considering that the series is focused around its titular character. But Diogenes is right. Having useful, even powerful abilities has nothing to do with mental fortitude. Other characters such as Tails (who is supposedly 8 years old for mercy's sake) can and probably should have very useful abilities, but they shouldn't all have the same strength of will. When you have characters it is important that they are different. Put each of them in any given situation and each of them should react differently. Maybe if Knuckles or Sonic (or Shadow?????) were in Tails' position they'd have reacted differently. Knuckles might have felt the resolve to take the fight to Eggman, Sonic may have turned angry and vengeful at the potential loss of a close friend. Who knows Forces was not a good game, nor did it have a particularly well written plot, but in certain areas they tried with the story. That they tried is the important part, because it means they can try again and maybe do it better. The intent was correct, but the execution was off. Problems like Infinite being the most one-note edgelord ever created, and the entire existence of Classic Sonic and Original the Character (DNS) are a detriment, but the latter two are at least ones I imagine were forced upon the writers by the circumstance of having absolutely creatively bankrupt management.
  17. Much as the whole of Sonic 4 at large was a game to forget, I find myself hoping that Jun Senoue remixes/remasters Sky Fortress Act 2 and 3 (ideally into a single track). Stood out amongst all the other tracks in the game.

  18. To be honest, I actually prefer it to the one that's used since Sonic 3 and Knuckles (not that I dislike that level complete theme, its also great). Feels like its got a "Good job, we cleared the stage, but there's still a long way to go till the end" vibe going for it. It sounds cool. However, this might just be nostalgia.
  19. I mean at this point, it wouldn't be a remaster as Crash and Spyro and Ratchet were, as opposed to a complete and total reconstruction of the game at an atomic level. There is so much wrong with SA1. It'd have to basically take the shell of it, and totally rebuild it from scratch.
  20. Not expecting Mania to be as successful as it eventually turned out to be, is not even close to being the same thing as "not believing/backing" it as a game. You're extrapolating a thought process you have literally no understanding of.
  21. Pls Jun. Bring back Fumie Kumatanie. Pls. A less scattered production team is good new though. Means everyone can much more easily communicate and stay on the same wavelength. Let's hope it means something for the quality of Sonic games coming out in the future.
  22. You hit the nail on the head here mate. I too am somewhat glad that critical reception is important to SEGA now. That's a good thing. But they seem to have no idea of what they want to do. Flip flopping between styles. Generations to Lost World to Forces. They need to find and pick a style they think will be good going forwards and then accept that it probably won't be perfect the first time around, but try and improve it. No I don't think Lost World was the style to take forward, but at the same time, that they rushed back to a watered down shittier version of Generations gameplay + some next character creator gimmick is baffling.
  23. That's a false equivalence. Sonic =/= Marvel/DC. Besides, did you forget CapAm's hilarious costume in Avengers 1? Spiderman may not wear a "purple polka-dotted lycra suit with yellow lenses", because as far as I'm aware that has never been his costume design. He's always worn a red and blue suit, and guess what, he wears a red and blue suit in literally every live-action movie he's in. Irrespective of how stupid it looks. And speaking of "market research" you are aware of the movie Space Jam right? A live-action movie with actual cartoons in it, which grossed $230 Million in 1996. Ah yes, there is also this one movie which did something similar called Who Framed Roger Rabbit which grossed $330 Million in 1988 (which is $700 Million in today's money, adjusting for inflation). You act like a cartoon in a live action simply cannot work, when it has quite literally been done before, and to massive success at that. Ah but of course, times change so maybe those films wouldn't be as popular today. I am willing to concede that, but you missed my point anyway. Why does the film need to be Sonic in the real world? Why must it be Live action? What is the need? The existence and apparent success of the Smurfs and TMNT and them being popular isn't really good enough for me, because neither of those movies were well received critically. And even though they were relatively successful; grossing around $500 Million each, neither of those movies can even begin to touch the critical reception or even commercial success of say...The Incredibles ($633 Million in 2004, inflation adj. $ 850 Million) or The Incredibles 2 ($1.241 Billion in 2018). I could list a fair few other Disney or Pixar productions in recent years that absolute shit on Live-action movie adaptations. I know you keep saying those films are for kids, like that's somehow a bad thing...even though they tell stories with emotional depth hitherto unseen by any Sonic game ever created. And I know you keep comparing this Sonic movie to the MCU, but that is frankly, delusional. This movie is better compared to the likes of TMNT, or Smurfs, cause that's how the average parent who sees posters of it, are going to view the movie. Maybe it will be a success...Maybe it'll break even at the Box office, or more. But that will never change my view that a fully animated film would probably have been better. I don't really like being talked down to in a way that suggests that my dislike of something I view to be bad, is somehow "toxic". Why should I be optimistic? Other movies that took this approach to bringing beloved franchises to big time Hollywood ended up being trash. Sonic's most recent endeavours haven't exactly been up to the mark.Do you expect me to sit down and keep quiet? This is a discussion board after all. A place where us fans can talk about things regarding a franchise we love(d). Not everyone can agree on everything, every time. I reserve the right to remain sceptical of everything I see, and I reserve the right to be critical of things I think deserve criticism. Just as you're free to like what you see, or be cautiously optimistic or whatever. You can even try to change my mind. That's the whole point of a forum.
  24. Still looks dumb man. Face is too small in that mock-up. I just don't get why a cartoon blue hedgehog being a cartoon is such a point of contention with movie studios. Why is more "realistic" so much better? Being a cartoon and exploring mature themes, or having a serious narrative aren't mutually exclusive. See: Plenty of anime, Batman TAS, Justice League Unlimited etc.
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.