Tara

But even in that context I don't see them as that any different as Mario baddies. They both just look like children's Halloween decorations to me. Literally no better or worse than Boos from Mario.

But none of that implies any added levels of seriousness, either. And again the Badniks have the same traits as Mario enemies. Even the more intimidating ones are still goofy looking.

That's the problem, though. The game that was supposed to bring Sonic back to his roots (their words, not mine) and return Sonic to his former glory only did "okay" at best. Not good, just okay. Despite the high sales, it means their marketing was a failure because it failed to do what it set out to do. That is, make Sonic (the series, not just one game) great again. The reason the first game sold well is because of the title hype and because it was developed by a studio that had a good reputation. But once the second game came out, naturally people were more aware that the first one wasn't what it promised to be and thus were more disillusioned to the idea. Not too dissimilar to the struggles the series currently faces when working on an ambitious new title. Apathy and skepticism quickly settles in as a result of their less than stellar past performance.

That's fair. The wording of your argument threw me off is all. But I still disagree. I still don't necessarily think Motobug is that different from Biddybugs or any Mario enemy. They're still about on the same level of cutesy and not much would exactly separate them in terms of presentation or how serious they appear to be. I mean, some of the facial expressions should be pretty telling of the tonality they're supposed to take on. I can't help but smile looking at this stupid goober. By comparison, Mario has enemies like Dry Bones who, while not terrifying, have a much more ominous presence, especially in the older games where they lack facial details. The problem with using Tentomon and Ledyba as examples is that they have different contexts they need to convey. Their design is less indicative of the tonality of the game, but the genre. Digimon and Pokémon are games about battling monsters, so emphasizing that these monsters can fight is important for their design. Motobug and Biddybugs not so much. The information they convey in their design is tailored to the context of platforming, so I don't put them exactly in the same category.

That's basically it. Why bother changing such an insignificant and barely noticeable background detail? At best, it would just be dismissed as an Easter Egg as opposed to an oversight. If I were in the dev's shoes, I wouldn't care either. It's not too dissimilar to the Casino Night Zone stages saying MILES instead of TAILS. It's technically not untrue, but seems like a weird choice when all the in-game text and manuals still refer to him by his nickname. But it's such an unnecessary detail that doesn't interfere with anything in terms of story or gameplay that it's not even worth fixing.

Animals eat other animals in nature all the time. Survival of the fittest and all that.

I think the only thing I really have against these things is honestly that their placement often relies on a more precise control scheme, despite the series by nature not having the most precise controls. Like, sometimes they'll place them right beside each other so that when I get off one, I'm immediately on another. The intent is that I land in the in between space. But since the controls are momentum-based, it's not easy to turn around to avoid getting crushed. And agreed with Mechano. I can't count the number of times I've died because I was beside one as opposed to under it.

I'm just finding it odd that some people are using tropes that have been the staple of every children's cartoon since the late 70's and early 80's as the basis for an argument suggesting the Badniks were meant to appeal to older audiences. Ninja Turtles '87 had more intimidating enemy designs than 90's Sonic ever had, and I've never heard a single person claim that show was aimed at anyone other than kids. (On the contrary, the fact that the show was such a heavy departure from the darker and more mature Mirage comics that came before it yielded quite the controversy amongst fans) The only thing the "scary" looking Badniks achieve in terms of maturity is assuring that the series isn't aimed at babies still fresh from their mother's womb. Ignoring all other problems with the overall argument, I think we're forgetting that there are different stages of children's entertainment and that children from a very young age can get handle a little bit of action. Sonic really doesn't push any boundaries in this regard when operating under normal circumstances. That's not to say that these elements can't be used to tell a story that takes itself reasonably seriously. We have Disney, Pixar, and select Dreamworks films that show that even the most colorful and saccharine of titles can tell stories that speak to people across all different generations. But that doesn't mean that children aren't still obviously and unabashedly their primary demographic. The secret is in good writing and relatable characters, not in aiming for any specific age range.

Fixed. Please be courteous with your profile updates so we don't have to do this too often!

I enjoyed the premier as well. I love all the ways it throws back to previous Disney IP's, including the original DuckTales, but also moves forward on its own. The only real qualms I have is still the voice of the kids, but I'll get used to them.

Fixed. Nice to know your birthday hasn't changed after all these years.