Does 3D matter?

[Chaos Walker]

So everyone and their dog's mom will nod in approval of the assertion that 2D Sonic on the Genesis from around 1990ish was all around really dang good, and it's pretty much the best blue hedgehog experiences you can throw money at.

k great, at least we got that out of the way.

Now when the playstation and nintendo 64 were still newborns waiting to drink money from our wallets, 3d was a big freak'n deal and if a game didn't have a Z-axis it was going to quickly be compared to something else with significantly more depth. But despite 3D games being more advanced, 2d didn't die. As it turns out now, 2D games arn't inferior. They are just DIFFERENT. So when a game like Rayman Origins come out, impresses everyone, and droves come to worship it's lack of any dimensions beyond the second, I have to wonder: Why is Sonic Team even trying 3D anymore? If there is no shame in making a 2D platformer, even now in the age of greybrownshooter, then why not capitalize on that rather than playing with it on the side like it's something you'd be ashamed to let the entire fanbase see?

Short version: Would letting 3D sonic gameplay die out really matter?

Thoughts?

Edited April 1, 2012 by Chaos Walker

[Solkia]

Sonic really does work better in 2D. A lot of the 3D Sonic games have Sonic-ish stuff, but is usually missing something.

[Soniman]

SA1 had some semblance of classic Sonic gameplay such as the momentum, so we've seen that it can at least WORK.

If used to it's full potential I firmly believe that 3D Sonic gameplay can far surpass that of the classics.

[Chaos Warp]

No.

Because 2d is the past.

And 3d is the present.

Sonic does not need to hold himself back in time. Especially when Sonic Team have proved that they can make great, if not classic 3d gameplay.

I don't think 2d Sonic (Or 2d in general. Look at Rayman Origins!) should die off, but if it regressed to JUST that, it would be a big step backwards.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Christmas Warp

[---]

I agree, though I like the 3D titles, it's just that they haven't hit that spot yet. They should have built upon SA1 and truly put 2D Sonic in 3D. They need to pull a Super Mario 3D Land, in a way of putting it.

[Sean]

I prefer 2D platforming as a general rule (ironic, considering what my favorite game is). If the past 20 years have been indication enough, Sonic has had a lot more success with me on a 2D plane. Generations is the only 3D Sonic game I can stand playing anymore, and even then I favored and had more fun with the classic gameplay.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Short version: Would letting 3D sonic gameplay die out really matter?

After getting games Colors and Generations that have gotten massive approval from building Unleashed's Daytime stages? I want you to answer that question for yourself because it's pretty obvious that it will matter a lot in some way.

My favorite Sonic game happens to be 2D, but that doesn't mean 3D didn't have it's appeal. The Adventures (although not having aged well) are very treasured titles, and with Generations being made full of fanservice to both 2D and 3D fans, it would be naive to think there wouldn't be an uproar if 3D died out. Fans of the 3rd dimension will no doubt see it coming the moment it slightly presents itself if Colors being mostly 2D had anything to say.

Edited April 1, 2012 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[krazystitch]

No.

Because 2d is the past.

And 3d is the present.

I can't say that I agree. Just because 2D was what everyone used in the past doesn't mean that we have to move on from it. Many games today use 3D, that's true, but it's not like you have to or anything.

The way I see it, just use whatever works best. Don't try to go along with what many people think is right and go with what IS right and make the overall product better in the end. As explained in the opening post, Rayman Origins was a smash with the critics and players, and that was a completely 2D game, it did so well because it worked the way it was supposed to and it was well done. The fact if a game is made in 2D or 3D doesn't change how good it is as a product, but it does work better in some cases as opposed to others.

[Old dead account]

I have no problems with 2D. If they released a 2D game with Genesis physics and level design as the next big retail game I'd go shell out $60 for it in a heartbeat. However, I would like to see a full scale 3D game, I fully believe it's possible. I just wish Sonic team would stop hiding behind 2D in their 3D games. I want full 3D game or a full 2D game. Not a 3D game hidden behind a bunch of 2D.

[Nepenthe]

I find it very ironic to read the op's defense of 2D as a creative decision with mass appeal and its own unique set of advantages to offer the designer before hitting the question "Why is Sonic Team even trying 3D anymore?" as if making a 2D game makes it impossible to have a mess on your hands and as if 3D has absolutely nothing to offer game designers. Yeah, that Z-depth, ease of content creation, and rendering ability? Fuck that shit; it's absolutely useless.

Yes, I know I'm purposefully being facetious, but these types of discussions about dimension are a thorn in my side because they always read in an inherently short-sighted manner. Artistic principles don't just die when you open up Maya.

I also find the mentioning of Rayman Origins ironic too; people waited until it bombed down in price for sales to start picking up, partly on the reason that a 2D platformer wasn't worth $60 in this day and age anymore.

[Meow]

I just hate when people think that making a game on a 2D plane is the same as going 'into the past'. I am pretty sure you can easily make a game that plays on the 2D plane and have it be just as "modern" as any of these 3D games. Because by that logic, doing 3D means that we're all just living in the era of Super Mario 64. Which is stupid really. Just by converting the game back to a formula that worked doesn't automatically mean its a bad thing like people love to try and point out. Not only that, but I find the "going 2D is teh sucks" camp is largely hypocritical, because for all the clamoring for a return to the Adventure style I'd say that is just as much of a 'step back' if we are playing that type of game. Just because its 3D doesn't automatically make it more modern either. Sonic Adventure is a 90s game after all as well, just like the classics. That's quite old and in the past now isn't it?

It's more of a playstyle thing rather than going back into the past or not. I'd rather have something that WORKS myself, and so if its a return to the 2D formula that was proven to be successful four consecutive times so be it. There is always room to innovate on a 2D plane as well, and not have it suck. Likewise if they were to hand a new 3D playstyle I'd give it a fair shake too as long as it was good, not that I mind the current 3D gameplay but I do find it somewhat restrictive - although that could be largely due to the level design and not necessarily the gameplay style itself.

HOWEVER - I do like both the 2D and the 3D styles. So to answer the initial question of "would letting the 3D style die really matter?", my answer is no it wouldn't. 2D or 3D, as long as it stays true to what was established to being the core mechanics of what makes a Sonic game, and as long as it is fun, I couldn't care less as to what dimension it is in. Quality is all I care about.

[BarkingChaos]

What Prince Solaris said. I feel like Sega is scared to make a game that is pure 3D these days after the disaster of 06. Sonic just does not work in an open world environment. It works best in a linear environment with branching paths. I want to see SatSR improved on. Implement the Generations style controls and multiple branching paths while still running through a fairly linear level.

Or just make a pure 2D game along the lines of Sonic Advance. Ever since the games when into 2.5D, the physics have been really floaty. Sonic Advance was the last 2D sonic game with good physics that still felt close to the Genesis games.

Really, I don't care about what dimension its in, I just want a good game. That said though, I enjoyed the Modern Sonic stages more than the Classic Sonic stages in Generations.

Edited April 1, 2012 by BarkingChaos

[Chaos Walker]

This post is not a reply to anyone in particular, but mostly just a general response.

Yeah ok, rolling physics yadyada. We know that Sonic's unique platforming style comes from rolling, slopes, and changing your speed/momentum. No matter the angle, that should remain true or it's not a "Sonic game" anymore. Mario Kart has the plumber on the cover, but we know it's not a "Mario Game" in the same sense that Super Mario World is. Thing is, I don't even remember Sonic Adventure doing much of that. There may have been a couple of smooth transitions from floors to walls in places where the it wouldn't spin the camera out of controll, but that's about it. 3D Sonic games, other than being fast (whatever that means) havn't done much to include Sonic's unique brand of platforming outside of running up a wall. Think back and try to remember how many times rolling or using the spindash seemed like it was what the level designers had intended you to do at that point. 3D Sonic has little semblance to 2D sonic, to the point that if Sonic Adventure has been released as "Rocket Robo" there's a chance nobody would have said anything beyond "This is fast. I remember playing another game that was fast too, but bluer." and that would be the end of that.

Imagine playing pinball in 3D. My image looks a little something like golf.

Now what I AM saying is that Sonic is better suited to 2D since his primary mechanics thrive there. 3D isn't an inherent evil, but it's not 1999 anymore so there's no reason to cater to people who want to see their character from all angles. Capitalizing on what works would be at the very least cost effecient, and instead of Sonic 4 episode 2 we should be seeing Sonic Adventure 3 episode 1. When I think about it, perhaps looking to golf for insiration is what 3D Sonic needs, or rather something like a skatepark. Those are some good examples of real life rolling and physics playing out in 3D.

And this bit IS directed at one person: People are a little afraid to buy 2d platformers today, just like how you'd think a new black and white movie wouldn't be worth your time. But if Rayman Origins 2 was released, the skeptecism train would already have come and gone. Anyone who enjoyed the first wouldn't be half as afraid of the sequel wasting their money.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Chaos Walker

[Nepenthe]

This post is not a reply to anyone in particular, but mostly just a general response.

Yeah ok, rolling physics yadyada. We know that Sonic's unique platforming style comes from rolling, slopes, and changing your speed/momentum. No matter the angle, that should remain true or it's not a "Sonic game" anymore. Mario Kart has the plumber on the cover, but we know it's not a "Mario Game" in the same sense that Super Mario World is. Thing is, I don't even remember Sonic Adventure doing much of that. There may have been a couple of smooth transitions from floors to walls in places where the it wouldn't spin the camera out of controll, but that's about it. 3D Sonic games, other than being fast (whatever that means) havn't done much to include Sonic's unique brand of platforming outside of running up a wall. Think back and try to remember how many times rolling or using the spindash seemed like it was what the level designers had intended you to do at that point. 3D Sonic has little semblance to 2D sonic, to the point that if Sonic Adventure has been released as "Rocket Robo" there's a chance nobody would have said anything beyond "This is fast. I remember playing another game that was fast too, but bluer." and that would be the end of that.

Imagine playing pinball in 3D. My image looks a little something like golf.

Now what I AM saying is that Sonic is better suited to 2D since his primary mechanics thrive there. 3D isn't an inherent evil, but it's not 1999 anymore so there's no reason to cater to people who want to see their character from all angles. Capitalizing on what works would be at the very least cost effecient, and instead of Sonic 4 episode 2 we should be seeing Sonic Adventure 3 episode 1. When I think about it, perhaps looking to golf for insiration is what 3D Sonic needs, or rather something like a skatepark. Those are some good examples of real life rolling and physics playing out in 3D.

And this bit IS directed at one person: People are a little afraid to buy 2d platformers today, just like how you'd think a new black and white movie wouldn't be worth your time. But if Rayman Origins 2 was released, the skeptecism train would already have come and gone. Anyone who enjoyed the first wouldn't be half as afraid of the sequel wasting their money.

"A true Sonic game is only defined by the principles of the classics; anything else is inherently lesser in some way. Sonic Team has not tried to fully replicate a true Sonic game in 3D. Ergo, 3D is an inherently worse artistic direction for the series than 2D."

^ I'm assuming that's basically your argument. If so, I find it extremely disagreeable.

I can't be the only one exhausted of people basing a Sonic game's legitimacy on whether or not it has perfect classic rolling or not. This isn't a snipe at the formula but rather at the idea that strict consistency with these games is the only way to progress, and that its artistic and technical themes can't be meaningfully expanded in other ways to cater to evolving industry standards and 3D.

I mentioned before that the classic series is actually way too consistent for its own good, establishing and sticking to a design that offers little room for innovation even within its own systems. This means it's actually a dead end, the only real choice for long-term continuance being pumping out the same thing over and over at the risk of either exhaustion from the lack of innovation or extreme backlash from any shake-ups to its formula.

An example of the latter? People didn't react to the Homing Attack in Episode 1 with cautious scrutiny despite the fact that it's apparently been implemented well in classic-oriented fan games. Rather, they bitched that it would "break the classics," reacting negatively to the idea of its very existence within the game. This is irrelevant to the fact that- true- the Homing Attack wasn't well-implemented. People were merely furious before we had any actual footage, and this speaks to a narrative that the classic formula should reign above anything else whilst also not being tampered with, which I consider a case of wanting your cake and the right to eat it too.

But I digress: If you like the classics and want to see more of that, fine. I don't want to stop you and I would love for Sega to do right and better by that series too. But I will always disagree against this insistence and implication that anything that isn't inherently classic is lesser or wrong. Designing around maintaining flow and momentum isn't something that's only inherent if you're in a ball and suddenly out the window when you're on two feet. I feel if we can abandon this idea, then we really can have some progress.

And finally on the point of Rayman: The fact that people waited for the price to drop simply because it was a 2D platformer speaks volumes about how the public's perceptions of worth have changed since the 16-bit era when Sonic 1 was comparatively a graphical godsend on par with Crysis. Also note: people didn't think the game would be a waste of time as a result of its dimension either. Rather, they knew that it was good!.... But Assassin's Creed 3: Brotherhood came out... and so did Modern Warfare 3, and even the oft-maligned-for-its-classic-gameplay Sonic Generations, all shiny new 3D games.

In short, people were convinced that RO could wait because these games were more worth their immediate attention over the holiday season, because more effort had been put into them, because RO was a 2D platformer being released for full retail price in 2012 as if we were still living in 1991.

(I apologize for writing this much. I'm hyped about Outlaw Star thus am prone to tl;dr.)

[Lamor]

No 3D shouldn't die. I think that SEGA should make both 2D and 3D Sonic games. One year we could get 2D game and next year we could get 3D game, that would please all Sonic fans. I love 3D Sonic games, Sonic Team wanted to do something different with them and that's okay. I'd like to see rolling physics and slopes implemented in 3D Sonic game, that would be AWESOME.

Besides too much 2D Sonic would bore everyone. 3D games change playstyles often, we already had like 3 and fourth playstyle is on the way. Classic games don't change much. Every next Classic Sonic game is just improved version of previous game.

Sonic 1 -> Sonic CD -> Sonic 2 -> Sonic 3K

It's similiar to this what different 3D playstyles did for example:

Sonic Unleashed -> Sonic Colours -> Sonic Generations

Don't get me wrong, I love Classics. I just don't see any way for them to change and keep being "fresh", while 3D styles can evolve and change all the time.

[Chaos Walker]

"A true Sonic game is only defined by the principles of the classics; anything else is inherently lesser in some way. Sonic Team has not tried to fully replicate a true Sonic game in 3D. Ergo, 3D is an inherently worse artistic direction for the series than 2D."

I see the direction 3D sonic games went something like Super Mario Bros. 2. Is it wrong on it's own? Well I suppose not, but why is Mario's face on it? The fact that I was expecting the same stomping/fireballing experience from the other games made it incredibly hard to accept.

I mentioned before that the classic series is actually way too consistent for its own good, establishing and sticking to a design that offers little room for innovation even within its own systems. This means it's actually a dead end, the only real choice for long-term continuance being pumping out the same thing over and over at the risk of either exhaustion from the lack of innovation or extreme backlash from any shake-ups to its formula.

Nintendo's good at that. It seems to be working quite well for them, considering Mario Galaxy 2 was a Mario Galaxy expansion pack with Yoshi. Yet looking at it's reception it would seem quality is prefered over variety. (Though to their credit, the whole Mario Galaxy series WAS a stab at variety.

But I digress: If you like the classics and want to see more of that, fine. I don't want to stop you and I would love for Sega to do right and better by that series too. But I will always disagree against this insistence and implication that anything that isn't inherently classic is lesser or wrong. Designing around maintaining flow and momentum isn't something that's only inherent if you're in a ball and suddenly out the window when you're on two feet. I feel if we can abandon this idea, then we really can have some progress.

Just a little easier. Much like in Metroid, having a character that can turn into a ball solves a whole bunch of nonsense.

And finally on the point of Rayman: The fact that people waited for the price to drop simply because it was a 2D platformer speaks volumes about how the public's perceptions of worth have changed since the 16-bit era when Sonic 1 was comparatively a graphical godsend on par with Crysis. Also note: people didn't think the game would be a waste of time as a result of its dimension either. Rather, they knew that it was good!.... But Assassin's Creed 3: Brotherhood came out... and so did Modern Warfare 3, and even the oft-maligned-for-its-classic-gameplay Sonic Generations, all shiny new 3D games.

And New Super Mario Bros. Wii is still selling for $10 more. Staying around for a long time and making your place (essentially proving your worth) will get you enough respect to sell 2D platformers with no shame. And though Sonic only pulls slightly more respect than Rayman when compared to the likes of Mario, being consistent in creating good games in a certain style for a while will get you credit with the consumers.

(and Sonic's prices are allready droping quickly anyway.)

Now what I AM saying is that Sonic is better suited to 2D since his primary mechanics thrive there. 3D isn't an inherent evil, but it's not 1999 anymore so there's no reason to cater to people who want to see their character from all angles. Capitalizing on what works would be at the very least cost effecient, and instead of Sonic 4 episode 2 we should be seeing Sonic Adventure 3 episode 1.

This was essentialy the most important part of my post. If I was head of Sonic Team, that's the direction I would take. Make 2D Sonic the main thing, and keep fiddling with 3D on the side to see what happens. If 3D Sonic can work, we'll get there eventually. If not, at least critics can't bash us too hard for taking wonky design choices in our mainstream games. (at least, not as likely to)

Besides too much 2D Sonic would bore everyone. 3D games change playstyles often, we already had like 3 and fourth playstyle is on the way.

I keep pointing to Mario as an example, but I it's not really wrong to do so seeing as they are doing so much right. I like that even though Mario 64 wash a smashing hit, and 3D Mario has thrived since then, they havn't forgotten about 2D gameplay. And when Mario gives up the z-axis it's for fun's sake, not out of desperation.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Chaos Walker

[Nepenthe]

Just a little easier. Much like in Metroid, having a character that can turn into a ball solves a whole bunch of nonsense.

If having a character turn into a ball solved a whole bunch of design issues in regards to platformers, why is Sonic's gameplay model not standard in literally any other major platforming franchise currently existing right now?

This was essentialy the most important part of my post. If I was head of Sonic Team, that's the direction I would take. Make 2D Sonic the main thing, and keep fiddling with 3D on the side to see what happens. If 3D Sonic can work, we'll get there eventually. If not, at least critics can't bash us too hard for taking wonky design choices in our mainstream games. (at least, not as likely to)

I'm glad you are not the head of Sonic Team then. I don't want 2D classic games over and over and over again and maybe a 3D game here and there out of fear of the critics. I want better 3D games.

Overall though, the Mario franchise is a completely different beast altogether compared to Sonic (or most other franchises) that I'm not convinced that its practices make your argument. It has a near-endless pool of money, development time, and talent at its helm, thus installments in any series are significantly rarer and of higher quality overall as a result. This staves off complaints of stagnation because it keeps the market unsaturated with crap.

Mario games are also known for relying heavily on in-level gimmickry and diversions to significantly enhance if not break up the pace, objective, and feel of the levels, an extension of its far more off-the-cuff universe while the classics focus on doing a couple of things well at all times: running and rolling. You see and do more things in a single typical Mario game compared to multiple Sonic games in the same generation. As a result, Mario games have set a precedent of having a ridiculous amount of room to play with its mechanics. Introduce the Homing Attack to a classic Sonic game? "It's broken."

Also, Mario is Nintendo's flagship franchise, the headliner of their consoles. They could charge $100 per title and they'd still be at full price three years later.

[Wittymations]

Why is it impossible to have both? Personally, I prefer 3D over 2D games. I guess I'm not too picky when it comes to games, many people will argue things that exist in 3D Sonic and not in 2D that I really just don't see. But I see no problem releasing 2D games alongside more main series 3D games of Sonic. I mean, when I play 3D games they seem more ambitious and more story driven.

But I see no reason why they can't split development between 2D games and 3D. They done that for a while and I'm sure plenty of people enjoy them. Some people like 2D Sonic more than 3D. Some like 3D more than 2D. There's no reason to stay to one claim.

Edited April 1, 2012 by WIttyUsername

[batson]

No.

Because 2d is the past.

And 3d is the present.

Dude, no offence, but that attitude just screams "1996" to me.

[Chaos Walker]

If having a character turn into a ball solved a whole bunch of design issues in regards to platformers, why is Sonic's gameplay model not standard in literally any other major platforming franchise currently existing right now?

Well notice my example was Metroid and not Crash Bandicoot. If you need your character to move a funny way that normal creatures don't, then having them suddenly change shape can certainly fix that problem. Having your heavily armored Space mercenary crawl quickly and backtrack through small spaces all the while making fantastic jumps from a crouched position might be a little hard to not look at funny. Take a moment to be rediculous, and make your character turn into an autonmous marble for the sake of fixing the problem.

It's the same idea as making the Werehog's arms stretch.

Mario games are also known for relying heavily on in-level gimmickry and diversions to significantly enhance if not break up the pace, objective, and feel of the levels, an extension of its far more off-the-cuff universe while the classics focus on doing a couple of things well at all times: running and rolling. You see and do more things in a single typical Mario game compared to multiple Sonic games in the same generation. As a result, Mario games have set a precedent of having a ridiculous amount of room to play with its mechanics. Introduce the Homing Attack to a classic Sonic game? "It's broken."

I don't entirly see the problem because I'm pretty sure the room is there. Mario is what I call a "vanilla" platformer, in that it mostly depends on the basic run and jump formula and after that it just trys to run as many different places as possible becuase it has the room for it. Thing is, Sonic also probably has space for that sort of thing since a physics based gimmick that depends on the shape of the environment leaves more room for creativity than say a glide or climbing ability. And even then, we've seen that not every gimmick need be based around the character's main abilities, or even touch on them at all. So long as it's a side diversion, it's pefectly ok to nom an alien and suddenly project yourself as a laser beam if the game has every intention of getting back to what you came there for: running, jumping, (and if you are Sonic: rolling).

EDIT: And to say Sonic hasn't tried his fair share of wierd gimicks... well I'm sure anyone who posts on here could list them from memory by now. We've been begging Sonic to STOP gimmicks for a bit, get his bearings, and then begin experimenting again. Experimentation is in the far flung future though, seeing as even generations is considered "not quite there yet."

Edited April 1, 2012 by Chaos Walker

[Scar]

Sonic works better in 2D, that's true. It always has been, because to this day we still haven't seen a 3D game that has matched Sonic's 2D peak. However, resigning to that notion and giving up 3D Sonic, because "Sonic works best in 2D" is stupid and lazy. If we haven't seen a 3D Sonic game as good as the best 2D ones, then keep trying till you make one that is.

So to answer the original question:

Short version: Would letting 3D sonic gameplay die out really matter?

Yes it would, because it would signify Sonic Team and SEGA giving up. Its stupid, lazy and cowardly. It would also spell Sonic's slow decent into irrelevance.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Scar

[SenEDDtor Missile]

If there is one thing I can think of that is worse than a beloved game franchise dying, it's a beloved game franchise disappearing into obscurity. And the best way for Sonic to disappear into obscurity is to give up on finding a better formula for 3D.

At least if a franchise dies, people will still remember the good times before the death. But if something fades into obscurity as a desperate attempt to return to it's glory days, that's that. Game Over for it. It will only be remembered by the select few who cling onto it. The masses will move on, leaving it to wallow in it's own self pity.

Maybe 3D screwed up alot, but at least it's still trying.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Enigma2Me

[Nepenthe]

Well notice my example was Metroid and not Crash Bandicoot. If you need your character to move a funny way that normal creatures don't, then having them suddenly change shape can certainly fix that problem. Having your heavily armored Space mercenary crawl quickly and backtrack through small spaces all the while making fantastic jumps from a crouched position might be a little hard to not look at funny. Take a moment to be rediculous, and make your character turn into an autonmous marble for the sake of fixing the problem.

It's the same idea as making the Werehog's arms stretch.

My point is, the basis of Sonic's rolling motion was to take advantage of gravity and slopes first and foremost; I assert that you don't actually need to put him in a ball to do this. If a character can move of their own volition, then they can be subject to the physics of a classic Sonic game. Rolling does not define the physics system at play, rather the opposite is true.

I don't entirly see the problem because I'm pretty sure the room is there. Mario is what I call a "vanilla" platformer, in that it mostly depends on the basic run and jump formula and after that it just trys to run as many different places as possible becuase it has the room for it. Thing is, Sonic also probably has space for that sort of thing since a physics based gimmick that depends on the shape of the environment leaves more room for creativity than say a glide or climbing ability. And even then, we've seen that not every gimmick need be based around the character's main abilities, or even touch on them at all. So long as it's a side diversion, it's pefectly ok to nom an alien and suddenly project yourself as a laser beam if the game has every intention of getting back to what you came there for: running, jumping, (and if you are Sonic: rolling).

EDIT: And to say Sonic hasn't tried his fair share of wierd gimicks... well I'm sure anyone who posts on here could list them from memory by now. We've been begging Sonic to STOP gimmicks for a bit, get his bearings, and then begin experimenting again. Experimentation is in the far flung future though, seeing as even generations is considered "not quite there yet."

So long as Sonic's movement is primarily governed by how the designers created the topography of the ground instead of by a set of multi-purpose moves under your complete control as with Mario, I maintain that you inherently can't get as much meaningful mileage out of the hedgehog. You are painted into a corner by the fact that he is- by diehards' insistence at least- obligated to act like a ball, an inanimate object subject to the whims of external forces and gravity, instead of a character with his own two feet and acrobatic sensibilities like Mario. This very difference right here is why going through the motions of a good Mario game are some of the most infinitely memorable moments we've all had, far more than even classic Sonic games, and it's the reason why every single other platforming series chooses to follow in the plumber's stead.

Also, I'm not talking about complete genre roulette as with literally every 3D Sonic game. I'm talking about about single levels or perhaps themed worlds dedicated to a specific goal or a type of movement. Examples in the Sonic series are the Karting games, snowboarding, Hedgehog Hammer, etc. These little things make a platforming experience more enjoyable and whimsical, but I wouldn't be surprised if the complete reduction of them in later games has been the outcry against everything not "Sonic only."

Edited April 1, 2012 by Nepenthe

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not exactly trying to add fuel to the fire, but do you notice how every time Sonic's name is so much as mentioned in the media the ONLY 2D titles that get attention in just about everyone of them are the Classic titiles?

How often have we heard anything regarding the Advance series in the past years since Unleashed? And although they fair better than the others, only the Rush titles and their deviants get any kind of attention, yet even then they don't mention them as often. For example how many people in the media were talking about Rush levels in Generations? In fact, the main reason Rush would get any kind of attention is because the main titles Colors and Generations have handheld versions that play similar, but even then you don't hear them with same frequency as you would expect from people who want only 2D titles.

In fact, the only 2D title to avert this would be Sonic 4, and that's mainly because of how it was made to be a sequel to 3&K.

Just something to think about.

[Meow]

I think a large part of that is also the fact that those are handheld releases, and for some reason the media has always passed off/forgotten about the handheld releases shortly after. I suspect that Sonic 4 gets the attention for what you mentioned, but also because its a home console release as well.