Sonic Lost World Announced

[tenchibr]

Also if Unleashed Day wanted you to replay it over and over, it shouldn't have been so shallow.

 

And that's the problem with Sonic level design. If a level is designed in a way that players don't feel compelled to play it over and over again, then they have failed at it.

 

On most other platformers this wouldn't be an issue, but for a series like Sonic that encourages speedrunning or leaderboards, the levels have to be addictive.

 

Edit: With Unleashed Day, if I know the level well, I can clear it on average within 4-5 minutes. I think that's a good length for later levels. But then you have Jungle Joyride for example, and that drags on for too long. It's  fun to do it within 5 minutes when you're good at it, but most of us won't feel the urge to do so. Eggmanland is the bane of most of our existences.

 

I think Colors nailed lengths well, with Act 1's being a decent length, and mini Acts afterwards that focus on a certain gameplay, but the flaw with Colors is the reliance on score more than time, meaning you can artificially bump your score for S Ranks with Wisp-spamming.

 

I think Lost World has to take the best from Colors and the best from Generations and I will be happy, but I would rather have an addictive "5-hour" game than a 10-hour play-it-once game instead.

Edited August 1, 2013 by tenchibr

[Mr Useful]

What wrong with asking for extra missions akin to Generations when you remove all the shitty mission(like the ones that involve Sonic's friends) to extend the playtime by an hour or two.

Yes there were "fun"(to me, remember, fun is subjective) missions like the drifting mission in speed highway and Shield Power up missions.

[Kuzu]

Do you guys forget why you even play Sonic games????

 

If you think Sonic should be a 20 hour game that you play once and then put it back in the shelf, Sonic is not the franchise for you. Let's put titles that artificially increased replayability: that includes the Adventure games, Heroes, Shadow the Hedgehog, '06, and Night Unleashed.

 

Let's take what's left: the Genesis titles, and Day Unleashed to today. The levels in those games are for the most part short, because the are intended to be played over and over and over and over again. Each time you find a new path or you play the same path faster, better, not taking as many hits, etc...

 

Sonic is at his best when it's about perfecting your gameplay. It's not about becoming immersed in the Greatest Story Ever Told in the History of Gaming. It's about being the best you can be through practice, practice, and practice.

 

Edit: My goal is not to tell people how to play Sonic, but just to keep their expectations in the right places.

 

 

Nobody wants 20 hrs of content, but paying full retail for a game that lasts for two hours is complete bullshit in my opinion. I can have fun with it all I want, but when I play games I want to have a reason to go back to them after one day, and not beat everything in the same time frame.

[tenchibr]

What wrong with asking for extra missions akin to Generations when you remove all the shitty mission(like the ones that involve Sonic's friends) to extend the playtime by an hour or two.

Yes there were "fun"(to me, remember, fun is subjective) missions like the drifting mission in speed highway and Shield Power up missions.

 

Nothing. I liked the extra missions, but you play them once and then you are done with them.

 

I agree we should have them, but the core levels have to take priority on development. I want LW to be the game I keep coming back to shave off seconds and milliseconds over time, like Generations was for a while. I think Generations nailed that aspect even though it flunked in the story department and overall length (yes, I wish Generations was longer too, but if they did so at the expense of poorer level designs, I would take that wish back).

Nobody wants 20 hrs of content, but paying full retail for a game that lasts for two hours is complete bullshit in my opinion. I can have fun with it all I want, but when I play games I want to have a reason to go back to them after one day, and not beat everything in the same time frame.

 

Now, that I agree with. I think that Sonic titles are over priced for what they are. Just the other day, I went to my local K-Mart and I saw Sonic Generations for $20 and I thought to myself "What a steal!"

 

I paid $60 for it and to the Sonic fan in me, I felt that the price was justified. To the average non-Sonic fan, hell no. I don't think LW should be $60 either, especially when the gameplay will be so different it might divide us once again. I personally think it should be $50 and unless there's a pre-order incentive going on, I might even wait for an opportunity to buy it at that price then.

[KrazyBean]

There's nothing wrong with wanting a game to be longer, dude. It's not always reasonable from the developer's perspective, but from the fan's side, there's really no argument against having more fun content.

Also if Unleashed Day wanted you to replay it over and over, it shouldn't have been so shallow.

 

That's...up for debate really. I've played Unleashed for 5 years now and I still find it fun to blast through the levels every now and then.

[Nepenthe]

I would be perfectly happy with a 20 hour Sonic game I would only play once, because that's what I do with most of the longer games I have anyway. The Pokemon games, Zelda, bigger platformers like Galaxy or DKCR- These are all fairly long games that I've not felt the need to pick up again after beating them (to the extent that I've wanted to beat them at least) because I feel like I've gotten my money's worth anyway with simply the sheer amount of mandatory content.

 

Replayability in the form of continuous playthroughs of the same shit is rarely a substitute for me on this front. However, games easily get new life again if they can offer interesting and addictive multiplayer, because the human element ensures a consistently unique challenge every time that breathes new life into a game that repetitive single player just can't touch. Sonic hasn't cracked this particular egg yet, so I'm never going to invest the amount of time into one of his titles versus, say, Call of Duty's multplayer. The closest I've gotten on this front is Unleashed, and that's because I liked all of the gameplay enough to indulge in the secondary content and found the levels fun enough to consistently speed-run (helped in part by my brother competing against me), but I haven't played it in awhile either.

 

Point being, for Sonic games, I would rather they either find a way to make the main game longer without pissing the rest of you guys off because that in turn rains on my parade, or lower the price below $50 if we're going to continue getting shorter games like this from now on, because both Colors and Generations felt like complete rip-offs.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I don't think you could accomplish either one without pissing off a number of people regardless. Okay, lowering the price for short games isn't gonna piss anyone off, but trying to find a way to make the game longer to be worth $50 is a challenge in itself. Especially when you have a series that is encouraged to overspecialize in a specific kind of platforming.

[Nepenthe]

Of course someone's going to be pissed off about almost every decision you make. People are pissed off about some aspects of the series right now (me xP). I would just rather the number of people pissed off about the mere idea of a longer game not be high enough to be detrimental to the franchise's financial earnings or reputation.

 

Either that or don't price them so high.

[tenchibr]

I would be perfectly happy with a 20 hour Sonic game I would only play once, because that's what I do with most of the longer games I have anyway. 

 

I get where you are coming from, but... Not everyone can afford to buy games constantly, and as much as it sounds like I am contradicting myself by saying that I do think Colors and Generations are short (when it comes to playing through them once), I felt like I got the $60 worth off of Generations that I paid for, and that's because of how much I replayed those levels.

 

We are talking about giving Sonic titles a one-trip length of at least 10 hours, and I can guarantee you I have spent at least 50 on Generations and probably 30 on Unleashed. It's really down to what you like and this is another one of those "there is no right or wrong here" situations, because you like to experience multiple games at least once, especially when so many come out one after the other. I have a lot of games sitting on my shelf that I haven't beaten yet: Skyrim, Dark Souls, AC II Revelations, Metal Gear Solid HD Collection (Haven't played any of it), Kid Icarus... I would rather spend my limited time on something that I know I will enjoy within a certain amount of time, even though I already played the same levels before, because it gives me the joy that I expect from it. I am currently doing that with Animal Crossing: New Leaf. New Leaf is a really good example because at the core of it, you literally only have 2 "levels": the town and the island, but it's jam-packed with content even if it requires a lot of repetition to enjoy it. And the game doesn't even have an ending, so does that mean it's worth infinity dollars?

 

It really comes down to the fact that if you don't like Sonic titles today, why play them? And I mean it when I say that there's nothing wrong with anyone's tastes here, but I do believe that ST is now stepping in the right direction with their production values, even if they are only taking one step at time. Besides, there are so many other great games out there.

 

I don't want Sonic to be a one-time-play, 10+ hour franchise and I think that's where the disappointment comes in for those who expect value from it with those standards. For reference, see "Tetris" and "Guitar Hero/Rock Band".

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Kinda miss the old days where games had replayability lasting years. We don't often get that quality a lot nowadays.

[Dizcrybe]

I'm with Tenchi on this one. I don't mind short Sonic games, mainly because I tend to not play entire games in one sitting.

[Nepenthe]

I get where you are coming from, but... Not everyone can afford to buy games constantly, and as much as it sounds like I am contradicting myself by saying that I do think Colors and Generations are short (when it comes to playing through them once), I felt like I got the $60 worth off of Generations that I paid for, and that's because of how much I replayed those levels.

 

We are talking about giving Sonic titles a one-trip length of at least 10 hours, and I can guarantee you I have spent at least 50 on Generations and probably 30 on Unleashed. It's really down to what you like and this is another one of those "there is no right or wrong here" situations, because you like to experience multiple games at least once, especially when so many come out one after the other. I have a lot of games sitting on my shelf that I haven't beaten yet: Skyrim, Dark Souls, AC II Revelations, Metal Gear Solid HD Collection (Haven't played any of it), Kid Icarus... I would rather spend my limited time on something that I know I will enjoy within a certain amount of time, even though I already played the same levels before, because it gives me the joy that I expect from it. I am currently doing that with Animal Crossing: New Leaf. New Leaf is a really good example because at the core of it, you literally only have 2 "levels": the town and the island, but it's jam-packed with content even if it requires a lot of repetition to enjoy it. And the game doesn't even have an ending, so does that mean it's worth infinity dollars?

 

It really comes down to the fact that if you don't like Sonic titles today, why play them? And I mean it when I say that there's nothing wrong with anyone's tastes here, but I do believe that ST is now stepping in the right direction with their production values, even if they are only taking one step at time. Besides, there are so many other great games out there.

 

I don't want Sonic to be a one-time-play, 10+ hour franchise and I think that's where the disappointment comes in for those who expect value from it with those standards. For reference, see "Tetris" and "Guitar Hero/Rock Band".

 

 

You're making a few false assumptions about me here. For one, I can't afford to buy games constantly either nor do I have an overwhelming desire to. The combination of being a broke college student and having limited tastes means I get one or a few titles spread across an entire year. Sonic is really the only franchise I buy consistently, and even then that's only the major console releases as I don't game on handhelds. I buy the Mario mainline games, which come once or twice in a generation, a Rayman or Donkey Kong here and there, and I only got into Zelda last year which is also a once-in-a-generation franchise. Bear in mind that my family and friends may pick up the slack on titles like Call of Duty that I can jump in with them, or I'll try out an Assassin's Creed or whatnot, but I'm not rolling in dough nor are my interests in games deep enough to assume that I'm in the position to buy lots of them. I can't. But I can play Super Puzzle Platformer Plus right now for a month or so and be just fine anyway. 

 

Besides, if you're amassing a backlog of games you can't even finish, I don't feel content creators are inherently obligated to shorten their games to four, five, or six hour stints (especially if they're going to keep the prices jacked up still) just so you can find the time to finish them. I mean, the backlog is your fault. Frankly, I've never really understood this habit of getting a massive backlog of stuff you own but absolutely cannot find the time to finish. It's a veritable waste of money to be honest, but as I said before, I'm not deep enough into the hobby to acquire games at the rate you do. Regardless I can't empathize with what I view as a self-perpetuating problem and then throwing the responsibility for finding a solution to it on developers.

 

Also, the implications of the idea that I don't like the current games in any capacity is disingenuous and ridiculous. Just because I have some beef with a few decisions Sonic Team is making currently doesn't mean I don't derive enjoyment from the current games at all. Rare is the Sonic title that I just absolutely hated at the actual time of playing, mainly because it's all new and shiny and I'm less apt to note flaws on games when they are new or shiny. But at the same time, I'm not about to sit quiet on my personal concerns either. Most games aren't perfect, even if they're fun, hence why I complain: I want the games to be better so I can have even more fun than I'm already having.

 

Now as I actually said, I don't mind Sonic games getting their longevity from either replayability or from length. The problem is, most Sonic games aren't all that replayable to me. They don't have good multiplayer, so it's not like I can sit with my brother or online patrons and play it under the assurance that the experience of playing the same levels or arenas is going to be livened up by an unpredictable human element. So all I have left is playing the same levels over and over again, which I don't care for either because 1.) I don't find the actual experience of playing the same level over and over exciting in most instances because I feel like the high of playing just plateaus after awhile. Again, Unleashed was the biggest exception. 2.) The actual rewards for replaying a Sonic game, like Red Rings and Super Sonic, frankly just aren't worth the effort to unlock them. I refuse to put in extra hours to unlock "Boost Mode Now With Annoying Jingle Loop." Give me a DKC Lost World or a Rayman Land of the Livid Dead though, and then I'll sit down and collect any arbitrary number of doo-dads you want me to, because then I feel like I'm working towards something that's worth it.

 

Or, if not, if we have to be stuck with six-hour games forever, I'll deal with it, but for fuck's sake I shouldn't be happy with shelling out $50 or more for them either, unless you want me to buy them second hand or wait for them to go down in price.

 

I also wouldn't compare genres directly. Puzzle games and music games are mechanically different from action-adventure/platformer games that I inherently have different mindsets going into each and subsequently place different values on different mechanics and game designs. It's like getting mad at a comedy for not making you laugh, but someone else points to a historical documentary you watched and says, "Why are you getting mad at the comedy for not making you laugh when this film didn't?" Them both being movies doesn't mean they don't have different intentions, mechanics, and focuses as part of their genres.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Kinda miss the old days where games had replayability lasting years. We don't often get that quality a lot nowadays.

Wasn't everything back then more expensive, since we were all kids, so we kind of ended up replaying games more frequently even though the games might have been even shorter?

[tenchibr]

The only wrong assumption I made against you was that you could afford to buy games consistently, and I apologize for that. But the fact that you assume as well that I am intentionally buying games without finishing them is also incorrect, because I have had those games for a while now.

 

Yes, I know I said I don't have a lot of time to play the games, but what I meant was I don't have a lot of times to play all the games I have, so I have to choose. Based on the time I have spent games like Animal Crossing recently, one could say "I have played enough of this game. Time to play the ones I haven't in a while or not at all." But what happens in my case is that I just choose not to.

 

Yes, the backlog is my fault, and I am not trying to hide that. I am merely stating that I choose to play something that I already know will be worth my time. In other words, I actually regret owning some of games I do, no matter how high their scores are.

 

Although New Leaf is also high, it is for different reasons. Sonic Generations wasn't, but I found enough replayability in it to make the money I spent on it worthwhile. It would be stupid of me to expect others to find the same level of enjoyment that I do on the games I play.

 

The only thing I have to say is when it comes to certain philosophies and concepts into what we think certain things should be, there are just some times that people like you and I will have a conflict of interest; that no matter how much we discuss something, there is no right or wrong; it's all very grey. Like I said before, I am happy with Sonic Team now, and I think judging LW so decisively based off the limited information that's out, especially with no hands-on experience, is way too premature to make a call.

 

As we approach the game's release, or better, even after it, maybe we will all reach a unanimous feedback. But for the time being, we just have to accept that our opinions on how Sonic games should be handled will be polarized in some areas and trying to win someone over it is a waste of time.

 

Edit: One more thing: I had the games on my backlog before New Leaf, and other titles that I have played but exhausted already (Monster Hunter, Bioshock Infinite, Walking Dead, Tomb Raider). It's just unfortunate that I didn't take the time to play them before all those other games caught my attention instead.

Edited August 1, 2013 by tenchibr

[Nepenthe]

o.o Uhm, I'm utterly confused on how I contradicted you. You've said you possess games with which you haven't beaten in part due to time constraints, that you would rather "spend your limited time" on something you know you'll enjoy. Unless you didn't purchase any of those games yourself, I'm not sure how you're not buying games that you can't finish due to time constraints as per your explanation.

 

Regardless, I'm not judging Lost World specifically in this particular tangent nor am I try to convince anyone of its quality. I've just been making statements about games in general as well as how I personally value different titles and react to replay value. I don't know how long Lost World is. However, I do have my preferences, and I know that if Lost World is going to be both full price and the length of Colors and Generations, I'm going to feel disappointed on that fact alone, just like anyone who hates the Boost would've felt disappointed in the game to some degree if they had it, even though they haven't played it either.

[tenchibr]

o.o Uhm, I'm utterly confused on how I contradicted you. You've said you possess games with which you haven't beaten in part due to time constraints, that you would rather "spend your limited time" on something you know you'll enjoy. 

 

You implied that I like to throw my money away. It wasn't intentional. As I got newer games, the ones that I liked playing more just became a bigger part of my gaming routine, which put my previous games on the side.

 

This is really off-topic though. I just wanted to clarify that.

 

About your preferences, I can respect them. It's one of those situations where we will just have to wait for the game to come out and see what they did, but I am inclined to believe the length will be similar to previous titles. Maybe this new title will give the replayability I usually seek, but who knows...

 

I can only think of one current-gen platformer that was long in terms of length: Super Mario Galaxy (1 and 2 - but I actually prefer the first one). But that was a game that after I 100% it, I never touched again.

 

I will be honest with you that when I look at the short-term approach, Super Mario Galaxy beats Sonic Generations badly; much superior story, much better length, slightly superior gamplay, and even the graphics are gorgeous, especially given the limited hardware (Galaxy in HD would have been orgasmic). Super Mario Galaxy is a masterpiece and a must-play if you love platformers.

 

But then, if I come back to it, it will be through a new file. Unlike Sonic, I cannot name a SINGLE Galaxy level that was memorable - I just remember bits and pieces, like Luigi's rescue in a Boo Castle or one of the Piranha bosses. And Galaxy's levels are some of the best design I have ever seen in a Mario game, but still are forgettable.

 

But with Generations, I can remember something from every Act, whether it's the corkscrew or the Gun Truck or the floor falling at the end of Sky Sanctuary. And those little things make me come back for more, aside from trying to do it better, faster, stronger.

 

Edit: Although I have to admit, a lot of it is nostalgia. But even if we were to take another title, like Colors for example - there are memorable pieces, like Sonic running at the beginning of Starlight Carnival, or the beautiful grass at the beginning of Planet Wisp, or the rollercoasters of Asteroid Coaster.

Edited August 1, 2013 by tenchibr

[Nepenthe]

Me saying that you were amassing an unplayable backlog which in turn is a waste of money did not inherently imply you actually liked doing so. But in any case I apologize for that; I didn't mean it. xP

 

Regardless, I find Generations memorable only on account of because it's purposefully pulling the more notable levels from the entire franchise out and giving them a high-definition do-over. Also as Sonic fans, we aren't going to forget its deign by the inherent fact that we're close to the franchise and all of the knowledge therein. These games also have smaller area/level counts than Galaxy. In fact, I wouldn't even go so far as to call Colors and Generations memorable so much as familiar, if that makes sense, but then again I don't have any overwhelming feelings of preference towards them. Galaxy was more memorable to me, because even though there's fewer levels I can name, the game still thoroughly trounces Colors and Generations on account of the extent of its quality and creativity of the controls and level design. It reaches elevations of joy only a few Sonic games have for me personally, despite the fact that I feel I only needed to play it once and never touch it again (hence why I'm always so harsh on Galaxy 2; it's the same shit. ):<) But opinions. Opinions everywhere. Overall, I've got no beef with the way you see things either. x3

 

As far as Lost World goes, I'm still inclined to give in to precedent and believe that it's not going to be that long, but again I don't know. In fact, I feel we know so little about the game at the end of the day that it's difficult to get a good read on it either way, so I don't empathize with claims that it's going to suck or the claims that it's going to kick ass. Ah wellz; at least the Parkour is looking up my alley regardless.

[tenchibr]

To me, one of the best things about gaming is memories, which sounds like nostalgia, and even though it goes hand on hand with it, I can also think of recent games that gave me new memories, like Bioshock Infinite or The Walking Dead as I mentioned sooner.

 

With Galaxy, I don't have a particular memory other than fragments. That doesn't mean it was bad downright; in fact, I know it was glorious. But the simple things are usually the ones that stick with me. For example...

Super Mario World, when you defeat Bowser, and you have the fireworks, and the ending scene with the Yoshis hatching out. It sounds nostalgic but it sticks with you.

I can name so many little things like that but I would be going off-topic, so I will just name 3 and keep it simple:

Knuckles getting betrayed by Eggman in Hidden Palace Zone followed by Sky Sanctuary, Zero's "death" in the first Mega Man X, Crono's "death" in Chrono Trigger.

 

Sonic Colors had some of this too, like

Tails getting mind-controlled by Eggman

, and Generations, well... It was nostalgia to the max, so doesn't really count.

 

I don't expect a grand, Oscar-worthy performance from Sonic Team with LW, but if they can deliver one little scene that just sticks with you like that, that will be more than enough for me. And Aaron already hinted that we will see Eggman in a way we haven't before, so I am placing my bets that he will deliver it for me.

[MegasonicZX]

To me, one of the best things about gaming is memories, which sounds like nostalgia, and even though it goes hand on hand with it, I can also think of recent games that gave me new memories, like Bioshock Infinite or The Walking Dead as I mentioned sooner.

 

With Galaxy, I don't have a particular memory other than fragments. That doesn't mean it was bad downright; in fact, I know it was glorious. But the simple things are usually the ones that stick with me. For example...

Super Mario World, when you defeat Bowser, and you have the fireworks, and the ending scene with the Yoshis hatching out. It sounds nostalgic but it sticks with you.

I can name so many little things like that but I would be going off-topic, so I will just name 3 and keep it simple:

Knuckles getting betrayed by Eggman in Hidden Palace Zone followed by Sky Sanctuary, Zero's "death" in the first Mega Man X, Crono's "death" in Chrono Trigger.

 

Sonic Colors had some of this too, like

Tails getting mind-controlled by Eggman

, and Generations, well... It was nostalgia to the max, so doesn't really count.

 

I don't expect a grand, Oscar-worthy performance from Sonic Team with LW, but if they can deliver one little scene that just sticks with you like that, that will be more than enough for me. And Aaron already hinted that we will see Eggman in a way we haven't before, so I am placing my bets that he will deliver it for me.

Honestly, without sounding like a big fanboy I would have to say each sonic game kind of leaves a lasting impression in my head (more influenced by unleashed but still though) and I don't really have many doubts that this one won't, I just hope it has a decent story instead of an empty one.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Wasn't everything back then more expensive, since we were all kids, so we kind of ended up replaying games more frequently even though the games might have been even shorter?

Yeah, but it was still enough bang for your buck when you bought it to last you long enough until you could scrape up the moolah for the next game.

Edited August 2, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Kamicciolo]

Not so much really, considering back then games were also alot harsher and unfairer in terms of difficulty (being younger and less experienced also being a factor). So those games only lasted longer due to those technicalities, which won't fly in the current day of accessible gaming.

[Lady Soniko]

That wasn't the case at all with every old game, games like Yoshi's Island both have appeal and length, Sonic games were deliberately made short, even Yuji Naka said it was purposely short so people could come back to it and complete it again in one sitting to keep the appeal and replayability, if it was too long like an RPG, the player wouldn't have as much interest to play through it again as often if it were short and sweet, it was also something to do with making the experience memorable, catchy tunes, memorable level tropes and a short and sweet story.

[Voyant]

That wasn't the case at all with every old game, games like Yoshi's Island both have appeal and length, Sonic games were deliberately made short, even Yuji Naka said it was purposely short so people could come back to it and complete it again in one sitting to keep the appeal and replayability, if it was too long like an RPG, the player wouldn't have as much interest to play through it again as often if it were short and sweet, it was also something to do with making the experience memorable, catchy tunes, memorable level tropes and a short and sweet story.

 

This is pretty much the point of Sonic. I have replayed Sonic games far more than any game in the franchise even without a multiplayer and I definitely gotten my moneys worth several times over. To be honest I don't understand how people got into the franchise if you truly wanted a longer one time experience, it goes against the primary principle that makes Sonic

 

That's like going to a restaurant that sells primarily "hamburgers"...ordering one...and getting upset because its not made out of chicken.

 

I think the problem were having right now is setting up a narrative that makes the player compelled to restart from the beginning. SA2 back in the day when we all kids or mid teens were in awe of SA2 cheesy story and it was fun to play through over and over again to relive scenes or maybe catch something that we missed. The storyline was also melded well with the actually level like for example Sky Rail's before and after scenes.

 

Hopefully Lost world gives me a reason to play its story over and over again instead of going through it once and just replaying stages that I like.

Edited August 2, 2013 by Voyant

[Kuzu]

This is pretty much the point of Sonic. I have replayed Sonic games far more than any game in the franchise even without a multiplayer and I definitely gotten my moneys worth several times over. To be honest I don't understand how people got into the franchise if you truly wanted a longer one time experience, it goes against the primary principle that makes Sonic

 

That's like going to a restaurant that sells primarily "hamburgers"...ordering one...and getting upset because its not made out of chicken.

 

I think the problem were having right now is setting up a narrative that makes the player compelled to restart from the beginning. SA2 back in the day when we all kids or mid teens were in awe of SA2 cheesy story and it was fun to play through over and over again to relive scenes or maybe catch something that we missed. The storyline was also melded well with the actually level like for example Sky Rail's before and after scenes.

 

Hopefully Lost world gives me a reason to play its story over and over again instead of going through it once and just replaying stages that I like.

 

I don't understand how wanting a game to last for more than two hours counts as "going against the principles" am I seriously unreasonable if I want to go back to a campaign after a day?

 

Mario Galaxy isn't very long, and I've put far more time into that game than Colors or Generations combined the first run through. Its not just about longevity, its about a lasting impression. 

[Nepenthe]

I got into the franchise through the classics, which were arcade experiences meant to be replayed over and over. I played them because they were good and the only Sonic games at the time.

 

Then I played Adventure when it came out and found its longer campaign style much more engaging than the classics' short arcade stints. So, with an actual choice in play, I could actually forge a preference, and it's the one I choose to stick with, mainly because Sega hasn't made a shorter 3D Sonic game that was inherently more enjoyable than the longer ones I like.

 

Unless you believe Adventure is somehow less of a Sonic game (I don't. It's a mainline Sonic game made by Sega, so damn people's appeals to tradition), I don't see how an overall progression design like the one it has somehow goes against some "principles." Besides, if it's a principle to pay $50-60 for four hours of game, then that's a rotten principle. As I've kept reiterating, shorter Sonic games would be a much easier pill to swallow if they weren't as expensive as, say, freaking Zelda games.