Does Tails need to be the sidekick anymore?

[Tani Coyote]

It's all really chalked up to gameplay necessity, really.

Though back on topic, the original point was their relationship is one of interdependence. Sonic and Tails reinforce each other's weaknesses; a sidekick is just an aid normally, rather than someone you need. Sonic wouldn't do half the tasks he has without Tails' know-how. He wouldn't get to ARK, or the Egg Carrier, or the Death Egg, or know the Wisps were in trouble.

[Kuzu]

I can agree with you on Colors, but to be fair Generations was about celebrating Sonic, all the other characters were fairly out of the limelight. In my opinion they just need to improve on Tails being the smarts and Sonic being the one to kick ass fast. That's if Tails isn't playable. If they make him playable again in an actual story driven game that's different.

 

I didn't know Sonic was the only character who mattered in the series :V Sonic's name isn't just the title of the series, its representation of the entire franchise, that includes its characters as well. Frankly, Generations not focusing on the rest of the cast despite supposedly being a celebratory of the franchise itself is a testament to how misguided that games was.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well Sonic is the central character of the franchise.

 

Still doesn't exactly excuse how lacking Generations was tho, as you'd think a milestone like that would at least have them trying to grasp at least half of what they tried to do for SA2. But I guess that screw up with the last anniversary title just frightened them towards not wanting to screw this one up, so they played it safe.

[Kuzu]

Well Sonic is the central character of the franchise.

 

Still doesn't exactly excuse how lacking Generations was tho, as you'd think a milestone like that would at least have them trying to grasp at least half of what they tried to do for SA2. But I guess that screw up with the last anniversary title just frightened them towards not wanting to screw this one up, so they played it safe.

 

Yea, but he's not the only one who exists.

[Tani Coyote]

At least Tails demonstrates some nominal utility in Generations. Even though now that I think about it, it's probably his most useless role in a while. Sonic's not dumb, so I suspect he still would have figured out what was going on... and as for the communicator, I think he could determine that was a homing shot on his own.

Overall I'd say Generations made Tails a sidekick/tagalong more than most other games. In most games his technological assistance has been of immense value to Sonic; in Generations it just comes across as him being given attention because the plot demands it.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Yea, but he's not the only one who exists.

But being central obviously means he's going to get more focus than others. So technically he is the only character that matters along with Eggman as the antagonist.

Not that it should be so central that all other characters are unnecessary, but but there's a line that people, be it the writers or the audience, fail to see regarding interdependence and occupations for the characters.

To sum it up, in addition to Sonic Team jumping the grimdark bandwagon back in 2005, had people not thrown the brains away from critical thinking rather than scapegoating things in a cheap attempt to solve problems with characters, we'd probably wouldn't be in this dilemma.

Edited July 5, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Kuzu]

But being central obviously means he's going to get more focus than others. So technically he is the only character that matters along with Eggman as the antagonist.

Not that it should be so central that all other characters are unnecessary, but but there's a line that people, be it the writers or the audience, fail to see regarding interdependence and occupations for the characters.

To sum it up, in addition to Sonic Team jumping the grimdark bandwagon back in 2005, had people not thrown the brains away from critical thinking rather than scapegoating things in a cheap attempt to solve problems with characters, we'd probably wouldn't be in this dilemma.

 

There have been so many games where the other characters play as large a role as Sonic so the notion that "he's the only character who matters" is daft. If Sonic & Eggman were truly the only characters who mattered as you said, then there'd be no reason for them to use the other characters period. 

 

You're right, Sonic is the protagonist and by virtue will have more focus than every other character, but that doesn't mean everyone else should be so ineffectual that they don't matter. 

 

Its terrible in Generations because the characters literally exist just for fanservice, they serve no other purpose. They have no impact on the plot at all and aside from Tails, don't even have a conversation with Sonic or any other character for that matter.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

There have been so many games where the other characters play as large a role as Sonic so the notion that "he's the only character who matters" is daft.

Really? List them.

Because as far as I see it, the number of games where other characters are equally important is far less than the ones where they are less important by comparison, whether mainstream or spin-off. Throughout most of these plots, Sonic is usually the most important character in dealing with the main conflict, so I'm pretty sure Sonic matters the most with Eggman being important for being the start of the conflict in the first place until someone else usurps him at the last second. Were Sonic not the only character that mattered, his name wouldn't even be in the titles of the majority of these games.

 

If Sonic & Eggman were truly the only characters who mattered as you said, then there'd be no reason for them to use the other characters period.

Well considering that they're the central characters in the typical man vs. man conflict, they are the ones that matter. But in saying that there'd be no reason for the other characters to be around, you just made yourself the very example of what I was criticizing in that last post.

Fact of the matter is that the protagonist and the antagonist are the primary characters that matter in the conflict that this series has, no "if," "ands," or "buts" about it; The story is about the protagonist's (i.e. Sonic) efforts in reaching a goal, and the antagonist (i.e. Eggman) providing the conflict (and therefore the story itself) by opposing the protagonist's efforts in reaching said goal. 

 

This is one of the most basic, general, and damn near omnipresent of conflicts as far as storytelling goes, as the majority of fiction out there uses it; although there are works that work with no antagonist at all in the usual sense, this series is not one of them. So as far as having a narrative in this series goes, the protagonist and the antagonist are the most necessary, and the story doesn't have to have anymore than those two characters.

 

But with that being the case, however, that's not saying there's no reason to have other characters, and this black and white mentality you're making it out to be is downright ridiculous when you're failing to keep in mind that you  can very well have a reason to use other characters in the plot alongside the protagonist and antagonist, hence the use of secondary characters like Tails.

 

You're right, Sonic is the protagonist and by virtue will have more focus than every other character, but that doesn't mean everyone else should be so ineffectual that they don't matter.

In comparison to the lead protagonist and antagonist, they don't matter because a story can work with just those two characters. However, that doesn't mean we need to do away with other characters, and I'll give you a cookie if you can find where I even remotely implied that they were (or should be) ineffectual.

Edited July 6, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Splash the Otter]

Really, do you even need Dr. Eggman? There's no rule saying Sonic has to fight the same person in every game. Ultimately, Sonic is the only character I would consider absolutely necessary to the series, so its only natural that he would stand out. However, there's a difference between that and being the only character who matters. Yes, you can have a story with only two characters, but most of the time it's going to be boring. If every game used the plot of Sonic 1 without adding anything to it, people would lose interest very quickly. And that is why the other characters exist, and why they do matter to the series!

[Uraraka]

Really, do you even need Dr. Eggman? There's no rule saying Sonic has to fight the same person in every game. Ultimately, Sonic is the only character I would consider absolutely necessary to the series, so its only natural that he would stand out. However, there's a difference between that and being the only character who matters. Yes, you can have a story with only two characters, but most of the time it's going to be boring. If every game used the plot of Sonic 1 without adding anything to it, people would lose interest very quickly. And that is why the other characters exist, and why they do matter to the series!

yeah, true true! I believe that Mario games would be boring Without Luigi and Wario right? So what exactly is Sonic without Tails?

 (note: He is a hedgehog stranded on an island with a busted plane while Eggman takes over the world )

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Really, do you even need Dr. Eggman? There's no rule saying Sonic has to fight the same person in every game. 

No, but considering how much they've abused the Monster of the Week since SA1, I don't think many people will tolerate anyone other than Eggman for a while. Hence why some fans are cautious about the new Deadly Six repeating the process again.

However, there's a difference between that and being the only character who matters.

It's practically the same thing, especially if the story can carry itself with just that character...but again, that doesn't mean the others can't be used.

 

Yes, you can have a story with only two characters, but most of the time it's going to be boring. If every game used the plot of Sonic 1 without adding anything to it, people would lose interest very quickly. And that is why the other characters exist, and why they do matter to the series!

Funny, because many people also began losing interests because of the other characters to the point that Sonic Team put them on a bus. Yet I don't see that stopping the series. To the very extreme, people say that having stories are ruining Sonic...but those people clearly don't know what they're talking about.

Edited July 6, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Splash the Otter]

No, but considering how much they've abused the Monster of the Week since SA1, I don't think many people will tolerate anyone other than Eggman for a while. Hence why some fans are cautious about the new Deadly Six repeating the process again.

It's practically the same thing, especially if the story can carry itself with just that character...but again, that doesn't mean the others can't be used.

 

Funny, because many people also began losing interests because of the other characters to the point that Sonic Team put them on a bus. Yet I don't see that stopping the series. To the very extreme, people say that having stories are ruining Sonic...but those people clearly don't know what they're talking about.

The other characters enrich the franchise with their diversity, and stop the games from just being the same thing over and over. I personally have a hard time enjoying games where the story only requires the cast of Sonic 1, so if they decided to get rid of every character except for those two, I would leave the fanbase forever.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not once have I so much as implied that the other characters have nothing to bring to this series, and for you to keep misconstruring it like that is a case of you guys not paying any attention to the other parts where I blatantly say that these characters can still be used.

Edited July 7, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Yugi Muto]

Really, do you even need Dr. Eggman? There's no rule saying Sonic has to fight the same person in every game. Ultimately, Sonic is the only character I would consider absolutely necessary to the series, so its only natural that he would stand out. However, there's a difference between that and being the only character who matters. Yes, you can have a story with only two characters, but most of the time it's going to be boring. If every game used the plot of Sonic 1 without adding anything to it, people would lose interest very quickly. And that is why the other characters exist, and why they do matter to the series!

Yes but not all of them. Tails, Knuckles, Shadow and Amy Rose are fine but anymore are just pointless now seeing as Sega doesn't do 'big stories' anymore since 06 failed. With the current formula do we really need Charmy Bee or Blaze the Cat hanging around? All they'll do is make a one liner anyway. Also I disagree that other characters should have had a larger focus in Generations, Sonic is more important than the brand because without him there would be no brand.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Characters having a larger focus tha being simple cheerleaders would not make Sonic any less important, and to claim such a thing would be a case of black-and-white insanity that fails to understand the simple concept known as "moderation".

[Kuzu]

Really, do you even need Dr. Eggman? There's no rule saying Sonic has to fight the same person in every game. Ultimately, Sonic is the only character I would consider absolutely necessary to the series, so its only natural that he would stand out. However, there's a difference between that and being the only character who matters. Yes, you can have a story with only two characters, but most of the time it's going to be boring. If every game used the plot of Sonic 1 without adding anything to it, people would lose interest very quickly. And that is why the other characters exist, and why they do matter to the series!

 

This would be true if Eggman wasn't the main antagonist. Eggman's presence is literally what drives the series forward because its his plans that cause Sonic to act in the first place. Yea, Sonic can theoretically fight just any old villain but Eggmans' constant presence establishes a long standing conflict between him and Sonic, and its that conflict which is the basis of the entire series.

 

Sonic & Eggman complete each other, they're two halves of a whole that make up the backbone of the series.

[Tani Coyote]

This would be true if Eggman wasn't the main antagonist. Eggman's presence is literally what drives the series forward because its his plans that cause Sonic to act in the first place. Yea, Sonic can theoretically fight just any old villain but Eggmans' constant presence establishes a long standing conflict between him and Sonic, and its that conflict which is the basis of the entire series.

 

Sonic & Eggman complete each other, they're two halves of a whole that make up the backbone of the series.

Indeed. They're like Batman and the Joker; Batman may fight a slew of other baddies, but at the end of the day it's the Joker who is his main enemy and his most prominent source of conflict, given all the personal damage Batman's suffered at his hands.

[Splash the Otter]

This would be true if Eggman wasn't the main antagonist. Eggman's presence is literally what drives the series forward because its his plans that cause Sonic to act in the first place. Yea, Sonic can theoretically fight just any old villain but Eggmans' constant presence establishes a long standing conflict between him and Sonic, and its that conflict which is the basis of the entire series.

 

Sonic & Eggman complete each other, they're two halves of a whole that make up the backbone of the series.

That doesn't really excuse the lack of other recurring antagonists though.

[Spin Attaxx]

True, but that's still no reason to say that you could easily toss Eggman into the rubbish.

 

I mean, you could, but the series becomes less interesting without it's main antagonist.

 

As the primary villain, Eggman is just as vital to the series as Sonic himself.

[Splash the Otter]

True, but that's still no reason to say that you could easily toss Eggman into the rubbish.

 

I mean, you could, but the series becomes less interesting without it's main antagonist.

 

As the primary villain, Eggman is just as vital to the series as Sonic himself.

But is he vital to each game? SatBK contained no mention of him or his empire, and I don't see people complaining about that! And there's a difference between leaving someone out of a game and "tossing them into the rubbish", as I'm sure CSS can attest to. Dr. Eggman may be the primary villain, but his presence isn't strictly necessary for a game to be good.

[Spin Attaxx]

SatBK was a spin-off game (not a main series one) though.

 

If Sonic Team wanted to leave him out of a few main games, then it's a bit late for that now. Eggman's become too iconic in the series to leave out in a major game. Leaving him out of a game may have little to no impact on the game's overall quality, but it would feel somewhat incomplete without the main baddie.

 

It's like a Transformers series without Megatron or a main Mario game without Bowser - they can be good even without the main antagonist, but they just add more familiarity and make it feel more special. And like Azure said, Eggman vs. Sonic is the backbone of the series.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not to mention how the storybooks games uses it's characters completely differently according to the setting. =/

 

Either way, I'd like an expanded rogue's gallery to the Sonic series as much as the next person, but it's nigh-impossible to ditch an icon like Eggman; once something reaches that status, you're doing a massive disservice by so much as trying to lessen its role. So that in itself makes it necessary to include it most of the time.

 

You don't have to do it every game tho, and you can certainly change up the roles; Bowser is the Mario series' main villain but there are several moments when he plays a neutral role like in Thousand Year Door or even a heroic one like Super Paper Mario or the Seven Stars alongside Mario and Peach. And no, there's nothing saying you can't leave a villain out for a game or two like the case with the Zelda series where there are games like Majora's Mask where Ganon doesn't even play a role in. But you can't phase out an icon and not get flak for it; conversely, make it predictable like they've somewhat done with all three franchises after each title and you begin to bore people as they reach the end of the journey.

Edited July 8, 2013 by ChaosSupremeSonîc

[Uraraka]

   While I don't believe everyone needs a staring role in every sonic game (for example, blaze, charmy, espio and the like)

I do believe that it is important to have Sonic have other characters, particularly Tails, Knuckles and Amy, so he can show off his personality more. If these characters are absent from a game, Sega usually sticks fillers in anyway (AKA, "New Characters"). why not make them Tails, Knuckles and Amy? 

  Personally, since Rouge became Knuckles' Amy, I would like to see her sometimes, just to develop their relationship a bit, and I do believe the other new characters can have a place for screen time in certain games where they would fit, but in the main stream games, they don't always need to be there... But Tails, Knuckles and Amy do!

Edited July 8, 2013 by knucklesgirl

[Your Vest Friend]

No, they don't. I know people have been wanting Knuckles and Amy to play a role again for a while, but they still wouldn't need to be there all the time if it got to the point that they got as mis-utilised as Tails. 

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I swear to god that pedestal they're on needs to be set on fire and nuked from orbit to serve as an example...